My bad--I meant ALL the herds in Atlanta. While there may be some survivors, the number of zombies would make survival iffy. Which increases the chances of supplies.
The Walking Dead Season 3
- Thread starter Gotham Central
- Start date
My bad--I meant ALL the herds in Atlanta. While there may be some survivors, the number of zombies would make survival iffy. Which increases the chances of supplies.
^^ Zombies are attracted to noise. You'd think somebody would set up some speakers, a CD player and a generator on a hill outside the city and lure them all away and then go in and stock up.
Probably. But that's what happened in World War Z.
Well, that was a different sort of zombie encounter.
I actually thought that's what the helicopter was doing and it was going to be 'herding' the zombie herds by leading them to giant trenches or off of a cliff. If you dug out some really deep and long trenches and then used noise to draw a herd towards them you could just collect them that way and then just burn the bodies.
Shades of gray are not universal--particularly when the subject (Merle) has never proved he is anything other than violent and vindictive. Glenn--or anyone else in the original Atlanta group--does not know of another side to the man, so it would not be logical to expect the next encounter to be civil. Who would forget Merle cut his own hand off?
Would you expect a happy reunion, after the way the original situation ended? Again, Merle himself admitted there was bad blood (only promising to let it go if taken to Daryl), so Glenn was being hopelessly naive, and is now paying the price.
I think few would disagree that Rick's reaction to a new encounter with Merle would be far different, much like his immediate reaction to the inmate's attempt to kill him.
In a world where zombies are far from the only enemy, when established bad and/or violent conflicts occur, only a fool would think an old enemy was somehow reformed.
George Romero's most recent zombie film (Survival of the Dead) was set on an island. In that film, the only threat of zombies action came from one group keeping transformed people active and locked up, instead of killing them at the moment of death. However, unlike the mainland, there was no threat of an entire country's worth of zombies possibly crossing borders, cities, etc., to eventually find hidden survivors--the island provided a the ultimate sense of security, until a person died, but one person is easy to handle. A million is a different problem.
You are probably correct, but, you're jumping to conclusions that Glen has never seen another side to Meryl. Meryl was a member of the Atlanta group before we came along, we have no idea what he was like in camp before the roof incident.
As far as Rick having a far different reaction, I don't think Rick would've shot him straight off, I believe he would've given Meryl a chance to make a threatening move before killing him (Which is what Glen did, but, Glen was unlucky/not as much of a stud as Rick)
As far as Rick having a far different reaction, I don't think Rick would've shot him straight off, I believe he would've given Meryl a chance to make a threatening move before killing him (Which is what Glen did, but, Glen was unlucky/not as much of a stud as Rick)
However Land of the Dead, had Zombies walking across the bottom of the Bay to get to the "Safe Zone"
Merle would be totally pissed at everyone in this thread who keeps referring to him as a female ("Meryl").
Oops, blame it on Daryl's spelling 
Mister Fandango
Fleet Captain
You mean the post where I was referring to the two opinions expressed by EmoBorg and G-Man and didn't even come close to mentioning your name whatsoever?
Yeah, good work on keeping up.
Mister Fandango
Fleet Captain
And that just proves my point. A zombie movie is going to have the threat of zombies no matter what the situation it is, else it isn't a zombie movie.
I think it would have been a far different reaction if he wasn't Daryl's brother as well. Almost no one has relatives anymore. I don't think the group would have just killed any of the survivors relatives witout hesitation.
let's not forget a couple of things:
1) Darryl has love for his brother -- certainly such that he was ready to go right back into the city to look for Merle.
2) Glenn can NOT keep a secret. The truth about killing Merle would have come out eventually. And it would have been an intense mess once Darryl would have found out that Merle was killed.
Was Merle that much worse that Carol's husband?
And Glenn's personal intercation with Merle might not have been that bad...for all we know, it was Glenn who chose Merle to be part of the team that went in to get supplies.
I think what happened was consistent with Glenn's character..i'll know he'll be hurt, but i think he'll survive Woodbury. If not -- i will be VERY sad!
What is the point to the show? The Endgame as it may be? Voyager got to Earth, Galactica got to Earth (and some livable planet with genetically compatible natives), Clark became Superman. How can this show end?
Kirkman has stated repeatedly that his goal (with the comics, anyway) was to create a never-ending zombie story. He wants to always show what happens after the "happy ending" and keep it going for as long as possible. And the way the ratings & comic sales numbers are going, that's going to be awhile.
Mister Fandango
Fleet Captain
The same way every other series of modern Star Trek ends. The same way every other variation of Superman ends. The same way the vast majority of series end.
Zombies are just a natural part of this world now. The show is seeing how these characters survive in this new world. Plain and simple.
I'm guessing he's asking what is the point if there's no true resolution to the story. If the zombie problem just goes on and on, while the living are on the run and/or hiding, it risks moving in a circle, with the usual zombie attacks, the usual survivor conflicts to the point where it becomes a true soap opera.
TV series like The Fugitive could have run for more seasons (for those who doubt it, in real life, fugitives can be on the run for decades), but a resolution was reached sooner than later, otherwise it would become stuck in repeat mode. Richard Kimble arrives, he gets involved, he's almost caught, he's captured, then escapes, he's still searching. That could have been milked for at least another three years...
I really enjoy TWD, but I also acknowledge why the original Night of the Living Dead was such a revolutionary chapter of that sub-genre, and retains its legendary place: it was not just the zombies and the human conflict, but protagonists ultimately had a fixed fate, and the drama of a dramatic ending. Neverending shows lose out on that luxury, and after a time, seem to exist for the sake of it (and/or to make money while the property has earning strength).
Right. Plus there's the problem that as presented now, the characters have no hope. At the current rate of attrition, we can't reasonably expect that anyone on this show will be alive after a few more seasons. They have no real goal other than "find someplace safe", and the show goes out of its way to depict nowhere as being safe. Will there be no other point to the show than that?
I like the show quite a bit, but I'll be disappointed if ultimately it's about nothing more than "Life's a bitch. Then you die. Then you reanimate."
BSG appeared equally hopeless, but it actually did go somewhere (whether people agree with that destination or not). So it's still possible for TWD to do the same. I just hope they do.
I like the show quite a bit, but I'll be disappointed if ultimately it's about nothing more than "Life's a bitch. Then you die. Then you reanimate."
BSG appeared equally hopeless, but it actually did go somewhere (whether people agree with that destination or not). So it's still possible for TWD to do the same. I just hope they do.
Similar threads
