Can anyone tell me why the Walkers (in the show, haven't read the comic) still bleed? When they're shot or stabbed, there's always a big glut of thick fluid, but where is it coming from? There's no heart to pump the blood and get it moving to various parts of the body. What happens IRL is the blood pools in the lowest part of the body, so wouldn't it follow that they wouldn't bleed that much?
In the comic book, all the events so far happend in few months, within relatively short time-span. That's the time when carcass starts to desintegrate and all kinds and types of soft tissues simply fall apart, if not already being eaten by insects and micro-organisms. And it shows. TV series? It's two years after the outbreak. Not counting desert and sub-polar climate, there is no freaking way anything dead wouldn't simply cease to exist after so much time. Especially in South-East, where temperatures are high and air moisture even higher. It's not the point of bleeding. It's the point of those zombies not being anything else than semi-gel lying on the ground. Which is the main issue of any other media about long-term zombie infestation. So either just go with MST3K Mantra or assume it's a plot-hole. Because there is no other way to solve this. And to answer your question - if you assume any, even slow rate of decay, the "blood" you are talking about is fluid from decaying tissues.
Do all dead people that have been buried right before the zombies came turn into zombies if they get any of the airborne virus on them?, Or just dead people after the zombies came?
It would be impossible for a person who's been buried alive to get out without help, so the same most likely applies to a zombie.
Well it's mostly impossible for a person to get out of being buried alive due to oxygen issues. A zombie on the other hand won't die from lack of oxygen (I assume) therefore has more time to work at it. Eventually, they might claw their way out.
True, yet said zombie would have to claw its way through its coffin, then the possible concrete vault, then six or so feet of dirt to get free. Suffice to say it's unlikely any dead will make their way out of their graves any time soon.
Probably not. The virus seems to only affect the living that come in contact with it, not the already dead.
How does a bite accelerate the infection?
Never read the comics, but for the show, what I've been assuming is that there's nothing to "accelerate"; as long as they don't die, the disease isn't going to do anything to them and they'll just walk around carrying the disease indefinitely. As for why the bites kill you, I have no clue. Maybe there's some kind of weird saliva catalyst that sets off the lethal part of the virus...or something.
I think there are two diseases that are very similar. Kinda like how we catch the flu each year because it's a "new" flu by the time it comes back around. The "first" Walker Flu is airborne and everybody caught it. It killed a large percentage of the populace outright. It explains why the hospital in episode 1 had bodies outside that they had simply put down. They had learned the symptoms and just dealt with it. It also explains how the military was so easily overrun worldwide. You had people turning both behind lines and during combat and nobody understood it early on. Everybody has this version and they are carriers. In fact if they meet healthy humans they might infect them and start a new outbreak. There is also a bodily fluids version spread by bite (and also presumably by sex or blood exchange) that nobody (currently) is immune to.
In the comics, they explained that the bite doesn't cause zombification, that it just killed you, and the zombie virus already inside you causes you to come back as one. Dale survives his bite by getting the limb amputated above the bite and the stump treated by Alice and Hershel. As for why the zombie bite kills you... Do you even want to think about what kind of nasty things are in the mouth of a rotting corpse?
Don't know if it's any different in the comics, but the show definitely seems to paint it as zombie bites as "special". Like for one thing, there seem to be pretty specific symptoms associated with being bit, and I'd also imagine death also comes much faster than it would just from succumbing to a nasty wound infection.
To be fair, you are talking about a cocktail of some very nasty toxic and necrotic bacteria specifically coded to eating human flesh, and in a world without a lot of antibiotics. Though it would be nice to show at least one person who had enough medicine (and luck) survive a bite to establish this theory.
One question continues to not be asked in the comic series and the television series...the "how". Let us start from the beginning. It isn't the BITE that does it. Evidently EVERYONE is infected. But how? An airborne virus? How could it just spontaneously affect everybody in the entire world all at once? And we see people that have been long dead rising up from the grave. If they're DEAD, their bodies can't become infected and thus reanimate. Dead people can't get influenza or ebola or anything. The "transmission from a bite" makes sense to a degree, your bloodstream's getting infected, but the airborne thing? And even then, there's no such thing as a supervirus. There's always going to be people who are immune, the same way there were always those immune to the Black Death, or the way people are, even now, developing immunities to diseases we didn't think could be resisted. So how can it spread so quickly, affect EVERYONE at once, HIT everyone at once? Diseases do not work that way!
I don't recall anyone "long dead" coming back as a zombie in the show. And who said it happened spontaneously all at once? You're making a lot of assumptions for something that we haven't seen how it happened. And as for people being immune? Even if someone's immune to the virus, nobody is immune to being torn limb from limb and having chunks bitten out of their flesh.
Bingo. We don't really know that much about the virus except that it reanimates those who die while infected with it and it's apparently spread across the globe sufficiently to cause a Zombie Apocalypse. The idea that everyone is infected is probably an exaggeration, but it's widespread enough to be close to the reality of things, and even if a person is immune to the disease, they're not immune to being ripped limb from limb by the corpses brought back by the disease. Immunity, in this case, means you won't come back when you die, not that those already succumbed to the infection won't kill you.
Has the nature of the zombie virus remained consistent across all media?
Basically. Dying by any means that doesn't destroy the brain brings you back as a Zombie, the Bite itself just kills you, but getting that limb amputated in time can save you. I don't recall in either media where corpses that had been buried before the outbreak started coming back, but honestly unless someone dug a grave up to check zombies don't have the strength to dig themselves up.
With regards to losing power/generators running out, HOW has no one - not even those at the CDC, before they killed themselves - thought to burn the killed walkers for fuel? Isn't there something like a 5000:1 walker/human ratio? That would mean there's an ample supply of fuel for any generator; just shoot a few walkers in the head and shove 'em in.
There are so many reasons that wouldn't work, I'm really not sure where to start. For one, humans aren't actually that flammable, and nowhere near flammable enough to serve as fuel for a generator. For another, generators are typically built to use gasoline—you know, liquid that has to be mixed with air in specific ratios to work. Generators do not work by just "burn something inside, and you get electricity."
At the very least, there has to be some engineer alive who can jerry-rig *something*. Surely, if there are enough military personnel around to operate a helicopter, there's someone around who can figure out a simple power source that runs on steam/smoke from burning bodies.
No, because those two things don't remotely correspond in the least. And why does there "have to be some engineer alive" who can turn what simply isn't a good fuel source at all into a fuel source? Again: Human bodies are not that flammable, otherwise we wouldn't need humongous piles of wood for funeral pyres and we wouldn't need massive furnaces to cremate people. Just because there's a lot of something doesn't mean it's a good fuel source—there's a lot of water, but you're not going to be able to make that burn either.
I mean, seriously, a generator works because he fuel you're burning either burns hot enough to boil water to steam almost instantly or is explosive enough to make pistons move rapidly and consistently. Human bodies have neither of those qualities. They burn slow, and only after you've done a crap ton of work to get them to burn at all—work that amounts to, "get other flammable substances to soak the bodies in or build up the fire beforehand." So in order to use human bodies as a fuel source, you need to already have other fuel sources that burn a lot better.
Theoretically, though, if there's a car around, the bodies could be soaked in gasoline. Not saying it'll work, but surely someone would have at least *thought* to try it.
Not really. Because if you have gasoline, that means you have gasoline, which is already the main fuel that works in available generators. What you're suggesting is that if someone already has fuel for a generator, they would waste it by dumping it on a body to try and make the body into something that it does not work as.
It's like saying, "Okay. I'm thirsty. I have a bottle of water. I know, I'll pour the water into sand in the hopes that maybe I can drink the sand."
But I suppose, yes. Theoretically, someone might have completely and utterly wasted his fuel in order to burn a body in some ill-conceived attempt at making it into fuel. He would then have discovered that this was a complete and utter waste of time and resources for no practical benefit whatsoever, and unless he was a complete and utter idiot, he didn't try to do it again. The other 99.9% of people who survived to the point in time that zombies are so plentiful have probably figured out on their own that trying to make a fuel source out of something that is composed primarily of water isn't going to work.
I think the better idea would be to, essentially, compost them and try to harvest the methane from their decomposition, but even that would take quite a bit of know-how, materials, and still be pretty inefficient.
Or strap muzzles on some still-animated walkers and cut off their fingers, then shackle them on a treadmill or inside a giant hamster wheel. Hang a cage full of rats where they can see it, and let them shamble endlessly towards the prey, generating power from torque as they go.
So, where exactly is Rick from? It's Cynthiana, Kentucky, in the books (Robert Kirkman's hometown), but the pilot changes it to (fictional) King's County, Georgia. But then, the Dead Reckoning flash game and Cold Storage webseries changes it back to Cynthiana.
Can Walkers swim? this is actually a vital piece of information as it opens up a place of safety that, in my opinion, borders on Too Dumb to Live for no one having thought of it before: Live on a boat. I'm not talking about the ocean or anything like that; anywhere that has water higher than 9 or 10 feet would do. A boat or a ship has several major advantages when dealing with enemies that are very slow, very dumb and can only attack using their teeth namely the 360 degree field of vision and the fact that its absolutely impregnable from the land. Supplies aren't an issue assuming you pick a lake with fish in it and even then it wouldn't be difficult to procure/build a raft to ferry yourself to and from the shore nor is fuel as even if they can't get hold of any gas/diesel (despite the fact that they have seemingly had no trouble so far procuring the fuel for any of their of vehicles since Rick stole a horse) oars would work perfectly fine for moving the vessel away from the banks. The only significant problem would be Raiders; however this is once again where that great field of vision comes into its own where one man with a rifle could pacify nearly every threat short of an improvized armoured attack boat; and only the very largest and most confident groups of Bandits would risk that kind of operation when there are so many other more vulnerable targets to go after.
Walkers wouldn't have to swim to threaten a boat, just float around until they drift up against it. Y'know, like rotting corpses tend to do if they're not weighed down by something.
During the scene where Daryl and Merle are made to fight one another gladiator-style, the fight is interrupted by Rick's group attacking. In particular, the girl with the bow gets sniped by Maggie. The girl with the bow gets sniped by Maggie, while the Governor who almost raped her, tortured and threatened to kill her and her boyfriend and is plainly the biggest threat to them is standing in plain view, completely exposed and completely oblivious to the presence of her or the rest of her group. For her first shot and with the element of surprise completely on her side, she has the chance to cut the head off the Woodbury threat and doesn't take it. Wouldn't a good chunk of grief have been ended right then and there if she had just understood the concept of a high priority target?
And how do you know she had anything like a good line of sight to him? Remember that she only starts shooting after the gas grenades are thrown.
Not to mention, the girl with the bow has... A bow. The mayor is unarmed, IIRC and so he is a lower priority target for the moment.
The Comic Book
So, uh...why did society collapse so hard? Rick's out for, what, a month, but by the time he wakes up, everybody's gone back to the stone ages. Nobody even bothers looking for battery-run computers/digital watches? I mean, what, did the vague cataclysmic event also destroy all electronic devices? And, putting that aside, was mass amnesia another effect? Everyone seems to forget the date, for no good reason.
The simple answer for not seeking out battery-operated devices is that they're simply too hard to come by. Even if the devices themselves were abundant, the batteries would have been one of the first things looted due to society's dependence on portable electronics. People still thought of the plague as a short event at the beginning that would be over soon, so they wouldn't give a second thought to aimlessly depleting batteries.
Granted it happened a bit fast but without a reason to know the exact date it would be quickly forgotten. In Zombie Land you don't get the weekend off, there is no President's Day or Veterans day. Currently these people are back to hunter-gatherer status so there isn't even a harvest. Considering how long watches seem to live it's hard to believe that nobody had a watch on when this all started but over all it makes sense.
Forgetting the date isn't unexpected, since there's no reason to really remember dates on account of the complete collapse of society. When the odds of surviving to see the next sunrise are so uncertain, you tend to stop caring about trivial things like what day on the calender it is compared to avoiding death by zombie. As for why nobody has watches, people probably do have them in their luggage but don't see the point in keeping track of time because again, with societies breakdown there's very little reason to need to know the exact time of day. Granted things like coordinating meeting spots would be better served with a watch.
Except enough people own watches, and enough cars have calendars built right in that it's a tad absurd that nobody seems to know the exact date. I can level with them simply not giving a shit but not with not knowing.
The only person with a watch was Dale, who kept the mechanical watch his father gave him. For the car calenders, none of the cars they use would have had them.
Why would people care about the date in a zombie apocalypse? It's useful for cordinating complex actions, which is not a smart thing to try and pull off in a zombie apocalypse. Simple plans would work best, which only requires a day and a fixed point (dawn, dusk, noon).
What bugged me the most—nay, what utterly pissed me off—was Tyreese's death. So, Rick doesn't do anything to prevent Tyreese being beheaded in front of him, supposedly because if they try to stop the Governor he'll kill Michonne too. Except here's Rick going on the word of the Governor, who already blatantly lied to them once before trying to kill them. Why would he be so sure that Michonne was actually a captive? (Of course, she wasn't but that's just Dramatic Irony for you.) Likewise, so much effort is made to make Rick look like this calculating and careful character, who's capable of being cold and merciless if it's beneficial to the group overall. So why would he value Michonne, who had only showed up a month or so before and was currently elsewhere with only the word of Rick's greatest enemy that she was in danger, over Tyreese, who Rick had known almost since the beginning of the plague and had proved to be one of the most capable and helpful members of the group? Likewise, it was just the Governor and one other guy against six or seven people from Rick's group. If they'd acted then they could have killed the Governor and his right-hand man, which would have made a huge dent in the morale of the Woodburians and made them think twice about attacking Rick's group. This would have saved Tyreese, and Michonne was out of danger anyway at that point. And anyway, even if Rick's careful risk/reward planning failed him for once, plain old human nature would have spurred him to help his best friend. It's like he was temporarily superglued to the Idiot Ball to give the writers an excuse for Woodbury to show up later and kill off 80% of the main characters. Needless to say, I thought Lori's reaction upon hearing about Tyreese's death was completely reasonable.
I won't disagree that the whole event pissed me off, but it made sense from Rick's standpoint. The Governor had Michonne's katana, which lent some credibility to his claim that he had her. He was
How exactly was Ben supposed to be presented? A burgeoning psychopath, or just a little boy with a poor comprehension of death as it relates to the zombie infection? I mean, he killed his own twin brother, but his reasoning was that he thought he'd come back.
How come nobody is afraid of natural deaths? They all know you come back irrespective of how you die, so shouldn't you be weary of old people dying in their sleep or younger people having heart attacks, all just to devour your sleeping ass? Now that they are in this Washington "paradise", why is it no action is taken to account for this?
They probably do have a plan to deal with it. It's just not shown to us. Aside from that, also keep in mind that nobody in Washington has died of natural death yet.
It's probably just destroying the brain, like they do after the walker attack on their camp outside Atlanta.
One question: How many natural deaths have occurred?
On another note, I'm pretty sure they established a contingency plan for impending reanimations. Her name is Michonne.
Why did Rick & c:o torture those cannibals instead of just stabbing them? I might understand if they were freaking out with all the stress and starvation and stuff, but they only act as if it's a just and necessary thing to inflict on these traumatized crazies the most painful and depraved deaths they have time for. You'd think being dead was enough to keep any person from eating people.
Wait, they tortured the cannibals? I thought they just hacked them to pieces with axes/machetes/etc. I guess I can kind of understand where you're coming from if they hacked off their limbs first, which they might have(it's been a while since I read that arc), but even then it could be reasoned that a limbless body is easier to decapitate and can't attack you while you're focused on executing somebody else. And stabbing somebody is a bit tricky. Unless you hit one of those "insta-death" vital organs like the brain or the heart, the person you stabbed can still try to pull a Taking You with Me if they have enough mobility and sufficient energy to do so(and you'd be surprised how much energy a person who is staring death in the face and is within arms-reach of their potential murderer can muster up....Or So Ive Heard...), so it would probably be smarter to either decapitate them in one quick swing(very difficult to do) or to cripple them and THEN decapitate them(which is what they did).
So, why exactly does everyone have such a hard time keeping track of the time since Z-day? Rick couldn't have been in a coma too long (any longer and he'd have been dead, not to mention that at the beginning, he's shown with a kind of two- or three- weeks scruff going on, not a months-old beard), so why the hell does everyone forget the time and/or date? Did the initial panic cause everyone to destroy every single clock and calendar around in their efforts to survive?
If you take people out of their normal routine, they very easily lose track of time and days. Think about when you go on vacation for two weeks, and you're doing something entirely out of the ordinary. It's disorienting for most people, and you'll wake up forgetting what day it is. Pair that with our reliance on mechanical and electronic time-keeping, and you've got people whose world is turned on its head, they're not doing anything remotely like their normal routine, and all those digital time displays—computers, banks, etc.—are no longer working.
I've owned digital watches with a calender function in them before that had battery life of well over a year and a half. Of all the survivors they've run into, not one of them has something like that?
Chances are that apart from periods and seasons none of them really have any reason to keep track of time. Who would really care? So even they did find someone with that very specific device (and not many people wear wristwatches anymore, let alone those calendar functions) it probably isn't something they'd put too much thought towards.
Does it bug anyone else that the villains in this comic, instead of being interesting, are just a bunch of crazy rapists?
What? A lot of them are much more than that. Dexter had some legitimate issues with Rick's group, The Governor was much, much, more than just a crazy rapist, then there was the cannibal group, and now Negan is something completely different as well. That's not even counting several of the more minor antagonists like Thomas and Pete.
I think what the OP is referring to is the fact that, barring very few exceptions, most of the villains in the comic either attempt to rape the survivors or show an inclination towards wanting to rape the survivors. There's always a sexual edge to them, and it kind of comes off as Rape Is a Special Kind of Evil sometimes. I guess it's to distinguish them morally from the protagonists, who often have to kill people(sometimes even innocent people) just to survive. It's like they're saying "Hey, Rick may have cut off that terrified woman's hand to make her let go of Carl, but at least he's not a rapist!" As for why they're crazy? Dude, these were(on average) normal people pre-apocalypse. They had lives, loved ones, and morals. However, the dead rising and killing everyone around them pushed them over the edge and into madness, and a lot of them were acting out of desperation and just happened to come into conflict with Rick's group. In a sick sense, you could almost say that most of these "villains" could just as easily be the protagonists of the story. That's what the apocalypse does. The few that didn't go crazy were either crazy beforehand(such as Thomas) or are sociopaths taking advantage of the craziness around them and using it to get what they want(like Negan and, possibly, The Governor). Insanity is to be expected in the apocalypse. In fact, when the shit hits the fan, madness often becomes the norm and reason consequently becomes insanity.
Why does Brian claim his name is Phillip at the end of The Road to Woodbury? He didn't seem to have any reason to change his name, especially since it's next to impossible to do background checks now. And it's not like he was some big name war criminal or bank robber before the world ended? Why not just say his name was Brian and be done with it? It just seemed like something thrown in for the sake of blindsiding the readers about The Governor's character.
Reread the section leading up to him killing the National Guard asshole because it spells out the exact reason why he changed his name (even if the reveal comes a few pages later). He looks back on his entire life as Brian and holds himself in contempt, and compares how he views himself (weak, cowardly, waste of space, needs his brother to help him all the time, etc.) to his younger brother (brave, strong, ready to take charge, etc.). The name change is to symbolise him letting go of everything he hated about himself and taking on everything he thought his brother was. Unfortunately, that took all of the bad and none of the good of the real Phillip.
The TV show 1
I really want to know why living at Herschel's house is such a big deal. Can't they just find another farmhouse in the area? Daryl can clearly hunt, and defending the farm doesn't seem to be an issue with no Walkers around.
Not necessarily one with all the acoutrements Herschel's house has: working water pumps with wells (well, two out of three wells), a road a good distance away from the main drag, and electricity and a generator. To say nothing of the fact that Herschel's a doctor.
As Maggie explained most of the other farms have either been burnt to the ground or are infested by walkers.
OP here. Maggie's point DOES kinda explain this, but I still feel that finding a nice country house in the sticks, where there seem to be relatively few wandering Walkers, would be preferable to continuing to live as nomads. I imagine the group could get their hands on a working generator. The well water would be the only real issue. My point was that, instead of wearing out their welcome with Herschel, they could just be neighbours. That way they could utilize his medical skills without pissing him off.
Not exactly. The farms that haven't been burnt down are infested with walkers, not just at risk to few stray walkers. You would end up exhausting your supplies, ammunition, and yourself just trying to make the place liveable. Then there's the season two finale, where the farm is overrun by the herd of walkers from Atlanta, and the group, inlcuding Herschel and his remaining family, must abandon it. The neighbouring farms are undoubtedly unuseable after that.
Hershel's farm is presumably also the only one in the region where the livestock haven't been devoured by walkers, starved to death in their pens, or fled. Those hens and cows are very valuable as sources of eggs and milk.
Why the zombies in the barn are fed live chicken? Also, where do they get so many chickens anyway?
Because keeping them somewhat fed means they're less likely to break out of the barn. They probably have a breeding program for the chickens.
It's more likely because Herschel sees the walkers as sick people that just need a cure. So they're feeding them so they don't "die" of starvation
As to where they get so many chickens: the average domesticated hen lays about 5-6 eggs per week on average. In our universe, the grand majority of those will be collected, packed and sold or simply discarded before they're fertilized of course, but the point is: getting a great many chickens in a hurry is pretty trivial should one be so inclined. How they *feed* those chicks to adulthood (or why they would even care to - what, the dead won't eat day old chicks ?) might be a better question though
Chickens are naturally omnivorious; and, when left to themselves, will eat weeds, seeds, bugs, mice, grains, oyster shell, scraps left over from dinner, whatever may be available in the compost pile, egg shells, and occasionally their own eggs.
Why are supplies so hard to come by? It's been a couple months since the end, so perishable food could reasonably be gone, but where are the twinkies? Gasoline would be very easy to obtain even without getting it from gas stations. And guns? We're supposed to believe that in the middle of ATLANTA GEORGIA Rick's bag of guns were the most easily obtained firearms in the city? They could probably even have their pick of brand new RV's if they bothered to find a dealership.
There wasn't a "vague cataclysmic event." It was a zombie apocalypse, which means that our heroes are not the only people trying to deal with it. The reason supplies are so hard to come by is that other groups of people have came and went through the areas already. Everyone didn't instantly die or disappear, they spent fighting and surviving too, using those same supplies that Rick's group is after.
I'm with the OP, though the previous comment certainly brings up valid points. Their truck is stolen, so they WALK back? The guy is short on tools - don't tell me every hardware store was looted. The "Getting a new RV" the actual vehicles may have been taken but by god the parts stores shouldn't be too picked over. Why on earth didn't anyone give the teams going into Atlanta shopping lists? Back in episode 1 they've established the Sheriff's department was protected, well-stocked, had water, some power and gas - why didn't the man and the boy move in there?
The city of Atlanta has a population size of more than 420,000 people. How long do you really think it'll take for several thousand weapons to be snatched off the shelves by the populace once riots break out and reports of the dead coming back to life to attack the living start hitting the airwaves? Raiding the gun store is a trope all its own and deserves its own page. Hundreds of thousands of people are all having the exact same thought and know where to head to try and seek supplies they believe they'll need.
Besides of the looting that usually comes with public panic. And the fact that some areas are infested with zombies
Twinkies are actually not non-perishables. I live in the Atlanta, Georgia Area. These people panic shop at Wal-Mart and such when snow is predicted, let alone whether it actually does snow. The stores would be stripped in a day or two. Even of the guns.
Yes, the stores may be empty - but with the population becoming walkers so quickly all that equipment would be still lying around for the taking. A house smart enough to stock up on guns and barricade itself, but then fell to walkers would stand out like a sore thumb.
That's just it. Atlanta was, more or less, infested with walkers, so the group was staying away from the city for their own safety, so looting stockpiles isn't an option. Besides, as shown in Vatos, there are others still living in Atlanta, trying to survive, and scavenging supplies from stockpiles throughout the city.
Perhaps the best way to look at this is, its not the supplies are so hard to find, they are not. But rather, the *risk* involved in going to get them is considerable. And the risk scales upwards exponentially with the size of the city. Atlanta=lots of supplies, but huge risk. Smaller towns, fewer supplies, but also far less risky. For some example, Glenn and Maggie just ride into the small town near the farm and take what they want. In the episode "Save the Last One", an emergency aid station is the goal. Plenty of supplies, not just medical, but vehicles and weapons, but also 100s of walkers. The group can afford to send, 2 men. Bad odds and very high risk, as Otis doesn't make it and even Shane barely survives.
Why haven't they considered circling the wagons in regards to the camp? And who chose a place where the only exit appears to be down into the quarry? The people in the camp seem for the most part smarter than this?
Most likely because they just got plain complacent. Because of their remote location, they managed to avoid most of the zombies save for a random wanderer or two. They start catching on to the problem as more zombies show up, but they probably weren't expecting an attack of the magnitude that happened in episode 4. Typical case of Too Dumb to Live.
It must have been complacency - because even in their secluded location, they're in TENTS.
In all fairness there were only so many vehicles in the camp, not nearly enough to encircle the entire encampment.
If only the world had ended and there were literally all of the free, unused vehicles you could ever want available. C'est la vie.
And if only getting those vehicles didn't always involve the possibility of being swarmed and eaten, and half those vehicles were crashed or otherwise unusable.
Will Glenn ever explain why they call them "Geeks" instead of "Zombies". Its clearly obvious what they are, they know they are dead, yet why no-one uses that word is a little weird. Or is it just a joke that "only geeks would call them zombies"
In the comic, it's something of a running gag that every little group has its own name for them. The black dude from the pilot calls them "Walkers" for instance.
Fun trivia: it's a fitting enough nickname, since "geek" originally referred to circus sideshow performers, occasionally of the sort that would bite the heads off a live chicken or similar for the audience.
It may be a failure of Genre Savvy. In The Walking Dead universe, they don't seem to have zombie movies or Zombie Apocalypse movies - therefore, to them, a zombie is an obscure movie monster that has something to do with voodoo, not a walking, virus infected corpse. This editor feels that this is common in Zombie Apocalypse fiction - what with, as in The Walking Dead, characters spend a lot of time asking 'what are those things?' and not knowing 'shoot the brain' right off, for example.
Confirmed by Word of God. It actually makes a lot of sense as, if this series was set in the real world, anyone who owns a George Romero boxset would have access to a list of Walker hunting techniques longer than your arm. Hell even owning a copy of Shaun of the Dead would be beneficial. Having the characters find this stuff out for themselves increases the drama tenfold.
Plus, it is incredibly unlikely that zombies could ever exist in a universe where people have seen zombie movies. Unlike serial killers which also exist in the real world, so someone could be hunted by a serial killer who watches serial killer movies, or vampires/werewolves which have been in legends for hundreds of years, the modern zombie was completely invented by Romero in the 1950s, so to have film-makers create an entirely new type of monster, and then to have it spontaneously appear in the natural world not 100 years later? Unless bio-terrorists were inspired by the movies to replicate the monsters, that simply wouldn't happen.
The above reasoning doesn't make any sense since the concept of the Zombie having been invented recently doesn't preclude a similar monster coming into existence for unrelated reasons. There are already countless instances of fiction coincidentally predicting eerily similar events. "The wreck of the Titan" comes to mind. Also the Bible makes reference to "the dead walking the earth" long before Romero.
The Bible is referring to corpses possessed by demons, and Kirkman just mentioned zombie movies didn't come to fruition in that universe, which might mean that earlier media that referenced zombies might not have existed so Romero couldnt base it off anything, so that means that no zombies existed before the outbreak in media.. BOOM Fridge Brilliance to the MAX!
How did Daryl manage to fire a crossbow three times in rapid enough succession to hit a deer each time? Deer tend to run off when hit by an arrow or bullet, even fatally. But that won't necessitate tracking a deer for so long and so far that a zombie gets to gnaw on it first. It seems Daryl is incredibly bad at hitting vital organs that aren't zombie brains, or deer in The Walking Dead have no need for them.
Why didn't anyone put Jim out of his misery before they left for the CDC? It looked as if it was going that way. Or that Daryl would quickly snipe him as he left with his crossbow. It was obvious to everyone they were leaving him to die, but it was also clear that he'd reanimate. Sure he could barely stand now, but when he reanimates, he'll be just as agile as the other Zombies! Jim lost his family to Zombies eating them in front of them, imagine the poor dopes who gets the same thing when Zombie!Jim comes crashing through their door and starts eating Auntie Gladys...?!
Totally. I mean, what was the outcome they were hoping for, here? Best case, he doesn't die from the infection, recovers...and is now left weak, unarmed, and stranded in the middle of nowhere? Second best case, he dies, but miraculously doesn't rise as a zombie? Worst case, he becomes a zombie, and remembers where the group was going and follows them?
Watch the relevant scenes again; Jim specifically asks to be left alive. He wants to let the infection take him because of his survivor's guilt over his family; he feels this is the best way he can be with them. He specifically turns down a gun when they offer to leave one with him. The other characters have an extensive debate over whether or not any of this is the right thing to do and end up deciding to respect his wishes. (Alternately, it's possible Jim is simply too much of a coward to want to die before the infection does the job, but, functionally, it doesn't make much of a difference.) This is certainly not the smart thing to do, but the subject of whether or not it's smart never comes up. The entire first half of the episode deals with the survivors from the attack on the camp figuring out how to cope with the state of the world, and ultimately they decide to let common sense slide on some things because they feel like it's costing them their humanity (to borrow a line from Battlestar Galactica, it's not enough to survive, you have to be worthy of survival.) Whether or not they're right is another debate entirely, I'm sure at least one person reading this had already started thinking "if they're too stupid to do what needs to be done to survive no matter what, they're not worthy of survival," but that's not the issue on making sense of Jim; given the place everyone is in, mentally, whether it's right or wrong, or smart or stupid, the way it plays out makes sense.
And, honestly, in a world with (probably) millions of zombies, one more on a road in the middle of nowhere (well, yes, between Atlanta and the CDC) isn't really going to make a difference. They followed Jim's wishes. There was no real danger to them in doing so.
Now, I may just be an undergraduate biochemistry major, but what sort of CDC scientist (working in a Hazmat suit, no less) spills corrosive chemicals on a sample, and then starts POKING the sample!?
A tired and mentally unbalanced one.
Seconding exhausted and mentally unbalanced — the latter was made clear in episode 6 that he'd suffered Sanity Slippage after spending 65 days with no one for company but Vi the AI.
He's also shown to be trying to brush off the corrosive material, not just poking at it.
And if you do decide to stay at your post through the Apocalypse, shouldn't you pass your data on? Sure, it's unlikely that our heroes will meet anyone who can use it but that's better than simply letting it "die" with you.
I'm hoping we someday find out that all the computer data was automatically uploaded somewhere before "decontamination".
Also, his video logs were sent somewhere else, it's safe to assume that other place made automatic recordings of all he was saying, hence he knew his research had reached out.
Little continuity glitch. Excuse given for Andrea being all skittish is "she hasn't eaten in days, none of us have" — but weren't they having a fish fry right before they left for the CDC? Or did many days go by after they handled the dead and the dead-again?
The fish fry was probably ruined by the attack. I imagine, in the panic, nobody gave much thought to securing the food, and afterward they probably got rid of the exposed fish just in case any of the Walkers had infected them. Aside from that, I'm not sure just how long the trip was.
Is anyone else a little confused as to why NONE of the women have learned to defend themselves yet? Slow to pick it up, I can understand, but so far all they've managed to do in any stressful situation is cower.
It likely hasn't really dawned on them yet that the world as they know it is never coming back, so they're probably still thinking "the men will protect us until this is all over."
In the comics, Andrea becomes a badass zombie killer after the death of her sister - this may just be a matter of time.
Think of it this way. Its been under three months since the infection happened. The only people we see defending themselves and acting badass are those who would have had experience with that in the pre-zombie world. Rick and Shane are police officers, natural leaders made for situations like this. Daryl and Merle were tough rednecks. Daryl obviously knows how to hunt and how to fight, same with Merle. Besides them, we don't see anyone else fighting. Glenn, Dale, T-Dog and such, none of them really do any fighting. Why is no one complaining about them? They were normal people before the apocalypse. It takes time for people to adjust to situations such as this. Andrea was obviously a family girl and college educated. Lori was just a house wife. Carol lived with an abusive chauvinistic husband. People have seemed to deluded themselves into believing the moment the zombie apocalypse happens, they'll be tough as nails and badass. This is the reason why I like the show, because of the portrayal of the characters is realistic. Its shows the shock, the yearning for a normal life once more (like Lori constantly treating Carl like a child still. He's the only thing that she feels she's still in control of, being a mom is all she knows.)
Perhaps that was the situation intended, but what's happening on-screen is "Stay in the Kitchen and let the menfolk handle things." Even Glen the delivery guy has Hidden Depths, but the women—three healthy, uninjured adults—haven't even considered trying to get some sort of makeshift melee weapon despite several months of scavenging. It's understandable to keep Andrea away from guns in case she tries to eat one, but there's still melee weapons and the other two have no excuse. In fact, Lori and Carol have a really good reason to find some kind of weapon—they need to protect their kids.
Mostly turned around in the second season. The women are at least given weapons while searching for things, Andrea wants to learn how to fire a gun and Shane will apparently teach her eventually.
I'm sorry but no it hasn't turned around in the slightest. Andrea now has a gun true, but Lori and Carol are still perfectly content to sit around/cry whilst everyone else protects the camp. In fact whilst we're on the subject of Andrea, firing a rifle at an unidentified target whilst three friendlies are in close proximity and knowing full well the sound might bring more Walkers is actually very good evidence of the Stay in the Kitchen theory above. If Daryl died Andrea would now be firmly in the Creator's Pet camp.
You can kind of understand where Carol's coming from, but Lori is married to a cop. Even if she'd never used a gun herself, he should have taught her how (if not, that's Epic Fail on his part). Why she doesn't carry one is a mystery, especially since she's, you know, pregnant.
Lori is actually shown to be perfectly capable to defend herself when the situation calls for it at least once, such as in Nebraska, when she crashes her car while heading into town to look for Rick, Glenn and Herschel, and has to defend herself from a lone walker that attacks her. She also took a gun with her when she left, and continues to carry it with her afterwards. I'd chaulk that up to Rick actually teachinjg her something about self defense at some point in time, which more or less Josses the Stay in the Kitchen theory. Carol, however, is an abuse victim, and it is implied that because of that abuse, she considers herslf useless for anything other than cooking and cleaning.
