Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 yakface wrote:

Am I the only one who was freaked out the whole time that Glenn & Maggie were out in the cage talking that they weren't keeping an eye out and that a sniper shot was invariably incoming? I was just picturing them kissing when one of the two of them gets shot...and then when that didn't happen and they abandoned their post to get it on, I then figured: 'okay they're going to get attacked now that nobody is keeping watch!'

I think the show has pulled the 'boy who cried wolf' (or the opposite of that perhaps) on me too many times with horrible things occurring in the middle of serene moments that I can never be relaxed and enjoy what's actually going on without thinking that something horrible is just about to happen.

I'm with you 100% on this. I was thinking the same thing. Than nothing happened.

It's dawned on me that the problem with this TV show is that....its a TV show. You just know nothing is going to happen with The Govenor till the season finale. In The Talking Dead after show they were literally laughing at the scene where Andrea pulls a knife on the Govenor when he's sleeping. It was just so preposterous that she would kill him there. It was the same with this episode when she pulled a gun on him when he wasn't looking. Not for a second do we beleive she'll shoot him. Sorry to bring up the book again but in there literally anyone can at any moment. Everyone on this show feels completely safe even the "bad guys". Axel doesn't count, he might as well have been wearing a red Star Trek shirt. The white having problems with Thyreese will probably die soon but obviously no one cares. The feeling of overwhelming safeness for the main characters is just not TWD. I fear the show will just continue to tread water till the season finale.

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
It's dawned on me that the problem with this TV show is that....its a TV show. You just know nothing is going to happen with The Govenor till the season finale. In The Talking Dead after show they were literally laughing at the scene where Andrea pulls a knife on the Govenor when he's sleeping. It was just so preposterous that she would kill him there. It was the same with this episode when she pulled a gun on him when he wasn't looking. Not for a second do we beleive she'll shoot him. Sorry to bring up the book again but in there literally anyone can at any moment. Everyone on this show feels completely safe even the "bad guys". Axel doesn't count, he might as well have been wearing a red Star Trek shirt. The white having problems with Thyreese will probably die soon but obviously no one cares. The feeling of overwhelming safeness for the main characters is just not TWD. I fear the show will just continue to tread water till the season finale.

What about Dale? That was pretty random and shocking. And for those of us who haven't read the comics, Lori's death was also a pretty huge shock as well (I'm still a little pissed about that).

You are correct that certain characters are certainly too important to a particular storyline to simply be offed randomly, but that HAS to be true in the comic book as well. If you're telling a story and building to a crescendo, then randomly killing someone key to finishing that particular arc kills the story that has been building.

I'd personally say that the Walking Dead has had more ability to kill its characters at a moments notice than any TV show ever made before it, and definitely more than movies because they have the time and luxury to 'recover' from killing a main character by introducing new ones (whereas movies only have 2 hours, so pulling a bait and switch like this is incredibly rare).

 yakface wrote:
I'd personally say that the Walking Dead has had more ability to kill its characters at a moments notice than any TV show ever made before it,..

Actually, this is pretty common in British television. It's practically a meme on Misfits and MI5 (Spooks) has done it for years.

 Breotan wrote:

 yakface wrote:
I'd personally say that the Walking Dead has had more ability to kill its characters at a moments notice than any TV show ever made before it,..

Actually, this is pretty common in British television. It's practically a meme on Misfits and MI5 (Spooks) has done it for years.

OK fine...on American television, then.

 yakface wrote:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
It's dawned on me that the problem with this TV show is that....its a TV show. You just know nothing is going to happen with The Govenor till the season finale. In The Talking Dead after show they were literally laughing at the scene where Andrea pulls a knife on the Govenor when he's sleeping. It was just so preposterous that she would kill him there. It was the same with this episode when she pulled a gun on him when he wasn't looking. Not for a second do we beleive she'll shoot him. Sorry to bring up the book again but in there literally anyone can at any moment. Everyone on this show feels completely safe even the "bad guys". Axel doesn't count, he might as well have been wearing a red Star Trek shirt. The white having problems with Thyreese will probably die soon but obviously no one cares. The feeling of overwhelming safeness for the main characters is just not TWD. I fear the show will just continue to tread water till the season finale.

What about Dale? That was pretty random and shocking. And for those of us who haven't read the comics, Lori's death was also a pretty huge shock as well (I'm still a little pissed about that).

