Your Opinion On Glen Mazzara.

- - - - - Season 2 Season 3 Glen Mazzara

Your Opinion On Glen Mazzara. (60 )

What Is Your Opinion On Glen Mazzara As TWD Showrunner?

  1. He was a great showrunner, I would have liked him to have continued as the showrunner. (4 [6.67%] - )

    6.67%

  2. He did a lot of good things for the show but it was time for him to move on, despite being quite successful. (6 [10.00%] - )

    10.00%

  3. He did alright but Season 2.2 and Season 3 could/should have been a lot better. (22 [36.67%] - )

    36.67%

  4. He was a poor showrunner, He needed to leave. (28 [46.67%] - )

    46.67%

Your Favorite Showrunner on TWD so far?

  1. Frank Darabont. (33 [55.00%] - )

    55.00%

  2. Glen Mazzara. (3 [5.00%] - )

    5.00%

  3. Scott Gimple. (24 [40.00%] - )

    40.00%

#1
Joseph

Joseph

    Lurker

  • Members
  • 422
  • LocationColchester, England.
I voted for 'He did a lot of good things for the show but it was time for him to move on, despite having a successful run.

It's never been confirmed when Mazzara actually took over as showrunner from Darabont but an educated guess would be around Season 2, EP5/6. If not here then definitely by Season 2, EP7/8.

So, basically he was in charge for the 2nd half of season 2 and the whole of season 3.

To keep it simple:

I really enjoyed the second half of Season 2, I thought it was brilliant and one of the best periods of show so far.

Season 3 has mixed opinions from people on here, I can see what they're saying with the writing being a bit average but in my opinion it wasn't that bad at all. I enjoyed season 3, It could have been better but it was a great season of tv.

What I will say is that it was time for Glen Mazzara to leave. Scott Gimple is the man, he truly knows what he's doing!

These are the episodes Mazzara wrote:
S1 EP5 - Wildfire.
S2 EP2 - Bloodletting.
S2 EP10 - 18 Miles Out. ( With Gimple )
S2 EP12 - Better Angels ( With Evan Reilly )
S2 EP13 - Beisde The Dying Fire. ( With Kirkman )
S3 EP1 - Seed.
S3 EP14 - Prey. ( With Evan Reilly )
S3 EP16 - Welcome To The Tombs.

I hope this doesn't turn out into a Mazzara is a joke thread. You have to have a good amount of talent to be a writer and showrunner on The Walking Dead, let's be honest.
He's written some great episodes and was the showrunner on a very good and successful time on show, despite a few flaws.
  • 1

#2
Walker_Bait

Walker_Bait

    Biter

  • Members
  • 1,342
He was a good show runner. Season 3 was great overall. With Glen Mazzara leaving, I am glad Scott Gimple is running the show now.
  • 0

#3
nazacuckoo

nazacuckoo

    Survivor

  • Members
  • 2,644
  • LocationTo your left
I thought his work was alright, but it really could have been so much more.
The farm should have been abandoned after season 2's mid-season finale, and the Governor shouldn't have been introduced until way later.

My favourite show runner is Scott Gimple, as season 4 has been my favourite season so far.
  • 2

"There's no "I" in team" 

"Yeah, there's no "U" either. So I guess if I'm not on the team, and you're not on the team, nobody's on the God damn team. The team sucks!"


#4
That Guy

That Guy

    Biter

  • Members
  • 2,105
  • LocationBumfuck, Nowhere
He's a hack who didn't understand The Walking Dead at all. The only reason he didn't completely mess up 2.2 was because Darabont and others had already written much of the story ahead of time. When he got full control of sesson 3, he turned my beloved TV show into action schlock.
  • 6

#5
That_Guy_From_NY

That_Guy_From_NY

    Lurker

  • Members
  • 337
  • LocationQueens

I voted for 'He did a lot of good things for the show but it was time for him to move on, despite having a successful run.