Another point in the Let the women stay at home question above, why is it apparently only the women that are contemplating killing themselves? now personally I don't think its ever justified no matter what the circumstances but the fact is that Andrea attempted suicide, Beth attempted suicide, Maggie considered suicide, Carol considered suicide, Jacqui actually committed suicide... how many healthy males (in other words Jim asking to be left behind after being infected doesn't count) have actually gone down this route? even the, and please forgive the expression, most feminine guy in the group Glenn never went the suicide route and instead has begun to morph into far stronger personality. Personally; I can only name Dr Jenner.
Speaking of which, why is Lori so bad at contraception? She's already had a child, she should know that unprotected sex can lead to pregnancy. Further, after she has decided to abort, she sends Glenn to the pharmacy again for abortion pills and... several morning after pills. No mention of condoms and/or the contraceptive pill. The morning after pill is an emergency strategy with severe side-effects - not something you'd want to take after every time you've had intercourse. Not that it matters since she decides to keep the baby... which is just as stupid considering that she lives in constant danger of mobilized dead people trying to chew her face off, and being pregnant doesn't exactly make you more agile. Not to mention that without access to proper medical facilities/staff, there is always a possibility of complications, and her dying giving birth.
No shit she knew. Turns out in a zombie apocalypse, people tend to have lapses in judgment. She wasn't planning to use that stuff as regular contraceptives, she only had him get any of it to specifically terminate the pregnancy she already had.
And congrats, you noticed and are calling her out on the exact same things she noticed and called herself out on. Did you watch the episode where they went into all this, and she gave her reasoning for trying to abort, and how Rick talked her out of it?
This bothers me as well. Lori stands around dispensing down-home wisdom about men needing to do whatever they need to do, Carol cries or goes catatonic, Andrea is training with a pistol but is totally incompetent under stress...basically, anything important is done by white males. It's an unsettling theme that wasn't present at all in the comic.
Well, honestly, the sad fact of life is that not everyone is going to be a badass. In fact, I'd venture to say that the vast majority of people aren't going to be badass or even effective in a situation like that. And the white males' track record isn't exactly spotless either. Hershel was in denial and that denial is part of the reason for all the conflict in season 2; Shane is a half step away from losing his shit; Dale is ineffective at the best of times (he didn't spot the horde of walkers that resulted in Sophia getting lost, or the one that killed him); and while Daryl is certainly badass, he hasn't gotten much done either and spent at least one whole episode as walking wounded, losing his arrows and nearly getting killed. And, as has been mentioned here and other places, nearly all Rick's decisions have ended in disaster of one stripe or another.
So, sure, if you measure importance solely in ability to shoot people, surprise surprise, the two cops (trained with firearms and to deal with life-and-death situations) and the redneck hunter are the most "important."
Well, to be fair, Andrea's "incompetent under stress" is perfectly justifiable. It's much different to be shooting actual, walking hostile targets than it is to be shooting bottles and "No Trespassing" signs, even among actual police officers who undergo longer training than an afternoon at the range. And once she overcomes that mental block preventing her from concentrating under pressure (entirely on her own, mind you) she's landing headshots with the best of them. Still doesn't excuse Lori or Carol, of course, but at least Carol's passivity is consistent with the character background.
Again, though, this is a theme that isn't present in the comic, where the women are as useful as the men — and no, I don't just measure usefulness in terms of shooting ability. Read the comic, then watch the show; the weird Stay in the Kitchen undercurrent in the latter is a distinctly uncomfortable addition.
And watch the Season 3 opener—where Maggie and Beth are right there helping to clear out the Walkers, and even Carol is wielding an AK with clear aptitude. The only reason Lori isn't is because she's visibly pregnant at this point. It's not a "theme," it's the characters having to develop.
Exactly; the writers had what is known as a no-win scenario on their hands. If they had made Lori and Maggie and all the other women badasses from the beginning they would have got just as many complaints that it was unrealistic that the women could so easily go from farmers and housewives into a team of Sarah Connor's overnight - whatever they did they were going to offend someone. The main males on this team were either ex-law enforcement, had handled guns all of their lives or were physically very strong such as T-Dog so naturally they were overwhelmingly superior to the females in terms of combat ability to begin with. It also should be pointed out that, whilst they may have slipped up occasionally, the writers were trying to make this show as realistic as possible and I imagine it goes without saying that developing as human beings is one crucial part of real life.
I don't get why the zombies are such a threat. I understand them managing to swarm an isolated survivor or two put how do they overrun secure well defended installations? Some initial panic in dealing with the zombie infestation I get, surely after a while police and the army would be sweeping infested areas and clearing them out? Even if every dead person turns into a zombie opposed to just those bit, just give orders to put a bullet in every dead corpse. Unless there is some other mechanism at work (e.g. an airborne strain) doesn't really make sense. Series is still awesome though.
My personal theory is that it's both airborne and bite transmitted. The airborne strain is weak, and only managed to infect those with weak immune systems, but the concentrated dose in a bite is enough to overwhelm even the strongest immune system.
I personally think that the initial panic is barely over. We know that Rick was in a coma for two months before he woke up to the world as it is, and judging from the scene where Shane brought him flowers in the hospital, the plague didn't start until he'd been out of it for at least a week or two. The military may still be forthcoming.
That's the thing with zombie movies/TV series - you gotta accept that these slow, dimwitted corpses can somehow overrun the entire world. So yes, somehow, everyone had a severe attack of incompetence, or some other factors are at work.
To further expand on this; the thing about the Zombie Apocalypse as a whole is that, despite outward appearances, it's much more of a vehicle for metaphor and social commentary than most people realize, even people who know in passing that the original Dawn of the Dead was an implicit attack against rampant consumerism. The idea that no military can possibly stand up to it is based heavily on the wish to critique the failure of societies that are ostensibly meritocracies to actually allow people with true merit to advance. This is why you rarely see businessmen or the saccharine middle class Taking A Level In Badass in these stories; it's always down-to-earth people like Rick who may be at least somewhat well-off but are otherwise street-smart and are painted as having a grasp of how the world works. Because the military is the group responsible for defending the populace (and are thus the group that must fail for the zombies to actually become an apocalypse,) they get something of a meta-Butt Monkey treatment in the genre where the writer assumes that the armed forces are so full of Neidermeyers (remember, overabundance of people who don't deserve to advance who have advanced anyway) that the troops on the ground are too handicapped to adapt to the new threat, so much so that they can gain absolutely no advantage from the new threat's many weaknesses. World War Z is a large offender here, with an entire chapter dedicated to explaining how the military higher-ups screwed up a chance at an easy victory while going into detail about the simple changes to strategy that would've made the battle completely one-sided against the zombies (to be fair, World War Z is also heavy-handed about the belief in the ability of humanity to survive and adapt, so it also goes into detail about how protocols/procedures are changed to reflect the new problems, and has characters like a soccer mom who actually discusses how her suburban "get the kids to school/social functions on time while keeping up with the Joneses" mentality left her unprepared and willfully ignorant of the problem.)
One good example, in my opinion, is the CDC building. The building has 50 or more computer terminals in that one room (I counted 49 visible, and several more obscured by lights). That's in zone 5, so there should be at least 250 terminals (more if there are more than 5 zones, or if that room is only part of zone 5). The building is defended by at least two machine guns and it is implied that there are many, many more guns inside. So where are all the bodies? It seems like there would be heaps and heaps of dead before the building was overrun. The people in the film, especially the military, just seem generally incompetent all the time, like when a zombie soldier is found in the tank (what happened to him? He had a loaded gun and was in a tank; couldn't he have closed the hatches or shot the zombies?) or when a soldier in the flashback in episode 6 is attacked by a zombie and starts shooting at the ceiling and lights.
The CDC guy left probably got rid of the bodies somehow. As for the guy in the tank, he probably did similar to Rick, went in for refuge, but in his case he'd already been bitten. As for the third, he was just bitten by a zombie. It has nothing to do with being "incompetent," and everything to do with being eaten alive and reflexively pulling the trigger.
The soldier in the tank was planned to be in a second webseries, starring Sam Witwer, when Frank Darabont was fired. It was described as "Black Hawk Down, but with zombies", and be about the fall of Atlanta, and how the soldier was bit, grabbed a grenade, climbed into the tank, and died before he could kill himself.
I don't think the zombies really did much overwhelming. In episode one we're shown dozens of bodies outside the hospital. Clearly there is an air/water/contact strain out there. In the same episode we're told that he saw what happened AFTER they started killing the infected. Presumably everybody got sick one day then woke up dead. It's also the only reasonable way to explain how the military bases got over run. It happened from the inside out. The survivors of the initial wave were probably a lot fewer than we think.
At the end of episode 5 you see dozens to hundreds of bodies all over the streets and yards surrounding the CDC building. It's likely they were overrun simply because zombies are nearly inexhaustible while ammunition isn't. The fact that Browning M2s are used suggests the military wasn't prepared to deal with the true nature of the threat, or they would've been using small caliber weaponry like the M249 or even just M4 carbines. Mowing down wave after wave of incoming enemies bent on killing you doesn't work when everything below the neck is of no consequence when hit.
All bullets generate a concussion wave. The concussion wave of the .50 BMG is larger than the human body and can gib multiple humans (which is why no movie will ever show the realistic effect of being hit by one of those suckers. Anything over the belt would kill a zombie. There should have been many more bodies, and they should have been in smaller pieces and the military should not have been overrun so easily. However, is the entire city reanimated was descending on them they would have lost from attrition anyways.
No, no they don't. There is no concussive wave from a bullet. If there was, there would be more than just a half inch hole in paper targets. Here's◊ a ballistics gel target with the permanent and temporary cavities created by a .50 BMG. Are those wounds nasty? Yes. Can a .50 calibre bullet destroy a human body in one shot? Not a chance in Hell.
Actually it is a valid argument that the terminal impact of a large caliber round from a machine gun or a 50 cal could kill a walker if the round hits the upper body. The Hydrostatic shock of military grade munitions can turn a person's brain to mush inside their skulls, even if they are hit in the extremities. It basically pops your brain cells like tiny balloons. Even if their brain isn't turned to jello, getting hit below the shoulder by a BMG round can easily destroy limb function or just blast it clean off your body. It may not kill the walker, but it would probably ring its bell pretty darn hard. As for typical assault rifles and carbines, the walkers would likely tolerate the effects, though a shot that hits the spinal cord could probably send enough shock through the body to splat the neurons in the brain stem, though such shots would be rare as well.
In the comics it is revealed that the strain is indeed an airborne type where everybody who dies returns as a zombie. It's not the bite that does it, that's just liable to be what kills you. Also the point is precisely that they're not really that dangerous by themselves; it's when they get into a large pack that it turns dangerous because they don't stop following you.
Nope, that never happened. There is no confirmation of "airborne" or "virus", just that everyone will become a zombie.
In the prison arc, they find out that people can turn without being bitten, and realize that this means everyone must already be infected and the bites don't turn, they only kill.
Another frequent Zombie Apocalypse staple is that by the time people work out what's actually going on, the numbers are already tilted against them. Most nations, sadly, do not have a good zombie defense protocol on the books, and it would take awhile psychologically to adapt to the fact that zombies exist enough to get your act together. You also have to deal with other random factors - denial by both governments and individuals, zombie-ism being treated as a disease at first and thus getting a chance to spread through/shut down the health care system, people not wanting to kill zombies because they hoped to rehabilitate them, and above all the fact that every dead human is a potential zombie, so every successive defeat for humankind is a force multiplier for the zombies. Beyond that, you just need to put your Willing Suspension of Disbelief hat on and accept the genre for what it is.
There's also the very real issue that emergency services can and do break down. EMTs and Police are going to be the first people called in and naturally the first ones bitten. As for the military, imagine if large chunks of the unit decide "I've gotta get home to protect my family!" all at once.
You also have to remember that about half of our military is National Guard and reserve units that have to be called up to be put into action. The other half is spread between domestic military bases and overseas assets. So those soldiers that could readily be deployed within the US would not be enough to police very large portions of the country (perhaps just the areas immediately near their bases).
It's not clear how the plague spreads. I agree that bite-only transmission probably would not have led to an apocalypse. Others have mentioned an airborne transmission - but I don't think it's even a virus. Nothing biological could cause a body to change in the fashion the show portrays (mutant influenza won't make you capable of surviving for months without food, blood, or the lower half of your body). Even if it it's a disease, it's necessarily a supernatural one. We can also look at the zombies themselves. They are decayed but relatively intact - they don't have limbs eaten off. I think that a lot of people change without direct exposure. If we assume an infectious agent, you could have billions seeming to spontaneously transform.
According to that logic, almost all zombie apocalypse stories are supernatural, when in fact, many, if not most, explicitly aren't. The thing about zombie fiction is that it's very common for the zombie-ism to be caused by some crazy virus that can somehow or other allow a corpse to keep moving and walking around despite having nothing but the brain still functioning.
In the comic and video game it is made clear that everyone who dies comes back as a zombie. So if it is some kind of plague, everyone's already infected and the disease is just dormant until you die.
This was also addressed in Romero's Day of the Dead. Basically, people are freaked out by two things. 1) Zombies are human beings functioning on pure primal instinct. Whether they're devouring someone alive or trying to break into a shopping mall or something else that provides social commentary, we get a good harsh look at what we are when all conscious thought is stripped away, so that scares people and leaves them unable to react. 2) Zombies are our loved ones. People don't want to kill their friends and family, even when they're trying to eat them. Sentimentality spells doom for the human race. By the time everyone realizes this, it's too late.
Is it really plausible that a system designed to eradicate all the dangerous viruses / bacteria in the CDC building would consist of a bomb that would rupture all the walls and roof, and blast debris out all over the place? Even if they were trying to invoke Kill It with Fire, wouldn't it have been safer to have something that would collapse the building in on itself and bury everything, rather than releasing aerosolized CDC material into the atmosphere?
I agree. When the scientist described the process and said it "set the air on fire" I assumed it would be something similar to what we saw with the contaminated sample at the start of the episode; essentially, a WHOOMPH of fire that incinerated the interior, but left the building intact. This would surely make more sense if the safeguard was to be used in any other situation, other than the end of the world. If there was a terrorist attack that took out the power grid, or the fossil fuels eventually just ran out, they would want to decontaminate the building to prevent bio-weapons leaking, but leave the complex largely intact, you know, just in case the government still had control, so they could re-use it.
I'm calling Rule of Cool here and going with a wild guess that the writers or director or whoever just thought that the explosion would look cooler and appear more dramatic as they raced to get away from the building in time to escape the blast. But who knows really.
Collapse inward so all those things are still there just waiting to be found instead of incinerated which we know kills just shy of everything? The better question is why didn't he spend a few days trying to figure out how to turn that off? Keeping weaponized Ebola is important in case of a terrorist attack or missile attack. Not so much in case of zombie apocalypse or other outbreak. When you've got a bacteria, virus, parasite whatever the one place you absolutely cannot afford to lose is the CDC.
The explosive is explicitly said to be a fuel-air bomb, which makes Jenner's description of "setting the air on fire" an understatement, if anything. An FAB strong enough to bring the building down is certainly strong enough to sterilize every square inch of space inside it; this is a weapon that is rarely used in reality because of the worry that it's so easily mistaken for a nuclear bomb that one might prompt A Nuclear Error from someone.
Concur. A thermobaric Bomb actually creates a vacuum that sucks all oxygen from the surrounding area into the flame. Though it creates a concussive force, it is primarily a heat based weapon that would incinerate anything in the air or building.
Fuel-air explosives are all about the concussive effect. Sure, they burn hot, but not for nearly long enough. They don't "create a vacuum that sucks all oxygen from the surrounding area into the flame" - they wouldn't have time; the total burn time is measured in mere milliseconds. The whole "vacuum bomb" confusion comes from the fact that there's a "rebound" after the initial massive overpressure, as the volume previously occupied by hot expanding gases cools and drops in pressure.note Ever see those old nuclear testing videos where dust and debris are first swept one way by the shockwave and then flung back again? Exactly like that. TL;DR: thermobarics are great for flattening structures, not so much for sterilization. For that you want high, long-lasting heat. Or a nuke.
The really nasty stuff was kept deep underground, so the part that we saw explode was just the tip of the iceberg. The explosion probably vaporized everything down there and then collapsed the only entrance to keep it in.
Shouldn't Felipe be turning into a zombie in "Vatos"? He got an arrow that has pierced countless geeks heads right on the ass, and I've not seen Daryl clean 'em once.
Just because you don't see him clean them doesn't mean he doesn't. He also uses the crossbow to hunt, remember, and he'd definitely want them clean for that.
And then there's Daryl's knife. If he puts it back in the sheathe after dispatching a zombie the blood and infected matter goes in with it, contaminating it every time he puts it back.
When the doctor knocks that stuff over in TS 19 and it sets off the fail-safe for that room. After he leaves the room. he strips out of his hazmat suit to get sanitized... unless there's more than one way of doing that, they must have not done the research because to my knowledge those things spray a deadly mixture of bleach and all sorts of other chemicals to make sure it kills anything that could cause an infection. It would kill a person very quickly, and painfully.
Maybe it had run out of the bleach mix? I imagine the decontamination showers would be used every time he exited the lab, and given the apocalypse going on I doubt the chemical reservoirs would be refilled at all.
He actually goes through a bleach shower (presumably bleach, anyway) while in his suit, and then takes a water shower in the decon chamber. Excessive? Not in a place that works on WEAPONIZED SMALLPOX.
If fresh material is so hard to come by, why did Jenner shoot TS-19 through the head? I would think the brain-stem, which he destroyed, would be the most important part of a reanimated corpse to study.
TS-19 was his wife, so maybe he couldn't bring himself to dissect her.
The flashback sequence in Wildfire shows that the sample Jenner was experimenting with was labelled TS 19, which better explains his Big "NO!" when the lab and sample are decontaminated after he spills the corrisive material.
A lot of these comments are presuming that the survivors are behaving rationally, when it's pretty clear that every single person left alive is suffering from deep psychological trauma. Expecting people, in that state, to make good decisions is a bit much.
If zombies tell who's alive and who's dead through scent, at what point do their olfactory senses decay past use? And if they're in a large enough herd, how can they smell the difference? And after a few weeks of no bathing and no perfumes or deodorant do humans really smell all that different?
I don't think it's just that they smell rotten, but that they have a distinct "undead" odor that's not found in anything but zombie flesh.
How did Rick survive being alone, in a coma, in a hospital full of the undead?
I wonder how he survived several weeks worth of dehydration and starvation. I wonder if the comics have a better explanation of how he slept through the Apocalypse** In a later episode, they show Shane blocking the door with a locked gurney. Since Rick wasn't moving or making any noise it seems plausible that they never knew he was in there. As for food and water, ehhhhhh....
There have been accounts of people in certain survival situations surviving for long stretches of time without food or water. In a sheltered area like he was, this reduces his exposure to the elements. He's unconscious, so he breathes less which means less loss of water that way. A person can survive 3 weeks without food being active, he was lying still in a single spot. As well he was hooked up to IVs that would continue to drip to sustain him for sometime. As well, we see the water still flowing as he heads to the sink which means there's water pressure. So you could say that he was left unattended for weeks instead of two months. We're not too certain on the time frame of when he was in the hospital and when the outbreak occurred. Requires a little plausible deniability for certain, but not a whole lot.
My guess is that if Rick didn't wake up when he did he was only a handful of days away from dying as it was. Probably one of those "by the skin of your teeth" things where the difference between life and death is measures in hours.
It's also possible that Rick's caregivers at the hospital had been giving him a mild sedative to prevent muscle spasms and to alleviate pain if and when he did regain consciousness. If so, it wouldn't be pure coincidence that he woke up before he could die of dehydration: being left without IV fluids and medication could have been what caused him to revive.
In season 2, we're seeing people not getting infected when it should probably have happened. Andrea stabbing a walker in the eye with a screwdriver sprayed blood all over her. Daryl hiding T-Dog under a freshly killed walker while T-Dog had a profusely bleeding arm wound. Shane punched a walker in the mouth. In the same scene, Daryl and possibly Rick get walker blood on them, something that Rick specifically mentions not to do way back in episode two. It's possible they just got lucky, but still.
Having the blood on you carries the risk of infection, but it seems that only actually getting bitten and having the walkers' blood/saliva/whatever actually enter your bloodstream is what does it. Incidental contact isn't enough to force an infection.
The show hasn't really gone into detail regarding just what presents the possibility of infection beyond an actual bite taking place. Unlike Max Brooks nobody has elaborated on whether or not the virus is in the blood and the tissues of the body, or just in the saliva. Everybody taking the precautions that they have with gloves, masks and coats may simply be an example of safety first rather than an actual necessity.
The Virus being carried by saliva makes the most sense, it was stated that bites and scratches(The zombies eat with thier hands so it makes sense that they would get some saliva on thier fingers)causes the infections that make people turn.
If the nature of the show zombies is anything like the nature of the comic zombies, the means of transmission is irrelevant.
Word of God says that it's not the zombie virus that kills you, but the infection caused from having a rotting mouth cause a wound. Most likely, Walker blood is a semi-coagulated goop.
If it helps any, Big Tiny is season 3 is determined to have to be put down after being stabbed not particularly deeply by a walker's arm bone.
First episode of season 2: Right at the end the boy gets shot by Otis who's hunting the deer. This scene annoys me so much because it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Why would the kid want to walk up to the buck anyway? And even more annoying: how can he be so quiet (and unsmelling)? The deer should have feld the second the boy made his first step.
The kid is walking up to the deer because it's the first good, natural, beautiful thing he's seen since, you know, zombies started eating people. Also, not all deer flee the instant something makes a sound. There are places where you can definitely get that close to deer because they're not hunted. The Shenandoah Valley, for instance, where my father nearly tripped over one deer while he was approaching another to take a picture.
Because God wanted him to get shot? No, seriously, I don't think it's a coincidence that after Rick asks God for a sign, Carl gets shot. Clearly the writers have a view of God similar to mine.
Deer have very poor depth perception, so have a hard time judging how close a person is if the person isn't moving. This troper has gotten within five feet of browsing deer, simply by waiting until they've lowered their heads to feed and quietly taking a step or two straight towards them while they're distracted.
How was the hanging walker able to move? Hanging breaks the neck, severing the spinal cord. Most spinal cord injuries cause loss of limb functionality (or, at worst, quadriplegia), which the hanging walker clearly shows control over.
Guy might have screwed up and choked to death rather then broke his neck. Hanging is a rather exact art, screw-up and a relatively quick and painless death gets traded in for a long and horrible one... there's actually one instance back in the old west when the executioners screwed up a hanging so bad it decapitated the man.
The way hanging breaks a person's neck is the sudden drop from height, usually accomplished by the trap door, or before that, putting someone on a horse and having the horse run off. The guy who hung himself wouldn't have had either of those, from the look of it.
Why is Carol staying at camp while everyone else (Even Carl!)looks for her daughter? Does she not have a single Mama Bear bone in her body?
If I had to guess, I'd say she's probably deathly afraid of finding her dead.
And she's an abuse victim. Most abusers systematically brainwash their victims, so Carol is probably convinced she'd be completely useless on the search and in any other situation that didn't involve cooking and cleaning and doing laundry.
Season 2 winter finale's big reveal; Sophia was a walker in Hershel's barn. What. They mean to tell us that Hershel forgot putting a little girl in his barn (in most believable circumstances) days before people show up looking for her? It's not like he had reason to hide her presence from them; he wanted the group gone and she was one of the main reasons they wouldn't leave.
Hershel didn't know. They said earlier in the episode that Otis was the one who caught and placed the walkers in the barn. Note that it was never mentioned to Otis that they were looking for Sophia due to Carl getting shot, so he wouldn't have had a reason to tell Rick and Shane about it himself before he died; the fact that Hershel didn't mention it implies that Otis never told him about catching her, either.
Also, Hershel probably wouldn't have told the survivors even if he knew Sophia was in there. After all, he never wanted to tell them the barn existed in the first place.
The more pressing question is why we never saw her in the barn before this point despite Glen having a full aerial view of the interior.
Really? Glenn saw the Walkers, freaked out for a few seconds, and then got the fuck out of there, he didn't have time to look at them all. And considering how she was the last to stumble out of the barn in 2.7, she may have been in a corner or something.
Not to mention the fact that it was night and the entire interior of the barn wasn't lit up, making it even more unlikely that he would be able to see her in there amidst the other, much larger zombies that were gathering right underneath him.
Why is Rick the default leader? season 2 episode 7 is a perfect example: Shane plans to shoot the Walkers whilst his wife adamantly pleads that "it's not your call to make" why? because he outranked him as a Deputy? if anything his steadfast refusal to make the hard choices makes him a liability not an asset. Not to mention that Shane's proclamation to Lori is 100% accurate: Rick never does seem to be the one that saves her life does he?
This annoys me too. The group was doing fine, it was only when Rick showed up that everything went to shit. Although when she said "It's not your call to make" she probably meant they should have a vote. But really, none of Ricks decisions have been good so far; go save Merle, now Jim, Amy, and the asshole are dead; go to the CDC, now whatsername is dead; have Carl come look for Sophia, then he was shot and Otis died. I can't tell if we're supposed to be against Shane at this point, personally he's my second favorite character after 2.7.
Not to mention the whole Sophia situation was almost entirely his fault. Yes she disobeyed her mother and ran off but she was also a scared, emotional little girl who had seen more horror than most of us can imagine... and he just told her to just sit in the middle of a Walker infested wood and wait for him to come back. For all we know (and what is most likely) is that she ran off because another couple of Walkers had flanked them and were in the immediate proximity the whole time. To give him some kudos however, Lori was quite correct when she stated that no one else seemed to be in any particular hurry to run after her.
Episode 2.7 is a perfect example of why Rick is the leader. Because after all of his chest thumping and all his self-righteousness, Shane didn't have the balls or the willingness to do what had to be done for Sophia. Rick did. Rick thinks long term which is way he was willing to make a compromise with Herschel about the walkers in the barn, because it gave Herschel a reason to trust them and thus allow them to stay on the farm. Rick probably knew the barn wouldn't hold for long and that they would be forced to deal with it down the road, but he wasn't going to force it because it would have pissed Herschel off. Plus, I'd rather have Rick as a leader than a mentally unstable, attempted rapist, who's looking to murder his supposed best friend because he wants that friends wife. Shane isn't looking out for the group, he's looking out for himself. He wants Lori because it would make HIM feel better, not because of her safety.
Shane does honestly care about Lori. He was perfectly stable until Rick came and started taking over everything. The only reason Shane wants to murder Rick is because he feels they aren't safe under his leadership, not just to make himself feel better. Almost everything bad in the series that has happened and put the characters in danger is RICK's fault. Of course Shane would want his irresponsible self dead.
Not to mention that Rick vacillates between the leader and supposed speaker of the house when it suits him. Because he didn't want to do what he knew he had to do to Randall, he instituted a democracy. Then, when he couldn't do it, he decided that he wanted a dictatorship and declared his word law even though it was completely irrational. This is putting aside just how fucking irresponsible this is. Later on, Randall does in fact prove that he knows exactly where he is, and is even able to give Shane directions from their to his camp. If Shane had any doubt, he probably stopped caring then.
Randall wasn't much of a threat. He's implied to have been a hanger-on of the other group and whose loyalty is to whoever gives him food and safety, and, if he is to be believed, that group moves at night, and since they lost four men to a picked over, walker infested town, why should they stay there for over a week? By the time Rick decides to execute him, that group is likely long gone, never to return. There was never a strong argument to execute Randall. He didn't rape anyone, and he was no longer part of that group.
Let's go over Shane's decisions as "leader". First, he lets four people tag along with Glenn on a routine scavenging mission, when Glenn says outright he'd never done that before, and, surprise surprise, the one time four people tage along with him, one of whom is a violent racist, they almost end up getting killed. And there are no other decisions. It's likely that if Rick hadn't come around when he did, Merle (assuming he hadn't gotten himself and everyone else killed in Atlanta) would have likely taken control from Shane.
The hanging walker who had only been eaten up to the knees brought up the fact that zombies, in this universe, do not have enough brainpower to climb trees so that they can get at their prey. Since there weren't any zombie guts around, why didn't Rick give Sophia a leg up into a tree, then come back with some gunpower and shoot any gathered zombies so they could get back to the road safely? Even though it took place after the scene where Sophia is last seen, the walkers had enough trouble climbing stairs and getting through a maze of cars to make tree-climbing unfeasible for decaying, unthinking bodies.
Rick has maybe 20 seconds to think in this case. He doesn't have time to go over in his head every small fact that they've gathered about the Walkers thus far.
In most combat or survival situations, taking higher ground than attackers will guarantee better chances—especially against attackers which are already struggling against gravity as it is. One would think that Rick, as a police officer, would know this.
He was also tired and the walkers were really close behind him. Even if the thought did occur to him, he didn't really have time to help Sophia up a tree, and since he is a police officer, he probably expected her to stay put like he told her too.
Rick's been traveling with Sophia for a while by then, so possibly he's already learned that she happens to stink at climbing trees. Having her fall out of one is hardly going to help the situation.
So Dale is willing to sacrifice his own life to keep Andrea from committing suicide by staying at the CDC but neither he, nor anyone else, seems to care about the black woman who does the same? Unfortunate Implications anyone?
Dale appeared to be in love with Andrea specifically. It's not about "white woman vs. black woman" it's about "Andrea vs. the other woman whose name escapes me." Not everything is about race.
Not only that, but Dale had a connection with Andrea that he didn't have with the other woman, and they only had like 30 seconds to snap her out of it.
This really looked bad. Nobody cared that Jaqui was staying behind. I'm surprised they mentioned her name in the next episode.
Watch the scene again. T-Dog tries to convince the black lady to leave but she refuses. She's made up her mind about not trying to live in a world with zombies and describes it as a perfectly sane decision. Andrea only wants to kill herself because she's sad about losing her sister. Sure enough a short way into season 2 she starts to regain the will to live.
No one seems to give too much of a shit about Andrea either to be honest. Only Dale is willing to go out of his way.
I must admit to being quite confused as to the motivations of the guys from Philidelphia in Nebraska. Were they intended to be an expy of Rick and Shane (trying to do their absolute best to protect their own respective group by any means possible) and thus we were supposed to pity their tough choice to try and steal the farm and kill Rick; or were they nothing but looters trying to steal as much as possible?
It was meant to be ambiguous through the whole scene, but Tony complaining about not getting any "cooze" really established their true motives as villains. And Dave drawing on Rick clinched it.
They were clearly "bad guys" from the beginning. The tension rose dramatically from the start of the scene. It was meant as character development for Rick and Glenn, to give the audience a little more information on the outside world, and present a new problem. (Randall)
What really bothers me is that the writers had a perfectly good moral dilemma on their hands (Dave and Tony being Not So Different from Rick and Glenn, as mentioned above) but abandoned it in favor of almost cartoonish (albeit well-performed, at least by Dave's actor - you could taste the tension as soon as he walked in the door) villainy. It's the apocalypse. Anything goes. I wouldn't hate Rick if he shot two people who were just trying to make their way in a broken world. But no, they have to remind us how evil Dave and Tony are. That's just lazy writing.
Why are so many fans already describing Shane as a rapist who tried to kill his best friend. He clearly realised she didn't want him and backed away in shock and horror about what he nearly did, and he lifted the gun off his best friend *before* noticing Dale so clearly he wasn't willing to do it. He's nearly crossed the line, but he always manages to pull himself back. Even the whole Otis thing: he had to do it to survive and escape with the medical supplies. Together they'd die and Otis refused to leave him. It was a necessary piece of pragmatism, and in that same situation the only way a character not willing to do that (like Rick) could of survived with the medicine is through a Deus ex Machina.
This Troper argued the exact same thing not to long ago on this very page. for some reason, it was deleted. Honestly, i'm getting kind of annoyed by everyone calling him a psycho, seeing as how i agree with him in nearly all of his decisions. What's interesting, to me, is that in-universe people have the same reaction to him (that he's a friend-murdering rapist) and people (Dale mostly, but also Lori) keep telling that to his face. The guilt and shame are making him extremely unstable. If someone just told him "Shane, we know you've had to make some really, really hard decisions, and we know those decisions are eating you up, but you're beginning to scare us. Do you wanna talk about it?" he'd probably calm down a bit. What's especially jarring to me is how he's compared to Rick. people are trying to make it sound like both of them are doing good jobs protecting the camp, but Shane is too harsh and cold. This is despite the fact that Rick has yet to make a good decision, Whereas Shane continually keeps making level-headed, rational decisions. I hope someone else weighs in, because truth be told, the only answer i have for your headscratcher is something along the lines of "The writers want you to think he's a horrible person, and most fans seem to be following this interpretation."
While this troper doesn't like imagining Shane "the designated villain", we see back during the first season when he beat down Carol's husband that he was unstable even when he was still "in control". You can argue it's because he just lost what he thought he had with Lori at that point but that's still not much of an excuse. Say what you want about Rick's decisions, you can't deny that he's trying to save people's lives (he even comes back for Shane after their fight). Shane's motives are a bit too selfish and/or convoluted for my tastes. I hope he stays around but Rick needs to lead.
In the most recent episode, i feel like Rick got his point across to Shane. They didn't exactly have the same conversation I suggested, but it did feel like Shane understood that, yeah, he's been going off the deep end, and that Rick may be the better leader in the long run. So, hopefully the whole "Shane-as-villain" arc is over and done with.
Personally I think a selfish-out-for-himself is exactly the kind of person you want as a leader during a Zombie Apocalypse. In those situations being alone would kill you, so the selfish-out-for-himself person would protect the group to keep himself safe. At the end of the day, wanting to save everybody requires taking stupid risks that cause more people to get killed than not. Motives don't matter when pragmatism works whilst idealism leaves you dying cold and alone.
You know what happens when the selfish-out-for-himself person leads? He does things that are selfish, and benefit himself, not the group. He's not going to risk himself to save people, he's going to risk other people to save himself. It's exactly the opposite of the kind of person you want watching out for others.