You are correct that certain characters are certainly too important to a particular storyline to simply be offed randomly, but that HAS to be true in the comic book as well. If you're telling a story and building to a crescendo, then randomly killing someone key to finishing that particular arc kills the story that has been building.

I'd personally say that the Walking Dead has had more ability to kill its characters at a moments notice than any TV show ever made before it, and definitely more than movies because they have the time and luxury to 'recover' from killing a main character by introducing new ones (whereas movies only have 2 hours, so pulling a bait and switch like this is incredibly rare).

The death of Dale was very shocking. The death of Lori was shocking. Mainly, I'm talking about since the death of Lori the show has got into a bit of a rut for me.

As for the comic, no seriously people die randomly all the time. A main character will just be walking down the street talking about what they're going to have for dinner and just get killed.
They have different feel. The comic has more of a documentary feel. The show has more of a Hollywood feel. By which I mean you can tell its building to a crescendo or big finale. That's fine by me, one approach isn't necessarily better than the other they both have their pros and cons. It's just the con of no one important is going to die for quite a while is really hitting me right now. Where's the fear?

Well, I wanted someone to die. I guess Merle's almost a main character.
Mainly, I blame Rick. He's just terrible. Incompetent and delusional. Michonne should kill him for this but for some reason she won't stab him in the eye even though he basically did the same thing The Govenor did. Even used the same guy.

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
Well, I wanted someone to die. I guess Merle's almost a main character.
Mainly, I blame Rick. He's just terrible. Incompetent and delusional. Michonne should kill him for this but for some reason she won't stab him in the eye even though he basically did the same thing The Govenor did. Even used the same guy.

Except if I remember correctly, Rick never told Merle to do it...

Merle took matters into his own hands. I don't know if Michonne knows that though.

I think Merle explained to her he was acting alone because he knew Rick wouldn't do it.

The moral of the story was he was really a good guy all along, kidnapped Michonne because he didn't want his brother to die (and knew that he cared about the group as well) so in the end he went to kill the governor because he realized it was the only way (or finally faced up to it).

I'll have to admit it wasn't as shocking as the other main character deaths, but then again Amy was the only one that really took me by surprise. It was still entertaining.

I honestly thought Merle was looking for an excuse to die. I mean he was sitting in the car, drinking some booze, and bringing as many zombies as he could with him. I felt like he knew he wasn't going to walk away from that scene.

Also, what do you guys think of the "honor" in the type of death that the governor gave him? I mean okay yes he killed him, but I feel like there is a level of dignity lost by killing him in such a way that he comes back as a walker. It just kind of hit me last night during that final scene.

Like in a world where they all know that if you die, you come back no matter how you died. Like, that's cruel to not give someone the sweet release of death, but to kill them, knowing full well that they'll come back as a mindless corpse with an insatiable hunger.

Just seems like a cruel thing to do :-\

 Alfndrate wrote:
I honestly thought Merle was looking for an excuse to die. I mean he was sitting in the car, drinking some booze, and bringing as many zombies as he could with him. I felt like he knew he wasn't going to walk away from that scene.

Also, what do you guys think of the "honor" in the type of death that the governor gave him? I mean okay yes he killed him, but I feel like there is a level of dignity lost by killing him in such a way that he comes back as a walker. It just kind of hit me last night during that final scene.

Like in a world where they all know that if you die, you come back no matter how you died. Like, that's cruel to not give someone the sweet release of death, but to kill them, knowing full well that they'll come back as a mindless corpse with an insatiable hunger.

Just seems like a cruel thing to do :-\

I thought Merle was going to collect a huge horde of zombies and kamikaze through the walls of Woodbury... but that's just how I think...

Yeah it was clearly the governors intention, especially with his love of killing things and stabbing bodies so they don't turn. But why not capture and keep him? Clearly he had at least some emotion involved. look at the effect it had on Daryl... in the middle ages they would catapult the severed heads of fallen soldiers back onto their friends.... I think a walker version of someone you knew can be a potent enemy.

 Meade wrote:
I thought Merle was going to collect a huge horde of zombies and kamikaze through the walls of Woodbury... but that's just how I think...

Yeah it was clearly the governors intention, especially with his love of killing things and stabbing bodies so they don't turn. But why not capture and keep him? Clearly he had at least some emotion involved. look at the effect it had on Daryl... in the middle ages they would catapult the severed heads of fallen soldiers back onto their friends.... I think a walker version of someone you knew can be a potent enemy.

