The Walking Dead

Aside from my initial post, which was very similar to Malg's, I have only responded to other posts that directly quoted me. Apart from this one, however I make an exception as it seems to be directly related to me.

The whole purpose of the forum is to facilitate discussion. Sometimes that may be contrary to what you want to hear. I don't think it's unfair to expect someone to respond to a post that directly quotes them. And it would be a pretty boring place if we all had the same point of view.

I simply stated why I initially liked it, and the reasons why I now don't, using examples. I also used spoiler tags to ensure that I don't spoil it for others.

My opinion isn't better or worse than anyone elses. Opinions are like arseholes - everyone has one and if they're not yours they're mostly full of shit... ;)

Which is fair enough and as far as i can see nobody is trying to stop your right to reply, I am merely questioning why waste so much time and effort with something you dont like? Its a valid question you dont seem to want to answer, yet you keep on replying, wasting yet more of your time, like I said i'd never be in such a position over xfactor or other reality tv shows, some like them, which is their right, life would be dull if we like the same things. I wouldnt waste my time telling them they are wrong unless they came to me and told me I had to like it. Nobody made you come into this thread and tell us how wrong we are for enjoying a TV show.

This isnt like a difference of opinion on City (which the vast majority on here love and want the best for) so differing opinions are understood. This is about a TV show on a football forum, that you claim not to care about, but are telling everyone who does how shit it is. I think if you criticised the show and you claimed to care about it, it would be more palatable. Like it is when a City fan criticises a City player on here, its more palatable than when a fan from another team does.

Glad you've stated your opinion is as valid as everyone elses because your last couple of posts have inferred superiority by casting aspersions on the quality of other's posts.
 
Which is fair enough and as far as i can see nobody is trying to stop your right to reply, I am merely questioning why waste so much time and effort with something you dont like? Its a valid question you dont seem to want to answer, yet you keep on replying, wasting yet more of your time, like I said i'd never be in such a position over xfactor or other reality tv shows, some like them, which is their right, life would be dull if we like the same things. I wouldnt waste my time telling them they are wrong unless they came to me and told me I had to like it. Nobody made you come into this thread and tell us how wrong we are for enjoying a TV show.

This isnt like a difference of opinion on City (which the vast majority on here love and want the best for) so differing opinions are understood. This is about a TV show on a football forum, that you claim not to care about, but are telling everyone who does how shit it is. I think if you criticised the show and you claimed to care about it, it would be more palatable. Like it is when a City fan criticises a City player on here, its more palatable than when a fan from another team does.

Glad you've stated your opinion is as valid as everyone elses because your last couple of posts have inferred superiority by casting aspersions on the quality of other's posts.

Similarly I could ask you why you are wasting your time bothering to ask me why I'm wasting mine, but then we'll just go round in circles.

I did answer it, in that I responded to other peoples quotes challenging me as to why I said the things I did. Also a fair few posts happened to be whilst I was at work, and the new little alert thing makes it easier to see who has responded. You check the forum for a minute as a break, see an alert, and reply. I never said anyone was wrong for liking the show, just stating why I don't, and clarified it when challenged by others.

And any aspersions that were cast were a firmly tongue in cheek, and only started after there was a thinly veiled dig about my IQ.
 
Similarly I could ask you why you are wasting your time bothering to ask me why I'm wasting mine, but then we'll just go round in circles.

I did answer it, in that I responded to other peoples quotes challenging me as to why I said the things I did. Also a fair few posts happened to be whilst I was at work, and the new little alert thing makes it easier to see who has responded. You check the forum for a minute as a break, see an alert, and reply. I never said anyone was wrong for liking the show, just stating why I don't, and clarified it when challenged by others.

And any aspersions that were cast were a firmly tongue in cheek, and only started after there was a thinly veiled dig about my IQ.

I'm on a thread about a show I like, defending it whilst someone who doesnt really watch it or like it has a go about it, whats your excuse? Or are you failing to answer because there you have no reason other than being argumentative?

He didnt have a dig about your IQ, thinly veiled or not, read what he put again. Or shall we not let facts get in the way?
 
I'm not sure that your extensive, bullet pointed post yesterday could have been written in a minute as a break.