There's a difference between being practical and volatile. As I mentioned before, his interaction with Carol's husband is indicative of his innate volatility. I'll sum it up like this: Shane can protect his allies from the Zombies but he cannot protect his allies from Shane. Don't get me wrong, Shane's input is important and he needs to lead along side Rick, but Rick should have the final word.
There is a difference and Shane is volatile. However lets examine the results of Rick's decisions vs Shane's decisions. Bag of guns or not Rick lead the group back into the city to to save Merle. Merle not saved, the bag of guns gets negotiated down severely and the camp gets over run causing a few fatalities and several people to leave the group. He was told that was a bad plan. A barnful of walkers isn't something you rationally talk over. You eliminate it and considering that the group as a whole hadn't even officially thought of putting up a night watch until it came time to set the boy loose combined with several people living in tents just means they've been lucky not only with the barn but just with walkers in general. Shane by contrast told Rick not to go into town, beat down a wife beater as he was threatening several women and that was at least in part because Lori snapped at him. Was she justified? Perhaps partially. I don't personally consider it lying to tell someone that a man alone in a coma (heartbeat or no) in a zombie apocalypse is dead.
There's a few things wrong with that statement. The group had very few guns when the walkers attacked their camp, and even with four extra hands to fight the walkers, there's still the likelyhood that their losses would have been greater if they hadn't had those additional guns. The barnful of walkers, being fed and contained, weren't an actual, active threat, and Rick was making a comprimise by humouring Herschel so the group might be allowed to stay on the farm, with food, water and medical attention. Shane killing those walkers sooner would have resulted in their removal from the farm, thus losing the closest thing to a permanent settlement they'd had in weeks. Shane beating Ed was more Shane venting about losing Lori and Carl than about Ed beating Carol. Hitting Ed a few times would be enough to teach him a lesson, but Shane was beating Ed within an inch of his life, and was only stopped when the everyone else started screaming at him to stop. Then, at the CDC, he threatens to kill Jenner, and when talked out of it, starts shooting computers wildly until Rick forcibly takes away his shotgun. That does not sound like a stable man.
I don't blame Shane for thinking Rick was dead and taking in Lori and Carl as his own family. Nor do I blame his reaction to the walkers in the barn, however that particular example is a moment of his volatility. If you really want to get literal Shane really wasn't "leading" anyone when before Rick arrived. He apparently allowed T-dog, Glenn, Jacqi, Andrea and Merle to go out to the city. Judging by Merle's behavior, he would have probably taken control of that group. Really Shane's "actions as leader" were all but non-existent until Rick arrived. Glenn attributed them returning in the first place because of Rick, and the bag of guns probably made a difference in being able to take out the Zombies after the 2nd trip (without the guns there would have been more surprise bites like with Jim). I'd say the worst decision Rick made was making the group look for Sophia (which was a shoot or miss). Challenging the leader=/=showing leadership skills.
Adding to this point. Rick has shown a willingness to "kill the living" if necessary, but he's able to do it with a much calmer demeanor. The only time he really seemed to go off was during his fight with Shane and like I mentioned before he took out his time to save the guy after he clearly tried to kill him with the wrench.
Shane is prone to violence, snapping, and just plain flipping his shit when he's frustrated. Those are exactly the opposite of the qualities you want in a leader, plain and simple. Level headed? No, when you're screaming your head off, physically beating people to vent, and just in general frothing at the mouth, you're way, way past "level headed".
And about Otis, fair enough to argue that he had no choice, but then why didn't he shoot him in the head? Would have been a quick, painless death vs kneecapping him and leaving him to be eaten alive. The fact that he went for that latter option just goes to show the creators are trying to tell us something of his state of mind, and it shouldn't be interpreted as "unfortunate, but not a big deal".
Sadly, the insta-kill would not have kept the walkers on Otis very long. They prefer live meat (usually) and a screaming Otis works better in this case. Gruesome and terrible, but does the job.
And even then, if they hadn't been hobbling along and turning around to shoot single walkers and instead ran for the truck, they probably would have made it.
The TV show 2
How exactly can the farm have a marsh that extends ALL THE WAY around it, keeping the walkers out - and no walkers ever saunter up the driveway.
It's a cattle ranch so its probably fenced in around the perimeter. Absent any specific provocation to climb the fence the walkers probably just bump into it and then wander away.
Maggie specifically mentions a gate leading up to the driveway when Glenn and T-Dog show up, asking if they closed it back up.
In "Judge, Jury, and Executioner", Hershel does mention that a minor stampede broke down the fence in places.
Am I the only one who completely fails to see Dale's argument in keeping Randall alive? whether innocent or guilty of the various crimes (including but not limited to rape, murder, attempted murder, armed robbery, torture) he is the member of a heavily armed thirty something strong militia that has already proven themselves as extremely dangerous. Our heroes only have Rick, Shane, Dale, Daryl and perhaps Andrea and Glenn provided they can keep their emotions in check and our heroes are also starting to run dangerously low on ammo. The rest of the group would be little more than cannon fodder (and rape victims) once the attack begins. There is no alternative here - keeping him alive means an extra mouth to feed and water and someone would have to keep constant watch out of fear that he will escape or stab them in their sleep. Our modern concept of human rights works wonders when all we have to worry about is paying our bills and getting to work on time; but when you are, quite literally, facing the potential end of the human race you have to take the course of action that will best ensure your groups survival.
What bothers me about this whole issue is that they saved the guy's life in the first place rather than giving him a merciful shot to the head while he was impaled on the fence — as they should have done. Now they debate whether they should kill him or not? The only character to even bring this up is Dale, and nobody gives him a meaningful reply. Addressing why they saved the person who was shooting at them would be nice, here. Is it just Rick being Stupid Good, or are we actually supposed to rationalize Randall's continued existence on the show?
Saving an abandoned group member whose loyalty will then most likely be with his saviours is not an inherently bad idea - it is indeed the end of humanity, and maintaining a group means you can't afford to wait for new members by breeding. Terminating viable sources of labour is counter-productive, especially when it's perfectly possible to leave him imprisoned overnight more or less indefinitely and work during the day (whilst treating him more and more as part of "the group"). Actually the main thing that bothers me is that, after saving him, after him helping save a group member's life, and ultimately after failing to kill him all of three times or so, that the group then randomly tortures the guy, after he'd not actually done or said anything to incur such treatment. If they'd kept him imprisoned overnight, and had him work with everyone during the to integrate into the group (sans-torture), then the idea that he'd randomly betray his new group in favour of the ones who'd left him to die would be far less likely. The problem is that the group is broken - the best way is either going by Shane's or Rick's method, then sticking with it and if necessary terminating the dissenting members so you're consistent, it's entertaining both that's making the mess.
It's not really clear why the "30 guys" would even still be around. If what Randall said was true, they move every night and it's been over a week. It's not like they will be out looking for Randall - the guy who abandoned him has to assume he's dead, if anyone but Rick was there he would be. And from their POV, they lost 4 men to a tiny town that's overrun with walkers, so why bother staying? If someone had mentioned that even once in the week while he was recuperating, they would have seen there was no need to dump Randall in the middle of nowhere. He's got nowhere else to go.
The problem wasn't them looking for Randall, it was Randall being kept alive and then escaping once he'd recovered from his injuries and telling his people about the defensible farm with food, water, no walkers and hot and cold running women to rape.
That's assuming that a) he could find that group (if what he said is true, they were likely not even in Georgia anymore); b) he doesn't get killed/eaten in his escape (all things considered, it seems he would have died on his own if he hadn't found a group); c) he could figure out which direction the group went. They could have headed to either Alabama (which would take them even further out of their way) or Tennesee (which would put them back on track), something that might be next to impossible to determine.
A more pressing question is, if they were from Philidalphia and headed for Nebraska, how did they end up in Georgia?
Nobody said they were on their way to Nebraska. They mentioned it was one of the more outlandish rumors of safe haven they've heard on their travels. One assumes they've gone where circumstances take them. Quite possibly they were originally on their way to the CDC. When Rick suggests "I hear Nebraska's nice," for their destination, they don't take it well.
Three questions, all about Melee: 1) Why do so few of the survivors use it? A quick trip to the farm's nearest garden centre and machetes for all would stop them from wasting around fifty bullets per episode on average. 2) Why do Rick and Shane voluntarily slice open their own hand before rubbing it along rusty surfaces (hence inviting at very least tetanus, if not simply getting zombie-blood in there)? It's not like Zombies aren't shown to voluntarily shove their heads into things to get into biting distance. 3) How the heck did Shane shove a dinky little pocket knife through the top of a skull?! I appreciate that using melee weaponry even in a remotely sensible way would remove a lot of the unnecessary drama from the series, but this coupled with the group's ongoing inability to operate in any sensible manner about the situation is really making it hard to watch.
As for why they don't use melee, it generally requires that you get within swinging distance of a walker, which makes it a lot easier for it to grab and bite you. It's personally safer to just use a gun.
There's something to this (though if they used something other than knives things wouldn't have to be quite so... "personal" when taking down a walker). But Rick already gave all the reasons for it: Ammo is limited, and guns are noisy - hence worsening the danger by adding more zombies to it. And when a walker gets into melee (as with a certain late elderly gentleman who was armed with only a rifle), the gun doesn't actually achieve much. Simply ignoring it the way they have (especially after Rick's already shown to have thought about it) boggles the mind.
He proposed it in the previous episode, and he's had a lot to deal with in the meantime. There's also the issue that it takes a lot of strength and some technique to properly get a killshot with a melee weapon reliably. Carl, for example, almost certainly doesn't have the strength to put a knife through a Walker's head, and most of the non-cops probably wouldn't be able to pull it off in stress conditions either. A gun, meanwhile, is pretty much point and click—the necessary force is already there, pre-loaded, and you can try again from a safe distance if you miss the first time.
Additionally, why is it taking so long for them to come up with decent melee weapons? The knives they've been using are garbage considering that they have lousy reach and require you to get very close to a walker's deadliest weapons. Is there not a single crowbar in the state of Georgia?
It seems they've gotten complacent in using guns instead of getting within reach of Walkers. Just look at how they were content with living in tents just outside Atlanta, with an almost constant threat of a Walker invasion.
I would also be very interested to know if things such as Tasers and stun grenades would work against Walkers. They may be technically dead but they still have human eyes, human brains and human nervous systems. I see no reasonable reason why electricity and a blinding light shouldn't still be an effective countermeasure.
It seems pretty obvious that TASERs, stun grenades, and pepper spray would be useless against against the dead. Since they aren't affected by by lethal shots to the chest and use smell to hunt, it deson't look like they're going to be stopped by being shocked, sprayed int he eyes or stunned.
Tasers should probably be effective at least while they're actively shocking the target, since they would cause uncontrollable muscle spasms even in dead things (Thanks for that factoid, Edison). Could be a handy way of disabling a walker til someone could do a melee kill shot on it.
Most people aren't trained in it (it's much harder than point and shoot), they don't want to get that close, and the walkers are supposed to be physically stronger than living humans, due to feeling no pain. Melee tactics that work on the living wont stop them. (but knowing this makes the scenes where they DO successfully take them out by hand much harder to believe)
This could be a rather stupid question, but the end of "Judge, Jury, Executioner" confused me at one point: Was that cow just a sign that there was a walker nearby, and it was still alive, but only faintly? Or was it a fucking zombie cow that couldn't get up?
I would think the fact that we haven't seen zombie animals to this point means it's probable they won't appear. It seems like at some point somewhere in the series we would have glimpsed a zombie dog at bare minimum, given all the cites and towns they've visited.
What exactly does Lori do to help out the group? Carol's passivity can be attributed to her long term abuse at the hands of her husband, as well as her still grieving for Sophia. Andrea pretty much does everything; she scavenges, scouts, joins search parties, fishes, cleans, stands watch, cleans the guns and sharpens the knives, and serves on grave details. Lori just seems to stand around and give orders and make demands people follow for some reason. We see her cut some carrots and a chicken quarter, but still. She doesn't even say please!
She helps clean and cook. It may sound unimpressive compared to killing and hunting Walkers but a clean camp and well prepared hot meals are equally important. In real life we discovered this hundreds of years ago where more of our soldiers were dying of things like food poisoning and disease then were being killed by the enemy. As for your second point about Andrea seemingly doing everything: I'll counter your Designated Protagonist Syndrome with Creator's Pet.
If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times: Just because you're not a gun-toting badass doesn't mean you're useless. Conversely, just because you do carry a gun doesn't mean you're "helping." See Andrea shooting Daryl, for instance.
Her not being a gun toting badass has nothing to do with it. Glenn is barely competent with a shotgun and Dale has his infamously bad eyesight, but both of them take the time to run security, work on the vehicles, and so on. Even before her level in badass Andrea was out scavenging, searching for Sophia, and fishing for the camp, and now she's moving bodies and digging graves with the best of 'em. Meanwhile, we see more of Lori giving "royal we" orders, making demands of people with nary a "Please" or "Thank You" and picking mushrooms than doing actual work. Even Carol and [[Redshirt Patricia]] do more while demanding less.
I'm going to refresh my previous point for you because I feel I may not have explained myself well enough. The Crimean War (1853-1856) killed an approximate total of 21,000 British soldiers. Of that only approximately 2800 were killed by the enemy and another 2000 by other wounds - the approximate death toll by disease and poor diet? 16,300. Only with the intervention of a certain nurse known as Florence Nightingale did any of that change. There is one very unfortunate fact that hasn't been touched upon in story; whether because the writers forgot or they are saving it for later story: very shortly the Walkers are going to be the least of their problems. Due to rotten food, poor healthcare, decomposing corpses littering the streets, the breakdown of pest control and other sanitation services such as sewers no longer being maintained; disease will soon become rampant and little things like the rat population would have quadrupled. So why am I telling you this? because without people like Lori (and the other women) spending all day tirelessly trying to keep the camp clean and cooking decent food there is a very good chance our heroes will get sick and die - and that includes Andrea. Getting off topic slightly I fail to see why you are making such a big deal about her manners because everyone else in camp is so courteous and respectful.
Perhaps it's a matter of Show, Don't Tell then. We see things like Andrea and Shane breaking down and cleaning the guns, or people standing watch, or Shane, T-Dog, Andrea and Jimmy digging the graves, or Glenn and Maggie scavenging and other things involved with keeping the camp supplied and secure. We see Patricia and Carol serving food and the former and Maggie helping around the farm, and we can infer Jimmy the farmhand's actions taking care of the farm by virtue of him being a farmhand. Lori tells us that she's been cooking and cleaning, and how it's so difficult, but that's a little difficult to swallow when we've seen her cut up maybe all of two carrots in between telling people "I need you to [Do X Personal Errand For Me/Look After My Kid/Risk Your Life To Look For My Husband]", and then having the gall to call them selfish when they refuse. That's why this Headscratcher is about Lori, and not about Carol or Patricia or Beth or Maggie, because none of them are taking people for granted asking for their help. And, in context, the woman she is accusing of laziness for not staying in the kitchen is the same one who, not three episodes ago (these three episodes all taking place during a 48 hour period), stepped up to the line to shoot down walkers who were heading towards her and her son. And the woman who took down walker Annette before she could eat Glenn's face, and the one who agreed to look after her kid, no questions asked, in between digging graves and disposing the bodies of a barn's worth of walkers.
Fortunately for them, the problems of food are currently not nearly so severe as suggested. Since most of the population is dead, the sewers are barely in use. Since the decomposing corpses are ambulatory they appear to be rotting much more slowly and only have one major disease of note. Since Walkers eat all lifeforms with equal gusto, they perform the role of pest control rather tidily as well. Since they are currently on a farm, food is fresh, and they have access to clean water. Most diseases that require a human to infect presumably have died out entirely, or are present in walkers, where infection of anything else is fairly irrelevant, as death is inevitable upon contact. Whilst not useless, it's definitely questionable whether this role is currently as important as keeping a sturdy perimeter for base defence - a walker might take out a single survivor or more, but an armed raider could easily kill every survivor in their sleep with inadequate defences. In any case, they do not qualify her to dismiss Andrea's role of sentry and security, inherently more dangerous roles, which is probably why viewers are so dismissive of her as a useless human being.
I don't think some people are understanding the ramifications of a zombie apocalypse. The dead population has risen, which makes large parts of the coutry unusable because the dead are trying to kill and eat you.
OP has a point here. Lori does not pull her weight much compared to the other characters and is more of the load than even Carl imo. Her role on the show is either to voice her opinion on decisions that are being discussed between Rick and Shane just because she is the wife, asking people to go on errands for her, asking people to look after her son for her while she goes off to talk, or maybe cut a couple carrots. I'm not calling out on her for not being a gun-totting badass but her actions throughout the show have not contributed toward the group. She buts into discussions between Rick and Shane who are discussing what is best for the group and lets face it, this discussion should either be between the 2 designated leaders who monitor the group and actually are the ones who put themselves at risk the most or with the group as a whole. She has people go into town for her (asking Glenn to go into town for medical supplies twice and Daryl to bring back Rick and Glenn when they went after Hershel which she asked Rick to do so they can stay on the farm). Yeah she cooks and clean which is helpful to the camp but so does Carol who at least has the excuse of being a distraught mother worrying about her daughter. We never see her do any heavy lifting like help dig the graves or clear the walkers, scavenge for resources, go into town, pick berries for additional food, etc. Even if she cant or doesnt want to use a gun, she can still be shown doing things with the rest of the group instead of walking around while others are working. I really understand why viewers do not like Lori on this show.
Here is a point to consider about Lori: doesn't being Rick's wife and Shane's former girlfriend automatically make her the most powerful woman in the group? It's not as if she had much competition until Andrea pulled out of her equally useless and suicidal way of life. As things stand at the end of season 2 Rick is the leader and Lori is First Lady by default.
This just means that Lori has some pull due to the fact that she is sleeping with them and thus has some influence with them personally. This itself does not justify her actions where she makes "royal demands" of others and "a set of rules for everyone but herself to follow" as stated by Andrea. And just because Lori has some pull on the leaders does not make her any more valuable a member to the group. She's only seen to be sort of helpful in dissolving some tension within the group such as when everyone was criticizing Rick for searching for Sophia or when talking to a shocked Beth. She fails to have any influence during critical emergencies like when Shane decides to kill the walkers in Hershel's barn, spends more time sitting or standing around while people are actively working, and seems to make herself more entitled than the rest of the group. Her argument with Andrea on living really gets the point across that she is a load on the team when she demands Andrea stay in the kitchen working with them despite already having Maggie, Hannah, and Otis' wife to help her in the kitchen while T-Bone probably actually cleans the campsite (he doesnt get much tv time). The total group is around 12 people so with around 10 of those people who can actively work (technically Carl can help out with chores or cooking but Lori just has him walking around and Beth is in shock). Having 1/3 of the workforce working on stuff inside the camp is a pretty good arrangement with the other 2/3 divided on guarding against walkers and going into town for resources.
It seems to be a severe case of Depending on the Writer, since Lori only acts like that in one scene of one episode, and never acted that way before this scene, and doesn't act like that afterwards.
Another thing about Lori, or rather, how they are writing Lori - I don't quite get how she goes all Lady Macbeth on Rick where Shane is concerned, only to be horrified and disgusted when he actually does kill him in self-defence. Seriously, first she tells him "you killed the living to protect your family... Shane is a threat now...", and then does a full 180 degrees on that. Yes, it must be emotionally wracking, and yes, she thought Shane was on his way to get a hold of himself, but it is still sloppily written, at the very least.
I don't think it's a matter of Rick killing Shane, it's the fact that her son did it. She was doing everything she could to keep him innocent then Rick drags him into this situation. As for her terrible "stay in the kitchen speech"... Jesus. I get that Andrea may seem like she's resting on her laurels but that's only because the women of the group refuse to learn to fend for themselves. If everyone could shoot and range then guard duty could become a regular shift for everybody, with the other work (cleaning, etc) being divided the same way. But I honestly don't think it's about that, she's mad because Andrea isn't part of their Martha Stewart club and pretending that all is well and good within the sisterhood circle. She's more standoffish and focused on the zombies which makes her grimmer. And honestly it's the most monstrously hypocritical thing to jump on someone for not pulling their weight or joining you in pretending everything's fine and dandy when you're planning to have a child that can jeopardise the group constantly. I mean, who's going to go find supplies for it? Not Lori surely? What happens when she's too heavy to run properly? What happens if the child cries out at a bad moment? What happens when the leader of the group is distracted during a crisis and trying to protect said child. That's at least one more hand going towards not fighting zombies. It is perhaps the most utterly selfish thing she could do.
It seems like Depending on the Writer more than anything, since she's only high and mighty in one scene of one episode, and that attitude never showed up before or after that scene.
I guess it's the same troper who repeatedly says that Lori just acts like that in that one scene with Andrea. Wrong. First, she asks Glenn to do her errands (twice, with barely a "please" or a "thanks" the first time) and keeps her pregnancy a secret. She gets called on it by Maggie, whom she almost got killed. Then, she asks Daryl to fetch her husband (although she has no reason to think he is in any danger), and calls him selfish, even though he spent the majority of his time looking for Sophia. Daryl calls her on that. Then the Andrea scene. It's not a behavior change Depending on the Writer, it's consistent writing.
I don't think that's entirely fair to Lori. All we know about her pre-zombies is a pretty typical housewife/wife of a cop existence. Lori's in an incredibly stressful situation like everyone else, coupled with the fact she's dealing with the man she thought she could trust's (Shane) behavior and the fact he continues to insinuate himself in her life/family when she said no, and trying to shield her young son from the bleak reality of the world they live in. Then, she finds out she's pregnant and it could be her husband's (who's progressively becoming less of the person he was before), or Shane's, which would give him another reason to never leave her alone. And she's (understandably) unsure if she even wants to continue her pregnancy in the first place, which means it has to stay a secret. There's also almost a sense of hope around the Grimes family, as they've gotten a lot of lucky breaks, especially Lori, but all of that is changing for the worse. TWD progresses very quickly over a really short period of time, and Lori's really just not handling all these changes/issues well, and that's reflective in her actions. I'm not justifying her crappy behavior, but it's not like she's being an asshole just because she can or because she thinks of herself as inherently better than anyone else.
Good Job, Rick. No, seriously, by all means kill the man who busted his ass and put himself in harms way to save the life of your wife and child. The man who has, pretty much from the moment we saw him, tried to make good decisions only to be shot down by you, you idealistic hypocritical ass. Okay, i know someone is going to edit me out if i leave it at that, so here are my questions: 1. How did Rick come to the conclusion that Shane had set up the situation to murder him? it came out of nowhere, for me at least. 2. Why did the writers go back on what they were doing? It felt like all signs had pointed to the Shane plot being wrapped up. He even patched his relationship with Lori, in what i felt was a heartwarming scene that established, deep down, Shane is a good person, and then not twenty minutes later, suddenly he's a psychotic murderer for some reason. and, 3. Are the writers honestly expecting us to sympathize with Rick after what just happened? I guess i could've been misinterpreting it, but he was well on his way to defusing the situation; he refused to shoot Shane when he had the chance, Shane seemed to be calming down. They were doing it Rick's way, the good, heroic approach, trying not to get anyone killed, and then he kills him. I honestly don't feel right saying "Killed", i honestly want to say "Murdered" because its obvious, to me, that Shane is suffering from mental instability due to a combination of insomnia, stress, fatigue and guilt. It looked like some cop who managed to talk a jumper out of suicide only to kill him himself.
This isn't the first time that Shane has considered trying to off Rick. Rick gave Shane his second chance already and Shane repaid him by luring him out to the woods to kill him. Shane's been growing increasingly unstable throughout and has already murdered an innocent man. This wasn't a sudden, spur of the moment decision on Shane's part. He's been on the verge of killing Rick since the beginning. Shane was never recovering and he was never going to.
OP, you must have watched a different show. 1) How did Rick come to the conclusion that Shane was gonna murder him? Because Shane outright confessed a second after Rick asked him what he was doing! 2) That scene with Lori and Shane, that wasn't a heartwarming moment at all, that Shane thanking he had another chance with Lori and thus deciding to kill Rick. 3) What would you have done?! This man has tried to kill Rick not once, not twice, but now THREE TIMES!!! Rick knew that Shane was beyond saving, and thus when he had the upperhand and the chance he took it. And as I'm sure you saw, that devstated Rick. But there was no other way. Shane was determined to get Lori and Carl back one way or another. The fact that you think it was wrong for Rick to kill Shane after Shane tried to kill him for the THIRD TIME really makes me think you have been watching a completely different show.
OP Here. I admit that my earlier post was more of a rant than a IJBM because Shane is probably the only character i like besides Glen and Daryl. I can see now that the scene with Lori and Shane could've been there to make him think that he had another shot with Lori, but seeing as how Lori pretty much said the exact opposite, and Shane seemed to be fine with it, i guess i missed it. That being said, Shane has not tried to kill Shane twice. I'm guessing that you're referring to the scene in season one where he considered shooting Rick. But, here's the thing, he put his gun down. Not because he saw Dale, because he knew it was the wrong thing to do. He didn't even try. the second time? With the wrench? that was a spur of the moment action, a reaction, TO A FIGHT THAT RICK STARTED. seriously, watch that scene. They're having an argument and then, BAM, Rick starts the fight. I don't know about everyone else, but i've been in fights where, due to a combination of adrenalin, pain, and anger, where it seemed that i had the intent to kill someone else, or someone else had to intent to kill me, which is why i'm willing to forgive that situation. And, again, the situation never should've come to this, the fact that it did is pretty much everyone else's fault BUT Shane's. I can't look at a single thing Shane has done and go "Evil". Killing Otis? Had to be done to save Carl. the attempted rape Lori? wasn't really an attempted rape at all, because he stopped when she made it clear she didn't want him. Killing Randal? THEY SHOULD HAVE NEVER SAVED HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE. Granted, i would've popped him right then and there when he was stuck on the fence out of mercy, but saving him was probably the stupidest thing that could've done. I do grant you that Shane is mentally unstable, and if you go to Fridge on this page, there's a theory that implies that he's probably not sleeping. Insomnia which is probably brought on from the stress of knowing his best friend is driving everyone into certain doom, the guilt and sadness he feels for "Lying" to Lori and losing her as a result, and everyone unanimously coming the conclusion, both in and out of universe, that he's as evil as fucking Hitler. Also, i don't think i mentioned this before, but if Rick had already decided he was going to kill Shane, why not just shoot him? at one point, Shane holstered his gun, which would have been the perfect opportunity to shoot him, but he waits to stab him instead, probably one of the worst ways to die.
The fact that he even had it in his mind in the first place to kill Rick shows that he's a mentally unstable and untrustworthy individual. And what did he do when Dale confronted him about it, he threatened to kill Dale. Yep,that's a good person right there. And the attempted rape? That was ATTEMPTED RAPE and you are blind if you think it wasn't. Sure, he quit, only when she started clawing at him desperately trying to get away from him. He only stopped when she CLAWED his face. The Insomnia excuse, alot of them including Rick probably have insomnia, but you don't see them goin off the rails. Why didn't Rick kill Shane when he holstered his gun, because Rick's gun was holstered too and right there thats a quick draw situation. You can't tell me that if Rick had went for his gun, Shane wouldn't have done the same. Then they both would have been shot with walkers on their ass. Rick got him destracted with the gun and took his chance in SELF-DEFENSE! To say that was murder is like saying killing the walkers was murder. Shane still had HIS gun trained on RICK. He wasn't giving up. Even when he was taking Rick's gun, he still had the gun on Rick. If he was giving up he would have put his gun down too, like Rick said. Instead, he was taking Rick's gun while still holding on to his gun, which would have left Rick totally screwed if he didn't stab Shane. Let me ask you this, what would you have said if Rick didn't try to stab Shane. What if he had given him his gun and then Shane executed him anyway. What would you say then. I have a feeling you still would be defending Shane. Your hatred for Rick and your love for Shane is blinding you from common sense and rationality. Kinda like Shane with his love for Lori.
Dale was POINTING A GUN at Shane, for no other reason than he thought, albeit correctly, that Shane killed Otis (And how he knew this is just a whole 'nother example about how the writers kinda suck). He had no evidence, and he was trying to hide the guns. Lets think about what would've happened in an emergency and the guns are just GONE. people would have died. What if the emergency claimed Dale's life, and only he knew where the guns were? then pretty much everyone dies. As much as i liked Dale (up to that point) he really deserved a good beatdown for the utter stupidity of that action, and i assume the only reason he wasn't beaten down was because there's no plausible way for someone like Shane to beat up a sixty-something without critically injuring him. I still disagree that the Attempted Rape was Attempted Rape; the entire scene happened in the span of five seconds, and as soon as Lori made it clear (which, granted, she had to do by scratching him.) he stopped. You're right, i guess. the quickdraw situation would've been bad, and i actually commended Rick for not doing it, it shows that he's still got his police training in his mind; giving your gun up is actually a good idea when you want to talk someone out of a rash action like murder, especially when that person is mentally unstable; it shows them you're not a threat, and while i'm sure police only do this when they have backup to kill the suspect if the plan fails, i know Police do that on occasion when they want to defuse a volatile situation, which honestly, i felt Rick could have done that, the way Shane was acting, it felt like he was calming down. I don't "Love" Shane, i like him because he's one of three characters who isn't an unlikable prick (To me). Granted, he's a mental unstable killer, but he's also the only person who seems capable of making good decisions, and i've yet to actually disagree with a decision he made, with the exception of him luring Rick out there to kill him, and I guess the root of my problem with this is that the entire scene came clean out of left field. it felt like they were FINALLY letting the Rick VS Shane plot go, and then, BAM, its back again in the last three minutes of the episode. Why? Why was this necessary? Didn't Rick and Shane see eye-to-eye in "18 Miles out" where Rick saved his life even though he didn't have too? it seemed like Shane finally understood he was going off the deep end a bit, and if you look up on this page, you'll find an earlier thread with that exact conclusion. It felt unnecessary, it felt hypocritical (of rick), and it felt like the writers trying desperately to make a character "evil" despite the fact he'd only qualify as "Anti-Heroic" if that.
Shane ONLY lowered his shotgun because Dale was threatening him. Dale didn't "guess" that Shane was trying to kill Rick, he saw what Shane was trying to do, and this happens BEFORE Shane kills Otis, not after. And the attempted rape was attempted rape, how you could see it as anything different is beyond comprehension.
This is the problem with this. What Shane did was attempted rape. There's no ambiguity, there's no argument. That's just what it was. There's nothing else it can possibly be called, there's no other way to interpret that scene. Shane attempted to force himself on an unwilling woman, she scratched him, and he backed off. That's still attempted rape, if the laws and courts were still running and Lori had reported him, he still would've been arrested and possibly jailed for it, and he doesn't get a free pass on it because he loved the woman he tried to sexually assault and felt really bad about it afterward.
Shane threatened Dale before he tried to hide the guns. This was after him and Andrea had sex in the car. How you don't think a man forcing himself on a non consenting woman isn't attempted rape is beyond me. And they didn't let the Rick vs. Shane plot go. Just in the next episode Shane was talking to Andrea about Rick being the leader and saying maybe there was something they could do about that. The way I look at it, Shane had three strikes. That fight with Rick and Shane, sure Rick did start the fight, but Shane escalated it from just a couple guys blowing off steam to one man trying to iill the other. And just when the fight had calmed down, thats when Shane threw the wrench at Rick's head. The first strike in the woods, the second strike in 18 Miles Out, and the third strike in the field. It would have been utterly stupid for Rick NOT to have killed Shane right there. How many times do you give a mentally unstable person a chance to kill you before you just say enough. Rick WAS NOT being hypocritical. He had straight up given Shane a chance to move on in 18 M Iles Out. Shane didn't take it. A person has enough to worry about in a zombie apocalypse, they don't need to be worried that their supposed best friend his going to shoot them in the back of the head, just because they want your wife.
Alright. I can see i'm not going to change anybody's mind, and i'm fine with that. Alternate Character Interpretation is one of my favorite tropes and it would hypocritical for me to get pissed if someone didn't agree with me. That being said, They lost a viewer in me, and honestly i'm very disappointed. I had been defending this show against criticisms pretty much since it came out, and i just feel betrayed. Does anybody agree with me about Shane? I feel like i'm the only one.
Sadly when I saw "Good Job Rick, no seriously", I thought that was sincere. Shane was a clear threat, and one that was never going to back down - just wait for a better shot. Rick made a hard decision which was most definitely not hypocritical at all. I actually find it sad that you think the writers tried to force the idea that Shane was evil, I personally thought the actor did a brilliant job of portraying someone with redeeming qualities along with a laundry list of bad ones. Was he evil? No, though he was mentally imbalanced and untrustworthy, which came through in both his acting and the relationship between him and Rick. The true villain of the piece is Lori. She had no reason to walk over there, and she was the direct cause of his mental break and the reason he acted the way he did. You could even see it on his face - another sign of his quality performance - the blank-faced look boys get when girls are brainwashing them. It was played subtly, but he sure as anything wasn't fine with it, and we could see the signposts clear as day.
Okay. I'm a huge Shane fan. If I had to chose team Shane or Team Rick it's not even a conversation. I'm going with the guy who kept a large group alive through an apocalypse not the guy who took the reins once things had more or less settled. However it was an obvious set up from step one. The odds of Randal getting his cuffs loose and escaping through the rafters is improbable at best. The same guy coming across and instead of avoiding knocking out Shane and taking his weapon and Shane seeing which way he went wanders so far into the unlikely that it's mildly amazing that nobody else caught on immediately. Rick let Shane get himself out there so he could eliminate a threat to himself and his group. Shane may or may not have been suffering from any number of mental break downs but a guy who's suffering from mental break downs and wants what's yours and has lead you out to a secluded area to point a gun at you is a guy you need to take out of the equation. It sucks. I wish to God that Shane had simply left the farm with Randall and joined the bad guys and maybe showed back up later but Rick really did the only thing he could given all the information he had.
About letting the Shane vs. Rick thing go after 18 Miles Out: On the way out to the dump off site, Shane and Rick have a talk. During one of Rick's optimistic speeches, Shane stares distractedly at a lone walker out in the field, and doesn't bother to mention it to Rick. On the way back from the dump off site, Shane and Rick have the same talk, and while Rick is talking later Shane sees the same lone walker out in the field, and still doesn't bother to mention it to Rick. It seemed to me that the writers were beating me over the head with the idea that Shane and his thinking hadn't changed at all, honestly.