It's never been confirmed when Mazzara actually took over as showrunner from Darabont but an educated guess would be around Season 2, EP5/6. If not here then definitely by Season 2, EP7/8.

So, basically he was in charge for the 2nd half of season 2 and the whole of season 3.

To keep it simple:

I really enjoyed the second half of Season 2, I thought it was brilliant and one of the best periods of show so far.

Season 3 has mixed opinions from people on here, I can see what they're saying with the writing being a bit average but in my opinion it wasn't that bad at all. I enjoyed season 3, It could have been better but it was a great season of tv.

What I will say is that it was time for Glen Mazzara to leave. Scott Gimple is the man, he truly knows what he's doing!

These are the episodes Mazzara wrote:
S1 EP5 - Wildfire.
S2 EP2 - Bloodletting.
S2 EP10 - 18 Miles Out. ( With Gimple )
S2 EP12 - Better Angels ( With Evan Reilly )
S2 EP13 - Beisde The Dying Fire. ( With Kirkman )
S3 EP1 - Seed.
S3 EP14 - Prey. ( With Evan Reilly )
S3 EP16 - Welcome To The Tombs.

I hope this doesn't turn out into a Mazzara is a joke thread. You have to have a good amount of talent to be a writer and showrunner on The Walking Dead, let's be honest.
He's written some great episodes and was the showrunner on a very good and successful time on show, despite a few flaws.


There isn't really an exact point in the show where it goes from Darabont's TWD to Mazzara's. And don't forget that the behind the scenes stuff with Darabont and AMC heavily affected the first half of the season. AMC cut the budget and ordered more episodes and also didn't really let Darabont make the season he wanted to make. Darabont had an idea for a season premiere that would have been like "Blackhawk Down With Zombies" It would have centered around a group of soldiers and the fall of Atlanta. It would have only had cameos from Dale, Andrea, Amy and Rick. AMC vetoed the episode, with the episode vetoed but still 13 episodes to filler an episode of filler would've had to be added.

What would have been episode 2 was then moved to the new premiere. A during the shooting of the episode a director turned in footage with an unnamed technical error or something like that. While shooting episode 2 Darabont was in the process of editing the footage into a useable format when he was ordered to drop it. He refused and AMC seems to use that as an excuse to fire him and promote Mazzara to showrunner. So right around pre-production for episode 3 is when Mazzara took over. The footage Darabont was fired over, was cut from the episode, and what was left of the premiere was then combined with the next episode to become the extended premiere we got. With yet another episode being cut from the line up another episode (of filler) had to be added to make sure the season was still 13 episodes.

That's 2 full episodes of filler that had to be added to pad out the season because of AMC... and is it just me or does Cherokee Rose, Chupacabra and Secrets all seem like 1 episode of plot stretched out over 3? Some of the cut footage from the premiere can be seen on deleted scenes for season 2, it seems to have started with Shane's car breaking down and him getting chased by horde. He takes out a few of them before he is rescued by Rick in the RV. The group then tries to figure out a save place to go and realize the Vatos are near by and they can go there. However, when they get to the hideout, they find it overrun and Rick says something like "screw the noise" and they kill all the zombies. After they examine the hideout they discover that the Vatos and the old people were all murdered by another group and robbed for their supplies... foreshadowing the danger with Dave, Tony and the rest of their group later on and setting up the whole second half of the season. Darabont clearly had a vision for Season 2 that AMC just wouldn't let him follow.
  • 1

#6
shrike

shrike

    Roamer

  • Members
  • 796
Thanks for the explanation; I don't think I've seen it laid out so comprehensively before.

But overall I think it actually worked out better. That "Black Hawk down" would have worked better as a webisode. As a season premiere it would have broken up the flow of the story a bit too much too early in its run

Also I liked it better to have the Vatos fate left unrevealed. It was pretty obvious they were doomed; not sure it was really necessary to show it. And that scene were they shot up the walkers would have really undercut the barn massacre in Pretty Much Dead Already
  • 0

#7
shrike

shrike

    Roamer

  • Members
  • 796
I voted he did a lot of good things but really its somewhere between that and did all right. I think history is going to be a little kinder to his run when all is done, but I think as well he did need to go.
  • 1

#8
That_Guy_From_NY

That_Guy_From_NY

    Lurker

  • Members
  • 337
  • LocationQueens

Thanks for the explanation; I don't think I've seen it laid out so comprehensively before.