I rarely watch the Talking Dead, as it just never grabbed hold of me, and it's older 11pm time slot was like just as I was heading to bed, but I watch until the first commercial break, and Greg Nicotero was talking about the close up shot of Merle's eyes, showing that it wasn't the person he knew anymore. Which made sense, and I picked up on that as soon as they zoomed in on Merle, but at the same time, it would suck to have to do attack your own brother/father/son/daughter/etc... I think the reason why he didn't capture him is because the Governor probably felt Merle was a dog that needed to be put down. No point in trying to discipline him, when it was quite obvious he didn't want to work for the Governor.

I'm so glad the finale is next Sunday, because then I can turn my attention to Game of Thrones and then Breaking Bad in the summer lol

 Alfndrate wrote:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
Well, I wanted someone to die. I guess Merle's almost a main character.
Mainly, I blame Rick. He's just terrible. Incompetent and delusional. Michonne should kill him for this but for some reason she won't stab him in the eye even though he basically did the same thing The Govenor did. Even used the same guy.

Except if I remember correctly, Rick never told Merle to do it...

He told him the plan and what's up. If he didn't tell him nothing would have happened.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alfndrate wrote:
I honestly thought Merle was looking for an excuse to die. I mean he was sitting in the car, drinking some booze, and bringing as many zombies as he could with him. I felt like he knew he wasn't going to walk away from that scene.

Also, what do you guys think of the "honor" in the type of death that the governor gave him? I mean okay yes he killed him, but I feel like there is a level of dignity lost by killing him in such a way that he comes back as a walker. It just kind of hit me last night during that final scene.

Like in a world where they all know that if you die, you come back no matter how you died. Like, that's cruel to not give someone the sweet release of death, but to kill them, knowing full well that they'll come back as a mindless corpse with an insatiable hunger.

Just seems like a cruel thing to do :-\

Yes, I think he did that on purpose so Daryl could see him like that.

 Alfndrate wrote:
. I think the reason why he didn't capture him is because the Governor probably felt Merle was a dog that needed to be put down. No point in trying to discipline him, when it was quite obvious he didn't want to work for the Governor.

I meant capture him as a walker, let him loose on the prison. May or may not have an effect... but it sends a message It would be worse if it was someone like Rick or Carl that everyone cared about.

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
Well, I wanted someone to die. I guess Merle's almost a main character.
Mainly, I blame Rick. He's just terrible. Incompetent and delusional. Michonne should kill him for this but for some reason she won't stab him in the eye even though he basically did the same thing The Govenor did. Even used the same guy.

Except if I remember correctly, Rick never told Merle to do it...

He told him the plan and what's up. If he didn't tell him nothing would have happened.

I still don't think he gave the order to Merle. It may have been this way, but I'm still fairly certain that Merle told Michonne that he was doing what he did because no one else in the group had the balls to do it, something about the weight of his actions.

 Alfndrate wrote:
I honestly thought Merle was looking for an excuse to die. I mean he was sitting in the car, drinking some booze, and bringing as many zombies as he could with him. I felt like he knew he wasn't going to walk away from that scene.

Also, what do you guys think of the "honor" in the type of death that the governor gave him? I mean okay yes he killed him, but I feel like there is a level of dignity lost by killing him in such a way that he comes back as a walker. It just kind of hit me last night during that final scene.

Like in a world where they all know that if you die, you come back no matter how you died. Like, that's cruel to not give someone the sweet release of death, but to kill them, knowing full well that they'll come back as a mindless corpse with an insatiable hunger.

Just seems like a cruel thing to do :-\

Yes, I think he did that on purpose so Daryl could see him like that.

But that would require him to know that Daryl was following Merle, and until Merle was found by the Governor, no one really knew what was going on.

Naw, he didn't do it so Darryl could see Merle like that, he did it so that Merle would come back as a Zed. Merle would know it, too, knowing he was dying from a chest wound.

Its just the Governor being spiteful and not giving Merle a clean death of a head shot. Darryl finding him was just a final tragic twist.

I really like how evil they are making the Governor. Can't wait to see how they finish it off with this last episode. I'm thinking they'll possibly do a cliff hanger and drag it on, somehow...

I think Rick told Merle about what was up just so Merle could go off on his own. That way he can have his cake and eat it too. His conscience is clear because he "changed his mind" but y'know it might get done anyway.

I think overall the Govenor knew someone from the prison would find Merle and at the very least let Daryl know because they were supposed to meet there. If Daryl sees him in person then that's just a bonus.