・Anyone who would intentionally leave a man on his team (or maybe even an enemy) to be eaten alive is doing evil. It doesn't matter what the reason is.
・If you were surprised by the ending with Shane, or thought it came out of left field - this was intentional, not writer incompetence. Sometimes you want to put the audience in a state of relaxation before you shock them out of it. Also anyone who paid attention during the talk between Lori and Shane could have seen the signs. While she thought this would finally give "closure" to Shane, it only made him think he had a chance with her - if only the other guy hadn't come back. That event would be a pretty stupid reason to stop watching The Walking Dead. I was a fan of Dale and thought the way they handled his death was even more pointless.
・You guys are missing the Fridge Brilliance if you just try to take one side or the other. They hinted in the final episode that it was about Rick, not Shane. From past behavior he knew this day was coming, and he "wanted Shane dead." That's the only way he thought it would be over. Jealousy didn't help the situation any. His best friend had sex with his wife. Logically there was an excuse, but that doesn't make it easier emotionally. I agree that Rick was being reasonable, and acted in self-defense, but that doesn't remove the human drama from the picture.
・Agreed that maybe it would have been better if Shane had just run off, so he could return as a rival in the future.
Honestly, as much as I hate Rick, I can't see him doing much else. Shane had proven that words had little effect on him, they'd already had a talk. Rick didn't say anything to Shane that he couldn't turn around and ignore later. The worst part wasn't just that Shane tried to kill Rick, it was that Shane did so in such a premeditated and calculating manner, it wasn't a crime of passion, it was a very wily person taking out a rival. There was no way he could guarantee that this same situation wouldn't crop up again. And while I really sympathise with Shane and him having to deal with Rick's utter idiocy at points, he had a chance to kill Rick, honestly I'm not sure what he was thinking, whether he truly believed the crap that Rick spun him or he simply didn't give a shit anymore (as evidenced by him trying to make it into a shootout) I think he was deliberately trying to push Rick to the edge.
This seems to be a quintessential example of Draco in Leather Pants. The problem is that it seems to be arguing that being an unhinged stalker is something that was forced into Shane's character. It wasn't, that was his character from the beginning. In one of the first episodes, we see Shane point a gun at Rick because he doesn't want to share Lori and Carl with him. Even if he stopped himself on his own (he didn't, he stopped because Dale caught him) the fact that he pointed the gun at Rick at all, well before Rick did any of his arguably bad decisions firmly and unambiguously cements Shane in the category of "wrong". The truth about Shane is that while he does care about Lori and Shane, that's all he caress about. That's why Shane would be terrible as a leader, because if you're not Lori, and you're not Carl, and you're not Shane himself, you're disposable, you're nothing. While Shane put himself on the line for Carl with Otis, honestly ask yourself: If it had been Glenn or Carol or even Sophia that had been shot instead of Carl, would Shane have done the same for them? Would he have risked his life for anyone other than Carl or Lori or maybe Rick? Of course not. The problem with Shane is that, while he does care about others, he's too selfish to lead a group effectively. What Shane wants is he wants Lori to be "his woman" and Carl to be his son. If you aren't helping him get that, you're in the way and he'd be perfectly willing to dispose of you to get you out of the way. This isn't something that the writers forced into Shane, that's just who Shane is. Additionally, while Rick may have stabbed Shane while he was surrendering, there's no way to argue he wasn't right about that. No matter who you root for, no matter who you think should have come out of that, ask yourself: How could Rick possibly trust Shane after he methodically lured him out into the woods for the sole intent of murdering him? There's no way he could have. To Rick, that's the point where it became clear that death was the only option for Shane, because if he allowed Shane to live, there's no way that would've been his last attempt on Rick's life.
According to Dr Jenner's MRI of his zombified wife the only part of the human brain that remains is the cerebral cortex - explaining why they can still do things like walk for example. The problem is that the Walkers in this series have begun to exhibit Villain Decay and have begun to take less and less damage to kill as time goes on. Why? because if the only part of a Walker that is alive so to speak is the base of the brain, how can you kill one by stabbing it in the top or side of the head? I could understand if this paralysed or stunned the Walker in question but that's not what's happening here - during the opening montage of season 2 episode 12 it now appears that stabbing a Walker anywhere on it's head will kill it. So was Jenner's theory wrong and that MRI was incorrect or have the scriptwriters just forgotten their own back story on Walker biology?
That's pretty common in Zombie stories; any damage to the brain will a zombie, despite the fact that it shouldn't be that way. Hell, even in real life people can recover or at least survive damage to the brain. in a realistic portrayal of a zombie apocalypse the zombies would be damn near invulnerable, because only destroying the most protected organ on the human body would finally kill it. That being said, Zombies aren't exactly the most scientific of things in the first place, so i guess its best to just roll with it. That all being said, there's probably something Jenner didn't make known to the audience(whatever he whispered in Rick's ear), so its entirely possible that its intentional on the writers part.
You have a good point there - the writers have to toe the line between realistic and making a good story. Given what happens to Shane and Randall I think Jenner must have told Rick that the virus is airborne and thus doesn't require a zombie bite like the T-Virus would for example. It would seem as if everyone is now infected; probably why Jenner wanted to go the way he did.
Other obvious piece of artistic license with biology: if the rest of the brain is dead and only the brain stem has any life, then the zombies wouldn't be able to see, hear, move or do anything outside of have a regular heartbeat and breathing cycle. According to the "virtual vision" diagram, most of the cerebral cortex is dead too.
And, to quote Shane, "Why is it still coming?" Why indeed? If its muscle tissue has rotted away, it can't move the bones, so why is it still coming? If you shoot its lungs, then dead or not, the muscles aren't getting oxygen, so why is it still coming? And if you sever the neural path from the brain (stem) to whatever muscle is trying to move, as I'm sure people do in the various fights, it should be paralyzed there, so why is it still coming?
Uh... because it's FANTASY? Because zombies don't exist and aren't even based in science to begin with so what's the point of trying to analyze it and try to bring science into it?
Since he broke his neck, fatally.... How did Randall rise from his grave, and secondly, how the heck was he mobile? Zombies do not regenerate severed spinal chords.
...What do you mean how did he rise from his grave? You have to ask that question in a show about zombies?
Well, actually yes. I could see him reanimating, possibly. I could maybe see him biting some serious toe.... But yeah, to kill the zombie, you remove the head or destroy the lower brain/central nervous system. For the guy who hanged himself, I can see he did it wrong and didn't break his neck. For Randall, he's explicitly lost one of the key requirements of unlife, yet he manages to not only reanimate (Okay, I could possibly see an animated head if a decapitated zombie head still functions, though I've not yet seen it in the series), but walk around and engage in hand to hand? Did they mention anything about restoring severed nerve tissue when they turned and I just missed it?
Severed zombie heads continue to...un-live. The walker that ate Daryl's deer in his debut episode survived through decapitation and kept snarling and biting until Daryl shot it with his crossbow. Also, the walker in the pharmacy (that Glenn killed) survived almost complete decapitation while remaining ambulatory. Finally, I'm not too sure about the...logistics, but Shane may have broken Randall's neck without completely severing the spinal cord. Maybe Randall suffocated or choked on his own blood or something. "Broken neck" is also a lot easier to say than "collapsed trachea," especially since it was dark and Daryl isn't typically one for technicalities.
It is generally established in zombie lore (ZSG for example) that zombies don't have to be unharmed to be able to move about. A broken leg will more or less stop a human because of the pain but that doesn't bother a zombie. Same thing with the neck, they appearantly don't need the spinal chord, the virus is enough to move them about. So basically, a zombie wizard dit it. In any case, it didn't bother me. The rest of his body was fine so he could still walk. Having your legs and lowered body eaten away (like the bike zombie in Episode 1) would slow you down however.
The spinal cord doesn't just carry pain messages, they carry the information that tells the body what to do. If Shane severed the spinal cord in breaking Randall's neck, he shouldn't be able to move. It would be no different than decapitating a zombie and having its arms and legs continue to work.
And a broken neck doesn't necessarily kill you by severing the spinal cord. Ideally that's how you'd do it, but it's not necessarily the case.
Many people have gotten broken necks and not suffered paralysis, as long as the spinal cord wasn't cut or bruised, and they were treated carefully. Plus, we don't know how the plague reanimates dead corpses. If it can activate parts of the brain, why couldn't it independently activate parts of the nervous system? It's all speculation at this point.
It bugged me, too, for a bit, but we never did see what Shane did, just heard a crunch. I figured he just crushed his throat; quick and easy. Breaking a neck is actually pretty hard, I hear.
Is anybody else bugged by the fact that a good portion of the firearms Rick obtained with the precinct's armory room were nothing more than hunting guns? Both the rifles and some of the shotguns are literally marketed for people who are going to be hunting rather than law enforcement or military applications
I'm not entirely sure if this applies, but I lived in a small town once where the budget for cops was just above "fuck all", so most of them bought and maintained their own guns. Truth is that a rifle designed for military/police work is more or less the same thing for hunting, albeit probably less powerful, same thing with shotguns and pistols. This is actually why Rick having a revolver didn't bother me, i knew plenty of cops who used their own guns on duty and some of them did prefer revolvers to semi-automatics. That all being said, Rick is a Sheriff, and that means his department was probably better funded than some small town redneck police force, so they really should have more "Professional" looking weapons. Its probably a matter of aesthetics rather than what a police force would actually have; in reality, they'd probably have a few AR-15's, a few shotguns and maybe a sniper rifle of sorts, and they'd all probably be jet-black. Don't know if i answered your question or made it worse. sorry about that.
The guns Rick took from the Police Station could have been confiscated firearms. Not that big a stretch, along with the "small time, self-armed police force" theory.
Maybe those were the only guns left behind and the rest (i.e. assault rifles, sniper rifles) were taken at the start of the disaster. He did get to the party late, and mentions he cleaned out the cage. When we saw the cage in the pilot, it was much larger than what would be needed to contain six shotguns, three rifles, and an asortment of handguns.
There's functionally no difference between a gun designed for military or law enforcement use and one designed for civilian use. The Remington 700, for instance, is a rifle used by all of the above (the only difference between the three being the finish on the weapon). The Mossberg 590, Shane's shotgun, is also a gun very popular amongst civilians and law enforcement and has been used by the military.
The budget for the show took a serious hit but the season was lengthened. They've been having to skimp on the sets and locations through all of season 2. Letting someone's lawn grow out and then fixing it up later was probably one of the expenses they cut out.
The amount of Failed a Spot Check is ridiculous. Dale, Rick, Glen, Amy, and more have had zombies like five feet from them and not noticed a thing. Not the smell of rotten flesh, the sound of them walking, or the constant moaning they do.
Habituation. That's what happens when you're constantly exposed to a stimulus. You get used to it and don't even notice it.
That's not what habituation is. In order to habituate to a stimulus, it has to be literally constant. Like an air conditioner or a lingering smell. Something that starts and stops periodically doesn't have the same effect. If anything, these people should be hyperaware of any stimulus that even remotely reminds them of walkers.
Three things from the final episode of season 2:
"No we can't go back to the farm!" (Never mind it's daylight, they're in cars and walkers don't go fast - if they see walkers ahead, just turn around!)
The farm is still, you know, overrun.
NOT checking the gas for siphoning in all those stopped cars on the highway
They did. The first time they were there. Back when they first lost Sophia. Remember?
I don't think "A few months ago" counts here.
...What? Are you saying you think there'd be more gas that wasn't there previously?
That's a valid point. They couldn't possibly have taken it all at once, but just enough to fill their gas tanks and canisters.
It's doubtful the gas would have been usable anyway. It had already been several months after the apocalypse when Rick woke up, and the flight takes place an even longer time afterward. Gasoline that isn't being specially treated for long-term storage will probably last a few months at best before it deteriorates into something that the car can barely use to run. Those cars were probably sitting there for a very long time before the group came across them and any fuel that was left would have become gummy and worthless. Even the stuff that would be usable would run very poorly and be barely adequate at best.
One car runs out of gas, they ALL STOP. They couldn't have squeezed into one? Sent Daryl ahead to scout for more gas?
They said in the episode, right then and there, that they couldn't all fit into one car, and Rick shot down the notion of splitting up entirely.
If I'm not mistaken, the car with gas was a Hyundai Santa Fe and that seats 5. They had 8 for that car: T-Dog, Hershel, Beth, Maggie, Glenn, Rick, Carl, Lori. That's just too much to cram in.
There was also the pick-up truck, which could easily fit two in the cabin and two or three people in the bed. That would be room to fit 6 comfortably (4 in the Santa Fe, 2 in the cabin of the truck) and 2 uncomfortably.
Um...the pick-up truck was the one that was out of gas, remember?
Small issue, but that is a Hyundai Tuscon, not a Santa Fe. The Tuscon is smaller than the Santa Fe, so it can fit five adults fairly uncomfortably. To compare, Herschel's Suburban (assuming it has front and rear bench seats) can fit nine people easily, and more in a pinch if needed (a shame station wagons with three benches fell out of fashion).
Aside from moving the plot along why are they leaving the farm? Sure it's got a zombie problem but we know enough about both how easily killed zombies are but also how easy it is to lead them away from something by making a lot of noise and staying just a head of them. Not to mention how easily they could take out zombies by driving around with weapons and killing them you'd need a lot more zombies than that to convince me to leave a stable food and water source like that.
Well the stable food source is certainly gone. That was a cattle ranch. But they were already running out of ammo and there were hundreds remaining and lord knows how many were converging on the sounds of the battle or the light from the fire. The farm was lost.
There is no indication the food source was gone. Cows will naturally return home to be milked. As for how many there zombies there were it doesn't really matter. Drive out to the road set off every alarm and sneak back. Hell if you really wanted to you could have a couple people pied piper every zombie within earshot all the way to Atlanta and just melee kill the straglers.
No indication the food source was gone? You don't think the zombies are gonna eat the cows, and chase the ones they don't catch?
Considering there were clearly zombies on the property previous to the finale as it's the the last episode of season 2 that they are shown actually doing a thorough sweep to clean up the farm and we'd already seen a few zombies on the farm it's clear that zombies either can't catch, can't infect or aren't interested in cows. Not to mention they clearly had a supply of chickens and likely were growing something off screen.
Are we watching the same show? The zombie that Carl let onto the farm eviscerated a cow before attacking Dale. In fact, the dead cow is what captured Dale's attention long enough for the walker to jump him. The chickens? They were being used specifically for feeding the barn zombies, so obviously walkers chase and eat them. How long is a chicken coop going to hold up against a zombie mob? The livestock is dead, the nearby town is basically picked clean, and the finale proved that the farm is basically indefensible. There's no reason to go back.
Quick physics lesson for the scriptwriters: What happens if you drop a lighter into a puddle of gasoline? absolutely nothing. Given how far they've currently strived to make this the most realistic zombie series of all time it would have been a nice subversion if this tactic was rewarded with nothing but an Oh s**t reaction from Rick. As it is? wasted potential and a critical research failure.
It wasn't just a puddle, it was the straw-cowered floor of a dusty barn. I've started camp fires in similar way (but with matches, don't want to waste lighters), it works.
Besides, as I told my best friend when we were trying to write our own zombie story: You inevitably come to a certain point where you have to decide whether you want to be "realistic" or "entertaining". I'm pretty sure the dude above me has it right. You can in fact drop an open flame on a puddle of gasoline and set it alight(my pyromaniac nephew has done it many times), but even if it wasn't real: Who cares? Honestly, who really cares?
For what it's worth, I think you're confusing "critical research failure" with "did not do research."
Just so I'm clear, this is the same show where the zombie virus has apparently infected absolutely everyone in the world, but doesn't "activate" until death? Oh, it is. What were you saying about realism again?
There's an old rule of writing that applies here: "You can ask a reader to believe the impossible, but not the improbable." You can have dead characters reanimated walking around and infecting the living and viewers will roll with it, but if someone correctly guesses the combination of a padlock on the first try - they will be headscratching.
If I was in the position that Jenner put Rick in - I wouldn't have told the group about the airborne strain either. At the time Andrea had just tried to commit suicide and a day or so later Sophia went missing and Carl was shot so obviously it would have been stupid to reveal anything at that point. Then he started to have all the problems with Shane and was making a determined effort to earn Herschel's trust... I fail to see the problem the group has here. Rick knows that half his group is teetering on the brink of a mental breakdown and the other half is becoming violent - telling them all they have been infected with the Walker virus has the potential to be disastrous. And even if he had been stupid enough to tell the group about it; what difference does any of them think it would have ultimately made? They neither have the resources nor the intelligence with which to cure or treat it. All that it would have gained is the group knowledge that none of them would face salvation after death. Fact is that false hope is better than no hope at all - and Rick knew this.
If the headscratcher here is: "why is the group so hilariously stupid about this fact" then I have to say I share the same question almost every week.
I don't think mental problems had anything to do with it. There were like four suicidal people in that group. They didn't know they would reanimate. Imagine Beth offing herself in the bathroom, they open the door to get her body and then two more people get bit. He was putting them in more harm's way by not telling them.
As much as I really, really, hate Rick, I have to side with him on this one, and here's why: We have no idea how Jenner worded what he said to Rick. Unless he specifically said "We're all infected, its airborne, everybody has it and when they die they're going to reanimate no matter what." (Which I think we can agree he didn't. Whatever he said wasn't anything more than a few words) then Rick was probably thinking "What? what did he say? and what did he mean?" Rick probably could've come to the conclusion eventually, but he had absolutely no way of being sure. There was no reason to tell everyone that there was a chance they were already infected if it wasn't true. To his credit, when he realized it WAS true, he did tell them almost immediately. Also, that's probably the only way the words "WE ARE THE WALKING DEAD" could ever get a mention in the show; if Jenner whispered that in Rick's ear. Of course, above tropers "Hilariously stupid" line seems to hold a bit more water given what we know.
This is a zombie apocalypse. All order has not only broken down, civilization is gone. Life is inherently more dangerous. Look at the people trying to commit suicide. Look at the possible death by injury like Daryl. It's much more likely that someone can just die without there being anything to be done about it. Rick knew and withheld important information. Salvation after death? What? That's achieved by a bullet to the head.
Whether or not he put the group at risk is all dependent on what exactly Jenner said to Rick. If he had said "We all turn after we die, no matter what", then Rick really screwed up. If he had said something more cryptic, like "we're already dead" or something then Rick probably didn't even realize the implications until he saw it for himself. Jenner was crazy, the situation was intense, adrenaline was running high and Rick didn't exactly have the luxury of hearing Jenner explain everything in detail.
Why did walker Randall already look like a bloated and decayed body, when he'd only been out there a few hours? Rule of Cool?
Well, he was already beaten half to hell before he died.
Did they ever explain why Dale had to be killed off when he was? The only thing I've heard was "this would present new opportunities for drama".
Well, during the show's mid-season break, reports came in that one of the stars had asked to leave after Frank Darabont was fired. Since Jeffery De Munn, who plays Dale, has been a long-time Darabont regular, it's fairly safe to assume that De Munn wanted to leave.
It always bugged me every time we see the characters shooting walkers unnecessarily. By that I mostly mean like situations where they obviously don't have nearly enough ammo with them to fight off all the walkers, yet they'll run around shooting at walkers when it'll barely help their situation. For example, at the high school with Shane and Otis, when they were down to like a handful of rounds with a massive horde behind them, picking off like four walkers in that horde isn't going to do shit. Same thing with Andrea in the season finale, where you'd often see her just picking off random walkers in the distance. (It also happened with Rick hauling ass out of the tank, though I guess that was also kind of lampshaded when he met up with the other survivors.) In cases like those, you'd think the thing to do would be to only use your ammo if there's any particular walker you really need to kill, like one that's getting too close or is blocking a doorway or something.
Its been bugging me too how much more frequently the characters are relying on their guns to kill walkers when in the first season, they only used the guns as a last resort and focused more on running around and avoiding the walkers or even killing them with melee when cornered. After Shane's gun training and living on the farm for a while, I think everyone is getting way too complacent, especially when ammo is scarce and there is no cache nearby. The shooting walkers at the distance may be a rule of cool/adrenaline rush. If you're being chased by a horde of walkers like Shane and Otis was, you would still probably shoot back since instinct would have us attack to scare off the enemy. Too bad walkers aren't scared of bullets.
They're probably just hoping to thin out the horde. The times we see them shooting "unnecessarily" are usually when they're being pursued by a huge mob, when the choices are to shoot a few now and hope that if they catch up there aren't too many to fight off or just let them climb over you in their dozens, shooting is a safe bet.
I don't necessarily disagree with the notion using up your last rounds in a desperate last stand, but it seemed pretty premature to start doing that with, say Otis and Shane at the high school. There was quite a large gap between them and the walkers, and if they kept on running (as opposed to tussling around on the ground for a while, like what actually happened) they'd probably have lasted for a large chunk of time before the horde caught up with them. You never know what might happen during that time, so you might want save your ammo in case, say, a stray walker blindsides you from behind a tree, as opposed to firing them all off to bring the horde down from 70 to 67.
So where have all the automatic weapons gone? Despite their immeasurable tactical advantages no one thought to lift an M4 from inside Jenner's lab or loot one of the soldiers - that explosion can't possibly have wiped out every piece of ordnance outside. Even the militia the team encountered were lacking the garden variety Uzi or Tec-9. Apparently only shotguns and handguns are allowed in the Walking Dead universe.
Automatic weapons were probably the first choice of most survivors—meaning they've been used, lost, broken, or out of ammo. The ones on the ground outside the lab have been sitting outside, exposed to the elements without any maintenance, for months. Plus, for all you know the dead soldiers next to them are only dead-ish. And honestly, I think you're overestimating just how prevalent automatic weapons are outside of the military. The movies make it seem like every street gang has enough Uzis and AK's to take on Schwarzenegger, but that doesn't make it anywhere approaching true.
I have to disagree with the "immeasurable tactical advantages" an automatic in this setting. Zombies can't be suppressed with rapid fire, so you lose the major advantage of having one in the first place. But the disadvantages: increased maintenance, jams, increased use of ammo - are all magnified.
Adding to the above or clarifying his point is me, a Marine. The main purpose of automatic weapons is basically to make a lot of noise so your enemy keeps their head down while your allies get to better positions. Even if you're hitting these are zombies. If it's not a head shot at best you eventually do enough damage where they can't stand but that takes ALOT. You literally need to rip/saw them apart or hit the knee or hip in a way that renders them immobile. Other than that all you've done is make a LOT of NOISE. And if there is nothing else this series has been clear about it's that being quiet is in your best interest. Additionally fully automatic weapons are difficult to accurately aim. Anybody who's done so much as play an FPS (and no, I'm not saying Halo or Call of Duty is realistic but for this point it's. . .well not close enough but gives the first hints of) that a vibrating controller and shakey camera make it hard to hit moving targets. Now multiply that by a thousand and you get the picture. A fully automatic weapon in this setting is probably more of a liability than a "immeasurable tactical advantage" especially if you don't have a fairly secure base to work out of.
Pelvic shots. Y'know, like you're supposed to do on opposition wearing bulletproof vests? A solid hit to the pelvis is a mobility kill. Raking a mob at about pelvic height is going to a)stop several and b)make it harder for their fellows to walk over them. I'd like to know why no one seems to be using smoke grenades and pepper bombs.
Pelvic shots aren't going to help much. With a living enemy, as long as they are capable of returning fire, they are still a threat. With the undead, shooting them in the pelvis isn't going to stop them. Even if it does cause them to fall, or even destroy their lower half, they are still capable of biting a person, as shown with Hannah, the 'Bike Girl' from the pilot, who had her entire lower half devoured by walkers, yet still turned and snapped at Rick. The other walkers in a mob will still be able to walk over the with relative ease, and firing at a mob of walkers instead of trying to escape would be foolish at best, as demonstrated on the show, several times. Now, as far as smoke grenades and pepper bombs, those have little use against an undead enemy, as smoke grenades are used to blind the enemy with a blanket of smoke, which is useless against zombies as they do not seem affected by thick fog or smoke, and pepper bombs are used to blind the enemy, which would be useless as zombies are not affected by pain, so nothing short of killing them will actually stop them.
If you're still wondering, they found assault rifles in the ten months between the season two finale and the season three premiere, and there's other groups with automatic weapons.
Time for an excellent point of confusion to discuss. In "What Lies Ahead" we see the herd besieging the Atlanta survivors and passing through the traffic snarl. The road they were on was a long section of highway, that was pointed out by Maggie. Where exactly did the herd come from in such large numbers and still be invisible to the survivors until after they came to a stop? They had to pass the herd at some point since they were both going in the same direction down the line. Three vehicles of people didn't see a lumbering mass of a few hundred undead cannibals as they passed right by them?
This seems to be an error caused by rewriting the premiere. The horde was following them after they go to the Vatos' stronghold, only to find it overrun and themselves swarmed, and only just get out alive. This is a better explaination of why the horde is leaving Atlanta in the first place. They were running from the horde in the third part of the original premiere, and come across the traffic snarl, and the horde catches up to them, forcing them to hide.
Couldn't Merle have just cut off his thumb?
Simple answer: he was in a panic, and the thought didn't occur to him.
Just taking off the thumb wouldn't have done any good. It doesn't add that much width to your hand, and if the cuff was tight enough around his wrist it still would have caught on the rest of his hand.
A better question is why didn't Merle try and cut through the pipe at the other end of the handcuffs? Galvanized iron water pipe is greatly softer than the hardened steel of police issue handcuffs.
I didn't know that. Presumably neither did Merle.
When Rick is riding into Atlanta on his horse, we see that the outgoing part of the highway is gridlocked while the incoming lanes, where his is, are completely free of cars. This is even the picture on the box for Season 1. This is all well and good thematically, as well as something that should have tipped Rick off that all might not be well, but Fridge Logic kicks in when this means that there were 5 lanes of perfectly good highway that nobody used to escape an infected city during a zombie apocalypse.
Maybe we don't see the inbound lanes backed up because when people used it to escape, it wasn't backed up, probably done after traffic laws went out the window.
Real people can be Lawful Stupid at the worst of times. Sad, but true.
it's also possible that the inbound lanes were being used by the military, and they didn't want them being clogged up by civilian traffic.
The scarcity of resources is presented as being a big challenge to the survivors. Food maybe, gasoline less maybe, but we're supposed to believe that guns are difficult to obtain in the Deep South? Even if we were told that every single gunshop was locked up or empty, they could just start raiding houses. Odds are good that any given household will have at least one firearm.
That's assuming that in the several months that have passed, nobody else has thought of that.
That's been tossed around, but I don't really buy it completely. The human population rapidly dwindled, clumped into groups then turned into walkers or left the city. Some stores were probably skipped by looters because there were walkers all around. (And some of those walkers were from previous attempts to loot the store!) With the lack of resistance Rick ran into upon entering the city on the horse, it's pretty obvious these people either weren't trying hard enough or were too scared to try. I mean look at how long it took to check all the homes in New Orleans after Katrina by an organized military. We are talking thousands of homes and shops.
That's just it, though. The chances of finding a cache of weapons and ammunition in a city the size of Atlanta, with a population of roughly 420,000, are slim at best. Plus there's at least one group of survivors in Atlanta, the Vatos, who implied that there were others there, plus the Philidalphia group seen in Nebraska mentioned passing through from Philidalphia to Nebraska, so any stockpiles of guns and ammunition are going to very hard to come by, considering anything is likely to have been picked over several times already by the time Rick showed up. And, since this Atlanta we're talking about, people panic when snow is forecast, and stores run out of stock in mere hours. Imagine how bad it would be if the dead started to rise and eat the living. Any supplies left in stores would be a miracle, even without other groups getting there first.
My take was that guns might not be altogether rare, but that ammo would be. Plenty of people might keep a gun in their attic but they're much less likely to carry around more than a few weeks' worth of ammo at the most and ammo for one gun isn't guaranteed to work for another.
That's what I was thinking. You don't need ten boxes of bullets if your only reason for having the gun was for home defense.
Just the opposite. Most gun owners have multiple guns in their home and a fair amount of ammo. Three reasons. #1 Ammo lasts forever so buy in bulk to save a bit of money. #2 guns are often owned by people who want to be ready for trouble so extra ammo makes sense. #3 guns eat ammo fast. Gun owners practice and shoot for fun. A single box of ammo is not enough.
Eh, actually, it depends. Ammo doesn't last forever, but it will last for quite a while if it is properly stored. Good ammo costs money, however, and buying in bulk requires adequate storage. Simple home defense doesn't require more than a few boxes lying around, and that would go quickly in a zombie outbreak. Sporting goods and gun shops would have a lot more available, but would also be the first target for looting — which would have started before everything was overrun by the walking dead. Also, you need to have the right ammo. Sitting on a crate of 5.56 NATO doesn't do you much good if all you have is a .357 and a shotgun.
Any stores of ammunition in Atlanta would require checking houses in a Walker infested town, and even if it weren't infested, finding a someone's cahce of ammo in a major city is like finding a needle in a haystack.
So, your average citizen has a few guns and ammo in his house. He hears there's troubled times ahead, so he stores up some more ammo, until shops don't have anymore. City gets overrun by zombies, so he makes a run for it with his gun and ammo in his pockets or in a backpack. He gets surrounded by walkers in a deserted area. He is eaten or turned. Since zombies are not known for searching their victim's bodies for anything valuable, we can suppose the poor fellow's weapons are left lying around in said deserted area. Considering that most of the world's population is by now dead, and most of them probably carried weapons, I wonder how many guns are just lost somewhere, never to be found again?
Your average citizen doesn't have a few guns and ammo in their house for starters. Despite what the media would have you believe less than half of Americans have guns in their homes. The people who DO have guns tend to have multiples. However two major points. The first is guns rust relatively quickly left out in the elements. I'm sure there are exceptions but I wouldn't expect to be able to get a gun that had been left out in the elements for a year to function. I doubt there are lots of weapons lying around from the above scenario anyway. Zombies don't search bodies but they seem equally unwilling or unable to shed themselves unnecessary items. So a backpack or holstered weapon probably contrary to the idea of dropped weapons probably still carry them around.
"Less than half the population" still means a whole lot of guns, given the sheer number of American citizens. Besides, once the apocalypse started, a lot of people would've bought guns right away, especially if they didn't have any before. And then, if they had weapons in a backbag, I doubt that once they were zombified they cared enough to put it on their shoulders and carry it around; and if they only had a gun strapped to their side, it would've likely been lost, since our heroes (understandably) generally prefer to shoot zombies from a distance and leave them there, instead on going up close on purpose and searching them; not counting the fact that zombies would not be very invested in keeping the guns on their sides clean and functional, so after a while the weapon would be useless anyway.
Why have none of the women been taught how to defend themselves? They are three healthy, uninjured adults. Lori especially should be going Mama Bear when Carl is threatened, but instead her tactics are limited to Human Shield, crying and screaming, or running and hiding. Andrea's lack of access to her dad's gun is justified, but there are plenty of melee weapons that they could use if they need to. If there was at least one guy among them, it would be a more realistic "Not everyone is going to become a gun-ho zombie slayer if Z-day actually happens," but right now the Stay in the Kitchen implications are VERY unfortunate. Even Glen is showing some potential for Badassery, so why haven't these three done anything like it?
It's not just the women. The entire group, men, women and children should have their own melee weapons at worst, and realistically, they should all have guns as well. They were either lazy or stupid.
Agreed, but Shane did make a good point about untrained people with weapons wasting ammunition and making quite a ruckus by absentmindedly shooting at something that moves before they verify the target.
It could be argued that the group would be justified to go back to an antique lifestyle of men doing the fighting and the women staying home. Eventually the process of making babies will need to restart as it already has!, and one of the main reasons to keep the women off the front lines was not that they couldn't handle themselves but the fact that you don't want to lose reproductive capability in the group you are trying to defend - otherwise eventually, over a period of years, there's no group to protect and all of your fighting has been for naught. (In a society like ours with MANY reproductive pairs to keep things going for the future, woman and men alike have the freedom to be single and reach for their dreams, these folks don't exactly have that sort of latitude - numbering less than 20 and all.) So while Stay in the Kitchen understandably strikes a bad nerve with some female viewers, keep in mind that the guys on the show are having to fit Men Are the Expendable Gender, and there are many men who don't exactly jump up and down in excitement at the idea of taking that role, either. And I'll also point out that there is an Action Girl in the group, and Dale's job seems to be back at home with the women. (For the record, I'm a male who would prefer to stay back at camp helping out with the chores and spelling Dale guarding on top of the RV. I wouldn't be much good out killing walkers, I think.)
Nobody is asking the women to become battle-hardened zombie slayers. We're asking them to pull their own weight. It's not that hard to get a baseball bat/crowbar/giant stick and swing it at anything that looks like a zombie. It wouldn't kill them, obviously, but it would SLOW THEM DOWN enough for them to escape or reach the men.
One word: Michone.
Three words: What's that mean?
Michonne is a highly capable female character in the comics. It's hoped that she will appear in the T.V. show earlier than she did in the comics
Confirmed; she's set to appear in the last episode of season 2. Hope this works out.
Andrea at least has started training with her gun, and went with Shane to look for Sophia...though it's fortunate she's not too good a shot, or she would have straight-up killed Daryl. No excuse for Lori, though, especially since she's married to a cop. Given how psychologically fucked-up Carol was by her abusive marriage, she kind of gets a pass for now, though I wouldn't be surprised if she starts picking up a weapon now that her daughter's dead.
And "Triggerfinger" proves they're not entirely useless. Lori manages to take out a handful of Walkers and survive for several hours, alone, while injured from a car accident, and using improvised weaponry.
Mitigated by the fact that she's a Southern cop's wife and she still doesn't know not to look down the barrel of a gun...
Well, apparently she does know how to use a gun. She is able to sucessfully gun down some Walkers in Nebraska and Beside the Dying Fire when the barn is being overwelmed. Lori is perfectly capable of firing a gun. She just chooses not to.
Actually, keeping your potentially childbearing women safe in a post-Zombie Apocalypse world is completely useless unless you have an extremely well fortified home. A pregnant woman is a resource drain which slows down the rest of the survivors, and the child she carries really wouldn't be a benefit until after at least a decade.