But overall I think it actually worked out better. That "Black Hawk down" would have worked better as a webisode. As a season premiere it would have broken up the flow of the story a bit too much too early in its run

Also I liked it better to have the Vatos fate left unrevealed. It was pretty obvious they were doomed; not sure it was really necessary to show it. And that scene were they shot up the walkers would have really undercut the barn massacre in Pretty Much Dead Already


I disagree. To this day people still ask about how Atlanta fell so I think it would have been nice to see. The episode would have ended with the main character getting bit and climbing into a tank just before dying, a time lapse then Rick climbing into the tank too, finding the grenade then shooting the now long dead soldier. That would have been a nice twist to the episode and a good tie into the main series. The stand alone premiere would have been exciting and I like the idea of an episode where anything can happen to anyone without regard for the rest of the series. It would have been like a little TWD movie contained within the show.

Not to mention the episode would have been very action oriented which would have greatly helped the pacing of the overall season. The same goes for what would have been episode 2. The footage that was cut had a good amount of action in which would have helped season 2's pacing even more. It would have been 1 less overall episode of the search for Sophia (which got old really fast) and 2 episodes worth of filler material would have been swapped out for 2 episodes of fast paced action. Those moves AMC made is what really made the first half of the season seem obnoxiously boring.

I'm personally fine with not knowing the Vatos fate but I think keeping in the reveal of their murders would have added more to the season. The foreshadowing, and the bleak tone it set really would have benefited the series in the second half of the season and would have informed Shane's reaction too Randal more (not that Shane's reaction really needed justification... Rick was simply a dickhead for bringing him home to begin with).
  • 0

#9
That_Guy_From_NY

That_Guy_From_NY

    Lurker

  • Members
  • 337
  • LocationQueens
Season 2 was really just a mess in general... it's hard to put it's faults on any one person, because there really is no clear cut moment when Mazzara took over not to mention that Darabont's influence would have been felt for the pretty much the entire season. If anything I'd say season 2's problems are AMC's fault more than anyone else.

Season 3 was a wreck in my opinion. It started off well. The first 2 episodes were fantastic in my opinion, then episode 3 was alright and episode 4 was good... unfortunately most of the things Mazzara did with the first 4 eps made the rest of the season suck. For instance, the fast passed way in which he told the stuff with the prisoners, while exciting while happening, lead to the story and the characters it introduced being underdeveloped. Oscar and Axel were just redshirts because Mazzara wanted to speed through the material to get to the Guv. So he introduced the Guv in episode 3... way too early in the season. He wanted to make the Guv into a more sympathetic villain than he was in the comics... but they showed he was murderer and a thief in his first episode so the audience couldn't sympathize with him. So he was continually trying to be shown as this not totally evil guy meanwhile we know he likes to cut off people's heads and put them in fishtanks.

Then because he rushed through all the prisoner material he had no real story left to tell with the group at the prison and there wasn't going to be any real confrontation between Rick's group and Woodbury until the season finale. That's why it was a mistake to introduce him so early. There was so many episodes focused around the Guv and Woodbury that the Guv never really had that mysterious and scary quality he had in the comics, he never really felt like a threat or a match for Rick. In fact Rick had to act out of characters a couple times just to make the Guv seem more menacing and to pad out the plot.

