I don't think that Rick is Shane. The big difference, Shane enjoyed it. It doesn't look like Rick is enjoying himself.

Yeah, Rick still needs approval/encouragement/whatever. Shane didn't give a shit what anyone else thought, he just did what needed to be done. At the end he enjoyed it way too much of course.

 

I want to see more of Andrea and Michonne, for sure.

I don't agree

I think when he slammed that machete into the dudes skull he enjoyed it

It was only later that guilt caught up with him

Eventually that guilt isn't going to be there at all

 

Shane felt guilty too remember

He was going to leave the group entirely

I don't really like Andrea's character to be honest. Sort of wish someone else had been taken to carry on the side story instead.

See below post.

I don't agree

I think when he slammed that machete into the dudes skull he enjoyed it

It was only later that guilt caught up with him

Eventually that guilt isn't going to be there at all

 

Shane felt guilty too remember

He was going to leave the group entirely

 

Rick didn't enjoy killing that guy. He did it because it needed to be done. People who enjoy killing don't then later feel regret about it. Secondly Shane wasn't gonna leave because be felt guilty. He was gonna leave because be wasn't the big bad boss man anymore and couldn't do whatever he wanted.

I don't think that's true

You can enjoy something and feel guilty about it later

 

Also maybe

His motivations are definitely debatable

Yes in some cases you can enjoy something and then feel bad about it later. However the psychology of a man who enjoys killing does not allow for guilt later. There's a big difference between eating a piece of chocolate when you probably shouldn't and killing someone.

 

The big difference about how Rick goes about killing someone funds mentally differs then Shane. Rick gave the prisoners a chance. Only killing two if them. Shane would have killed them all. If Rick enjoyed killing as you say he would have killed all five as well.

Yes in some cases you can enjoy something and then feel bad about it later. However the psychology of a man who enjoys killing does not allow for guilt later. There's a big difference between eating a piece of chocolate when you probably shouldn't and killing someone.

 

The big difference about how Rick goes about killing someone funds mentally differs then Shane. Rick gave the prisoners a chance. Only killing two if them. Shane would have killed them all. If Rick enjoyed killing as you say he would have killed all five as well.

 

Remember this.

They have been killing zombies like they were stepping on ants.

Ultimately, thats going to eat away at you. (they are obviously using this as a plot point).

Where do you cross the line from actual murder, and just.. taking care of buisness? (killing zombies)

To add to this. During the heat of battle, I am waiting for one of the friendlies, to kill or injure a friendly, without even realizeing it.

Last season you had a very heavy handed aproach to that. They tried not to kill zombies... and ended up having to run away.

Now they are more like shane then they realized.

 

There is a real danger in what the old man said about killing zombies (specially enjoying it).

They still look vaguely human.

 

If these were Aliens, or elves or monsters that weren't undead humans. then that issue would defiantely not exist as much as it does in their universe.

I don't think Rick enjoyed it at all, it just had to be done; you can equate it to taking out the trash. He was a violent criminal, he enjoyed killing Big Tiny, and he had to go. Letting the walkers kill that skinny black guy was essentially the same. Now the 2 who are left can hopefully stay in their cell block.

Another thing to note is that Rick has only ever killed someone (a living someone) after they attempted to kill him.. The two guys in the last season drew on him, Shane had a gun on him, and that prisoner threw a walker on him, the on prisoner who ran was about to hit Rick before Daryl threatened to shot him then he ran.

I don't agree

I think when he slammed that machete into the dudes skull he enjoyed it

It was only later that guilt caught up with him

Eventually that guilt isn't going to be there at all

 

Shane felt guilty too remember

He was going to leave the group entirely

 

I think he felt apathetic to it. I don't think he enjoyed it. He knows what kind of world they're living in now and he realized people can be a lot more dangerous than Walkers. This guy happened to be one of them. I think if it was something he enjoyed he'd have killed them earlier and just taken all the food.

 

Also, I think the person looking through the bush at Carol was almost definitely Merle.

 

Edit: Just to clarify, I haven't read a single one of the comments. So if you have and you can tell that something is going to happen that totally contradicts my theory, please feel to let me know in the least spoiler(ish?) way possible. : ]

Well only time will tell I suppose

I think it's Merle too. I kind of get the feeling he may have been following them since Atlanta....

Why wouldn't he have made a move by now if he had?

Why wouldn't he have made a move by now if he had?

I won't rule out Merle, only because the show hasn't specifically called him dead. But I'm skeptical. I'm leaning toward the theory posted by someone.... Don't remember who... But they thought it was "the governor" who we got a glimpse of in the next show's preview.

well i'm glad Hershel isn't dead, but i can't see how he'll survive as a amputee in that world. it might have been less cruel to just kill him tbh.

 

 

Rick ... i dunno about. i agree that latino guy needed to be killed, and i dont think Rick enjoyed it. he just saw that this guy was gogin to threaten the group and was more of a rabid dog than anything. i mena, these guys are convicts after all, they were in jail for a reason.

 

i do however dislike him locking that black guy out in the yard with Walkers. that ... that was just cruel and un-needed. the guy swung at Rick, yes, but then ran away. i also think that quarinting Tiny woudl have been the better option. out of all the convicts, that character was the one that gave me the least amount of worry if they had joined the group. and he didn't get bite, he got scratched. and its not like their lacking for cells either. these last two convicts, i can see them joining the group. the spiny little meth head ... he needs watching though. i think the last black guy is probably alright.

 

 

that said, i dont think that Rick enjoyed doing what he did, he just did what had to be done.

