Me too. I'm an animal person, so any time a show like this involves more animals I'm happy.Indeed. I love having the horses around in general. I wonder what that's like on the set-- and how it affects the show's budget.![]()
Me too. I'm an animal person, so any time a show like this involves more animals I'm happy.Indeed. I love having the horses around in general. I wonder what that's like on the set-- and how it affects the show's budget.![]()
Me too. I'm an animal person, so any time a show like this involves more animals I'm happy.
It's not just "general consensus" it's fact confirmed by showrunner Angela Kang on the Talking Dead preview special back in the summer.
Can you confirm or deny that he's about to die?
I cannot confirm or deny that! (Laughs.) What I can confirm is what's already been confirmed: episode five will be his last episode on the series. I think there's a really emotional and exciting story awaiting the fans. We'll see what happens!
One thing that I've always found weird about TWD is that there aren't more animals. You'd expect to see a lot of feral animals, especially dogs and cats, but also farm animals. Plus you'd think survivors would like to have dogs around as an early warning system-- and they could probably also be trained to lead Zombies away from people.Me too. I'm an animal person, so any time a show like this involves more animals I'm happy.
That's something that they really haven't explored too much, unfortunately.You also have the girl who picked up the Teddy Bear or how Morgan's wife seemed to know she use to live in their old house.
That sounds like more than muscle memory to me. It sounds like there's still some level of consciousness in there.^^In The Walking Dead prose novels (set in comic continuity) zombies do retain muscle memory. In one case, a zombie was able to recognize a gun as a threat and stopped approaching the character holding the gun.
One thing that I've always found weird about TWD is that there aren't more animals. You'd expect to see a lot of feral animals, especially dogs and cats, but also farm animals. Plus you'd think survivors would like to have dogs around as an early warning system-- and they could probably also be trained to lead Zombies away from people.
That's something that they really haven't explored too much, unfortunately.
I just gotta ask - how would muscle memory allow a cognitive reaction to someone holding a gun. Your muscles don't recognize anything. The recognize a gun as 'dangerous to you' takes a cognitive reaction.^^In The Walking Dead prose novels (set in comic continuity) zombies do retain muscle memory. In one case, a zombie was able to recognize a gun as a threat and stopped approaching the character holding the gun.
It was on Talking Dead, which is a TV show. Unfortunately I can't link to a TV show that aired in the summer. Whatever, we'll know for certain on Sunday.Can you give a link to some article or a quote?
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/l...-dead-showrunner-angela-kang-explains-1155577
From a more recent Angela Kang interview:
"Muscle memory" is the term used in the book. Don't blame me for repeating what was written.I just gotta ask - how would muscle memory allow a cognitive reaction to someone holding a gun. Your muscles don't recognize anything. The recognize a gun as 'dangerous to you' takes a cognitive reaction.
Yeah, I it is a bit surprising we don't see more animals running around.One thing that I've always found weird about TWD is that there aren't more animals. You'd expect to see a lot of feral animals, especially dogs and cats, but also farm animals. Plus you'd think survivors would like to have dogs around as an early warning system-- and they could probably also be trained to lead Zombies away from people.
I don't know about that. The nomadic groups are essentially in the same position as the early humans who originally domesticated animals; the main difference is the ubiquitous threat of the Zombies. This may make the use of horses problematic, but I think dogs would be very useful and more than worth the resources needed to keep them around, especially since they would not only be useful in dealing with the Zombies, but also in hunting for food.With food in short supply, most nomadic groups might avoid keeping animals, as they need as much care as humans, which explains why Woodbury, the Savior compounds (and outposts), and Terminus did not keep animals.
I wouldn't call it a failing, since it's a concept that's very common, if not universal, in the ZA genre. The inexplicable nature of the ZA is part of the horror. But it's definitely weird that it's not discussed more, or that people don't worry that the virus will spread to animals, et cetera. If it were me, I'd have some ideas about why it happened and what the implications are, but in Walking Dead it's already been established that the lack of explanation is an integral part of the premise.If I were a betting man, I would point to cowardly Kirkman as the reason zombie memory did not pop up beyond season one, where that first season (where the doll-carrying girl & Morgan's wife appeared) under Darabont--played in a logical fashion, which made the strange qualities and gravity of the outbreak feel real. Any plot or element that might force writers to answer "why" left with Darabont, and that's the one great failing of The Walking Dead.
True, dogs are fast and nimble so they're unlikely to get cornered like horses do. They could help with finding food and keeping watch. And think of how useful they would be any time a herd needed to be diverted. The next spinoff should be called Dogs Versus The Walking Dead.Yeah, I it is a bit surprising we don't see more animals running around.