In Killer Within, Mazzara decides to kill off Lori and Tdogg, and wasted SOOOO much potential in the process. With TDog, a totally neglected character during season 2 still around the return of Merle would have been awesome... That whole thing was just wasted potential. Lori's death was probably the biggest mistake the show has ever made. I'm going to have to compare the show to the comics for a minute here... her death in the comics is arguably the single biggest moment in the entire series and what makes The Walking Dead, The Walking Dead ... it's really like the whole series' defining moment. It was shocking, heartbreaking, tragically pointless, unexpected and awesomely brutal... it's everything TWD is about and was a really fitting ending to the Prison storyline and the Governor storyline, her death combined with everything else Rick experienced that day even made his mental breakdown much more believable.

While in the show, her death seemed just kinda tossed in there for a cool and sad moment. Her death happening so early meant that the Guv's Saga could now never have that same emotional, utterly shocking moment and the same impact it had in the comics, so the Guv lost a huge part of his potential right there. Her relationship with Rick was shit in the show, they hadn't even talked in about 8 months and Lori was heavily disliked at the time of her death by the audience. So instead of redeeming the character over the season, redeeming and repairing her relationship with Rick to create a stronger attachment to the character and have her eventual death be that much more important, he kills her right in the beginning of the season. Then he has Rick go WAY too crazy over it... to the point were he is literally chasing ghosts in the woods, talking to himself and pointing guns at people. In the comic he lost MUCH more, much more quickly and didn't go nearly as crazy.

Mazzara then used Rick's insanity as a means to have Rick do things that made no real sense in the context of the story. Like kicking out Ty's group, not killing the Guv in Arrow in the Doorpost, seriously considering handing over Michonne to be tortured and murdered even though he KNOWS it won't stop the Guv from attacking, not just leaving the prison even though it was a death trap and their was a homicidal maniac with an army who wanted to murder him and his entire group and it was shown how easy it was for the group to clear out an area.

I had a bunch more problems with season 3 and its writing but this post is getting long enough as it is... maybe I'll write more tomorrow.
  • 3

#10
Joseph

Joseph

    Lurker

  • Members
  • 422
  • LocationColchester, England.
The way I see season 3:

Episode 1-4 are brilliant, most people would agree with that.
Episode 5 - is a bit filler but still a good episode.
Episode 6 - is a great episode in my opinion. Phoecalls, Michonne&Merle. Glenn,Maggie&Merle. Amazing ending. Great ep!
Episode 7 - Bit filler, still decent but maybe the worst episode of season 3. Was alright though.
Episode 8 - Pretty awesome episode.
Episode 9 - I really liked it but it depends on if you like crazy Rick or not. I did like crazy Rick.
Episode 10 - Great episode, first 30 mins were decent but the last 10 was brilliant. Epic ending.
Episode 11 - Was interesting to see Andrea reunite with the prison but it could have been handled a bit better.
Episode 12 - One of the best episodes ever.
Episode 13 - I liked this one, I didn't find it boring at all. Rick & Governor scenes were awesome.
Episode 14 - Good episode.
Episode 15 - Brilliant episode.
Episode 16 - Really good episode.

I don't think TWD ever does a 'Bad' episode but this is how I view them..

Good but a bit more filler/average ish episodes:
EP5, EP7, EP11.

Good episodes:
EP9, EP13, EP14.

Really good episodes:
EP1, EP3, EP6, EP8, EP10, EP16.

Some of the very best episodes of the season/series.
EP2, EP4, EP12, EP15.

Season 3 just isn't as bad as some people make out. It's still awesome.
I reckon some people who didn't like season 3 will re-watch it one day and just be like 'hey you know what, this is actually pretty good.'
  • 0

#11
JesusMonroe

JesusMonroe

    Hallelujer! Im STILL Alive!