 

 

and Lori needs to lighten up on Carl. its a different time, i get that your his mother and all, but the boy did the right thing. should he have asked someoen to go with him, yes, but to scold him like that, infront of almost all of the group, that was uncalled for and i can sympathize with his resentment over it.

and Lori needs to lighten up on Carl. its a different time, i get that your his mother and all, but the boy did the right thing. should he have asked someoen to go with him, yes, but to scold him like that, infront of almost all of the group, that was uncalled for and i can sympathize with his resentment over it.

 

She was tring to reinforce the go with the group, never alone. Even hershal got hit, and he was with the group. one kid? has no buisness doing what he did. Her anger and fear was well justified. And embarassing him infront of his wannabe girlfriend, might make him angry at her. But what else could she have done? Spank him?

Pretty sure scratched or bitten is the same thing. Quarantining him wouldn't have made a difference.

Yeah scratched and bitten will produce the same result.

 

I have no problem with Rick locking that inmate out in the yard with the walkers. It is something Shane would have done, but that guy should have just stood down after Rick killed Tomas.

 

And yes, Carl did the what was right, even though he should have taken someone with him. Lori could have taken him aside later and had a talk with him. I just hope he doesn't revert back to his level of stupidity of season 2.

A couple things -

 

KIrkman has made it clear the title is a double entendre, and that's essentially what TWD is about: the zombies on one hand, and this group of people gradually becoming the walking dead themselves in a sense, through what they have to do to survive. That's a clever play, but it's about as clever as Kirkman gets IMO. A better writer could have done a hell of a lot more with it, but he's been repeating himself ever since the governor arc. It's pretty rare for a show or a movie to best it's source material, but I think it's happened in this case. Issue #100 really put the last nail in the coffin for me as to whether he had any interest in character development, situation ethics, psychology, etc; all the stuff that made TWD interesting to me in the first place. If it's just about cashing in on a brand and pandering to the lowest common denominator with the same gory torture porn genre fare that there's already an ocean of out there, then I'm not at all interested anymore.

 

I also think he really screwed up when he went the sci-fi route with the zombies instead of the supernatural route. He'd said from the beginning that we were never going to find out where the zombies came from because that's not what the story was about - it's about Rick and whoever is alive for the moment in his group. Then he goes and has it come out that everyone is infected, and will turn when they die. On the show it's even worse, since the CDC guy analyzes the virus and informs Rick about the infection. Well, once we're in scientific territory, where we never needed to go in the first place according to Kirkman himself, I'm afraid the whole thing makes no sense at all. Are their 2 different virus strains? One that turns you immediately from a zombie bite, and another strain that's inert in everyone? Do the zombies have poison or something in their teeth and fingernails that kills people super quickly? If it's the transfer of bodily fluids from a bite or scratch, even special fluids local to the zombies mouths, then why aren't RIck and the gang turned immediately every time the bash a walker's head in and have it's guts and blood spray all over their eyes, mouths, etc. This happens pretty much every episode/issue. And this is not to even mention the anatomical state of some of the zombies, such as the ones lacking most of their bodies. If he'd gone the supernatural route with them instead, then he'd never have to explain anything and could just make his own rules.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the show's the better of the two now by far and they're probably best distancing themselves from the book and Kirkman at this point. The guy who plays Rick( I don't feel like looking up his name) imbues his character with so much more personality than the writing in the comic does that there's really no comparison. The only real problems now are that some of the cast take such a back seat to Rick and Lori that they really just feel like extras. T-Dog is such a token black guy character. Why not bring on Tyrese, who was a great character in the book during this period? Daryl needs a personality transplant bad if he's gonna stick around. Maybe Michonne can liven things up in this department.

Most of what you've said is spot on (although I haven't gotten far enough in the comics to see a repeat of the governor arc yet) but I just want to note that as far as the infection goes there are not two different strains

 

The virus is in everyone and when you die you come back as a zombie

Zombies, being walking bags of rotting flesh, are carrying around tons of viruses and diseases with them

The idea is if you get bit or scratched you get sick from normal virus/disease infections and then you die and reanimate as a zombie

 

You absolutely have a point that when they're bashing zombies and the blood and guts spray all over them it's getting in their eyes and should be doing something

But then again you have to remember it's a show about zombies

There is only so much realism you can shove into that you know?

The current arch-villain, Negan, is essentially the Governor with the swearing, violence and gore all cranked up a few notches. I'll say no more, if you're still reading.

 

About the realism, I agree to an extent. I don't recall it ever being explicated that it was other infection or disease that was fatal in the bites, but it has been a while since I read the beginning or watched season 1. My gripe is that one thing that was originally crucial in setting TWD apart from the myriad other zombie stuff out there was that a few certain things were going to be taken very seriously. It was exactly the kinds of things that were usually ignored, which are a) the long term psychological effect of the situation on the characters and b) to some extent, without being too tedious, the technical aspects of surviving in a post-apocalyptic world. That's really my problem with it - Kirkman made it clear that he wanted to avoid going into the specifics about the zombies in order to focus on that stuff but then he establishes that it's an "infection" and makes it a prominent plot point. After that it's spilled milk and we can't un- know it.

 

This is making it sound like I'm far more concerned about this than I really am, and now I'm realizing I've just been waiting for an opportunity to unload about Kirkman. I do agree with you that it's generally best not to look too closely at this kind of thing, and just try to enjoy the show. I'm just annoyed because I was pretty into the comic for a bit and now it's looking like it's not for me afterall.

I'm on issue #31

I read a bunch at one point and then got distracted and haven't read any since

 

And yeah I totally get where you're coming from

There was an aspect you really liked about TWD and you thought that it was going to be treated a certain way but it's gone back on that

It's reasonable to be upset about it