 Gymnogyps wrote:
Naw, he didn't do it so Darryl could see Merle like that, he did it so that Merle would come back as a Zed. Merle would know it, too, knowing he was dying from a chest wound.

Its just the Governor being spiteful and not giving Merle a clean death of a head shot. Darryl finding him was just a final tragic twist.

I really like how evil they are making the Governor. Can't wait to see how they finish it off with this last episode. I'm thinking they'll possibly do a cliff hanger and drag it on, somehow...

I hope not. I'm getting real tired of the Woodbury storyline.

Ya, it's time to move on. This was the PG version on The Govenor and Woodbury anyway.

So place your bets on who's gonna kill The Govenor. The obvious ones are Rick, Michonne and Andrea but I was actually going with a dark horse: Milton! I'm not so sure now because some mini-spoilers in Talking Dead make it look like be won't get that chance. Plus I think we'll find out Gov did some bad things to Andrea which will shoot her up to the top of the revenging list.

I hope it's not Rick. They just don't have a good hate on. They're supposed to but when you think about they don't.
That's why it'll probably be Rick...

Dead Merle, not sure its good for the story line at this point. But hey, at least something happened!

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
Ya, it's time to move on. This was the PG version on The Govenor and Woodbury anyway.

So place your bets on who's gonna kill The Govenor. The obvious ones are Rick, Michonne and Andrea but I was actually going with a dark horse: Milton! I'm not so sure now because some mini-spoilers in Talking Dead make it look like be won't get that chance. Plus I think we'll find out Gov did some bad things to Andrea which will shoot her up to the top of the revenging list.

I hope it's not Rick. They just don't have a good hate on. They're supposed to but when you think about they don't.
That's why it'll probably be Rick...

Ok here we go (mind you I have not see Sunday's episode yet):
*Rick: because the writers can't seem to have any one else do anything.
*Daryl (most likely) . Payback time. Plus he'd be a cool vengeful type.
*Milton. He's seing paradise lost right before his eyes. won't happen.
*Herschel. Would be cool.
*Andrea. No. Too many chances. She will be rescued.
*Michonne. Nah
*Carl. Because he's a crazy psycho pathic little kid. Nah.
*Glenn. Glenn's turned into a whiny little . Way to kill a character.
*Blade. Blade will appear and waste him, setting up Season 4: Zombies vs. Sparkly Vampires.

 Frazzled wrote:


*Blade. Blade will appear and waste him, setting up Season 4: Zombies vs. Sparkly Vampires.

That's been made already




I liked how Merle went, he was a complete douche the entire time and reduced Daryl into a whiney little brother whenever they were together but he still gave a good fight at the end

And Milton should be the one to take the governor, Andrea wasted all her chances already

A more important question would be "Which character from 'the group' is going to die in the finale?" Cause you know they're going to off somebody.
I'm thinking Maggie, or Carol.

Maggie because it'd put an end to the "happy" bits of this Grimdark™ setting. And it'd push Glen into being a more interesting character.

Carol for the same reason except it'd just push Daryl into being a Super Saiyan lvl2.

You know what's sad? Seeing a picture of LeAnn Rimes without her makeup. I mean, when you look at a woman the last thing you expect to be thinking is, "Who knew Daryl had such nice legs?"

While Milton makes a good candidate for offing the Gov, it's a little too Saurmon/Wormtongue-ish.

I vote Milton to kills the Governor. Or else he gets killed freeing Andrea...one or the other for sure (in my mind).

Also, it seems highly likely that Tyrese and his lady-friend will end up re-joining Rick's crew post Woodbury showdown. They'll likely intervene and save the day thus proving their loyalty ultimately lies with the prison group. But, if they're joining the prison crew then definitely some people will have to go. It does seem like they hate happy relationships so that does put Glen or Maggie up on the chopping block, but both those characters seem to popular, so who knows?

Excited to see it, that's for sure.

So much to play out, so little episodes...

Honestly, I'm very afraid this next one will be a cliffhanger... time will tell...

And oh yeah, Glenn/Maggie.... very doubtful about that as well, got a strong feeling from that marriage proposal scene, as well as the sex scene in preceding episode.

Last season finale was quite the bloodbath so I'm expecting a whole lot of killing this time around too. The only people I'm concerned about are Glenn, Maggie and Daryl but I know the only safe People are Rick, Carl and Daryl.