To be fair on this whole thing, somebody does need to do chores like cooking and cleaning because, well, diseases. Being a hardened badass is pointless if nobody is keeping the place sanitary. It would make sense that Lori and Carol would take on these roles because they were probably ordinary housewives before the whole thing started and would therefore already know what they're doing in these departments. The handful of times we see Lori and Carol attacked by the walkers, Lori can handle herself fairly well. Carol can't, although she probably hasn't sought training.
In the first episode Morgan points out that anytime the car out front is bumped the alarm goes off and the noise attracts more Walkers, especially at night. Why didn't he and Duane go out and disconnect the battery during the day when all the Walkers wandered off?
They might not have known how. Tampering with a car battery without knowing what you're doing is a good way to electrocute yourself.
No. You might get a painful shock, but car batteries aren't all that complicated.
More specifically, it's pretty hard to get under the hood of an alarmed car without setting off the alarm. And then you've got problems.
Setting off the alarm wouldn't be a problem so much if they could work fast. Once the alarm is going off they can disable it any way they want, or at least pop the hood then run so they can snip the wires the next time the coast is clear.
Many people unfamiliar with automotive electrical systems are often uncomfortable with handling electricity. Even though a 12 volt battery isn't enough to electrocute someone (and even then you have to touch both terminals just to get a shock), the idea of being shocked is usually enough to scare off those unfamiliar.
In the episode "Guts" the group of survivors in Atlanta includes Glenn, Morales, T-Dog, Jacquie, Andrea and Merle. Given that Merle is a racist and a sexist individual can anybody explain why he would be included in a group made up almost entirely of non-white individuals?
Merle is a veteran and an experienced gunhand, but he still needs backup, so both sides consider it a marriage of convenience.
Between episodes 3 and 6 how did Rick NOT notice the absence of the hand grenade in his pants pocket? It's combination of weight, contours and sharp edges would make it impossible to forget about when it's riding against your hip, thigh or any other part of your body. - Charlie XT
He probably had bigger things on his mind, and might have thought it had slipped out or he lost it when it went missing.
So in the season 2 finale, Daryl said something along the lines of "a horde that size would tear through the house." What I don't get is why it would. As long as nothing inside the house grabs they're attention, at most all that would happen is they'd probably just bump into it and then wander off in some other direction. The only reason they busted through that fence in the beginning of the episode is because they were all walking in that direction because of the chopper, and there was no way around it, which isn't the case with the farm. Granted, I can understand trying to fight off the horde for other possible reasons, such as that they could possibly end up starving inside the farm if the huge horde outside never clears away, but the reasoning the show seems to give us is that they can't just safely hide inside.
The horde knows there's people there. If the group were to try and hide in the house or try to evacuate someone hiding in the house, they would be spotted and the house attacked. What exactly do you mean the walkers breaking through the fence isn't the case with the farm? They broke through the farm's fence. That coldn't possibly have anything more todo with the farm.
Something that I don't understand about Lori; in the second season, when Carl asks to be taught to shoot a gun, she tries to shut the possibility down, insisting she doesn't want him to learn how to shoot things. Uh, has she somehow forgotten that the world is crawling with undead cannibals? Meaning that her son learning to fire a gun may be the only thing standing between him and a horrific death someday?
She's being unreasonable, it's sort of her major character trait. In addition some people are skitish about guns and as much as I hate supporting Lori I might be a bit hesitant, even in zombie land, to have my son around guns right after he was shot accidentally. I'm not anti-gun by any means but they are what they are and I figure having your child prove that fire arms can have unintended consequences might sound especially true given the circumstances.
This may have been covered, and I missed it, but do the zombies ever die "naturally"? I.e. from causes not including being bludgeoned / stabbed / shot to death by a living person. They clearly need to eat. So can they starve? And if they can, shouldn't they be dying off by this point? No one has suggested trying to outlast them.
You're mistaken. They don't "need to eat". They just eat. They're not living beings that can starve. They're corpses which are still moving.
Jossed in Season 3 during an autopsy by the Governor and his doctor. The Walkers do need to eat however they have a far greater resistance to starvation than a human being - these particular ones had gone several months without eating with only marginal hunger related degradation. In short they will eventually die of natural causes but the human race will be all but extinct by the time they do.
I disagree with the Governor's doctor in that his research is flawed. The Governor has a lab of decapitated Zombie heads, how can he say those are starving when they're not even attached to a body/stomach?! I agree with the theory that the Walkers are relegated to their primal instinct to walk and eat due to their limited brain activity and not out of hunger or starvation.
Who's to say the heads weren't slowly starving to death?
Everyone turns into a walker when they die, bitten or not. There's no way to "outlast" the zombies unless some form of cure is found, because otherwise humanity will be at a constant risk of an outbreak even if they manage to gradually repopulate the planet because impossibly strict disposal methods would be required for every single death that occurred on Earth. Considering how many people have died or turned into walkers (to the point where the United States seems to have become almost entirely depopulated), it's highly unlikely that humanity will ever manage to outbreed the deaths and transformations enough that they can rebuild. Unless some method of curing everyone is found, humanity WILL die out and leave nothing but zombies until those eventually die, whether by starvation or accidents. And then evolution picks up where we left off.
I don't see why. There could just be strict laws and social taboos requiring destruction of the brain upon death. If it's ingrained enough in the culture, then even clandestine mob-murders will be done in this way. Leaving dead bodies with intact brains will be something you simply don't do. The only danger would be from hermits who die alone, but if society gets organized enough after clearing most of the existing zombies, then those people would have to be accounted for too and checked on regularly.
If, barring head trauma, everyone turns regardless of means of death, why are there so many dead bodies in the cars in the traffic snarl, yet none are zombies? The only zombie we see in a car is the one in the pickup blocking the road in the mid-season premiere (which Glenn should totally have seen right away).
A car crash is a pretty good way to get head trauma. Presumably the pile-up leading to the snarl happened long enough ago that anyone who died of causes other than head trauma has reanimated and shambled off in search of fresh meat. Alternatively, it may have happened early on in the crisis and not everyone there was infected yet.
I wasn't referring to the dead bodies in car wrecks, I meant the bodies in the cars that were stopped because of the crashes, like the one in the truck that Carl finds all the knives. And would they even be able to get out of a car, or even a seatbelt?
Why hasn't anyone commented on how weird Christianity just got? I'm on season 3 episode 2 at the moment, so it might well come up later. But there has been some praying going around, and I'd have thought someone would be enough of a wiseass to mention it.
What on earth are you even talking about?
Hershel does mention at the end of season 2 "The Bible promised a resurrection, I was just expecting something different." But really no religion touches on the matter of the walking dead all that much, so Christianity isn't any weirder than any other religion left standing.
The TV Show 3
So, why exactly is bum rushing a prison yard full of zombies a safer bet than ambushing five or so zombies at a house?
It wasn't because it was "safer" and they didn't "bum rush" the prison. They went to the Prison because—as Rick clearly says outright in the episode—it looks like the prison wasn't hit by looters or outside people, and therefore there's a very good chance that it's still full of food and medical supplies. Plus, you know, big frigging walls and iron bars and all that can keep Walkers out better than wooden doors and walls.
To elaborate on that point, it's not just the strength of the prison's walls/fences/bars that provides better protection, but the amount as well. Even if a massive horde of Walkers pushed through the two fences leading into the prison complex, the group would still have several vantage points where they could (provided they find a good cache of ammo) safely pick them off one by one.
And continuing on that point, prisons have armories. If it wasn't completely depleted when the prison fell (I give it 50-50), then Rick and his gang may well be sitting on a pretty hefty stash of bullets.
Rick addresses this point when they first enter prison. He says that prison armories are offsite, and that they will go look for it once they are secure.
In "Killer Within" Rick stated that the armory had been picked clean before they got there, meaning the group has no more ammo than what they came in with.
Same episode. You're about to bum-rush a prison full of walkers, armed mostly with melee weapons. You get partway in and oh no, riot gear walkers! They're MUCH harder to kill, what with the armor and whatnot. You nonetheless kill them, and then you just LEAVE those suits of bite-protecting armor as you go in FURTHER to the prison full of walkers? Why not take them, wash them (if able) and freaking WEAR them!? We already know Rick and Glen (at least) are relatively ok in being slathered in any residual walker goo that mat be left inside.
They've held this Idiot Ball for three seasons now; remember all the way back in episode two where the group first meet Rick? yep they were indeed wearing armoured leathers and helmets that they completely forget about as a tactic by episode 3. If I was in this situation I would sleep in my armour let alone go into a place where I knew for absolute certainty I would be going up against a zombie horde.
They do discuss it, but the walkers have been in those suits for ten months now and are started to melt and peel off inside them. Safety or not, nobody wants to be covered in zombie skin goo.
Helmets and body armour are probably more useful to the zombies then they would be to the living fighting them. What bugs me is that virtually everyone goes into combat against the walking dead in t-shirts, tank tops and open-necked shirts with the sleeves rolled up. I get that it's hot but surely it would make sense to cover up the parts of the body the zombies go for ; necks, throats and arms. Gloves, long sleeves and even a scarf of some sort might impair your combat effectiveness slightly, but surely it's worth it for an increased chance of survival? At one point Milton is saved by the fact that he wraps duck tape around his forearms and it's treated as a joke by the others, almost as if it makes him less of a man!
Okay, in the second episode of Season 3, the group meets five prisoners, three of which die. Now, Big Tiny, the first Black Dude Dies First guy, gets stabbed by a walkers bone when the walker's hand gets ripped off. Why did Tiny just stand there when the walker spend at least ten seconds ripping off his hand? He wasn't established to be slow to react or anything. Also, why did he wander off from the group for ABSOLUTELY no reason?
He backed up because he was scared of the fight and the zombies. Just because he's big doesn't mean he's brave. And he didn't react to the cuffed zombie because it was behind him.
However, just the scene before, Tiny joins the other prisoners just as gleefully in "prison riot" tactics, and appears to have no problem with violence.
It's possible he was Squicked by Walkers that can't be killed by shanking to the stomach.
Same guy from above, another question. This one has minor spoilers, so beware. After the second prisoner dies, the second black guy attempts to run, because he tried to attack Rick, who killed the second prisoner because he threw a zombie at Rick. Why did Rick Lock the running-away prisoner in with a horde of zombies? Honestly, he didn't seem to be much harm, and it is quite out of character for Rick to be that cruel.
Rick didn't know that he was harmless. All he knew was that this guy had come at him with a bat after Rick murdered his friend. Also FWIW, he didn't lock the guy IN with zombies, he locked him OUT with zombies. He even told him to run.
Rick's options at that point were either A. let the guy who just tried to attack him back in, B. run out and finish him off himself, or C. close the door and leave him to his own devices. He's disinclined to go with A because for all he knows the guy's going to go after him again; B is risky for any number of reasons. That leaves C, AKA not risking his resources, time, and safety on a guy he's probably already decided to kill.
Didn't Rick have a knife or pick he could have mercy killed him with when he ran to the gate though? I'm pretty sure he did. Plus, I think using a gun would have been okay in that circumstance since the zombies were locked out,the zombies already knew they were there, and the path behind them cleared.
At this point it needs to be clarified that this is not the same Rick we started with in season 1, nor is he the man he became throughout season 2 nor is he even the man that season 2 ended with. This is Season 3 Rick who the apocalypse has made dark, dangerous, unpredictable and paranoid. In other words debating the many ways in which he could have resolved this situation peacefully or with mercy killings falls flat on its face because you all seem to be under the impression you are talking about a man who is still playing with a full deck.
If anything, Rick has become more pragmatic and reasonable since seasons 1 and 2. Rick would forgive almost any crime in the past and keep on risking his life time and again for people who'd try to kill him. By now, he's learned that that approach is just plain stupid. Rick has moved on from Good Is Dumb to Good Is Not Dumb.
I think it is fair to say that since the airing of episode 6 the Rick has lost his sanity argument carries an awful lot more weight than the fact he is simply pragmatic considering he thinks his dead friends and family are talking to him from beyond the grave using a telephone.
I contest that the argument has grown stronger, if only because it's being retroactively fitted to new circumstances. As of episode 6, Rick admittedly has a mental breakdown following Lori's death. One he seems to shake off reasonably well by the end of the episode no less. But this does not mean that Rick wasn't 'playing with a full deck' before episode 6. His actions before Lori's death don't seem like the actions of an insane man to me. Just because he's not thinking straight now doesn't mean he was insane all season.
At the end of "Walk With Me" (the episode in which we're introduced to the Governor,) the camera lingers for a long time on a specific head on the top shelf of his collection. Are we meant to surmise that there's some special significance to that particular severed zombie head or was that just a stylistic choice?
It was the head of the helicopter pilot.
In the same episode, why did the Governor kill the soldiers for their supplies when he could have just as easily brought them back and added their skillset to the community?
Firstly, it's a simple question of resources. He doesn't know who these people are, and doesn't know what problems they could cause if he bought them in to the community. As a group of highly-trained professionals with loyalty to only one another, not The Governor, they could conceivably orchestrate his downfall. It's not worth the risk or the resources they would use. Secondly, I don't know if you've noticed yet, but The Governor is.... not a nice person. At all.
I would go a step further and say he didn't really care about resources at all. Yes, at some point the population and available farmable land might make that a concern, but for the time being the Governor wants to be emperor and have only people around he know's he can control. Those military guys might have gotten the automatic trust of the townspeoples not in the Gorvernor's personal little guard, or at least challenged his authority, which would have riled him to no end. He seems to prefer lone people or small groups that will be indebted to him and unlikely to challenge his rule. If it had been an equal number of women, children, and older or disabled men the Governor probably would have welcomed them into the fold.
It shows he will take in individuals or small groups who are likely to be thankful to him, but is mistrustful of larger groups loyal to each other. This is why when he finds out about Rick's group at the prison, we know there won't be a peaceful ending as far as he is concerned.
"Highly trained professionals"? They were ambushed in their own base by a group of amateurs. If that's the best they can do, they won't be adding much to the military assets of Woodbury, leaving aside any "questionable loyalty" issues.
There is something else to consider here: In numerous flashbacks now we have witnessed soldiers gunning down unarmed civilians, apparently hunting Shane in the hospital, using fighter jets against a populated city and generally doing very little in general to help the survivors at the beginning of the Outbreak (when there was still presumably an infrastructure.) It is possible that the government in this universe is corrupt and/or evil and as such the Governor really doesn't want to associate with them. The man may be evil but he also demonstrably clever.
Not so sure about that. The hospital staff were probably infected (perhaps even bitten in places covered by their scrubs), they weren't hunting Shane (they never even saw him when he was visiting Rick), and Atlanta was, you know, overrun, and they were firebombing the streets that were swarmed with Walkers, not attacking or otherwise not helping survivors.
His hate for National Guardsmen makes more sense if you take the novel Rise of the Governor into account, where Woodbury was initially ruled by a group of cruel Guardsmen who ruled the town with an iron fist.
That doesn't work since the novel is set in the comic continuity, which is very different from the show continuity (such as Tyrese never being married or having a daughter, Carol being a completely different person, etc.). It's most likely that this Governor isn't masquerading as his brother. But to answer the question, the soldiers gear is useful to him, the soldier's themselves aren't. They are either loyal to the government or loyal to themselves, and more to the point they proved they can survive without him. He has no hold over them so he takes them down hard and fast before they can become a threat, the same way he planned to kill Rick and his entire group the second he found out about them but before they attacked.
So why does Michonne act like such a jerk to the Governor in episode 3? lets just make one thing absolutely straight and clear: WE know that he is evil and kills innocent men for the their supplies and has a fish tank full of heads etc but THEY don't. As far as she and Andrea are concerned a man who acts very much like Rick used to in the opening of season 2 has rescued them (Andrea had a potentially fatal fever for a woman weakened by hunger in a world without antibiotics) and brought them to a village where all the residents are apparently well fed and happy. In effect this is exactly what Rick's group were trying to achieve with Hershal's farm just on a far smaller scale. In fact Andrea even points out that they have no reason to be suspicious at one point and yet she still marches off in a huff. I personally think that in an effort to try and make her a strong willed Sarah Connor type character the writers forgot about the one thing that this show has consistently done well: realistic characterization.
Well, it's the end of the world and the Governor just captured them, dragged them to a heavily-armed town, and stole their weapons. It is understandable that Michonne may be a bit paranoid and her examination of the stolen military vehicles confirmed that something was probably up.
Micchone also notices that they are being watched by the impossible to miss Woodbury Only Black Guy who makes no secret of following and glaring at them. That, coupled with their weapons being put under lock and key, and the Governor saying they can leave at any time but never making a move to begin making arrangements to return their weapons (like giving them to one of his guys with instructions to hand it to the women at the gates), and always tries to talk Andrea into not leaving, definently suggests he has no intention of letting them leave.
Plus, perhaps she has picked up on reading people as a lawyer, especially body language. She may see that the Governor seems to be surrounded people who are subserviant, dependent on, or indebted to him in some way, and that coupled with his talk about re-establishing society (how he does it)comes across as creepy.
How does Michonne's chained-walker camouflauge technique work? We've seen several times a living person caught in a herd of walkers get torn to shreds in an instant. Not just by the ones right next to him or her; all walkers within viewing, smelling, or hearing distance rush in. Why is it different if a couple of them are chained up near said person? Especially since she never has enough decoys to completely surround her. And Michonne does it with two bringing up the rear, while Andrea's makeshift version has one in front, but they both seem to work without incident.
Zombies tend to ignore other zombies, and from behind it would seem like Michonne is just another zombie because why else would the other two zombies not attack her? It'd fail from the front, but that's what the katana's are for. The trick is to just be quick enough so that the zombies don't have time to give you a second look.
That seems like a bit too complex of reasoning for zombies, deducing that because other zombies aren't attacking, they shouldn't either. I would think they could still smell her and her living flesh through them. But I guess we can chalk that up to all the other things that don't make sense about these zombies and their brain stems. But then why would Andrea's version work at all? She was holding one decoy in front, and didn't even have a weapon as I recall, and in any case her back was totally exposed.
Having now seen part of the third season they do explain it. The scent of the walkers overpowers the human scent, acting as camoflauge. So long as you don't get too close to one they'll never realise you weren't another walker (think of it is as variation of covering yourself in walker guts. If you spent long enough around them you probably would start smelling like them). Andrea's doesn't work as well because there's only one walker, but they only notice her when she's passing by.
So, this was unclear: is Carol dead? we didn't see a body and she didn't get a death scene.
Probably not. The group found T-Dog's body, Carol's head scarf, and simply assumed the worst. Nobody has found a body yet.
It does make one wonder why they bothered to dig up a grave and then apparently fill it in and leave a marker without having found a body.
Cleared up: She was alive but trapped inside a room in the prison.
Why does Rick stop Carl from eating that can of Dog Food in Episode 1? I can tell you from personal experience (I was drunk) as well as a legion of Youtube videos that it is absolutely possible to eat Dog Food without any ill effects whatsoever. Remember that this is a survival situation in which they are constantly on the run scavenging scarce supplies of food and water whilst being permanently hunted by predators and bandits. They no longer have the luxury of passing over perfectly good food just because it was originally designed to be eaten by animals; especially since that the related dialogue heavily implies that this group hasn't had so much as a morsel of food in days which is one of the reasons they were so happy to come across the prison. I am curious as to whether Rick would object to his son eating a stew made out of assorted bugs and insects given the general disgust our society has for them despite being ridiculously plentiful and nutritious.
That left me confused too. To me it played like Carl was willing to do things the others weren't while his father still had some naive belief that they weren't at that point of desperation yet. As for reasoning I've heard that some types of dog food have ground bone meal that that human body can't safely digest and could cause internal bleeding. Another possibility is that the food was from a chinese manufacturer and chinese dog food doesn't have the best track record of being safe even for pets, due to salmonella and another nasties contaminating the product.
It's quite possible the dog food was expired. Long shelf life is one thing, but if it's sitting on a shelf for long enough pre-outbreak, well...unless Word of God comes out, all we can do is guess.
Pride. Rick didn't want his group resorting to eating dog food. If they did, that would mean that they are no better than, well, dogs. He wanted to believe that they deserved better than having to resort to that, and that they would at least have some humanity left.
Or maybe Rick just wanted Carl to save it for later. Better to eat the owl and any other game they can scare up for now, keeping the canned goods for future meals.
Look more carefully. The top was rusted and looked a bit bulged; it wasn't likely fit to eat.
So are we supposed to believe that the boiler room walker managed to completely devour Lori's body, all by itself, in the space of less than a day, and yet show less of a distended gut than Lori herself did despite supposedly consuming a greater amount of weight? And what about the bones, did it eat those too?
In the episode of Talking Dead that followed, the director of the episode stated we were supposed to assume the walker dragged her behind the corner, ate most of her and only got that far before falling over. It wasn't shown very well in the episode though. Also, the object that Rick finds on the ground is supposed to be the bullet that Carl shot through her head.
Except walkers don't seem to drag anything anywhere but rather eat on the spot where they find it.
Andrea and Michonne. Why the heck don't they tell anyone anything? So many season 3 plot elements are hinging on them withholding information for no good reason. First, Michonne refuses to articulate any of her suspicions or findings about the Governor, leading Andrea to conclude that she is a paranoid and refuse to follow her from Woodbury. Second, the guts trick. Michonne stumbles onto this purely by accident when she disembowels a walker, but Andrea was in the room when Rick discovered this way the hell back in episode 2. It's not like she could have forgotten it, there is no more pertinent information than how the walkers hunt. Third, Andrea helps the woodbury scientist without once mentioning that she talked to the last survivor of the CDC, who explained much of what he knew. Finally, Michonne finds the prison and tells Rick's group that "some Asian guy" was kidnapped and taken to Woodbury. But if she was close enough to hear them mention the prison, she must have been close enough to hear Glenn and Merle talking to each other. In which case she would know Glenn and Merle's (assuming she hadn't already learned the latter's from Woodbury) names, that they spoke as though they knew each other, and that Merle had a brother among Rick's group. And since she doesn't volunteer why she wants to attack Woodbury in any detail (and Rick doesn't bother to ask), they don't reveal Andrea's presence there. It's bordering on Idiot Plot.
You should have seen some of the decisions they made during the comic version of The Governor Arc.
Michonne does articulate her reasons for distrusting the Governor, "nobody who comes to this place leaves" Andrea just isn't trying to hear all that. Second, Michonne did stumble into the guts thing but she was already aware of using smell to keep the Walkers at bay hence her pet Walkers. Personally I'm amazed that plan worked. I'll go back and rewatch the episode but I'm pretty sure Michonne hearing about the prison was the writer's goofing up. The rest of the information you mentioned isn't the kind of thing you'd be likely to talk about without being asked specifically.
Nobody who comes to this place leaves. Nothing Andrea had seen about the place suggests that anyone would want to leave. Aside from being taken there by Merle (which the Governor apologized for), Woodbury appears safe and well-supplied and they saved Andrea's life. Andrea doesn't know about the caged walkers, the Hummers riddled with fresh blood and bullet holes, or the Governor's diary of crazy because Michonne tells her nothing about it. Regarding the smell of the walker pets, there was no TV show explanation that she was using them for that purpose - that was the comic explanation. On the TV show she used them to carry her stuff so she could travel father and be agile with the sword, and the guts thing suggests she wasn't even aware of the side benefit. As for the remainder, she deliberately went to the prison carrying the baby formula and then refused to give a whole lot of pertinent information.
Actually, no. Milton, the Governor's doctor guy, outright says that's why she had the Walkers chained to her, and what they did.
That's Milton's explanation, not Michonne's. She never said anything of the sort. Again, she might not have been aware of that benefit.
That might technically be true, but it's pretty obvious that scene was intended as exposition. Otherwise it means they just randomly added in this whole inconsequential plot point about how Michonne doesn't know about it but Milton spends a whole scene incorrectly speculating that she does.
As of the Attack on Woodbury Episode this point goes even deeper. How different would things have turned out if: a.) Michonne mentioned Andrea to Rick? She knew that Andrea and Merle were connected, and she knew Merle and Daryl were connected (and Daryl's name must've come up during the long trek back to Woodbury with him). She really seems the type who would listen for this sort of thing. b.) When Andrea stumbles across her about to off the Governor, all she had to do was mention that the Governor was torturing two survivors - even if Michonne didn't understand the connection between Glenn, Maggie and Andrea, she still should have justified her actions with SOMETHING.
Again, Michonne had no reason to say any of those things. Michonne had no reason to assume Rick and Andrea know each other, and if Michonne did talk about Andrea, she had absolutely no reason to mention her by name. Even the most specific things Michonne would realistically say about Andrea to Rick ("a blonde woman I was traveling with") wouldn't tell Rick anything because Andrea isn't the only blonde woman on the face of the earth. As for Merle not mentioning Daryl, why would he do that? Michonne isn't even a talkative person and remember that Merle is still racist and sexist. I can't imagine those two having much to talk about, let alone about Merle's family. Any of those subjects being brought up in those specific circumstances would be rather forced and coincidental.
In Episode 7 Milton introduces Andrea to his experiment to see if Walkers retain any trace memories and all evidence would point toward him never having found anything. However all the way way in season 1 episode 1 the wife of Morgan Jones made repeated attempts to try and open his front door by turning the handle - isn't that concrete evidence Walkers have partial recollections of their previous lives and something that could be replicated pretty easily? Morgan actually points out that she apparently does this every single night. I realize Milton obviously wasn't present during these events but surely to god at least one Walker must have repeated this or similar behaviour at some point.
This whole mini-plot made no sense. Andrea was in CDC and listened when Jenner explained what happens with dead person and the brain after reanimation. She saw what happens with the brain functions on neat LED displayer. She heard the lecture made by professional biologist about all the data the CDC collected and all his own experiments conducted with proper equipment and knowledge. And she didn't tell Milton single word about it. Instead she helped him to conduct his own experiment. Probably the only reason why this was placed was to allow Andrea and Milton create a bond.
An in-universe explanation would be that Milton's experiments cannot get a response from the biters. Instinctively remembering a house and how to operate a doorknob doesn't mean a biter will remember the names or faces of family or be able to understand and perform specific instructions. A meta explanation is that with Frank Darabont's exit the writers have either forgotten that bit from years ago, lack the same vision for the series' progression, or are specifically trying to distance themselves from the scene-setting events of the first season.
Honestly, it's more likely that Milton simply botched the experiment by getting too close to Mr. Coleman. Because we did see another hint that the Walkers retain some of their old selves after Darabont had already left. When Glenn and Daryl found the Randall walker, it actually shoved Glenn aside to charge after the guy who had tortured him.
Milton was testing if the Walkers retained knowledge, which they clearly do not. What they retain, if anything, is muscle memory, habit, and some bit of instinct. Morgan's wife might not have tried opening the door every night because she "remembered" her previous life, so much as she, as a Walker, knew there was food in there and had some vague, lingering understanding of how doors worked.
The Pilot establishes that Morgan is inhabiting a place that's not his original home. Rick knew the former owners; it's a sign to Rick/the viewer how quickly civilization has vanished that a total stranger is living in his friends' house. Morgan's wife was not reconnecting to her old life...a walker had a suspicion that turny-knob-thingy might lead to food.
I think another problem is that Milton was right there and wether or not Mr. Coleman would have had any response to the cues is outweighed by his hunger as a walker. We see a little girl walker pick up her teddy bear, but she only does it before she knows Rick is there. Similar for Morgan's wife and the door. It's possible they do have some echoes of their former lives, but only when they are calm.
And we finally have an explanation of why the lawns are all mowed! All the landscapers are just going back to work in between attacks.
What was the deal with the crazy guy in the cabin? How the hell would a guy who's too insane to even realize there's a zombie apocalypse going on be able to survive nearly a year into it?
I doubt he was always crazy, but probably driven to madness by the isolation. How he survived after he snapped though, is beyond me.
In watching that scene, the guy looks like he's on drugs or something. He leaves his door unlocked and sleeps through the group storming in an all the zombies bashing on the walls. Then he wakes up INSTANTLY and is waving a gun in everyone's face as soon as Rick pulls back his blanket.
How did Michonne find the prison and know to bring the food? I know she claims to have heard Glenn or Maggie talk about the prison and it's location but they were very specifically NOT talking about where the rest of their group was so much so that they both spent the next episode being interrogated.
Both Glenn and Maggie do mention the prison when they think they are alone at the store. Maggie says something along the lines of "A little girl growing up in a prison could use some toys." So it makes sense that Michonne would grab the supplies since she heard about the baby. I don't remember them mentioning a direction or it being a straight shot, though.
No, but Michonne's been wandering in Georgia for a while. Once she heard "prison" I think she could have figured out where it was pretty easily. Especially since Glenn's convo with Merle suggested it was close (the 'We'll bring Daryl back to you' part)
When Glenn is first talking to Merle, he mentions which direction he and Maggie came from, and says it's a "straight shot" to the prison. Michonne relays the same information to Rick when he asks in the following episode. Pretty simple.
Glenn doesn't mention the direction, and certainly doesn't say anything about where they came from to Merle (he cautiously promises to bring Daryl out). Glenn was talking to Maggie when Michonne overheard "straight shot". She could've guessed the direction based on where they came from.
Not being someone who knows a lot about guns is the silencer they improvised from a Mag Lite flashlight in episode 1 a clear case of a Hollywood Silencer or would it actually have a noticeable effect? could someone with arms as thin as Carl even wield such a weapon accurately given how the entire balance and weight of it has now been thrown off?
Strength has less to do with muscle mass than muscle conditioning. Considering the survivors have been on the run for about nine months between seasons 2 and 3 and the need for everybody to cowboy up in order to survive there's nothing saying that Carl didn't take part in some exercise regimen to get himself into better shape to help out the group. Not being able to sit around and do homework all day gives you a lot of reason to get physically conditioned when at any moment you may have to bolt with as many supplies as you can carry because walking undead cannibals are coming your way.
So Rick decides that the best way to handle their shortage of weapons and ammo is to drive all the way back to his hometown police department and raid the armory. The same armory he raided in the first episode, the weapons and ammo from which sustained the group through the second season. Why was he surprised to see that there was nothing there? And why didn't he think to check out the police stations in the towns they passed through on the way?
Yeah that had me confused to as to why he went back to his old station to check the cage when he was the one who cleared it out (except for one single bullet apparently). As to checking other police stations we have to remember that at the beginning of season 3 the group had M4 carbines in their possession, meaning they were acquired either from police stations or military personnel that didn't quite make it. There's nothing to say the other stations weren't checked, we just didn't get to see it happen.
In all honesty I predicted the exact reason why the script writers made him go there the moment he set off: Reintroducing Morgan Jones. It was always obviously on the cards given how long Rick tried to raise him on the radio during season one although why they couldn't have just written him so they meet up at a roadside somewhere is anyone's guess. As for the question: yes Rick was holding the Idiot Ball here. There are three places most likely to be looted in a time of extreme danger: supermarkets, gun stores and government buildings such as police stations and hospitals. Everyone would have had the idea to try and get at the armoury in the months since the apocalypse began; and the obvious fact that he himself had already emptied it once should have told him that it was a fools errand. Still... in Rick's defence the man has been bordering the lunatic fringe ever since Lori died so we can't really expect him to behave like a rational man at this point.
It's not clear why he went back to the police station, but he did give the reason for going back to his hometown: He signed all the gun permits and thought he knew where some hidden guns might be that wouldn't have been picked over. I thought it would have made more sense for him to check the hospital because the rather large Army presence outside should have produced something valuable - but Morgan's stash rendered that moot.
That manages to raise yet more questions, however, as neither Georgia nor Kentucky (I don't remember where Rick was from in the show) require permits for gun ownership. They do for concealed carry, but you wouldn't need a CCL to have a gun in your own business.
Even if he didn't have an "official" list of gun owners, a sheriff would have a pretty good idea of who's been casually shooting off guns in his county. There'd be a history of noise complaints, shot-up road signs, and other petty offenses that would suggest where to look.
Why hasn't the group tried to secure a prosthetic leg for Hershel? I would imagine that one of the only things still left in hospitals would be fake limbs as most post-outbreak survivors probably would have looted on a stop-and-run basis where they pulled up in a car and loaded up with essentials such as medicines or first aid supplies. Add to the fact that most people probably would be living life on the road or holed up in a fortified house where space is limited; securing, transporting and storing a plastic leg would be a needless waste of valuable space unless you actually need one. And even if they couldn't get hold of a real one how about making their own? all you would need is wood, some basic tools and a couple of belts to secure it. Considering just how vital a stable footing is when firing a gun (particularly when you absolutely need nothing else but head shots) I certainly would be able to look over the probable discomfort if it meant my brains were less likely to be eaten or it meant I looked less like a nice vulnerable target for a Raider.
The amputation wasn't all that long ago. It's likely that Hershel's stump is still healing as of the season's end.
They did find a prosthetic for Herschel in the Time Skip between seasons 3 and 4.
The whole "breached gate" of the prison. For second half of the season, the main gate is breached and walker roam freely on the outer yard. It's shown in almost all episode till the breach and after it that it's extremely easy to lure walkers and safely pick them through the fence, killing them by dozens without use of single bullet. Then it's even more jarring when they set in penultimate episode roadblocks, easily going in presumely "lost" sector of the prison. Why no-one bothered for few months (assuming how weather changed from late summer into late autumn or even early winter) with picking up the walker in outer yard, blocking the main enty even with the broken gate and thus reclaiming the yard? It would save a lot of trouble, not to mention silecing the constant moans of walkers.
Mostly because after the gate was breached, they had bigger fish to fry, and really, having a yard full of walkers more of a problem for an invader than a defender—when Woodbury does attack, they have to spend time and ammo shooting the Walkers when they otherwise could've strolled right in. Hell, if I were the prison group, I'd have done everything I could to fill that space with Walkers just to slow down the Woodbury people.
