View Single Post
Old November 29 2011, 04:01 PM   #623
Morpheus 02
Location: Chicago IL
Re: The Walking Dead Season 2 Discussion *Spoilers*

Silvercrest wrote: View Post
PKerr wrote: View Post
One of the things I don't understand is not one single person in the group even remotely mentions to Herschel the fact that they were at the CDC and they pretty much knew what the "disease" is/does.
Herschel apparently believes that it's possible to cure people who are suffering mortal wounds, fatal blood loss, and their organs hanging out. And he believes all this despite being a doctor. (Yes, I know what kind.) His medical knowledge should inform him what is and isn't possible.

It doesn't matter what you tell him. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
Herschel is actually ahead of the curve. He was already a believer of resurrection of the dead BEFORE this event. Would anyone have believed the current situation even a couple years before it happened? (This is a universe where George A ROmero apparently never made zombie movie)

If something as unbliebavle as mass resurrection happened, how much crazier is it to have hope for a cure?

Gotham Central wrote: View Post
Here's a thought on the drawn out nature of the season thus far...

If you think about it, the sluggish nature of the storytelling this season and the endless search for Sophia was actually necessary.

At the end of the day, Shane, in all of his wild eyed glory, ended up mirroring the impatience of the audience. Even within the world of TWD, a character was tired of looking for her. The story needed to drag this out in some way since the endless search for Sophia is a big part of what's been pushing Shane ever closer to the edge. Part of what makes Shane's character work is that he is more than just crazy, he is also right and the audience is made to agree with his arguments if only because him being right means that we can all move on.

Shane's decision certainly moved the story line and parallels with fans' frustrations.

He is perhaps right in one sense, but certainly wrong in the attitude and approach.

There is the "reality", but there is also our reaction to that reality. ANd his reactions, IMHO, while understandable, are still wrong.

DarKush wrote: View Post
Derishton wrote: View Post
I agree that the ending was brilliant, in spite of the spoilers ... but my reason for thinking it was effective seems to be unique to me.

Shane isn't the Darwinian one, at least not in a conscious way. He's all for the hard tough-guy decision if it means killing anonymous walkers; he's as paralyzed as everyone else when it's Sophia, and it means re-killing her in front of her mother. In that sense, Herschel has the moral victory: his theory that there's a cure seems unlikely, but his point that walkers are our mothers, spouses, children, etc.? He's spot-on about that, and the hesitation of every one with a gun when Sophia lurches out the door testifies that Herschel is right, that there is a moral quandary here.

And then there's Rick, who answers Lori's faith that he is the kind of man to lead them, that Dale is wrong that this world is meant for someone like Shane. This world needs people like Rick, who can reinterpret the firing of a bullet as an act of compassion and not just fear or machismo. It also, paradoxically, points to the major theme of the last few volumes of the graphic series: can Rick make these decisions and still keep his soul?
Shane's hesitation when it came to Sophia was one of the few things I had issues with at the end. He had been going on about writing her off for two episodes and he's the one that initiated the zombie massacre. It didn't make sense for him to freeze then. I think it was more plot driven to get Rick in that position of pulling the trigger. It should've been Shane.
You're right in that it should have been Shane to have shot her. But like with all self-righteous hypocrites (not just religious ones, but seems like most in today's political debate climate), if "they" are not on your side/have no relationship with them, it's easy to shoot 'em down, and do it with even glee. But someone you care about/on "your side" (whom you have sacrificed for) is just as much a monster as the anonymous one...your reaction is mostlikely going to be different. The compassion that you lacked, the hope & memories of the what that person once was, will change your reaction, and create essentially a double standard. Sophie is just as dangerous as any of the Walkers...but could Shane viciously shoot her down, with her living mom seeing that? There's enough of a conscious to at least hesistate.

Rick, meanwhile, has shot a girl walker before. He didn't like it, but knew he had to do it.

If Hershel had taken Rick's Walker, Rick might have stopped Shane. But since the secret was out, Rick was willing to finish it.

i would hope that Hershel's "mercy" toward Walkers that he knew is a lot more understandable by the group (certainly Carol) than when they were just anonymous monsters.
Morpheus 02
JP Paulus jp [at] paulus . com
Morpheus 02 is offline   Reply With Quote