I haven't questioned your IQ. My missus has a go at my inability to multi task on a daily basis (she's never seen me 1) having a wank 2) watching a bluey and 3) keeping an eye on the door all at the same time) and my constant response is that a person cannot possibly give 100% focus on anything if they are concentrating on something else at the same time. The very idea of it is ludicrous. If you see that fact as a dig at you then I suggest you read my posts properly instead of half reading them whilst you keep an eye on the Walking Dead.

When you cast aspersions, it's tongue in cheek but when I state a fact it's a thinly veiled dig.

There are plenty of people who enjoy the show. This thread shouldn't be derailed by us arguing, you admit to not even liking it. Complaining about an entertainment show not being realistic is a bit silly. See my post about Toy Story 1 yesterday. It's called 'entertainment' for a reason. Christ - how many times has the bad guy had a chance to kill James Bond. People don't concern themselves with writing about how unrealistic it is not to just shoot him. The film would last 5 minutes.
 
At the risk of going off topic here and actually discussing the show rather than whinging at each other...

Yeah, but when they build up Rick et al to be SME's about living outside the walls and dealing with Zombies, and the citizens of Alexandria cede control to him for this 'expertise' and then his plan is to take a somewhat controllable situation and then make it less so, by releasing the zombies, then it doesn't stack up.

There was even a point in last weeks episode where Morgan chastises Rick after the walkers attack them with words to affect of "I thought you don't take risks" ignoring the fact that they were right in the middle of taking the biggest risk yet. I see that people on this thread routinely anoint the show with "best show ever/on tv" and yet there are some massively glaring plot holes, inconsistent characterisations which is clearly an indication that it's not.

Managed to avoid this weeks episode as the missus was sick and watched it during the day before I got home.

I think that's one of the points the show is starting to raise though. They have been on the road that long and done that much that the walkers are viewed as nothing more than an manageable annoyance, now that the fear is gone the group see the main threat as being other survivors. Look at the point where Morgan brings up taking risks, Rick is trying to get the new bod's over their fear of the walkers by directly confronting them while they are in small numbers that can easily be killed, in the first season or two the group reacted exactly the same way as the new ones. Its only in the later seasons you see them waltzing up to walkers barely paying attention and stabbing them in the head.

Rick, Carol and a lot of the group are now down for straight up murder to protect the group. Fuck morals, fuck right and wrong, do something they perceive as wrong and your done for. As they said, if the vote in Alexandria didn't go well they were just going to take it. I binged last season from the break up to now so not sure what episode it was exactly but they are riding with someone and Michonne checks if they asked the 3 questions. A subtle reminder that they haven't asked the 3 questions for a long time because they don't give a fuck anymore, its survival at all cost.

Morgan has come back in to counter that viewpoint, he's already showed how opposed he is to killing humans, and he's gently confronted Rick a couple of times. He believes the risk is worth taking letting people live, believing that there are good people left and that you can't just go around killing people, whatever the reasoning. As someone separate from the group but has known Rick for longer he's perfectly suited for a different viewpoint that can argue the toss with Rick while keeping Rick's respect as a valuable asset to the group, if Morgan acted how Rick does now Rick would have been dead a long time ago.

It feels like they've been building this up to a level where the main cast are drastically underestimating the walkers. Their increasingly default answer of 'kill it' wouldn't work here and their self belief in their ability to survive when against walkers is bordering on arrogance now to the point they think they can just herd 1000's of walkers about the place and have nothing go wrong, partly I think because if something does go wrong they think they can revert to plan a and just kill everything and the directors are using this situation to highlight that mindset.

I'm interested to see how they go forward from here now and how Morgan will try to bring Rick and the group round to a 'there has to be more than just surviving' way of thinking, I think the plot is going to focus on keeping/losing their humanity over the course of the season with Morgan being instrumental in bringing that to the fore. I'd also guess that at some point that is going to cost them big time in some way.

All in my humble opinion of course, I could be well off but that's why I don't think its shit writing!
 
daily_gifdump_927_29.gif
For you Billybong:)

Great episode last night..
 
Agreed, another good episode.

So much for the racist claims, 3 black people surviving, when the whites were dropping like flies and the big shocker of Glenn biting the dust, have to say didnt see that coming.

I don't think Glenn is dead. I think Nicholas' body fell on top of Glenn and they were eating that. Presumably that masked Glenn's smell. He'll get out somehow.

They didn't make a big enough deal of him dying either - they just carried on with the episode. When they kill a main character, its the climax to an episode.

I'm almost certain he is still alive.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.