It took seconds to clear the yard when Woodburians arrive and the prison crew wasn't even trying to stop them. Open gun fight with 40+ people was last thing they were trying to do. Then again, with proper use of roadblocks, the gate could be secured in such way that it would be simply impossible to get to the prison in any other way than on foot, slowing the attack much more than short firefight with walkers. Not to mention preventing the shock-and-awe tactic the Governor was trying to use. The only reason to not secure the gate I find is that it was the only way to get out of prison, so that's why the bus wasn't hauled back on it. In first episodes of third season the broken bus is right on the road and then somehow (which is a headscratch on it's own) it's pushed away, to clear the road. But that still doesn't explain why no action was taken to secure the outer yard until penultimate episode roadblocks (which work only on human attackers anyway). The time wasn't even the issue - many episodes are separated by days or even weeks in-universe.
Unless I'm misremembering, the gate is only broken when the Governor kills Axel—at which point the prison group knows that Woodbury is watching them, meaning any extended time at the gates trying to fix them leaves you exposed to someone from Woodbury who wants to take a pot shot. Also it's only a few days between that attack and the season finale. And by "filled" I mean something like a whole horde—yes, it takes seconds when Woodbury arrives in the finale, but that's because there's maybe a dozen Walkers or so spread around the yard. They'd have considerably more trouble if it was a hundred or more, if for no other reason than the sheer press of bodies would make it hard to drive through.
I can understand the fear about some sniper early on, but for few episodes not only they lower their guard against such surprise, but it's also obvious that no sniper is waiting around. More - when they roam around the prison, they do it in open manner, not bothering about chance of being sniped. And then, when roadblocks are being set, they basically ignore any other factor than few walkers on the outer yard. So they are obviously not afraid of pot shots from surrounding woods. If the outer yard is so damn valuable (I hardly see any use of it in winter), then why no actions are taken to secure it?
What would securing it even do? They know the Governor's going to attack them. Which means if they secure the gate, he's only going to knock it down again. Don't know if you've noticed, but they don't exactly have a skilled team of metallurgists and craftsman who can repair something on that scale and keep it secure against someone ramming a truck into it. What, exactly, do you think they could do, and what good would it do?
And, once again, it's at the absolute most a week or two between the gates being knocked down and the Governor's attack. They don't know when that attack is coming. It might well come while they're all out there faffing about with the gate, because that's a project that's going to take a long time.
It doesn't take to be a rocket scientist to fix a gate. And what for? Well, if they got roadblocks, it's not a big deal to stop with them those ramming trucks. Giving the fence much more "stopping power".
Rocket scientist? No. But you need time and resources and knowhow, none of which they have. Nobody there has ever worked with fences or gates of that size, let alone had to make or repair them.
That's exactly why no know-how is needed to take gate lying on the ground and even chaining it to the support beams. More - they did this with secondary gate, leading to prison yard in final episode. So why not with main gate?
Because a man with a private army at his disposal is going to come and kill you, why would you want to have to send a good chunk of your guys (you need two or three people just to keep the walkers at bay, plus at least that many people to actually lift the gate up and position it right), and there is a world of difference between using one chain to keep a gate that's still on it's hinges in place and using chains to take a gate that's been knocked fully of every hinge in place. You'd need to secure it at least on all four corners to keep it in place, which prevents you from leaving the prison in a hurry and leaves you exposed for the men with guns to come and shoot you, which is really the main reason why they don't try and fix it. When the governer's army is dead they probably did get around to fixing it because they weren't at risk of an attack by a superior force.
How was a heavily armed militia of 40+ people driven off by two people firing A-Team style? I know the Woodbury Army was basically just a bunch of civilians with little formal training, but they had such overwhelming firepower and numbers it's pathetic how easily they were driven off.
You answered your own question: Most of the Governors army were untrained and, far more importantly, unwilling. Despite what Hollywood and Shane's replacement Carl Grimes might say, murdering a living breathing human being because someone else said so is hard. They had no say back in Woodbury because they were worried about the consequences at the hands of the Governor and his Lieutenants (note how Sasha worked that out pretty quickly) and as soon as they were directly faced with those consequences they ran away and were subsequently executed.
Yeah, seriously. Despite what the movies show, people don't turn into super badasses who can kill anyone put in front of them just because someone put a gun in their hands. A lot of military training boils down to two simple things: A. Overcoming the human reluctance to killing another human, and B. overcoming the human reluctance to being shot at. Woodbury's militia had neither—in fact, they'd been living a pretty damn cushy lifestyle up to then. Frankly it's amazing that nobody got killed and eaten when they ran into the walkers in the tombs out of sheer panic.
Added to that, it wasn't just "two people firing A-Team style." It was a group of people who were very, very clearly willing and able to defend their territory, people far more prepared to do that than the Governor's militia was prepared to attack. They went in thinking it was going to be a handful of people they could easily rout, and quickly found they'd walked right into a trap. In short, they vastly underestimated how badass the Prison group was going to be—they were expecting pushovers, but ran into flashbangs, walkers, and people in full armor firing on them with fully automatic weapons from cover and the high ground.
Also if the Wordof God that 27 people died in the season 3 finale is correct, minus Milton and Andrea, that means the Governor had 25 people backing him up, plus Martinez and the other guy that he didn't kill. That's nowhere close to 40+.
In first season it takes a lot of Willing Suspension of Disbelief, when Merle saw his hand off with a hack-saw, instead of going through the handcuffs or the pipe they were attatched to. Hack-saws are made to cut such things. Then how exactly Andrea was able to cut two handcuffs' chains in mere 10 seconds using pair of pliers and having both her hands cuffed? Not only it's impossible to generate so much force with single hand, but if force required to cut hardened steel would be applied on pliers, they would simply fell apart.
I think Andrea was being held by plastic handcuffs.
No, they are regular, metal handcuffs. They are clearly visible all the time and even in her final moments Andrea still wears the remaining bracelets.
I can't think of an in-universe justification because it was extremely implausible; Andrea is pretty well built for a woman but she must be exhausted from the chase and the resultant torture so I personally don't believe she could have mustered anywhere near the strength Merle did even if we did accept pliers have the same handcuff defeating capabilities as a hacksaw. As for the real world explanation it was obvious that the writers wanted us to think that she had earned a happy ending to her ordeal; its the reason why Milton is the first body we see and why Andrea's wound was hidden beneath her top. Unfortunately what we actually have is an Idiot Ball that rivals the time she shot Daryl because given just how easily she actually cut through the chain why did she stop halfway through to talk to Milton despite the latter outright telling her to hurry up? all she needed was ten seconds and she would have lived.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand the idea behind finale last scene. After most of Woodburians get killed, the rest are packed into bus and everyone rides into prison. As far as I remember, there are few things that made Woodbury better place than the prison: A. The prison is not really safe. The gate barely holds now and there is a breach in the wall, if not breaches. Woodbury got set and working wall. B. The prison suffers serious squalor problems. C. Woodbury got furnished houses, electricity, pressured water supplies, functional medical bay... you name it. And the winter is coming. Instead of packing from the prison to Woodbury, they drive children, old people and all the stuff they could pack on single pick-up and school bus (assuming they packed anything on the bus), driving to the prison. While you can look through fingers on everything else in the finale if you judge the Governor's actions as revenge beforeanyreason, the last scene is just jarring. It's not that the Governor and his two remaining soldiers could do any harm to resettled Woodbury, because in terms of security it's on the same level as the prison when it comes to human attacks. And now he got just two people under his command and virtually no resources, so really, why not retake Woodbury, when it's open to grab? Rick's Honor Before Reason to not take advantage over your enemy and pulling All Your Base Are Belong to Us? Then that means Rick grabbed the Idiot Ball again and his whole character arch went back into Status Quo Is Godagain. And as usuall, Rick and pack didn't bothered much about scravaging - the whole lot of military-grade equipment is left where the Governor dropped it with people he killed.
Indeed you could even add a D. to that list by the fact that Rick and Daryl would presumably be itching even harder for the Governor's head after immediately following up Merle with Andrea. The most obvious place he would eventually try to reach is Woodbury as its his town and there is no reason to suspect he has given up his claim to it. If I had to guess they may be setting up the annexation of Woodbury for Season 4 episode 1 where Rick works out his empty cold prison is unsuited to housing a large population of people who, most likely, don't trust him entirely.
Woodbury might be comfortable, but it was an inevitable death trap. The walls required at least ten people guarding them at all times and constantly picking off any walkers. The Governor killed just about everyone in the town who could fight, leaving only children, invalids and old people, who wouldn't be able to guard the town. It's also a suburban area - what would they do about food? They'd eventually run out of canned goods; there's no way in hell the town would last. The prison has suitable land for farming and is built for defense. It has multiple fences that have held up against any walkers that have come close, only requires one person on watch at any given time, and every area of the prison is self-contained and can be quarantined in case of a breach. Hell, in the comic, Martinez says verbatim that Woodbury is falling apart at the seams and they won't be able to hold out for much longer, and the Governor doesn't crash through the gates because he initially wants to take over the prison rather than just kill everyone. Woodbury might be closer to the pre-zombie standard of living, but they don't live in that world anymore.
The points are that: A. We are not talking about comics here. B. Prison's defences are almost all breached and the ones that are still in place are damaged at best. C. What will you do with your farmland in winter? D. There are no means to house all those people in run-down prison, when they have warm houses behind a wall as an alternative. I'm not postulating that Woodbury is indefinitely better place to live. It's just much better place to take as winter shelter. And Woodbury wall was manned not because of defence reasons, but to keep people inside from doing stupid things (hence the curfew). The wall by itself is as good as fence around the prison. Please, note that we are talking about setting of TV series, not comic book continuum, so Woodbury and prison are in hell of a different condition that their drawn counterparts.
I have to disagree. A: Not sure what this was about. B: The prison's defenses are far from almost all breeched. The prison ITSELF is a defense by virtue of barred windows and being built of concrete as opposed to burnable wood. And fires don't necessarily mean being attacked. C: I have no idea what you're going to do with your farmland in winter but you have to figure something out. I imagine there is a very good reason why the group didn't disperse, use all of their luring techniques and then return to Hershel's Farm. Sooner or later the canned food is going to run out and when that happens we need farms, the sooner the better. D: Keeping people from doing something stupid is actually quite important in a zombie apocalypse. Combine the facts that in the dark it's hard to see, someone could have died any number of ways so you can't risk not shooting someone just because they're inside the wall and zombie's incredible sneaking powers when they need them a curfew is pretty much a must for a large population. The bottom line though is there is no good reason not keep both, live in the city and have a skeleton crew maintain what is effectively a bomb shelter for when the shit hits the fan.
Walkers keep pouring into the prison and by prison I mean inside of it. They don't really know from where. That means there is a breach in the wall or even breaches. Then we've got the main gate knocked out and the secondary gate barely holds. That means it's hardly working as defence. Fire is as much an issue inside of concrete bunker as it is for wooden lodge. And you are still talking in some far-fetched future, when I simply ask what you need farmland in winter - it's useless now and infested with walkers. I'm asking why not holding the winter out in Woodbury. There is no longer a large population. That's 20 people when both groups are combined.
After what happened to Axel, the visibility through the chain link fence seems like a massive security risk. The Governor has already proven that any living person can cause chaos from outside the prison, using guns. And, at this point in the series, the Governor isn't dead yet. The transparency of that chain link fence is far inferior to the opaque Woodbury walls, and you could man those with a skeleton crew of 2, as proven by Tyreese and his sister.
That was just one of presumably at least four watches around Woodberry. We see it several times because Tyreese and his sister are viewed (correctly) as the weak point in the defense not because they are the ONLY defense. Woodbury might not be a huge city but it's more than big enough that two people, especially at night, aren't preventing people from climbing in or out of the walls at the opposite side.
At Comic Con 2013, Andrew Lincoln stated season four would address why they chose the prison over Woodbury.
The prison itself however is the clear superior choice for a few reasons: the Governer built Woodbury up into it's current state, which means if there is any hidey holes or hidden suprises there he could use that against any future tenants. The prison itself only has two breachs in it's defence; the front gate and the hole in the back, both which are easily fixable (but were discovered/made when the prison itself was under threat of invasion). Both breaches have also been contained; zombies in the front yard can't get into the courtyard, and the zombies sneaking in the hole in the back are trapped behind the thick prison doors (and can be slowly cleared out and fixed). Finally the prison itself is designed to be secure, Woodbury had to be jury-rigged into it's current state. One attack by Rick's group and walkers were able to break into it. Without a lot of guards to keep going over it with a fine-tooth comb zombies will eventually force their way into it. Concrete on the other hand will hold up rather well in the long-run, and so long as the zombies are routinely cleared the chain-link fences will hold.
Moot point now, latest episode shows the Governor burned the whole thing to the ground, eliminating the one thing that made it an attractive location.
Am I the only person who thinks Carl really made the only choice he could in the situation that he was in with the kid who stumbled over them? I heard Hershel tell him to drop the gun. Drop does not mean approach slowly while gauging the situation. It means DROP then preferably back away. Had Carl stood there and then got kicked in the gut and the other two got shot everybody would be jumping down down Carl's throat about how stupid he is (just like last season) but he's getting no love for what at worst is a case of Poor Communication Kills since neither he nor Hershel repeated drop the gun or gave any additional instructions or orders but someone was the adult there and instead of taking charge he just tattled after the fact.
I think the problem Rick had was not the decision itself but the fact his very young son has learnt how to kill without remorse. Now you may be thinking hey so what? it's the apocalypse he'll have to learn sometime which unfortunately is not true. As Rick pointed out after Carl got huffy he was going to be hiding in the woods instead of fighting; he is still a child and moreover is a child who has barely entered puberty meaning he hasn't got a handle on just how violent and unpredictable hormones and a lack of experience can make you - there is a reason why most violent crimes in real life are perpetrated by young males. Next time it might not be because he was faced with a militiaman with a gun; it could be because he has lost his temper with one of the team. Considering the writers have been setting this up for a long time I'm predicting a season 4 storyline here.
The kid had it comming. Both Carl and Hershel told him to drop the gun. And he just standed there, slowly approaching them with the gun still in hand. I hardly see why Hershel is dissappointed about Carl's decision. Sure, Carl is too a kid, but this was a Hobson's choice here - drop the gun to not die.
Like I said; whether you agree with the decision or not is irrelevant. Its the fact Carl, a child, murdered a man without a single drop of remorse before, during or afterwards. Rick as a seasoned police officer knows just how absolutely dangerous that potentially is. A child is not an adult in a small body.
And no-one question his age and that he killed the kid with cold blood. The point is rather that he got every reason to call it by himself I Did What I Had to Do. I understand why everyone, both viewers and people in-universe are freaked out about this, but that doesn't make the kid's death any different. If Hershel would shoot him, no-one would even mention this. But as Carl, barely a teen, did this, it rise many eyebrows, forgetting that he got the point and went through enough bad things because he or his father was indecesive then protecting their own group. So while it's still a murder by a teen, it's not simple Black and White Morality. Plus, isn't the disarming procedure all about telling the other person what to do and when there is no cooperation, just shooting that person? Sure, not by a kill-shot, but still shooting to deal enough harm so other side won't shoot back.
I question if it was in cold blood. If I tell you to drop a gun I mean drop it. Not hand it over. I can pick it up just fine on my own once you walk away from it. As is mentioned before (and can be evidenced about once a month in the News) real Law Enforcement don't exactly take chances with people who aren't complying EXACTLY with the instructions they were given. As was mentioned above both Hershel and Carl did a terrible job of taking charge of the situation but that doesn't make this a cold blooded murder. Shane murdered someone in cold blood, they were helpless and there was currently (little) reason to do it and none to do it when and how he did.
The only way to shoot enough so the other side won't shoot back is to kill. Any law enforcement officer with half a brain will tell you that. That said, Carl is, what, 12? And he's suddenly deciding on his own who lives or dies? That's a decision that most adults will have serious problems with. Carl doing so without remorse means there's something broken inside of him. Rick is worried because he sees his son turning into a remorselessly-killing sociopath. And because he is still, despite the situation, a child. When a child is able to kill a surrendering person in cold blood, there is a problem.
It would be suprising if something wasn't off with mental state of young teen after surviving a year during zombie apocalypse and giving a Mercy Kill to his own mother. Not to mention his Survivor Guilt after Dale got killed. So we can clearly assume that Carl's mentality is already damaged, maybe even beyond recovery and that murder (because it was a murder) is the point when it's became obvious to everyone. It's also a case of in-universe Double Standard. As long as Carl was gun-totting kid taking down zombies it was ok and considered good. But after talking down enough walkers to create a Drinking Game for viewers, he kills single human and now everyone in-universe is suddenly surprised that he is able to murder someone in cold blood. The same routine, only milder, goes with viewers. Suddenly everyone waked up that he's just a kid and he not only know how, but feels no remorse over killing.
That wasn't murder in cold blood. At worst it was a classic case of Poor Communication Kills. Carl was already close enough that he could easily have been tackled to the ground and overpowered by a much larger person and his help? A girl and a crippled old man. Sure it's three on one but that would be a stupid risk to take and everybody would have leapt down his throat had that played out. Frankly if you don't want him killing take the gun away. Sure there are zombies but we've proven that a good piercing weapon will do that just fine so make him a quality spear and call it a day. However in the world they live/lived in with gangsters (Vatos, Season 1), wandering bandits (Season 2), and a well armed militia (Season 3) I wouldn't want anybody with me who couldn't both shoot and take a life if necessary. That person is simply a liability waiting for a place to happen. Like it or not currently everybody lives in a "military" compound with all the responsibilities that come with it until they can secure something at least on par with Woodberry with enough people to let the fighting fall if not to the men (sexist as it may be until men can have babies they are less valuble than women in any apocalypse scenario) at least to the adults.
Sorry to keep repeating myself here but the issue isn't whether or not he was right or wrong or whether or not was just a mistake or whether or not it was just self defence. The fact is that only sociopaths can kill without batting an eyelid; even seasoned soldiers can rarely do that. You know who else in this series besides the Governor who possessed this trait? Shane. Who murdered an innocent man in cold blood to save himself and tried to kill Rick over a woman. This is who Carl is growing up into and like it or not a child is not an adult nor is a boy a man. Its not a question of size or ability, its a question of self-control, and the reason why most violent crime in the world is from teen to young adult males is that young males are very easily overcome by aggression which means he is just as liable to shoot one of the team over a petty squabble as he is to shoot a bandit. You are very correct in saying that he will one day have to become a man and protect the women and the vulnerable and he will need to become one far earlier than any of us ever did... but the brain of a twelve year is simply not developed enough or experienced enough to make life or death decisions. And yes, if I was Rick I would take away Carl's gun and hand him a baseball bat until such time he has shown himself to be that responsible adult he needs to one day become.
Not that I'm one of those diehard Shane supporters or anything (frankly I sided with Rick more often than not), but while Shane was indeed very ruthless, he did not kill without remorse, especially not on the level of the Governor. They made it very clear on a number of occasions that killing Otis affected him deeply, and even Lori comments that he hasn't been the same since that night at the high school. And while he was fully prepared to kill Rick in the penultimate episode, he definitely wasn't doing it without even batting an eye.
There was probably meant to be some ambiguity to the situation. Yes, Carl is perfectly justified in shooting an armed man who failed to follow directions. But it's not as though Carl is a soldier; he's a child. And the man he shot didn't look to be much older than him and may have not meant any harm at all. So, for Rick, it's a question of what his child has become. If you recall in the second season, Rick insisted that they not let Carl pass away because he still felt that Carl could grow up and see beauty in the world. And now he's shooting people left and right.
Rick likes to agonize over morality. It's his way. I see it as having less to do with it being a matter of right vs wrong, but Rick facing the fact with his own son that the world is now not only a place where kids have to make those calls, but that Carl is prepared to do it so casually.
How did Andrea get bit? Seriously. Not only were both her hands freed, but the walker was someone who was skinny as a weed, she had a metal object in her hands, and she saw him coming. It's hard to even justify she didn't want to kill a friend because she killed her damn sister in the first season. Not to mention the fact that her bite was on her shoulder, under her coat somehow.
Because she's probably spent the previous two days without sleep or food, maybe even water, while being beaten up and tortured by the Governor, after running from him on foot from Woodbury to the prison. She just wasn't in good physical shape by that point.
She was exhausted from her escape attempt before she was captured, tied to a chair, and presumably starved, tortured, and beaten for potentially a full day. She did kill Walker Milton, ultimately, but that's the thing: One mistake and you're screwed.
So, Michonne went out of her way to save Andrea, a stranger. Rick went out of his way to save Michonne, a stranger. Rick goes out of his way to save all the children and elderly of Woodbury, all strangers. Why did neither Rick nor Michonne care for the Backpack Guy when they passed by him, and he was clearly asking for help? What made his life any less valuble than Andrea's to Michonne or Michonne's to Rick? Was it becuase he wasn't in danger?
Point of fact, Rick did not go out of his way to save, Michonne, a stranger. Carl went out to save Michonne, and Rick only let her stick around at all because she had the baby formula. Also, Michonne saved Andrea, yes, but we don't know the circumstances other than she happened to be around and chopped off a single Walker's head. The whole of Season 3 is Rick progressively giving less of a damn about anyone who isn't already part of his group. That's kind of his character arc for the whole season.
Agreed. Rick wasn't prepared to take a chance on the Backpack Guy, someone they would have had to take along in the car with them. He obviously trusted Carl and was willing, somewhat reluctantly, to go along with Carl's estimation of Michonne. Unfortunately, the Backpack Guy had no one to vouch for him.
Why would such a multiethnic mix of prisoners be locked together? Aren't American prisons basically defacto racially segregated? The probability of the prisoners being together in a nonviolent situation, as well as the probability of them not turning on each other after being locked together in a room seem slim.
Um, because American prisons aren't defacto racially segregated because that is illegal under US law. The can segregate themselves if those chose to, but there can and in fact has been many cases of mutliethnic cells where you have two people of different ethnicities because space is not exactly an abundant resource considering the state of the prison system. So long as the prisoners aren't fighting each other there's no reason to take them away, and prisons aren't hotbeds of racism like some media would have you believe; (case in point, in high school they showed a video of a former convict who turned his life around since leaving prison, he was racist going into prison because of how he was raised but was paired with a black man because what the fuck does the prison system care? They got along without killing each other, and the man became depressed when his cellmate was murdered by other black prisoners because they thought he had done something). We also don't know if they were locked in the same cells before the outbreak, but if you're refering to why they were locked together afterwards when the dead started coming back to life and eating people holding onto racial grudges you might not even have had before seems a bit silly.
Axel was bullied pretty badly by Tomas and Andrew, so I wouldn't say "nonviolently."
That seems to have been more because Axel was a bit of a dick than because he was white, however.
Milton you're dying and it seems like you already accepted that, you couldn't muster enough strength to crawl over to Andrea, give her the pliers and give a surviving chance to escape or at least try to?
The guy got stabbed in the gut half-a-dozen times. That is not a series of injuries you can simply shrug off, and depending on where he got stabbed he could make his injuries worse if he moved (hell given the viciousness of the attack he could be holding his own guts in). Plus him moving around means he can't be trying to stop the bleeding through pressure, which means he bleeds out faster as he gets closer and ends up putting Andrea in more danger.
Blame AMC, who changed the plot from its original concept. Milton was originally supposed to be shot, and was intended to spend more time trying to help Andrea escape. He would be unable to get the restraints off, and tries to choke her with a piece of chain at one point, but fails and turns into a walker. He would then take a bite out of Andrea's shoulder, and Tyreese (who was looking around Woodbury for her) comes in and shoots Milton. They shot all the footage, then reshot it for the broadcast version. At the end of the day, it wouldn't have made much difference anyway.
So, that thing Allen was carrying during the invasion of the prison... was that a bloodyhead spade? Because the tip looked way too broad for it to be a crowbar.
Something that bugged me for a while, why didn't Rick, Michonne, and his son not pick up the hitchhiker when they went for a supply run, he was calling for help and another hand wouldn't have hurt. My only thought is that Rick was at a point he couldn't trust anyone, maybe he thought he was a plant set up by the Governer to take out the prison from the inside. Any other ideas?
It's more just that at that point, Rick doesn't give a damn about anyone who isn't in his group. If you're not already there, Rick simply doesn't care.
You should already have realised that point; prior to the field trip he forced Tyreese and his group out of the prison into the wild knowing full well that they would most likely die out there. He had no reason to suspect anything bad about them, he just didn't want to be responsible for their fate and didn't want to risk trusting them.
The hitchhiker wasn't merely a stranger, he was also quite clearly a liability. Someone yelling for help has not been trained in Walker Safety 101. Someone alone has not demonstrated an ability to work with others. Someone chasing your car and yelling is only attracting walkers to your position; there is no reason to help someone like that and every reason not to. Groups like Tyreese's have proven an ability to work together to survive. Individuals like the hitchhiker prove by the very fact that their alone that either 1. their previous companions abandoned them as a liability or 2. they got their companions all killed. Either way, Rick is only interested in helping those who can help themselves.
The TV Show 4
At the end of the season premiere, Patrick staggers into the shower room, succumbs to the Incurable Cough of Death, and is shown opening his eyes as a walker. Granted, he's portrayed as very naive during his earlier appearances, but he's still someone who'd been living in Woodbury, under the Governor's hyper-vigilant administration. We know that Woodbury's officials were aware that anyone who dies becomes a walker — Milton's experiment with the dying man proved that — so why wasn't Patrick, and every other Woodbury resident, indoctrinated to believe that sick people must report their illnesses immediately, no matter how mild, for treatment and precautionary restraint? Not the sort of security-lapse you'd think a paranoid like the Governor would have overlooked.
Patrick isn't from Woodbury. He is one of the new people brought in by Daryl or Rick during the 6-7 month Time Skip. Also, we have no idea how the Governor treated sick people in Woodbury.
As for Patrick, he starts off with just an upset stomach and goes to get some rest, then dies a few hours later. The illness would make thinking clearly impossible, so by the time his health is in serious danger it's too late for him to sound the alarm.
There is also the unfortunate possibility that he didn't actually care what happened to anyone else after he died. Harsh I know; but not everyone is cut out to be a decent human being when your entire world (literally) has gone to crap and it's also not as if he got much character development for us to say otherwise.
It doesn't really matter if Patrick was from Woodbury the same basic rules should have applied everywhere. The most likely answer though is that it's relatively rare for young healthy people to die of random illnesses. It's always the very young or the very old and Patrick was neither. It probably hadn't come up in Woodbury and certainly hadn't come up (nor any natural death) for Rick's group and our heroes have been shown to be to dumb to live on a number of occasions prior. I can't think of a single time they anticipated a problem instead of reacting to a situation ever to be honest.
What basic rules? You yourself pointed out how rare it was for someone young to die a natural death, but let's not forget that we have seen (up until that point) exactly one person die of natural causes and that was old age and cancer. The rest of the deaths in the entire series are "death by zombie" or "death by gunshot/knife wound/snapped neck." When the two largest groups in the show have one natural death between them, it's safe to assume there are no "basic rules" covering spontaneous and rapid death from illness. As for them not anticipating problems, they anticipated the prisoners were going to be a problem right off the bat, Rick figured out straight away that Randall's group was bad news the second they entered the bar, he knew for a long while that Shane was going to kill him, really the things they've been blindsided by are the things they really could not have anticipated (a massive horde of walkers appearing, the Governor's existence, etc.).
Also, the flu strain affecting them is virulent enough to kill a previously healthy person within a day, something that is almost unheard of.
So has Rick started to get complacent in between the end of season 3 and the première of season 4? Firstly Hershel states that he has been going outside the prison walls without his gun which is possibly the worst of the amateur mistakes it is possible to make... alongside the second one he made immediately after which is him now suddenly trusting Randoms. I get why they need new blood at the prison as there is indeed strength in numbers but he knows full well from the incident with Randall that there are gangs of bandits roaming the country and he sure as Hell should remember that the Governor is still out there biding his time. This could have so easily been a suicidal trap that orphaned two children and left his group without their leader. The smart thing to do would have been to tell her to meet him somewhere out in the open so he could return and evaluate her with a team of armed backup.
Rick has probably gotten complacent. That's how real people are, after a while you start forgetting that there is a reason why we have so many rules about so many things. As has been mentioned numerous times zombies really aren't that big a threat under regular circumstances, it's only when they sneak up on you or overwhelm you with numbers that they are dangerous. We have to assume that during the entire time skip between seasons that nothing major happened. As for guns they've been intentionally not using them since Season 2. It's still stupid to go out without the gun but I can easily see how someone who had spent several months without incident would simply decide to stop carrying it and he is called out in-universe so it's not something that's gone unnoticed. He's just starting to believe his own hype. Finally that woman seemed half crazed and starving. He didn't really have the option to tell her to meet him some place it was either leave her to die or go with her. Wrong choice? Probably but those were his options.
I'd invite you to rewatch the episode in question. He's not going outside without a weapon, he's going outside without a gun. He still has a blade, which is silent and doesn't draw every walker for miles towards him (which was the main reason why the farm fell at the end of Season 2; gunfire drew hundreds of walkers at once). If he had gotten into trouble he would have just run from the shambling corpses and not waste the bullet. For the woman, he really had no choice there; he couldn't just set a time and place to meet her because A) if she is hostile that means she has time to prepare and B) where is he going to set this meeting place? The only open place that's close is the area outside the prison (which both reveals his home and is also constantly surrounded by walkers), and how exactly is he going to even convey the idea of where the meeting place is to a woman who doesn't know the area and has no major landmarks to guide her?
Also, part of the theme in the opening episodes is that Rick is trying to distance himself from his old occupation, putting away everything that reminded himself of being a police officer and instead putting all of his energy into farming. It's a big personal blow to him when he's forced to burn the pig sty and sacrifice the piglets.
Sick people in the cells. Geez, if you want to leave their cells open, at least tie their legs to the bars with some rope. It doesn't have to be short, or constricting - you can give them enough line to stand up, walk around, get to the toilet - doesn't even have to be tight! You can even make a knot that any human could easily untie if they need to leave the cell. If they go walker, the walker won't be able to go more than ten feet or so - and wouldn't be able to untie the knot. But you know - Rule of Drama.
This actually leads to the second problem in that back in episode 2 people are now sleeping with their cells unlocked. If they had taken this simple precaution Patrick would have eaten precisely nobody whatsoever.
Because people want to feel safe. Closing the cell doors in those situations isn't needed, because they're supposed to be safe behind four sets of walls in the heart of their compound. The idea that someone could get sick, die and turn in such a short time span that locking yourself inside a prison cell is so out there that nobody has a need to lock themselves in. This ties into why the sick people aren't tied up; Hershel even gives a quote for it, "A sad soul kills faster than a germ." You start bringing in the bleak realities of what's going on then those sick people are going to look at it and go "why am I even bothering to stay alive?" Something similar was brought up in World War Z where survivors were dying more or less because the thought of living another day in the apocalypse was so soul-crushingly bleak that they just stopped waking up in the morning. Whilst getting depressed and losing the will to live can't kill a healthy person, a sick person giving up will die a lot quicker than one whose fighting with everything they have.
They may want to feel safe, but they aren't and they know it. Anyone dying in their sleep from even an undetected medical issue or an accident - or suicide, brought on by aforesaid depression - is a threat inside the walls.
Hershel does start telling the people in the sick ward to close their doors in the latest episode. Mostly, it's that they want to make the prison into their homes and not into, well, a prison. Locking yourself in every night in a prison cell is not something most people want to do.
Locking yourself in a prison cell at night sucks. Getting your guts ripped out is marginally worse, however. I could understand leaving the doors open from complacency at the beginning of the season, but after the fiasco in the cell block it shouldn't be optional any more. You're a threat to others if you sleep with your door open.
^^If you have to start locking yourself in a prison cell just to be safe in the world, then why bother getting up in the morning? Hershel says it right at the start of Episode 5, a sad soul kills faster than any germ. The people have to believe that there's hope, that they can survive this, otherwise they just stop fighting the illness and die. There comes a point where surviving just isn't good enough anymore, you have to live or you cross the Despair Event Horizon and check out. Close the cell doors, the patients decide that it's already a lost cause and just give up. Keep them open, yeah it's a risk, but it gives them that small sliver of hope that they can pull through and they keep hanging on. It's a catch 22; it's a risk to sleep with the door open, it's a risk to sleep with it closed.
That's a matter of degrees. Where I live a lot of people don't lock their doors but if I lived in a different area I would. These people live in a world where someone could slip in the shower and become a zombie. Locking your room at night and never going anywhere without a buddy should be common sense. I agree about a sad soul and they have done very little to attempt to alleviate that. I don't see anybody, even the children playing any games, story time is survival training for crying out loud. I'm not trying to downplay the need for training time but why aren't the kids playing checkers (a Prison probably has a board and if it doesn't checkers is simple enough to draw a board in the dirt and play sticks vs leaves or what have you) in Reign of Fire they were putting on Star Wars the play and ended with an educational prayer. That's what's needed to help normalize things. Why is Rick the one working the garden seemingly alone? Give these people something to do!
The idea that keeping the cell doors locked will lead to widespread depression-related death is, frankly, absurd. The survivors are in the middle of a zombie apocalypse. They all know this. As mentioned, someone could die because of completely natural causes. There is no train of thought that leads to "We should lock the cell doors" to "I am so depressed that I will just cease to live." We all die, and yet most of us do not die of despair or suicide knowing the eventual outcome of our lives. The suggestion that this would occur if the prisoners were forced to keep their cell doors locked is untenable. Furthermore, not locking the doors is implausibly stupid because it involves an unnecessary risk. Those basically never pan out. Has Rick or Lori ever said, "Man, what a great thing that I have no idea where Carl is!" Is that how Rick treats Judith? With sloppiness? Not at all. There is no way that the characters would not have learned their lesson about taking risks with huge downsides by now.
You've got the argument wrong. Nobody is saying that if they left the doors locked people would start dying. People in the prison don't lock their doors because everyone in there is healthy and unlikely to just kneel over and die in a hurry. The flu killing people as quickly as it did wasn't a probable event to even consider, so why lock the cells? Hey the prison is old, maybe the ceiling will cave in, so let's go and live outside to avoid taking that unnecessary risk. Nobody is going to be doing anything risky at night, and if someone does get sick they aren't going to die in the time between people going to sleep and waking up. When it gets to the sick people Hershel doesn't want them to give up hope, because they will die if they just give up on trying to get better. Plus as someone else pointed out below at no point do we ever see the cells properly locked; in the comic at least the only time they ever lock someone in a cell they have to do it with a chain and padlock. They never once even float the idea of doing it with the prisoners or Merle, so it is plausible they simply can't lock the cells.