Dogs could also help to fight off the zombies.
I don't know about that. The nomadic groups are essentially in the same position as the early humans who originally domesticated animals; the main difference is the ubiquitous threat of the Zombies. This may make the use of horses problematic, but I think dogs would be very useful and more than worth the resources needed to keep them around, especially since they would not only be useful in dealing with the Zombies, but also in hunting for food.
I wouldn't call it a failing, since it's a concept that's very common, if not universal, in the ZA genre. The inexplicable nature of the ZA is part of the horror. But it's definitely weird that it's not discussed more, or that people don't worry that the virus will spread to animals, et cetera. If it were me, I'd have some ideas about why it happened and what the implications are, but in Walking Dead it's already been established that the lack of explanation is an integral part of the premise.
Sending a dog after them, really wouldn't be that different from a person going after them with a knife, and a dog could probably do a lot more damage then one person could. Most of them would also be smaller and harder to catch.Dogs not only require as much care as humans, but TWD established that the walkers eat animals (e.g. Rick's horse in season one), so I would not use dogs as some force against zombies, as they would face the same risk of being bitten / eaten alive as humans.
It wouldn't really be that different from kids out running around, or people using using tools and equipment.Further, unless you have well-trained dogs, their barking and general rambunctious behavior would attract walkers--and enemies of the two-legged kind.
I wouldn't say that dogs require as much care as humans-- they generally receive it in our civilized society, but we're talking about people who are reduced to the Hunter-Gatherer level. I wouldn't suggest using dogs as a force against the Zombies, since they really wouldn't be capable of inflicting the type of head injury needed to destroy them, but they could be used to draw the Zombies away, which would frequently come in handy-- and being generally smaller and more nimble than people, I don't they would have the same risk of being eaten. In any case, they don't turn when bitten and are more expendable than people in this context. As for rambunctious behavior, they can definitely be trained to be quiet, and they would arguably be even more effective against human enemies, because they can hurt human enemies.Dogs not only require as much care as humans, but TWD established that the walkers eat animals (e.g. Rick's horse in season one), so I would not use dogs as some force against zombies, as they would face the same risk of being bitten / eaten alive as humans. Further, unless you have well-trained dogs, their barking and general rambunctious behavior would attract walkers--and enemies of the two-legged kind.
That's the part that nags at me a bit. I don't mind that there is no answer and that nobody has the means to look for a cure, but people really should be talking about it and theorizing about it. They've had a bunch of these tin Hitlers to deal with, but never a religious fanatic preaching that the ZA is God's Punishment-- which is especially weird considering their location.Well, its not so much a premise as it was Kirkman not wanting to be forced to even entertain the most pressing, obvious question anyone in a zombie apocalypse would have. Darabont was primarily responsible for the entire CDC plotline of season one, so while involved, the question was meant to be a part of the show's narrative to a degree.
I loved that. It had an atmosphere that really hearkened back to Night of the Living Dead. There was one scene where Madison was in a car and saw a shadowy figure stumbling through the park-- homeless drunk or man-eating Zombie? Could have been either.^I really enjoyed the first three episodes with them driving around and you'd see a random zombie milling around in the background.
None of the characters are scientists, and they've been pretty focused on just trying to survive, so I can see these specific characters not really being that interested in trying to find the cause of the outbreak or trying to cure it.
As a viewer, I'm not really that concerned either, the show isn't about them trying to end the zombie apocalypse, it's simply about them trying to survive.
Sending a dog after them, really wouldn't be that different from a person going after them with a knife, and a dog could probably do a lot more damage then one person could. Most of them would also be smaller and harder to catch.
I wouldn't say that dogs require as much care as humans-- they generally receive it in our civilized society, but we're talking about people who are reduced to the Hunter-Gatherer level.
As for rambunctious behavior, they can definitely be trained to be quiet, and they would arguably be even more effective against human enemies, because they can hurt human enemies.
That's the part that nags at me a bit. I don't mind that there is no answer and that nobody has the means to look for a cure, but people really should be talking about it and theorizing about it. They've had a bunch of these tin Hitlers to deal with, but never a religious fanatic preaching that the ZA is God's Punishment-- which is especially weird considering their location.
^I really enjoyed the first three episodes with them driving around and you'd see a random zombie milling around in the background. I also really liked how the zombies really got the drop on everybody during the riots. I would have liked to have seen more scenarios like that, and not them having to fight off random tyrannical guy for the umpteenth time.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.