  • Members
  • 5,836

The way I see season 3:

Episode 1-4 are brilliant, most people would agree with that.
Episode 5 - is a bit filler but still a good episode.
Episode 6 - is a great episode in my opinion. Phoecalls, Michonne&Merle. Glenn,Maggie&Merle. Amazing ending. Great ep!
Episode 7 - Bit filler, still decent but maybe the worst episode of season 3. Was alright though.
Episode 8 - Pretty awesome episode.
Episode 9 - I really liked it but it depends on if you like crazy Rick or not. I did like crazy Rick.
Episode 10 - Great episode, first 30 mins were decent but the last 10 was brilliant. Epic ending.
Episode 11 - Was interesting to see Andrea reunite with the prison but it could have been handled a bit better.
Episode 12 - One of the best episodes ever.
Episode 13 - I liked this one, I didn't find it boring at all. Rick & Governor scenes were awesome.
Episode 14 - Good episode.
Episode 15 - Brilliant episode.
Episode 16 - Really good episode.

I don't think TWD ever does a 'Bad' episode but this is how I view them..

Good but a bit more filler/average ish episodes:
EP5, EP7, EP11.

Good episodes:
EP9, EP13, EP14.

Really good episodes:
EP1, EP3, EP6, EP8, EP10, EP16.

Some of the very best episodes of the season/series.
EP2, EP4, EP12, EP15.

Season 3 just isn't as bad as some people make out. It's still awesome.
I reckon some people who didn't like season 3 will re-watch it one day and just be like 'hey you know what, this is actually pretty good.'

No
  • 0

Imagine a group of a hundred motorcycles driving down a freeway. Eventually, they hit a junction. One road goes northwest and the other goes northeast. So one guy, we'll call him S, says, "Let's go northwest!" A mile past the intersection, a semi careens into the group and kills ninety of them. Ten are wounded, but they survive and keep going. Eventually, they hit 10,000 miles. S suddenly has his consciousness thrown into his past body right before the junction. Now, he says, "Let's go northeast!" All 100 bikers survive. Happily ever after, right? But what about the ten, no nine, who went northwest and survived? What happens to the reality they were living? Does it just disappear now that S has changed the past? It's not like only bad things happened on that 10,000 mile journey. Maybe one of them fell in love with a gas station attendant and got her pregnant or maybe one adopted a homeless kid that joined the adventure. That 10,000 mile journey would be full of stories. Romances, farewells, friendships...the loss of those ninety lives is horrible and unfortunate, but what would rewriting their history mean? The nine who survived lived full lives and did the best they could with the hand they were dealt. How could it be right to just erase all that? Isn't that worth something? Is there a point to a world where everything is happy? Are people who struggle for a better life just idiots? Being human is about fighting even when it seems hopeless and finding happiness in a world that hates it. Are you saying that's worthless?


#12
Joseph

Joseph

    Lurker

  • Members
  • 422
  • LocationColchester, England.

No


Haha!
  • 0

#13
That Guy

That Guy

    Biter

  • Members
  • 2,105
  • LocationBumfuck, Nowhere

No


I second this.
  • 1

#14
Joseph

Joseph

    Lurker

  • Members
  • 422
  • LocationColchester, England.

I second this.


Hahaha!
  • 0

#15
nazacuckoo

nazacuckoo

    Survivor

  • Members
  • 2,644
  • LocationTo your left
I liked Season 3 for the most part. I liked episodes 1-4, the Midseason finale, clear and this sorrowful life.
There were a few other episode I kinda liked, but not so much. I did NOT like the season finale, though.
  • 0

"There's no "I" in team" 

"Yeah, there's no "U" either. So I guess if I'm not on the team, and you're not on the team, nobody's on the God damn team. The team sucks!"


#16
NAGILLUM

NAGILLUM

    Roamer

  • Members
  • 725
  • LocationCanada, eh!
"Why would we progress the story when we could have pairs of people arguing at each other?" - Mazzara logic.

And that's exactly what we got in Seasons 2 & 3. Mazzara was a terrible showrunner. Constant episodes of nothing but filler because he didn't know what he was doing with the show. No story progression either.

Darabont was the best showrunner.
  • 2
Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past, or the present, are certain to miss the future.

#17
Mr. NomNom

Mr. NomNom

    Biter

  • Members
  • 2,390
  • LocationOhio
Frank was the best, they shafted him with the money thing for season 2.;so what do you expect ? Maybe he should have talked kirkman into going to HBO to go in the direction they need to.....yea I know that subject is talked about constantly....but it may be true.