The argument was forwarded as I presented it — the claim that keeping the doors locked would lead to some despair horizon was forwarded explicitly. The problem with the line of reasoning you suggest is that it is implausible. The characters are all in the middle of a zombie apocalypse. They clearly feel that staying in the prison is safer than staying outside of it. Perfectly reasonable. There is no way, however, that keeping the doors locked is less safe than keeping them unlocked. Therefore, every cell door should be locked. The argument toward complacency is simply flawed at the most fundamental level. The group is armed with the knowledge that anyone who dies turns into a walker. It thus strains credulity too far to believe that they would not take precautions against this — no locked doors, no night guard. There is a constant threat of walkers, and there is no way at all that they would not take proper precautions when they have the means to do so. They are in survival mode. They have survived long enough to know that proactive behavior is necessary. They cannot merely respond to threats. Every time that happens — the original camp, Hershel's farm, the Governor's assault — people die. Lock the doors with keys. Can't do that? Tie the doors shut to the metal bars that are part of the door frame. Can't do that? Hammer a metal spike into a rough loop and put it in the wall or floor, then tie the door to that. Can't do that? Tie yourself to your bed. Don't want to do that? Tie yourself to a heavy object in the cell, or bring one in and tie yourself to that. The entire incident is just lazy writing. All of these things occurred to me before the breakout even happened, and I am not stuck in zombie survival mode. There is no way that no one in their huge group did not push for this, and no way that such an obvious suggestion would not be taken.
Except you keep missing the point; the odds of someone just spontaneously dying without warning are so long they are next to impossible. Your argument holds as much weight as "well while they were camped out in the R Vs they should have locked themselves in separate compartments in case one of them died in the night." What happened at the start of season 4 was acknowledged by both medical experts as being a one-in-a-million circumstance that happens a grand total of once throughout the entire affair to two people (with all the people who catch the illness taking at least two days from the first symptoms to death to die, at which point they are separated from the others), and your ideas are frankly absurd; someone pushing for people to tie heavy objects to themselves every night? Saying that there is no way no one in the group pushed for that and that it's lazy writing shows a distinct lack of understanding how normal people think and operate, even under zombie survival mode. That is one step beyond "shoot every survivor you see because they could be a murderous cannibal" on the paranoia track. You're too busy thinking of ways to stay alive you're skipping the whole "living" part, because spending every waking second taking every last precaution against every last possible risk no matter how far-fetched (which the show establishes people going straight from healthy to dead within twelve hours is an incredibly rare feat) then what exactly are you living for? Plus your idea carries just as much risk to life as the alternative; you tie everyone down in their beds and then all of a sudden the Governor attacks again, well all of your defenders are fucked because they can't get out of their cells fast enough to get to their weapons and fight back, they die. This isn't lazy writing, this is the simple fact that people aren't going to just give up their lives and take ludicrous measures to combat highly improbable events from occurring.
You keep missing my point. First, my thinking is not abnormal at all. For one, I am not the OP, so clearly others thought the same thing. Furthermore, every single person I have talked to and half of the reviews I have read mentioned the exact same thing. It is not a matter of assuming the impossible. Does locking the doors or tying people down introduce any substantial risk? No. Does not doing so introduce any substantial risk? Yes, as the show demonstrated. Your suggestion that there would be risk if, say, the Governor attacked is flawed because the group would have ample warning, given that the group is presumably guarding the outside of the prison anyway. If there is enough time for someone to walk through an open cell door but not enough time to twist a key or slice through a rope or untie it, I would put the chances of surviving this extremely stealthy assault as 0% anyway. Keeping all individuals (save cases like Judith, who needs someone present to survive) separate during the night a dominant strategy that minimizes risk. This is not rocket science. It does not require a fancy degree or a high level of intelligence. It is just common sense. I am also surprised that you suggest that such a course of action would take away from living. That is like saying setting the alarm on my house is taking away from living. It requires seconds of time every night, and somehow I manage to summon the will to carry on with life. Making sure the cells are secure and having a night guard in every block is just good sense. In fact, it was so obvious that it was my first thought when they first took the prison, back in Season 3. It is not some transcendental mental magic or some cumbersome oppression. It is basic survival skills.
Do the block's residents even have keys to their cells? For all we know, any surviving prison guards might have fled the compound when it was originally overrun, taking the keys to a bunch of the cells with them.
Maybe maybe not. It doesn't really matter though because zombies are at best a little stronger than regular people (they don't hold back anything) and lack any real problem solving skills. A pair of jeans tied through the bars of the prison would probably keep most people from escaping through brute force the same way a wedge under a door would keep most zombies in as well even though it would only take a human two seconds to pull the wedge away from the door zombies aren't that bright.
Just wanted to add something else to this discussion about locking your cell door at night: It isn't just the Walkers who are a potential threat. It may be horrible/depressing to think of things such as rape and murder but this is a very dark show and they are letting in random strangers who they barely know. It would only take one man to buckle under the strain and suddenly we have a cell block full of sleeping victims and a man who no longer gives a hoot whether he lives to see another day.
It being "a very dark show" doesn't mean people are going to randomly turn into murder-rapists. In fact, the show goes out of its way to show that the people at the prison are, until the flu strikes, living pretty idealistically. They get along, they trust each other, etc. It being "dark" doesn't mean what you think it means.
I didn't suggest (or mean to suggest) that it did. What was getting at is that they would only have to invite the wrong guy into the prison one time only for the sleeping residents to be in danger. What if for example they accidentally let in one of those bandits that Randall was rolling with in season 2? The fact is that even normal well-balanced men will be highly likely to become desperate and mentally unhinged if they spend months in constant fear for their lives, suffer from prolonged starvation/thirst/illness and potentially have seen their loved ones eaten alive and to suggest otherwise is silly. This idealistic existence they were living was foolish and they eventually paid for it with their own blood.
You're acting like they just blindly open the door to anyone, when they don't. They do have something of a screening process, remember. They don't "accidentally" let someone in, they interview them and discuss it.
Hershel's extreme reluctance to be the one to destroy the brains of his dead patients seems inconsistent with his being a veterinarian. While human doctors' ethics dictate that they preserve lives first and foremost, vets are trained to consider the alleviation of suffering their primary goal: euthanasia is a routine and respectable part of their profession. In his years of veterinary practice, he'd have put down possibly hundreds of animals that were sick, injured, or aged beyond the point of hope, so why is Hershel so very unwilling to take comparable measures with his human patients, who aren't even alive to feel him do it and are even farther beyond hope?
Not sure when he refused to destroy the brains of his dead patients. I know that he refused to do it in front of the other patients because he wanted to keep hope alive in the others but at no point do I remember him saying he's not going to prevent their reanimation.
Why does The Governor kill Martinez, right as Martinez is about to offer him the opportunity to rule along side him? Why doesn't he beat him to death with the club while he'd down and then feed him to the zombies instead of messily feeding him to the zombies while he's still alive?
The Governor is still bitter over Martinez' betrayal. The Governor also does not desire to share power. Martinez would very likely be a more humane leader and would reign in The Governor's more extreme ideas. Martinez also knew about The Governor's past which makes him even more of a liability. And The Governor had no idea who would be coming around to check on them. If someone came up to him beating Martinez to death with a golf club, it'd be a dead giveaway to what he was doing. But holding Martinez over the pit gives a convenient alibi should someone stumble in - Oh, I tried to catch Martinez but the Walkers were too strong.
That makes sense to me, except the Governor yelling "I don't want it!" as he was doing it.
Because the Governor is a fucking sociopath. This wasn't some precision-planned coup where he was covering every contingency, this was him snapping like a twig and murdering Martinez because he was in a rage blackout. He wasn't playing with a full deck here, so there's really no reason to assume he's running on full logic.
What did Governor was trying to achieve with his - mind you - second attack on prison? Rick stated all the obvious things about the assault before it even started, right in front of attacking force. That without the fence the place is useless. That the shoot-out will not only cost many lives of both sides, but also lure dozens of walkers. Who will roam free into the prison without the fence. And it all happend. More. They used the tank as a demolition machine, breaking and tearing apart cell-blocks they were tryign to capture and live in later. So what's the point of the attack beside revange beforeanyreason? Not to mention that it's clear to all viewers that Governor lost it way in the 3rd season, so he's practically a madman leading bunch of sheeps on slaughter. Which he can't win. Or gain anything from. Which makes him look like an idiot. But compelling antagonist? Hardly.
More, what's the point on going to the prison anyway? As far as it was shown in previous episode, Governor's group may be lacking supplies, but they are in low-infested area. And with enough manpower to recreate another community like Woodbury. Instead of taking what they got or starting somewhere else with only walkers to deal with, they decide to attack well-defended, well-guarded and well-armed prison inhabited by people who not only proved themselves dangerous, but also beat Governor in the past.
Not to mention that everyone is listening Governor like some kind of God-chosen leader, even after Rick is directly addressing his group about how wasteful and needless the attack is.
Number 1: The Governor is a psychopath but all evidence points towards a genuine love for his new family. If revenge was all he cared about he would have murdered Michonne immediately after capture, hidden the body from the camp and used Hershel as bait. Numbers 2 and 3: The Governor explained very well why the prison is superior: Sooner or later bandits or a horde of Walkers will overrun it as it essentially has no major defences. Hershel's farm is a perfect and indisputable example. As for listening to him like a God-chosen leader? they weren't. They were listening to him because they agreed with him and because none of them had the balls to stand up to him. Oh and incidentally Rick's group only defeated the Governor the first time around because they launched a sneak attack on his militia and they ran away frightened. Its a completely different scenario and everyone involved the first time around knows it.
None of them could get the message, or stand up to him, even after he sliced off someone's head?
Actually at this point it becomes closer to self-defence as Rick and party were shooting at them - it's not exactly inconceivable they weren't expecting much leniency if they surrendered especially if they knew Hershal's daughters were amongst those gunning for them. Retreat wouldn't have seemed like much of an option either as they had been fed the lies that the prison was full of bandits so a few of them may even have been scared of a revenge assault against their camp... which is exactly what Rick would have done so its a completely justified fear frankly. Only we the viewer know that they would have spared the innocent.
Moreover, it's entirely possible that the Governor simply can't stand the idea that Rick might be right about the groups being able to share the prison, or about how people who've done terrible things can still come back from them. He has to believe it's not possible, that there's no alternative to violence in this dead-plagued world. Because if Rick is correct about that, then the Governor has no justification whatsoever for murdering Martinez or Mitch's brother — not even his self-chosen, threadbare excuse that it's the only way he can keep Lily and Meghan alive — and his descent back into murder and power-madness is entirely his own choice, his own fault. He murders Hershel for spite's sake because he can't accept what Rick is offering, and his feeble self-justification still falls apart on him when Lily shows up with Meghan's corpse, proving that his own violent methods couldn't protect the girl any better than peaceful ones could.
I look at it this way; Episode 6 is the World saying to the Governor "Oh look, you can come back," whilst Episode 7 is the world in true Walking Dead style turning around and saying "Oh you thought you could turn back? Well let's just throw all this problems at you and stop you from being able to run away from it." For a brief moment the Governor is honestly considering what Rick is saying, that you can still come back from things, but then he remembers Episode 7 and how all his attempts to avoid the same mistakes never worked out for him and utters "Liar."
Rick said that he knew that they were not too far gone. That they get to come back. That they all can change. The governor knew that HE (the governor) was too far gone. He couldn't change. So he called Rick a Liar, and proved him to be one by decapitating Hershel.
My take is that the Governor doesn't care about justification for the murders. He is a psychopath; he started murdering again exactly when he thought it was in his interest. And he doesn't really care if Rick is right about what's possible for the prison. What he can't stand is that Rick is able to be the better man, to be more calm, collected, and humble, and say more things that the followers on both sides would want to hear than he can. His murder of Hershel is him giving up on retaining the appearance of the moral high ground among his followers, and simply betting (correctly) that the latter would just have to fight for him now that Rick's group will open fire.
The truth about the Governor is that, first and foremost, he's not only a psychopath, but a petty and vindictive psychopath. The Governor seems to feel that, on some level, Rick and his group have wronged him (despite the Governor himself being the aggressor in most of their interactions). It's true that he sincerely cares about Lilly and Meghan, but at the end of the day, he's just using them as an excuse to get his petty revenge on Rick's group the best way he knows how: kick them out of their safe place. The fact that he did this makes it clear that while he does care about Lilly and Meghan, he's simply too vindictive to really put them ahead of his hatred for Rick's group and he'll still opt to destroy the best refuge around so that nobody gets it than let Rick's group have it. My interpretation of episodes 6-8 of this season was that the Governor was shown that he's capable of redemption, that he's still human, and he had been presented with the perfect opportunity to redeem himself (and a lot of what he went through between seasons 3 and 4 was similar to what Rick went through in seasons 1 and 2 if you look at it the right ways), but he still actively chose spite over common sense. To me, it was to show that he can't be a good guy because he's just a bad guy by nature.
Would throwing a grenade down a tank's barrel really kill the operators and cause the whole thing to catch fire? I know absolutely nothing about how tanks operate but I would think that the firing mechanism would be sealed and separated from the cabin.
Not in a tank that size; you have to be able to load new shells into the barrel, which has to be done by hand (at least in all the tanks I've seen in movies). Dropping the grenade down wouldn't be enough to wipe out the entire tank, but it would be enough to set off any tank shells waiting in the barrel, or in the cabin if the tube was open for reloading, and those shells would be enough to cause the whole thing to catch fire. The real issue would be that the grenade should have exploded way earlier since they should only have a five second fuse. I suppose you could handwave it as the grenade's handle was being pressed in by the barrel until they opened it up for reloading, which would fit the timeframe presented in the episode.
It's plausable to kill everyone inside the tank with a single granade, when it's thrown inside by any means (but it's usually unsealed hatch in ubran combat). Basic M60 Patton's (the tank they used) loading system is build in such way that anything that can fit inside the barell can roll inside it it's under any angle allowing such roll. The part that takes some Willing Suspension of Disbelief is the fire. Hand-grenade shouldn't ignite fire nor fracture anything fuel-related (engine compartment is in the rear section, sealed from the crew compartment) and setting explosion of ammunition rack is not that easy. So yes, the grenade would render the tank inoperatable, yes, it would kill everyone inside and the fire is possible, but somewhat unlikely. It doesn't mean it's impossible. The chances are simply low. So let's just assume they used few dashes of Rule of Cool.
Is anyone seriously buying the idea that the Governor, who lost his daughter Penny, pushing him down the slippery slope to mental instability, would permit his substitute daughter Meghan to play in a pile of mud far away from everyone else? Its suspicious coloring aside, I find it impossible to believe that a man who has grown attached to a substitute for his daughter would be so reckless, especially given that the same episode includes a speech about the dangers of the position of the camp and its inevitable downfall to the walkers. Furthermore, while he and most other camp members are attacking the prison, Lilly is on top of an RV, very busy NOT paying attention to her own daughter. This is the same daughter that was almost killed by a walker in the camp not too long ago. After all of the grief that inattentive parenting has caused, the situation is totally implausible.
As he pointed out, on one side of her was a river that walkers couldn't cross, on the other side the layout would limit the walkers to only one direction they could come in which they could see coming ahead of time. Lilly is on top of the RV yes, which happens to give her the best vantage point to see Zombies coming in every direction except for directly below the ground beneath their feet, a situation which had not come up before in the entire series. It's not implausible at all; Lilly was protecting her from every direction except the one that the walker actually came from, which nobody could have seen coming since they didn't know the mud was on top of a flood area.
Meghan was playing next to a forest. The show has set a clear precedent for walkers appearing out of nowhere against all odds; this has been stated time and time again on the main page and on this sub-page. Meghan ran into a walker in the middle of the camp earlier in the season, so clearly the camp is badly defended after all. No one could reach Meghan if there was a problem or if a walker stayed out of Lilly's view, such as when her attention was focused on the river. Lilly's position on the RV does not permit her to see through the forest. Furthermore, all of that is irrelevant: if one asked the Governor whether the risk to Meghan was greater if she was near armed adults or off on her own, we know what he would answer. Again, these characters have survived the zombie apocalypse. The suggestion that they would take unnecessary risks is risible. Keeping Meghan locked in an RV or sitting right next to Lilly is less risky than letting her play where she was playing, therefore it is inconceivable that anyone would let her play far away without someone right next to her. Given the fate of every single child in the series who strayed from his or her parents, there is no way the parents would continue to take such unnecessary risks with their children.
You keep missing the point that they aren't at the camp, the Governor took them somewhere else, hence why that river only appears in that episode. If a walker appeared from the forest there's plenty of time to go back to the RV, Lily is armed with a gun, and more to the point the both of them are within walking distance of the prison, where the Governor is currently making a lot of noise that is attracting any zombies on that side of the river away from the RV. This is the same point you're missing over at the question about "why don't they lock themselves in their cells every night or tie heavy objects in case they just spontaneously die in their sleep?" There comes a point where the risk of something happening is so out there that it's not even worth considering. Meghan stays in the RV? The RV roof could collapse and crush her. Sitting on top of it with Lilly? A stray bullet hits her. Sitting behind it, making no sound and staying still? Hit by a meteorite. There comes a point where you just have to stop worrying about all the implausible ways you could die and just start living.
You keep missing my point. They are not at the camp. They are in a new area, and Lilly was alone on top of an RV, too far away from her daughter to protect her with a gun if a walker popped out of the forest. Keeping Meghan out of literal reach is a completely unnecessary risk, given that the group has not erected a perimeter that they can guarantee is impermeable to any walker. Keeping Meghan close by is a dominant strategy. Many characters in the show have died because of separation, however minuscule, from others. To say that the risk of the RV roof collapsing is equal quantitatively to that of dying from a walker attack is preposterous given the track record of the show. How many individuals have died because of roof collapses? How many have died from walker attacks when they were separated or away from the group? How did Sophia get lost? How many times in Season 2 did Carl wander off, only for disastrous consequences to follow? How many problems resulted when the children were safely locked in a confined space or within grasp of their parents? The evidence speaks for itself. Everyone knows it. If everyone just stayed together and took basic precautions that are obvious to viewers even before the shit hits the fan, there would be many more survivors on the show. Still implausible.
The behavior of Mitch Dolgen strikes me as extremely unrealistic. The governor murders his brother, flat-out admits it (with the only explanation being something along the lines "He was weak. It had to be done."), then forces him at gunpoint to become his Dragon and Mitch just rolls with it. He may not have been at the best of terms with Pete, but he was still his brother while the Governor was just some unsympathetic stranger he had met only days ago. Considering Mitch was something of a rough guy, why didn't he try to kill the Governor at the first opportunity? What's more, the writers could have avoided this issue by just making Mitch and Pete former neighbors or army buddies or something like that, since them being brothers doesn't have any importance for the plot at all.
It's called "please don't kill me" syndrome and the fact that deep-down Mitch is a coward. Look at his last appearance; he's all full of bravado and talking down to Rick while he's sitting in a tank, then the second he loses the tank he turns all meek and surrenders instantly (not that it saves him). The Governor has him at gunpoint, and is more or less saying "you work for me or you die." By that point he's already committed to being an accessory to his brother's death and cover-up and the Governor is the leader and beloved by his subjects. Even if he could kill him the rest of the people would take revenge (and as far as we can tell Mitch doesn't know where Pete's body is hidden so he can't prove anything). It's not that unrealistic; there are plenty of examples throughout history where the fear of death was enough to get normal people to do horrible things to their own families to survive. As for the reason behind Mitch and Pete being brothers, the purpose of that was to contrast with Merle and Daryl's relationship. It's a minor touch, but it tells a lot more about the character that doesn't have to be spelled out.
Why did Lily and Governor have sex in the truck where her daughter and sister were sleeping? Were they worried they would run into walkers if they go out in the woods?
The episode with Hershel tending to the various ill people in the prison block seemed to end with Hershel going out of the prison with Michonne. As far as I can tell this is the same day that Rick arrives back at the prison without Carol, and is therefore also the same day where he and Carol spend several hours going around that small town (where they meet that couple who get killed), including travelling there and back. The Governor kidnaps Hershel and Michonne (this is after Rick has returned), keeps them in his caravan (trailer) at his camp, gives his speech, rallies his people, and attacks the prison by travelling there. The implication in the latest episode "After" based on Michonne being in the vicinity of the prison and killing Hershel's reanimated head is that this also takes place immediately after the prison massacre. As well as the stuff including Rick and Carl walking around until they find that house. Unless I'm missing something, *all* of these events take place in ONE DAY?! Did they mess up with the continuity? Or am I being unreasonable by thinking that this stretches belief?
It probably took Rick at least a day to get back to the prison after dropping off Carol, as they'd already searched all the nearby towns for everything useful and wouldn't have expected to find medicines (let alone living people) in those. The Governor probably also held Hershel and Michonne overnight: a possibility that probably wouldn't have alarmed the prison group much, as Hershel'd just gone through hell locked in the quarantine ward and nobody would've been surprised that he wanted a good, long break out on a "run".
In "After", how the heck did Lizzie manage to kill those young rabbits without any of them either running like hell, fighting back, or screaming like a baby? With only two hands and three rabbits, it'd be impossible to kill one while restraining both of the others, let alone do so without getting all bloody and/or nipped and scratched by a terrified bunny. At the very least, the last to die should've had time to shriek, and a dying rabbit's shriek would've been heard for a few hundred yards, never mind by people sitting a few feet away.
The how is a very good question however I can answer the why: The script writers are foreshadowing the fact that it was probably her killing the rats back before the prison fell. She is after all clearly on the lunatic fringe (willing as she is to smother a baby) and in real life budding psychopaths generally begin by abusing the weak first such as animals or children.
Did a scene get cut out when Lizzie was suffocating the baby? Mika fires her gun at a walker, but the next scene it shows Carol bringing the girls to Tyrese. WTH? We don't know if Carol saw Lizzie smothering the baby or not. I find the editing very odd. Carol had to see Lizzie harming the baby.
Quite possibly Carol did. There is a fan theory that it was Lizzie not Carol that murdered Tyreese's girlfriend at the start of the season and that Carol burned the bodies to hide the evidence and then took the blame to protect her. Its not really that unlikely when you consider the fact that Lizzie is a borderline nut and Carol has a Mama Bear thing going on (she may even be substituting Lizzie for Sophia in her mind).
So am I the only one that thinks that everyone is just a little bit too eager to head to this Sanctuary place down the tracks? I get why Tyreese and Carol would be so willing to head there considering they are protecting two kids and a baby but Rick and Michonne? without even a sideways glance or handwave or spoken worry that this place could be exactly like Woodbury? or that it could in fact be the home base of that gang of bandits they just escaped from? Bear in mind that this is one/two days tops since the Governor destroyed the prison, killed Hershel and seemingly killed every single one of their comrades including Rick's daughter. I'm just not buying that they would be so happy to introduce themselves to what is potentially another psychotic warlord so soon after being devastated from fighting the last one.
They needed a goal. Michonne asked Rick about one point blank at the beginning of the episode, but he decided he wanted a day to think it over. Well, he didn't even make it a few hours before he had to fight for his life from said bandits. I think we can all safely assume it won't be exactly what's promised, but they do need something to work towards. It does seem reasonable to assume they will scope it out a little beforehand.
It helps that they have no safe haven, limited ammo, Rick is still in a bad way and they only have a small amount of supplies. Taking a gamble on Terminus beats starving to death in the wild or getting eaten by walkers.
The logic behind going to Terminus is further spelled out by Maggie and Bob in "Alone": the signs are posted alongside train tracks all over the area, so other dispersed survivors are likely to have spotted them and followed the map, either seeking safety or in the hope of finding their former companions. Whether or not its promised safety is for real, Terminus is the only destination they can realistically expect others from the prison to share with them.
In Chase's story, Cold Storage, it takes place in Atlanta. But, BJ tells him he can take clothes from a locker that "belonged to a cop" (which is implied to be where BJ found his M16), which we then find out is Rick, via photo albums and department photos of Rick, Shane, Don and Leon. But, this also retcons Rick's home town from (fictional) King's County, Georgia, back to Cynthiana, Kentucky, as it is in the books, since it's implied he's Hannah the Bicycle Girl's brother. How does Rick, a sheriff in Kentucky, have a storage locker in Atlanta? Even if he did live in Georgia, it still doesn't make sense that he would have a locker in Atlanta.
Didn't Rick have family in Atlanta? Perhaps business took him to Atlanta and he had to leave some things behind, so he used one of his families' lockers and BJ just assumed it belonged to Rick himself.
Or it might have belonged to a cop who used to be a deputy working for Rick: one who moved to Atlanta and brought some photos along from his old job.
The video game
Why doesn't Lee get on the tractor that's pinned Shawn rather than try to push it?
There was a walker behind the fence that could easily grab anyone on the tractor, as evidenced by it easily grabbing Duck when he was on the tractor. If Lee got on the tractor to save Shawn, it'd be like offering the Walker a nice little snack.
Why does Lee destroy the front gate of the drug store to get to the pharmacy keys instead of doing the sensible thing and just go through the back door? You know, the one characters had been using to get in and out of the drug store multiple times previously? That just felt like a really bad case of But Thou Must just to move the plot along.
It's safe to assume that the way around was blocked, either by debris, since Macon was obviously in pretty bad shape even before the military tried to intervene, or more zombies. Even if it wasn't, a walk around the block would have run more risk of alerting the massive horde out front rather than just a straight shot to the pharmacy key through the front gate.
Right. That back door lead to where they could find Glenn's car and Kenny's truck. Getting seen by walkers and running back that way would just lead them all into the alley and to that door, blocking off the shortest, safest route to the vehicles that clearly wasn't a big focus for the walkers given how often it's used. In such a situation, compromising your only real escape route from a locked-down location is a very, VERY bad idea, and a good way to effectively commit unwilling suicide.
In Episode 3, where would the first two train station zombies come from?? They didn't enter from the door, and they weren't lying behind the boxes...
I thought that they were the survivors from the house beside the train station and it seemed to me like they came through the door.
One was trapped with Clem, though. And one comes at you from the side. Zombies have an odd way of just appearing out of thin air, and not making noise at all until they're looked at, in which case they start shuffling and groaning immediately. It's unbearable the amount of times that a zombie gets the jump on the survivors or just appears out of thin air.
The one trapped with Clem makes sense - why else would the barred room be locked with the keys hanging on a hook on the inside? Guy probably locked himself in for protection, died from blood loss or a bite, and got up because of the amount of noise in the room.
In Episode 3, Lilly shows us a broken flashlight that she found in the trash and later we find an X made out of pink chalk. But I don't remember either of them having a reason of being there, neither Ben or the bandits would have any reason to make an X or throw a flashlight out.
It wasn't clearly explained, but I'm assuming Ben marked the X to let the bandits know that he had made a drop, and did it at night so the group wouldn't see him.
And when he almost got caught, chucked the flashlight quickly.
During the Sadistic Choice where you have to Mercy Kill Duck after he was bitten, Kenny raised a valid point. Why shoot him in the head when you can just give him a drug overdose?
Three reasons. Firstly killing him that way will ensure that he will rise as a walker, the very thing that his parents don't want him to be. Secondly, drugs are far too precious to use for a suicide considering that they could save someone's life later. Thirdly, dying from drug overdose will take a while, and during that time he will just die naturally and reanimate anyway.
Oh...yeah. I hadn't considered that. Also, it's likely they may not even have had the pills anyway, much less enough to cause Duck to overdose.
Also, while a headshot is more violent, it is quick and most likely painless.
When the group sees the overhanging gas tanker, Kenny wisely brings the train to a halt, as a full-speed collision would almost definitely rupture the tanker. However, the tanker is hanging off a bit to the side. Why couldn't Kenny just start the train up again and use the train's low start-up speed to ease past the tanker? It probably wouldn't have been that much more dangerous than what they end up doing, dropping the thing from a height.
Would you risk being in the train while pushing a full tanker of gasoline? Sure it's not likely to explode but it is likely to damage the train, you know the only mode of transport they had at the time.
You're forgetting that metal grinding against metal has a tendency of creating sparks. Combine that with the holes in the tank that such an impact would probably cause, and... well...
Even simpler solution to trying to move the whole tanker - open the taps and drain all the fuel from the tank. Sure it's dangerous to have fumes and gasoline all over the ground, but it means the train can much more easily push past the (much lighter, non-explosive) hanging tanker without causing damage to either.
That still carries risk—such concentrated levels of fuel would have equally concentrated levels of fumes. Combine that with metal tank grinding against metal train engine, creating sparks, and...
Why do we see police cars, helicopters and SWAT vans going into Atlanta in episode 1? Doesn't Atlanta have its own police presence? If these are reinforcements from neighboring departments, then shouldn't the city have been thrown into chaos long before the police from other areas got there?
Possibly it already was. There are conflicting stories at the start of the game just when this all started; Clem says two days, Kat says three and that's assuming that we lost at least a day passed out in the car. Either way life would have continued same as ever until "riots" overwhelmed local forces, wouldn't have affected a standard prison transfer.
Who says they're all going specifically to Atlanta? I assumed they were responding to a variety of calls from a vareity of districts as the first incidents occur.
In Episode 1, Why is Carley unable to just use her free foot to kick the walker that's grabbing her ankle, or better yet, club the thing over the head with her solid metal pistol?
She's panicked and fixated on using the gun as a gun and not a club.
Also, take a good look at the pistol—it looks like a Glock, which is a gun model that is very, very much NOT solid metal—it has a combination of metal and plastic parts, to make it light, and easy to use. And like most modern guns, it's clearly not designed for hitting people with anyway—pistol whipping is actually a VERY ineffective maneuver in reality, and never recommended by professionals for close quarters combat against the living, who might at least get surprised or stunned by the action. Try doing that against a walker with a lightweight handgun, and see what happens. You'll be lucky to not lose that arm (and thereby your life) in the process.
How long was Lee out in that police car? When he crashes the apocalypse looks like it's starting, but when he wakes up its all gone to Hell already.
This bugged me when I first saw it. But when I learned that everyone who dies turns it made a bit more sense, and if you accept the theory that the virus killed people who were susceptible to it on its own, it makes even more sense that everything could turn out poorly in a matter of days.
Still, for Lee to be unconsicous in the back of that car for days is fairly extreme. Realistically, it should probably still be Day One all the way up to getting to the Greene Farm.
He was probably only out for a few hours. It seemed like he crashed in a suburb of Atlanta, and that probably meant that there were walkers around in the city and its outskirts. The few hours Lee was unconscious was probably enough time to for the police response to break down. Keep in mind that we hear the military get involved apparently at the end of day 2, meaning things weren't completely fallen apart yet.
This all gets further confused when Clementine says something when she meets Lee about hearing her babysitter getting attacked a couple of nights ago, and then there are messages from Clementine's mother on the answering machine that suggest that Lee was out for more than just a few hours - it wouldn't make sense for Lee to be driven to a new prison and the officer to act relatively normal if the apocalpyse was under way already and Clem's neighbourhood was already overrun. I have to agree with the troper below and state that Lee must have been in a small coma for a day or two. (It is also perplexing why the walkers are so rotten when the apocalypse is only just underway, but I guess that's a design oversight).
Well, in the show and comic Rick was in a coma unattended for days. Maybe there's something about the infection that sustains people who are knocked out?
This has bugged me for a while, actually. If Clementine is 8 years old, why is she still in the First Grade? When I was 8, I was in the Third Grade. The game characters say something about how smart and mature she is for her age, so why is she an eight-year-old in the First Grade?
Adult writers often have a poor grasp of what stage kids are at for their age. See also: Jason from Heavy Rain
Does the game actually say she's in first grade? I thought she was just telling someone what it was like in first grade.
The hint following that line says "You learned Clementine is in first grade.", but considering how much the interface lies, it's entirely possible that it represents Lee misunderstanding. He has no kids, he teaches adults at a university, so it's entirely possible that he took Clem telling Katjaa about first grade to mean she's in first grade.
If Crawford is all about survival of the fittest and not taking in any weak people, why do they have medicine to accommodate a chronic condition like diabetes and morphine to be used in cases of debilitating pain as caused by extreme injury?
The "Only the strong will survive" mentality wasn't initially their policy. Remember that both Molly and Vernon's group used to be in Crawford before their leader got more and more hardliner about it, then were forced to flee. Likely, as supplies dwindled and the Horde grew, the leader became increasingly fanatical to the point where even diabetics and the temporarily injured were too much to care for.
Besides, the more autocratic it became, the more likely it would be that it would start dividing into classes, and the people in charge would obviously want medicine for themselves.
In Episode 2 where Mark has his legs cut off for the St Johns to feed to the others, why do they cut off BOTH legs when this will obviously lead to him dying from blood loss and, according to Danny, will leave the meat "tainted"? Another point diverging from this: throughout all their time of killing and eating people, the only time when their meal died on them and became a zombie was when Lee and the gang showed up? Really?
Well, they had guests. More mouths to feed.
It was the mother who did this one—previously the sons had, and it's presumable they were more adapt at keeping their victims alive. Since it had to be the mother (as she was entrusted with Mark's care), she did a sloppier job of it.
I didn't conclude that he'd been following them. Rather, as Clem and the gang approached Savannah, Clem just tried to contact her parents and managed to contact that guy. If he was up high atop a building or something, it seems reasonable that they'd be able to reach each other.
Good point, and far more plausible (Molly keeps to the rooftops when travelling through Savannah, after all). It keeps the poignancy of Clem talking to her (presumably dead) parents intact as well. And "guy hears voice of little girl over the radio, and tries to lure her away from her guardian" is such a cheerful thought.
Actually the guy has been following them. That was his car and his supplies in Episode 2. He's been following them in his car.
Speaking of St. Johns Dairy when the group were starving to death, living in a motel with a makeshift wall around it; why didn't anybody think about staying at the farm or at least taking some of the food? I can understand not staying at the place (especially if you didn't kill the "boys") but they had ample food even ignoring the non-kosher meat. Surely it would have been better in the long run if we stole all that food and then left. Also before the whole Mark getting shot Kenny was already thinking about taking the place from the St. Johns by force.
Did they really have ample food? They only had the one dairy cow and they didn't seem to have much in the way of crops. Plus it's surrounded by angry bandits.