Oh btw mazzara was shit.
  • 1

#18
JesusMonroe

JesusMonroe

    Hallelujer! Im STILL Alive!

  • Members
  • 5,836
To the people who say Scott Gimple is better than Darabont, Darabont had budget problems. If you think budget doesn't matter and all that matters is good writing (which I agree with), keep this in mind

If Season 4 had the budget that Darabont had

-30 Days would've been impossible to make (zombie sequence)

-Infected would've been impossible to make

-Isolation would've been possible (they'd have to remove the scene with Tyreese getting surrounded and all the walkers crowing around)

-Indifference would've been possible if they only focused on the Rick/Carol story

-Live Bait would've been possible

-Dead Weight would've been possible

-Too Far Gone would've been impossible

Scott Gimple has a bigger budget than Darabont. Give Darabont an increased budget and 12-16 episode Season and see what he can do


  • 2

Imagine a group of a hundred motorcycles driving down a freeway. Eventually, they hit a junction. One road goes northwest and the other goes northeast. So one guy, we'll call him S, says, "Let's go northwest!" A mile past the intersection, a semi careens into the group and kills ninety of them. Ten are wounded, but they survive and keep going. Eventually, they hit 10,000 miles. S suddenly has his consciousness thrown into his past body right before the junction. Now, he says, "Let's go northeast!" All 100 bikers survive. Happily ever after, right? But what about the ten, no nine, who went northwest and survived? What happens to the reality they were living? Does it just disappear now that S has changed the past? It's not like only bad things happened on that 10,000 mile journey. Maybe one of them fell in love with a gas station attendant and got her pregnant or maybe one adopted a homeless kid that joined the adventure. That 10,000 mile journey would be full of stories. Romances, farewells, friendships...the loss of those ninety lives is horrible and unfortunate, but what would rewriting their history mean? The nine who survived lived full lives and did the best they could with the hand they were dealt. How could it be right to just erase all that? Isn't that worth something? Is there a point to a world where everything is happy? Are people who struggle for a better life just idiots? Being human is about fighting even when it seems hopeless and finding happiness in a world that hates it. Are you saying that's worthless?


#19
Deadpelican

Deadpelican

    Ad Victoriam!

  • Moderators
  • 2,551
  • LocationThe Prydwen

If you think budget doesn't matter and all that matters is good writing


That's pretty silly when the show is supposed to be taking place in a zombie-apocalypse. There doesn't need to be constant zombie killing, and people don't need to get eaten in every single episode. But the walkers do need to have a frequent presence.

The main focus SHOULD be on the characters, but it's ultimately about how the characters cope with living in a very dangerous world. This means that the world has to be dangerous.

The zombie infestation is the reason Phillip Blake becomes the governor and Rick's group goes to war with him.

Infidelity, hunting accidents, missing children and questions of paternity are common, everyday occurrences in the world that we all know and live in, so I fail to see the point of any of them in a story about a world that's supposed to be very different from ours.

That's why I didn't like season two and much prefer season three.
  • 2

Shield yourself from those not bound to you by steel, for they are the blind. Aid them when you can, but lose not sight of yourself. 


#20
nazacuckoo

nazacuckoo

    Survivor

  • Members
  • 2,644
  • LocationTo your left

To the people who say Scott Gimple is better than Darabont, Darabont had budget problems. If you think budget doesn't matter and all that matters is good writing (which I agree with), keep this in mind

If Season 4 had the budget that Darabont had

-30 Days would've been impossible to make (zombie sequence)

-Infected would've been impossible to make

-Isolation would've been possible (they'd have to remove the scene with Tyreese getting surrounded and all the walkers crowing around)

-Indifference would've been possible if they only focused on the Rick/Carol story