They didn't have any food to take. That's why they were cannibalizing people.
No, it wasn't. They clearly were plentiful in milk and butter, and you actually see tons of corn on the farm. They weren't cannibalizing to survive, they were cannibalizing because they wanted an excuse to get as depraved as possible fast, so it didn't feel like they were forced to give anything up.
They weren't looking for an excuse to get as "depraved as possible." They were all clearly already a little crazy, probably even before the apocalypse hit. It takes time for crops to grow and mature, and here's a free tip about crops in a world where you can't just by planting seed by the bucketload: you have to wait for them to mature enough not just to be edible, but to produce seeds so you can plant MORE. Also keep in mind that it's a dairy farm—and there's only ONE cow. One they can't afford to kill for meat (because they still need the milk and butter). Meat which, if you listen to Andy talking to Dan outside the barn when he's guarding it, they're using to trade (for gas, and most likely to keep the bandits off their backs). Most likely, they started out killing some of the cows for meat so they wouldn't have to trade off their veggies. Then chances are one of their farmhands was fatally injured, and they took that mad leap to use his body for food—most likely to trade. They had to have been at least slightly off-kilter to already consider this a valid idea at all, so all the above in mind, it's not a stretch of the imagination to consider that if they feel it's good enough to give others to eat, it's surely good enough for them to eat, too.
Because the electric fence that was supposed to keep out bandits and zombies had run out of gas, and a whole army of zombies were walking into the dairy the moment you beat "the boys". Even if you could come back a while later, after the zombies might have dispersed, there is a likely chance that the nearby bandits would have moved in for food first.
Why, in episode 5, does Kenny stay behind to kill Ben? There was a good minute after he decided to Mercy Kill Ben where he and Lee were dicking around talking about bullets. If he had just killed Ben, like Ben wanted anyway, he could have gone back up with Lee.
Sloppy writing, Telltale couldn't think of a better way to kill off Kenny. I suppose you could justify it as Kenny being a Death Seeker after the loss of his family, but that sort of flies in the face of his anger at the couple who committed suicide for just giving up five minutes earlier.
I felt it was a little sloppy too, but when he was angry over the couple committing suicide I'm sure he was mostly upset about Katjaa doing the same thing. That doesn't mean he wouldn't do it to himself if he wanted to - remember, Kenny is pretty much defined by hypocrisy, such as killing Larry while refusing to even entertain the thought with Duck. Not that that's not an understandable reaction, as his father.
Honestly, it flies in the face of his entire character. He had been established as a man who wants to survive, who will fight to survive no matter what. He had plenty of time to shoot Ben and get out with Lee.
I disagree; it fits perfectly with his character arc. He wanted to survive no matter what because he had a family. Once they died, he stuck to his plan no matter how delusional or dangerous it was, because focusing on a goal was the only thing keeping him going. But it's very obvious that the strain was breaking him down. Even his anger at the couple was directed mostly at himself; he stuck it out, did what he had to, and what did that get him in the end? He's filled with regret that if he had done 'more', his family would be there. As for dying with Ben, a lot of his character is defined by fatherhood. He felt guilt about Shawn dying, at how Duck getting bitten was because of his failures, and then he realized that he treated Ben like shit without realizing that he was a scared kid with no family. He might have failed Shawn and he might have failed Duck, but he was NOT going to fail Ben. He was going to protect him like he was his own, like he 'should' have with the first two sons. From that point, his character has nowhere to go but to die 'redeeming' himself as a father. Of course, you're all free to disagree. There's heaps of times that I disagreed with how a character was written. But that's what I believed the writers were going for.
Why does no one think to tie up potential Zombie Infectees? If it's clear they'll turn, kill them. If not, let them go. They all act like it's kill now or die immediately.
Because they don't know how long that person will have until he/she turns, all they know that its going to happen eventually. In the case of the three Zombie Infectees Duck, Lee, and arguably Larry, consider the situations they were in:
Duck was Kenny's and Katjaa's child. Strapping him to a tree and abandoning him would seem very, very cruel to them. Even if Zombie!Duck didn't break out of his restraints, someone else would've gone by and just shot the kid. Remember that scene where you and Kenny find a zombie kid in the attic in the next chapter? How it looked like Duck? Had they restrained Duck, another party of survivors would've found his zombified corpse and done the same thing to him. And let's assume they weren't going to restrain him to a tree and leave him, let's suppose they tied Duck up and left him at the back of the train. Duck still becomes a zombie, and his parents' worst fears are realized. They wanted to make sure Duck died before he turned.
Larry was a big strong guy. Even if they somehow restrained him, that would've bought them only seconds until he ripped his restraints off. There was a reason Kenny was freaking out like he was. If Larry were turning, they'd be stuck in the freezer with a huge, strong, muscular zombie who could easily overpower them.
Lee had to find Clem. Christie and Omid knew this, so they weren't about to restrain him. They wanted to help him continue for as long as possible.
What do you mean abandon him? They could have just released him. I mean keep him bound and with you. And what about in the drug store? No one thought to suggest tying him up? It might have been a bit scary, but it's a reasonable suggestion that doesn't end with anyone hurt. And not if they weighed his arms down with those salt licks. They were heavy enough to burst open his head. I think they could have held them down long enough to attempt to revive him, with Kenny waiting in the wings to kill him.
In the drugstore/meat locker, the characters were in the middle of panicking for multiple reasons. (Larry was belligerent and already mad that the group got let in, Kenny and Lilly thought their family members might be about to die, and Kenny thought a huge zombie was about to come to life and kill everybody in a small space.) You could argue that Lee should have been able to think of a more reasonable solution, but it's hardly the only time the player's choices are limited to keep him within certain set boundaries established for the character/plot. The family members probably wouldn't have reacted well to the suggestion in any case.
How did the survivors not pass through the waves of zombies on the train or RV? They must have been ahead of the group in order to have reached them so quickly—after all, you're only delayed for a short while (not even an hour), and they've already caught up to you at their incredibly shambling pace. If they were attracted by the noise of the train, where did so many of them come from? As we see from the sound of bell ringing, loud noises only attract them for a brief period before they lose focus and start mindlessly shambling. And then they keep heading towards Savannah? Why? They don't track, as pointed out by the group. There was no reason for all of them to head in one single direction for such a long time, and then just stop in Savannah.
Wall of Text warning:
There wasn't a single wave of zombies on the way, all of the zombies were attracted individually by the train and came through the forest after them.
As for why they kept following it, the comics (which the game is set in the same continuity as) explains this a fair way into it (around book 5 of the collected issues). Basically due to the way they operate, if one zombie brushes up against a door handle and gets a reaction from it, the other zombies near it focus on the door and try and get past it (reasoning that there is something behind it). So once Zombies start gathering in a group, they tend to stick in a group, with each zombie following the others because the others are following it. Then one group runs into another group and the two combine, eventually creating a herd (we see one in book 5 and it's absolutely massive, although not to the size of what we see in Episode 3). Telltale just took that concept and ran with it; when the train passes by the woodlands, the noise attracts all the zombies in the area who head towards the sound, and some of those zombies converge and form a group, which continues to head in the direction because the presence of the other zombies is confirming to it's mind that food is in that direction. You stop for an hour, but it's enough to attract every zombie that was within earshot of where you stopped, plus any others just out of earshot who were already heading in that direction and end up merging with the now growing herd. The zombies in the back will keep following the herd for food, and the zombies in the front will keep going forward because all of the zombies around it are going forward. And they only have a short attention span as invididuals, which was the case in Episode 4 when the herd was still coming to the city. They weren't packed in enough for them to form groups.
Then why did they all stop in Savannah? If they were formed together as a group, why didn't they keep on walking? They all spread out nice and evenly. There were cities in between Macon and Savannah, and the road does not stop there.
They stopped in Savannah because there were loud noises keeping them there, and there's no indication that all of them were stopping in Savannah; they arrive at the end of Episode 4, and episode 5 takes place in less than a full day. Any members of the Horde who weren't pulled off the Herd by the bell or munching on survivors they come across may very well have left Savannah the next day and kept walking past the city until they hit an obstacle they couldn't cross and just lingered around. Depending on the size of the herd it could take days for it to pass through the streets, especially seeing as there are several sections (like Crawford) which are blocked off, more zombies getting into the sewers, others being drawn away from the herd by seeing or hearing something the others don't, and you get the mess in Episode 5.
In almost every scenario, it's understandable why the Stranger starts hating Lee. But in the scenarios where Lee does everything nicely and correctly, I can see him wanting to "rescue" Clem still, but why hate Lee for it? Sometimes there's literally nothing for him to call Lee out for. I understand he was going crazy, but his crazy was directed in most scenarios, except this one.
Lee was still part of the group that took the food, and he was the surrogate parent of the girl he'd decided to kidnap and start his new 'family with'. That's presumably reason enough for him to rationalize hating Lee after he's gone crazy.
But why not Kenny? He's crazy, but he's still rational and focused enough to understand who slighted him. And sometimes he has good reason to hate Lee. But it feels like Telltale either ran out of time or money when it came to scripting a sequence that didn't involve the Stranger blaming Lee.
He does hate Kenny; he specifically mentions Kenny and Katjaa when he talks about looking for revenge, at least if you didn't take the food. Kenny's just not the one who showed up at the hotel, nor is he the one whose kid is always playing with a walkie-talkie.
He specifically targets and talks about Lee, even when they're not at the hotel, though, remember? This just comes across as a huge case of 'have to make it about the protagonist', even when logic and reason flies in the face of it.
When does he specifically target Lee? Kidnapping Clem is more about 'rescuing' her than getting at Lee (hence he doesn't make demands or tell you where he is), and his only way of communicating with the group is via the walkie talkie, which is always being held by Lee or Clementine. Not sure that his "stand outside the yard menacingly and then running off" is really sufficient evidence of him singling Lee out for revenge, which is the only other time I can think of that he shows up.
He whispers things to and about Lee once you get to Savannah. Specifically referencing him. On the walkie-talkie. Being that the Stranger didn't move, I'm going to guess that it was entirely a ploy to get Lee to show up. If he didn't want that, he would have taken Clementine in the station wagon long before Lee arrived.
What's an example of him singling out Lee during a conversation? The conversations I remember are telling Clem to look for her parents (mentions Lee, but only in a "do what I say even if he says not to" way), telling the group to get out of the street when walkers were coming (only "to Lee" in the sense that Lee was holding the walkie talkie), and the conversation at the end of Episode 4 (the only suspect one, but Clem was the one who initiated the call and it's not that hard to envision reasons for it that are not "getting revenge on Lee".) as to being at the hotel, the city was recently mobbed by zombies; a group that size would be difficult at best to just power through in a station wagon — remeber, Kenny had to get out to deal with running over just one in the RV.
The shortest answer is that the guy is insane (he's carrying around his wife's head) and thinks that Lee is doing a terrible job as a parent, so his pain over losing his own family is causing him to target Lee because he already had made up his mind that he was going to adopt Clem.
I would chalk it up to a combination of things. The Stranger calls Lee a murderer several times; he could be referring not just to what he's done in the game, but also to his prior murder conviction, which he could easily have found out about from Clementine or other sources. This would be reason enough to consider Lee an unfit guardian, but the Stranger is probably at least a little jealous of the fact that two otherwise unrelated individuals such as Lee and Clem were able to do something he could not with a wife and biological children; not only establish, but also maintain, a familial bond. The Stranger's motivation is strongly implied to be, on some level, quite selfish; he sees raising Clementine as his one chance at redemption and/or validation, regardless of what kind of father Lee actually is, or how happy Clementine is with him.
What exactly was the point of killing of kids in Crawford? They seemed to be under the impression it was the end of the world, no saving it, and Crawford somehow being their permanent solution. Their society was obviously going to be useless in forty years, with there being only sixty year olds alive, with everyone else having been killed for aging too much, and the kids all slaughtered.
The point at the time was that it would have taken up food to keep the kids fed whilst they couldn't contribute anything to the community. From the dialogue from the doctor in the second tape this was a temporary measure and that eventually they would ease this restriction once the situation was better.
Zombies are always presented as groaning, shuffling noise-makers...except when they manage to sneak up on you some how. Zombies tend to just appear out of thin air in the game all the time. When Sean was trapped under the tractor, Lee runs over not two seconds later and there are ALREADY zombies there, even though it was an open field and they are loud and slow. How did he not notice? And the aforementioned issue with zombies just appearing in the train station without anyone noticing. And how quickly a horde of zombies manage to make it to the camp when the bandits showed up. And how long it took Ben to notice the extremely loud herd of zombies coming towards the train. And when Lee gets bit. They are loud and slow...except when the game needs you to be taken by surprise.
However, this is true in pretty much all examples of zombie-related fiction.
Wall of Text INCOMING:
To be fair in the case with Shawn, the farmhouse was surrounded by a cornfield—a very large one. And he was busy hammering away loudly at a fence, completely focused on that task. This troper has actually wandered through a cornfield in it's final stages of growth before the harvest (on a dare, don't ask), and I can tell you right now that such an environment is not only disorienting, but also surprisingly noisy thanks to even the slightest breeze causing all those stalks to hit against each other, and the literal millions of loud, noisy bugs all chirping, clicking and god-only-knows what else all throughout. Even in a calm, it's fairly hard to hear a noise that ISN'T the crunch of someone stepping on a dry stalk, and even harder to tell just where it's coming from. And that was when this troper WASN'T loudly hammering away at a fence. Next to a loud, hyperactive kid on a tractor. Also keep in mind that the tractor had started and ran over Shawn's leg before the zombies showed up—chances are, Duck was being, well, Duck, and started the damn thing without realizing it, running over his leg, the sound of the tractor and Shawn's scream of pain attracting whatever walkers were wandering in the field by that point. Also, it's worth noting that this game takes place in the comic universe, and that there are different "types" of walkers based on their behaviors. A good number of them DO shamble and groan while shambling, but there are several who don't groan or moan while they shamble to their target—and those who don't even shamble, let alone groan. Try shambling—not like a walker who sees food and is going for it in all earnest, but just wandering about idly and slowly—on a number of floor types like a zombie would—carpet, stone, metal, grating, etc.—and see how much noise each situation makes. Depending on the gait of the shamble, the force of each step and the surface area's friction and composition, even a shambler could feasibly be relatively quiet until they start moaning and groaning or increasing their pace. Lastly, let's look back on all the moments that walkers suddenly pop up out of nowhere on the protagonists, Shawn's case aside. 1: In Clemetine's house, with zombie babysitter. Lee was busy talking to Clementine with a normal indoor voice, and focused on that and looking through the window. 2: zombie!Coachguy or zombie!Travis attacks Katja—she was less than a foot away, there was little stealth needed. 3.1: Zombie 'Copter Pilot: The drug store was already FULL of loud, groaning walkers, case closed. 3.2: Zombie walks in from offscreen to bite bandit in neck—yeah, okay, that one's kind of out of nowhere, despite the loud gunfight going on, surely the bandits would've seen it and the other walkers approaching, though the chaos of such an undisciplined force making an attack might have something to do with the lackluster response. 3.3: Small Train Depot: Lee is busy talking with Clem on how to get what's behind the bars. While the damn door is left propped open, and it's hinges have been shown to NOT be squeaky. Also, the zombie behind the bars was clearly a lurker. 3.4: Herd that shows up going for the train: They were pretty far away when Ben noticed them—and they weren't moaning before then, so probably only started moaning once they saw food moving about on top of and next to the train, starting a nightmarish moaning chain reaction. Episodes 4 and 5 don't really have these sudden ZOMBIE SURPRISE moments in calm, quiet settings.
Georgia going to absolute shit, with deserted desolate streets within 3 days is frankly absurd.
I have a theory that the zombie virus made some vulnerable people sicken and die almost immediately, meaning no one was prepared and a bunch of people got attacked by zombies right away. This isn't wide spread news because they either a) died immediately or b) killed everyone around them. The people still alive simply weren't susceptible. But that's just a theory.
People die every day, in not-so-inconsequential numbers. So take everyone who would ordinarily die in a single day in the state of Georgia, then take into account that everyone who was next to those first people are going to get bitten first. People panic and gather in communities before anyone knows what's going on, leading to plenty of uninfected people being next to someone who turns and starts biting everyone there. The situation rapidly escalates until you have thousands of people infected within the first day and it's still spreading fast. By the third day everyone whose not dead would have to be Genre Savvy enough to start holing up or getting the hell out of dodge.
If you are one of the folk who think Lee was in a small coma in the cop car for a few days this gives more time for things to go downhill, though it can still be hard tyo believe.The impression I got from the series was that the infection started in the outlying towns then spread to the cities, then back into the outlying country as the walkers found food to become sparse.
What did Vernon see from the Crawford belltower to make him ask whether Lee's group arrived by train? The question can even be repeated in Episode 5's recap, and was perhaps one of the motives for Vernon to steal the boat. Was it simply a dropped plot thread, or will Season 2 have and import feature, giving you a nightmare start if you told Christa and Omid to wait for Clem by the train?
He saw the horde of approaching walkers, which is what led him to run away with the boat. He guessed they had been attracted by the sound of the train coming in.
That said the developers could have included a scene where you see the thousands of walkers heading in before cutting back to Vernon's response.
It was supposed to be a surprise to you, and to make it less obvious Vernon would betray you.
Why does Vernon get mad if you state that Clementine's your daughter? Yeah, Clementine and Lee aren't even blood related and basically had no real connection until Lee found her...but she basically considers you her guardian at that point in the game, and guardian/parent are usually considered one in the same. How did Vernon even figure out, anyway? Did he ask Clementine? I mean, it makes sense for her to say "no" because 1. it's the truth and 2. she's looking for her parents, but come on, Lee's basically the only one focused on her until the others want to help you find her when she gets kidnapped, so cut him a bit of slack.
Maybe he doesn't believe it because there's a lack of family resemblance?
Vernon finds out when Lee reunites with Clementine and she asks if Lee had found her parents. He considers Lee's lie a sign that he is an unfit and dangerous leader for the group, and an unfit surrogate parent for Clementine, prompting Vernon to offer to take care of Clem himself.
In episode 4, how did Lee get back into the school after jumping over the barbed wire fence in the alley the second time? That fence is a one-way trip; Lee only got back the first time because Molly was able to help him through the garage. The second time, Molly's not around, and the garage is closed. Telltale seemed to acknowledge this impossibility, as the game simply cuts to Lee reentering the school once you've gotten the item you went out for.
He could have climbed the fence high enough to grab onto the roof, or used some items around there to build something up to grab onto it.
How'd the helicopter crash? The walkers don't have anti-aircraft guns! Fuel loss? Friendly fire?
The pilot might have been bitten at a previous time, and then succumbed mid-flight?
Helicopters are some of the most complicated machines in the military's arsenal, and they require an enormous amount of maintenance to stay air-worthy. If the thing was operating non-stop trying to keep up with the ongoing fiasco, or the maintenance crew died or fled, it could have crashed just from that.
I understood that Lily was paranoid in Episode 3, but why did she accuse Carley of being the traitor instead of Ben? If you save Doug, she actually accuses the right person.
She disliked Carley. She liked Doug, and didn't dislike Ben.
It was heavily implied that she shot Carley less because she thought she was the traitor and more because she was pissed off due to the heavy "The Reason You Suck" Speech smackdown Carley just laid on her.
We see some zombies trying to attack flowing water. Given that they're attracted to noise and motion, wouldn't zombies eventually congregate around the surf of the ocean? The noise and motion should be endlessly distracting, and with no human activity the ocean would be louder then anything else in the area.
My theory is that the zombies don't worry about constant sounds that were already there. Like the crackling of fire for a burning building or a river or stream. It's when there's a sudden new sound that gets their attention. Otherwise, survivors could just wait for a thunderstorm and escape with ease while the zombies are spazzing out due to senory overload.
Episode 1 seems to bear this out with the static-y TV screens. Turning them while they're behind glass is only mildly distracting. Breaking the glass and letting the full-volume static blare gets them all. But they all eventually get "bored" and spot Lee.
In episode 5 how exactly did Vernon steal the boat? Boats that size weigh several tons and require a truck to tow them. The previous episode made a specific point that every car in the whole city had been stripped and Crawford was overrun.
Replaying the episode, I could swear the boat is shown already resting on some sort of platform (what looks like the back of a truck, complete with a license plate) in the brief time its shown in the garage. I don't think Vernon stole the boat, I think he stole the vehicle the boat was on and drove away in it.
That was a boat trailer. A boat that small would usually be stored on such a trailer, which would require a license plate just like any other trailer, and would be hitched behind a pickup or van to be pulled out to a launch ramp. You would then back into the water down the ramp, submerging the trailer until the boat floats free, then return to forward and drive, pulling the trailer out of the water. These sorts of trailers CANNOT be moved by hand without great effort, as they only have two wheels, or possibly four if the boat is big enough. Even with four, the wheels are simply not spread out enough to keep the trailer from tipping forward into the ground, because it's made to be pulled by another vehicle which will provide the support for the front end. While storing, you would use a chock to hold that end up, which is no good for moving it. Either they have some very strong guys hold the front end up while moving it (Good luck!), or they pushed a pickup into position, hitched it, and pushed the pickup out.
400 Days, is there ever a way to learn what was in the bag that Deb has stolen?
Medical supplies from Shel's camp. Dee was the thief who hit them shortly before Shel's chapter starts.
How did Vince get a picture of himself?
Well, we know that the 400 days takes place somewhere close to Macon, where Vince lived beforehand. He could have tried to swing by home and took a picture with him when he left.
After the conversation about Eddie's dick, what exactly did Wyatt mean by "lost ammo"?
Exactly what he meant. Somehow, I assume, Eddie managed to misplace some bullets for the revolver at some point in the past. That's what you get for smoking pot during a Zombie Apocalypse.
Ah. Forgive me for my crudeness. When after the penis talk, "lost ammo" was in quotation marks in the subtitles, so I thought it was some sort of euphemism for semen.
As I recall, it was "lost" that was in quotes, not ammo. Which would tend to indicate that Wyatt thinks that Eddie hid it in the glove compartment and said he lost it, rather than actually forgetting it was in there.
At the end of Episode One, Larry tries to kill you, no matter what you do. He punches you in the face and leaves you to be devoured by the horde of zombies breaking into the pharmacy. The only reason you live is because Kenny steps in to save you at the last minute. Under those circumstances, why is the relationship between Lee and Larry portrayed as if he's nothing but a Jerkass with an obnoxious personality rather than, y'know, the dangerous psychopath who straight up tried to murder you in cold blood? I'm sorry, but after attempting to leave you to be devoured alive, the time for humble gestures of reconciliation is pretty much past. Yet you're never given a chance to confront him or Lilly or anyone else about what he tried to do beyond a single line of dialogue and afterwards Lee acts almost like it never happened. Certainly it should have been an option to remind Lilly rather forcefully as she's weeping for what you did to her dad, or whining about how you treat him, that he was openly trying to kill you.
At that point Lee's still trying to hide his past isn't he? Bringing it up will probably lead to questions about Larry's motivation that Lee would want to avoid.
Why doesn't Kenny or someone else bring it up though?
Maybe Larry deserves a little more credit. He knows Lee is a murderer, and in the conversation he has with him afterward, he makes it clear that he's concerned not only for Lilly's safety, but Clementine's as well. Larry took an opportunity to get rid of someone who was a potential threat to his daughter and, as far as he knew, someone who might have also kidnapped and been doing any number of horrible things to a little girl. It may not be justifiable or sympathetic, but he has more motivation to try and kill Lee than simple dislike, and on some level Lee probably understands this.
It's not clear that anyone but Lee and Larry knows what happened. Larry did wait until he was alone with Lee before socking him.
Actually, Clementine is heard shouting "no!" and Mark asks about it in episode 2, to which Lee confirms that he was indeed knocked flat by Larry. So if even Mark, who wasn't with the group at the time, knows, it does make one wonder why people don't make a bigger deal of it.
The St. Johns' Cow just up and vanished late in episode 2. The last we see of it was when Katjaa was standing by it, preparing it to calve. Where'd it go?
Y'know, I was wondering about that too. Truth be told, it's probably just a content oversight. Considering that several of your team of survivors, including your Morality Pet, are now in the clutches of self-professed cannibals they didn't put it in because more pressing issues were happening at the time.
Actually, the cow appears one more time. When Kenny and Lee escape from the meat locker and hide in a stall in the barn, the cow can be heard mooing off-screen, and Danny comforts it. Presumably, she remains locked up somewhere in the barn throughout the rest of the chapter.
Why is it that when Duck is bitten and Kenny and Katjaa realized they have to put the poor little boy out of his misery, Katjaa shoots herself? I mean, yes, she couldn't cope with the fact that her own son was dying and either she, Kenny, or Lee had to shoot him, who would? But for Pete's sake, her husband was still alive and healthy. She couldn't just abandon him.
Fun fact: People whose loved ones are dying horribly in a zombie apocalypse situation do not always do the sane and rational thing.
Katjaa: "I love our son more than life, itself."
At the beginning of Episode 1, why didn't Clementine use the same bathroom as Christa. Clementine sharing the bathroom with Christa could have prevented Omid's death.
They didn't know that a crazy person was hiding there, and just assumed Clem wanted some privacy.
My bigger issue was that Omid stayed outside to keep watch but then let a stranger in? How did she get past him? Furthermore chasing the water bottle seemed a severe But Thou Must on my second playthrough, because there's nothing you can do to stay near the gun...even after Clementine was just told to keep her possessions close.
I was under the impression that Omid went into the bathroom with Christa to wash up or whatever. Did he actually say he was going to keep watch outside? As for the water bottle thing, from Clementine's point-of-view she was only going to be away from her gun for a few seconds. What were the chances some bandit would wander in during that time?
Christa and Omid went to have sex in the men's bathroom. That was pretty heavily implied. Why on earth would they have Clem take the other bathroom otherwise? That was the reason why no-one was keeping watch.
When was it implied?
 Go to about 2:55 and look at the ... uh, look Christa gives Omid after he says "Vegas Weekend". That's probably the biggest thing (Heheh) implying it.
In Episode 1, when Clementine was feeding Sam the dog, why did he turned aggressive and bite her after they were being friendly to each other. I understand Sam was hungry but that moment came right out of nowhere.
This troper has a family friend who trains police dogs, and when I asked him about it, he said that it would have been out of character for a dog not to attack given the conditions. As to why it was friendly, he explained that the dynamic can be explained in the terms of hunting. When an animal is domesticated, the first thing they are taught is not to attack other animals for food, as the human will provide it. The humans are the hunters for the animal, hence why they have no need to look for food. When humans are taken away, a dog will quickly slip back into hunting for it's own food. Clementine came in the situation, and promised the dog food, so Sam slipped back into his role that he had assumed with his previous family. Any well trained, friendly dog would. Then, when Clementine denied him food, Sam had to become a hunter again as Clementine was essentially another wild animal.
Because Clem had snatched food from a starving dog when he was in the middle of eating what was likely his first meal in a long time. Wild/feral dogs, as with other animals, do ''not'' take this lightly. What Clem should have done was simply let the dog have that can, then go find food for herself. In her mind, they had to share. In the starving dog's mind, she was robbing him of his chance to live, and he reacted accordingly. It sucked, and it was a big Tear Jerker considering what Clem has to then do to the dog after their fight, but in the animal kingdom, that's how things work. "You steal my food, you pay the price."
Not even just wild dogs. Even nice old domesticated dogs can turn really violent if you take their food away or mess with them while they're eating. I grew up with dogs in my house, and the first thing my parents ever taught me about handling them was never, ever to touch them while they ate.
The dog's reaction seemed believable to me the way she drops the can; playing again makes it worse because Sam attacks no matter what you choose which feels like But Thou Must if the player is thinking of cautious methods before Clementine acts: Like SCOOPING a small amount of food onto the ground from up high. I did not expect her to offer him the can because...I never would have. Is that because I'm adult or because I'm familiar with how to treat feral dogs? I don't know, but I found it rather implausible Clem wouldn't be more cautious WITH A STRAY ANIMAL after she's learned how violent PEOPLE can be. I tiptoed around Sam the second he was introduced, but the game offered no methods to exercise my mental caution. It's a problem with making certain choices too linear for the sake of plot even when the player is actively thinking around corners. Very little is as frustrating on screen as, "I specifically thought of a way to prevent that but the game forced me to do it anyway."
Yes, it's because you're an adult and you're familiar with how to treat a feral dogs. What makes you think that a child would act rationally and like she has full, experienced knowledge in a situation she clearly has never encountered before? Everyone isn't a badass expert.
And you really can't compare her experience with humans with her experience with dogs. As far as we know, since the first game started, she had never confronted anything other than humans, humans, and more humans. Given her age and her limited experience with wild dogs, she probably figured that this one would, if anything else, be all cuddly and understanding because, y'know, it's a dog, not a person.
Also, the attack was the first moment, barring their initial meeting, that the dog had acted hostile. Before that, Sam had been acting just like any pet, really - letting you pet him, following you around, barking and wagging his tail. You can even throw the frisbee for him and he'll chase it, and when he started begging for food he was sitting there waiting patiently like most pet dogs will do.
Speaking of Sam's sudden aggression, if he was really that desperate, why was he friendly with Clementine from the word go? Why didn't he try to eat her instead?
As stated before, dogs lose their shit when they are hungry and the idea of being fed is threatened. Even trained dogs will snap their jaws at you if they think you're a risk to a good meal. You can find a photo during the abandoned campsite that shows Sam had owners so it's entirely possible that he was trained as to why he didn't attack Clementine immediately. Strays in real life can be friendly and Sam previously had owners so he might have sensed Clementine might not be a threat. But as I've already stated dogs do not play nice when it comes to food. No matter what your choice is, if you feed Sam he gets overly hungry since you only offer him a few mere beans and he knocks the can over. Clementine bending down to get it posed a threat and he snapped. And refusing to feed him angered him in the same way. To shorten things up; Sam is a friendly rover companion to Clem until the idea of him eating gets threatened.
How does Clementine have that photo of Lee? I previously thought it might have been from Kenny and Lilly (made a WMG on it) but if Clem was with Christa and Omid until the latter's death to which she was just with Christa up until after the timeskip where else could she have got that photo? The photo was in the pharmacy and episode 3 shows that a majority of the pharmacy is destroyed by that airplane. Who else would have found the photo and decided to take it? Clem visiting the pharmacy once more seems pretty hard to believe.
IIRC, there was a three-month time skip when the group held themselves up in a hotel somewhere. It's likely during that time, Lee showed Clementine a picture of himself as a younger man (possibly when he was with his wife) and allowed Clementine to keep it.
But the photo of Lee Clementine has is clearly the one he himself tore up in episode one of season 1. The white shirt he wore is the same plus it's torn off exactly like it. It's the very same one he ripped up in episode 1. It wasn't a different photo.
Maybe she decided to walk around the store while you were out front with Doug, trying to get the keys from the Pharmacy, went in the back, saw the picture on the floor (I forget if Lee actually disposed of that part or not) and picked it up?
I highly doubt that. Clementine only knew Lee for a day at the very least then. Her taking a photo of a man she only knew for a limited amount of time doesn't seem likely.
Well, she may not have necessarily took it for sentimental reasons. She may have picked it up wondering why there was a picture of Lee there and forgot to ask him later. Or, alternatively, she actually DID see Lee rip the photo earlier and decided to see what that was about later since, as you said, she didn't know him that well and didn't feel comfortable asking him. Really, seeing a ripped-up photo of the guy who's taking care of you in such a seemingly random location such as that would raise enough questions that she might decide to keep it just in case. As for why she's still holding onto it, I assume after she bonded with Lee it became a memento.
This may be answered by a revelation in a future episode; but from what information we have now... Is there a reason Winston (The dude chasing Clem in "All That Remains") would save Clementine from the walkers? If you're not quite quick enough dodging that female walker and you trip while trying to avoid it he knocks it down and stomps it's head in before turning his attention back to you. There's also that instance when that Walker stuck behind the tree grabs you and then HE grabs you and pulls you away from the Walker, tearing it's arm off. I almost felt bad letting the Walkers have him until I saw some Game Overs where he kills you if he catches you. His saving you and trying to kill you at the same time is just really, really confusing. Is there any type of explanation for this?
Could be that he simply wanted to kill Clem himself, considering how huge of a thorn in his side she's been, and didn't want to give the Walkers the pleasure.
There's another possibility, as suggested by S 1 E 2: Cannibalism. The men may assume that if she dies by walker, her meat is tainted.
If he wanted to kill Clem straight out, he had a gun. If he catches her, he drags her until one of his friends tells him they have to go right now and to forget about her, at which point he shoots Clem in the head. Clearly the initial intent was for Clem to be interrogated so they could find out where her non-existent group was, chop Clem up and use her for food, or whatever other nasty fate they had in mind.
What happened to Christa's baby? She's pregnant and then after the timeskip, it's far enough along that she should have a year old baby, but there's no infant. Did she miscarry? Abandon the newborn? Did it just die offcamera?
The game never says one way or the other. It could be Tell Tale using Nothing Is Scarier; Though I'm hoping they'll show what happens later via Flashback. Maybe during Episode 3. (The slide shows Clem with Rebecca, maybe delivering a baby? It would be the perfect time.)
The implication would be that the baby is dead, since Christa's only help with delivering it would be a nine-year-old girl and she just saw her husband murdered and either reanimated or head-shotted to stop it. I doubt there will be a flashback as that is something that has never been used in the series; even an audio version was used exactly once and then discarded. Best we're likely to get is Clem talking about it.
From Episode 2: When you climb the radio tower and see the flashlights across the bridge (warning you that it's Carver), Clementine is cut off from warning Luke and the others by the arrival of Kenny's group. She then completely forgets about this crucial information for the entire visit, and never warns anybody, despite it being quite suicidal. But then later on, it turns out that Rebecca knows about the lights on the bridge, because apparently Luke told her: But this didn't actually happen in the game?
She isn't cut off, she does directly warn Rebecca and Alvin, which prompts Carlos to say that they're leaving at dawn. It was just rotten luck that "dawn" turned out to be too late and Carver's group showed up in the middle of the night.
When asked in one scene, Clementine can say that she saw the lights turn back into the woods, giving them the false confidence to stay the night.