-Live Bait would've been possible

-Dead Weight would've been possible

-Too Far Gone would've been impossible

Scott Gimple has a bigger budget than Darabont. Give Darabont an increased budget and 12-16 episode Season and see what he can do

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j95EHqxefwA


Why exactly does Scott Gimple have a larger budget? The Atlanta scenes in season 1 looked very expensive to make, and the show was way gorier back then... Or at least, it seems that way.
By the way, I think Frank Darabont was an awesome showrunner. Hell, the Shawshank Redemption is my all time favourite movie, but I just think that Scott Gimple has so far done a better job on the Walking Dead.
  • 2

"There's no "I" in team" 

"Yeah, there's no "U" either. So I guess if I'm not on the team, and you're not on the team, nobody's on the God damn team. The team sucks!"


#21
JesusMonroe

JesusMonroe

    Hallelujer! Im STILL Alive!

  • Members
  • 5,836

Why exactly does Scott Gimple have a larger budget? The Atlanta scenes in season 1 looked very expensive to make, and the show was way gorier back then... Or at least, it seems that way.
By the way, I think Frank Darabont was an awesome showrunner. Hell, the Shawshank Redemption is my all time favourite movie, but I just think that Scott Gimple has so far done a better job on the Walking Dead.

Season 2 was the season with the reduced budget, naza. There were less zombies and they looked pretty bad in scenes like the highway

Point is, Darabont had less freedom than Gimple so they're not an equal playing field and can't be compared
  • 0

Imagine a group of a hundred motorcycles driving down a freeway. Eventually, they hit a junction. One road goes northwest and the other goes northeast. So one guy, we'll call him S, says, "Let's go northwest!" A mile past the intersection, a semi careens into the group and kills ninety of them. Ten are wounded, but they survive and keep going. Eventually, they hit 10,000 miles. S suddenly has his consciousness thrown into his past body right before the junction. Now, he says, "Let's go northeast!" All 100 bikers survive. Happily ever after, right? But what about the ten, no nine, who went northwest and survived? What happens to the reality they were living? Does it just disappear now that S has changed the past? It's not like only bad things happened on that 10,000 mile journey. Maybe one of them fell in love with a gas station attendant and got her pregnant or maybe one adopted a homeless kid that joined the adventure. That 10,000 mile journey would be full of stories. Romances, farewells, friendships...the loss of those ninety lives is horrible and unfortunate, but what would rewriting their history mean? The nine who survived lived full lives and did the best they could with the hand they were dealt. How could it be right to just erase all that? Isn't that worth something? Is there a point to a world where everything is happy? Are people who struggle for a better life just idiots? Being human is about fighting even when it seems hopeless and finding happiness in a world that hates it. Are you saying that's worthless?


#22
Mr. NomNom

Mr. NomNom

    Biter

  • Members
  • 2,390
  • LocationOhio
I'm not a gimple fan yet.... Sorry but this whole sickness thing didn't work out for me...they could have just killed those redshirts in the battle...at least this way we could have gotten a name or two and not cared that they died.

Also those governor episodes..such a waste...could have saved it for a battle two parter, or maybe the first hour and a half could have went to the battle, and the last 30 minutes could have shown what was going on with the split groups.
  • 0

#23
DeadCave

DeadCave

    Resident Scribe

  • *Members*
  • 2,911
  • LocationUtah

I thought his work was alright, but it really could have been so much more.
The farm should have been abandoned after season 2's mid-season finale, and the Governor shouldn't have been introduced until way later.

True, had the show been following the comics closely. But Dale was killed (because of the actor leaving), & Shane was left alive when he likely should've been killed in season 1. Because of that the dynamics of the original story line changed dramatically. It allowed more depth (?) to the triangle that Rick, Shane and Lori found themselves in. So to explore that further, they went with the "hey we found this kid Randall" plot and this allowed for Shane to go off to his own version of "Crazytown". With Shane's murder , err killing (really, it was self-defense on Rick's part) done later than the original plot line, it lead the show down a different direction.
Andrea being separated from the group and meeting up with Michonne and spending all that time with her (instead of the group) also changed the dynamics, which allowed introduction of the Governor sooner than the comic's time line.
Now with season 4 starting very soon, Gimple can pick a spot from the comic (as planned with Carl & Rick alone) and find another spot to deviate from... if at all.
Daryl is the wild-card and his involvement in any point of the story (i.e. Vatos) changes the dynamics of the show's story to accommodate this new persona to the Kirkman universe.
  • 0

69% of the people find something dirty in everything they read.  http://http://www.gofundme.com/c66cv4


#24
Kat

Kat

    Biter

  • Members
  • 1,248
  • LocationPretty Much A Swamp

Darabont was a visionary who was hamstrung by the powers that be at AMC.  The way he was treated was disgraceful.

 

Mazarra had no clear vision for the show.  And is TERRIBLE at consistent characterization.  I remember several cast interviews where it was clear that the actors didn't even have an idea of where their characters were headed.  Season 2 was inconsistent at best.  Several episodes dragged but there were moments of brilliance (probably thanks to Darabont's original vision and the able assist from Gimple's writing).  Season 3 was an abject mess.  The pacing was all over the place.  Characters who were pivotal in the GN were empty shells and other introduced characters who could have been interesting were killed off before we could even care who they were.  Lori's death, while well played by the actors, lacked the impact that a later, more in keeping with the GN death would have had.  And what he did to poor Andrea should have been criminal.  He took such a great character and just trashed it.

 

I saw the light at the end of the tunnel with "Clear."  It was SO good and tight and well-written.  I wondered if that episode marked a change of leadership. 

 

So far, I have been pretty impressed with GImple.  IMHO, the whining about the Governor story arc is coming from fans who only want zombie carnage and non-stop action.  The strength of this show (starting in season one) is a careful blending of good characterization (we barely knew Jim and Jackie but we CARED when they died) AND zombie action.  In Season 3 the Guv made no sense because Mazzara couldn't be bothered to tell his story. Gimple had to back up and put him in perspective to lead up to the siege of the prison.  Gimple has good sense and it has paid off.


  • 2

#25
JesusMonroe

JesusMonroe

    Hallelujer! Im STILL Alive!

  • Members
  • 5,836

 

So far, I have been pretty impressed with GImple.  IMHO, the whining about the Governor story arc is coming from fans who only want zombie carnage and non-stop action.

 

That's a dumb generalization


  • 0

Imagine a group of a hundred motorcycles driving down a freeway. Eventually, they hit a junction. One road goes northwest and the other goes northeast. So one guy, we'll call him S, says, "Let's go northwest!" A mile past the intersection, a semi careens into the group and kills ninety of them. Ten are wounded, but they survive and keep going. Eventually, they hit 10,000 miles. S suddenly has his consciousness thrown into his past body right before the junction. Now, he says, "Let's go northeast!" All 100 bikers survive. Happily ever after, right? But what about the ten, no nine, who went northwest and survived? What happens to the reality they were living? Does it just disappear now that S has changed the past? It's not like only bad things happened on that 10,000 mile journey. Maybe one of them fell in love with a gas station attendant and got her pregnant or maybe one adopted a homeless kid that joined the adventure. That 10,000 mile journey would be full of stories. Romances, farewells, friendships...the loss of those ninety lives is horrible and unfortunate, but what would rewriting their history mean? The nine who survived lived full lives and did the best they could with the hand they were dealt. How could it be right to just erase all that? Isn't that worth something? Is there a point to a world where everything is happy? Are people who struggle for a better life just idiots? Being human is about fighting even when it seems hopeless and finding happiness in a world that hates it. Are you saying that's worthless?






Welcome to RoamersAndLurkers.com, the largest walking dead forum and discussion board online. If you are a fan of AMC's The Walking Dead or Robert Kirkman's The Walking Dead Comic Book, we invite you to peruse and enjoy our discussion board, and don't be afraid of joining in!