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.

It was a good episode but just wish they had spent some more time on the road getting to DC. Swear they get some kind of tax break for never leaving Georgia. It's impossible to escape Georgia!

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
It was a good episode but just wish they had spent some more time on the road getting to DC. Swear they get some kind of tax break for never leaving Georgia. It's impossible to escape Georgia!

Well they do get a massive tax break for filming in GA. That was part of the dust-up season 2 when instead of putting that money back into the show it went to Mad Men. They're still in GA now just trying to make it look like VA/DC.

Also the road can't be 100% fraught with peril. They have people who've already made a similar distance journey with them from Texas so it's not like they are learning as they go. I was kinda glad they just skipped it as it would have felt episode of the weeky.

I HIGHLY doubt that they're going to do to Carl in the TV series what was done in the comics.

Maybe something close, but no way...

Well I'll be hugely disappointed then.

 Alpharius wrote:
I HIGHLY doubt that they're going to do to Carl in the TV series what was done in the comics.

Maybe something close, but no way...

Agreed - they toned down what the Gov did massively and the vengeance taken against him.............

See similar thing with Tyrion's injury at Blackwater in Game of Thrones - its easy to write or draw major injuries like that - make up for it is a pain.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
I HIGHLY doubt that they're going to do to Carl in the TV series what was done in the comics.

Maybe something close, but no way...

Agreed - they toned down what the Gov did massively and the vengeance taken against him.............

See similar thing with Tyrion's injury at Blackwater in Game of Thrones - its easy to write or draw major injuries like that - make up for it is a pain.

I meant to say "bite" but a bat would be hilariously funny.

 Alpharius wrote:
I HIGHLY doubt that they're going to do to Carl in the TV series what was done in the comics.

Maybe something close, but no way...

Yeah, I tend to agree.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sinful Hero wrote:

Spoiler:

And I they use Neegan, they'll have to tone him down a lot to air on cable. Not sure if he'd be the same character. Of course, they could always just not use that arc as well. Glenn could die from a simple walker bat for example.

I meant to say "bite" but a bat would be hilariously funny.

Makeups really not a problem.

****** language is certainly an interesting puzzle for the writers

Perhaps they could substitute the words?

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=6AGDkHYe22Q

Diddly ding dong pow!

No, it really is a problem.

It is the same problem that means that Rick

In the next episode Daryl needs to find some way to wash his hair, I'm sick of seeing that greasy gak.

I actually was hoping that Alexandria wouldn't exist in the show, and that they would do something totally different.


I'm still hoping that they diverge enough away from the story line that its fresh and new,

At the pace they're going they'll pass the comics soon enough - and that will be A Good Thing!

Indeed. I'm sick of hearing about Nagan from the comics guys.

Frankly I'm done with the Governor type bad guys. We've had two (or 2.5 if you count the Governor II this Time with Tanks) plus cop lady bad guy if you want to count that.

Do something different.

 Frazzled wrote:
Indeed. I'm sick of hearing about Nagan from the comics guys.

Frankly I'm done with the Governor type bad guys. We've had two (or 2.5 if you count the Governor II this Time with Tanks) plus cop lady bad guy if you want to count that.

Do something different.

Whhhhaaaaaaaattt? You don't like Neegan?! But he's the most boring character from the comics! Of course they'll put him in!

Neegan's interesting, but Lucille is the real star. Think they'll have her in the series?

I sincerely hope...not.

Man, safe place or not, I'd never give up my weapons. Even if it meant living outside.

 KiloFiX wrote:
Man, safe place or not, I'd never give up my weapons. Even if it meant living outside.

Amen to that

Another good episode. Kinda wished they'd have killed that scout leader. He's gonna be trouble.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
And I nearly busted a gut at, "I brought dinner!"

My personal favorite part was Carol's interview.

Can all Neegan talk go in spoilers please.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
My personal favorite part was Carol's interview.

I like how she's creating a persona for Alexandria.
"Oh don't mind me, I didn't blow up an entire encampment or anything I'm just a little old lady."

 Jihadin wrote:

 KiloFiX wrote:
Man, safe place or not, I'd never give up my weapons. Even if it meant living outside.

Amen to that

They let them keep their melee weapons and stuff. I kind of understand a no guns policy. Of course, I would also have blocked off interior sections with security fences so if the outer wall goes down in a location you just vacate that section and you are good, but I'm sure that the perimeter fence is so robust it'll never go down.... right? .... right?

Like ricks new face, last minute of the episode is getting me giddy

 mitch_rifle wrote:
Like ricks new face, last minute of the episode is getting me giddy

Ugh, don't remind me, his beard made me forget how much I hate that beak.

What's kind of starting to bug me is how little the group seems willing to share their personal experiences even when doing so has the greatest likelihood of making their case/improving their position.

I get that they've been through terrible experiences and are reluctant to bring them up because they probably don't want to think or talk about it (pretend it didn't happen to a degree), but when they're entering a new community like this and people are asking them to do things that don't make sense, like give up their guns, it seems to me that explaining *why* the community is doing things stupidly based on their past experiences would actually be a very valuable thing to share. Especially when that community claims to actually be interested in taking them in *because* they are survivors who have been on the outside, and therefore have skills and experience that the people in the community don't necessarily have.

So for example, when they are asked to give up their guns, shouldn't the natural questions be:

"I see that you have walls, which is great for keeping walkers/roamers out, but please tell me what is your community's protocols for defense if/when a group of crazed people show up with a semi-truck or tank, knock down a section of your gate and start killing people? Because we had a pretty heavily fortified prison, and some crazy dude with a tank drove up and blew that up. Similarly, on our way here, we encountered another gated community where one of our members used to live, and that place had a section of its walls knocked down by somebody, and there were no survivors.

So, yes you have walls, but I don't see sentries. Are you watching for people outside scouting the community, probing for weaknesses? Do you have protocols in place if this community comes under attack from other groups of people and if so, what are they?

Finally, if nobody is allowed to have guns, what are your protocols for when somebody *inside* the walls dies and becomes a walker/roamer? How do you expect Grandma to deal with Grandpa if he passes on in the night and comes for her? Have you had to deal with that type of situation yet and if so, how did you deal with it? If not, maybe you should consider *not* taking people's guns and instead give *everyone* guns and teach them how to use them."


The fact that these types of conversations aren't the very first thing that Rick starts asking the lady during the interview really kind of irks me. At this point in that 'world' the #1 thing that should be on everyone's mind is: What do we do if other people attack us (can we deal with it)? What do we do if walkers come en masse (can we deal with it)? And what do we do if people inside our walls turn into a walker (can we deal with it)?

What I don't get is; what is the rationale for NOT having guns in the first place?

Seems like the only reason is to allow someone else to control you later.

 KiloFiX wrote:
What I don't get is; what is the rationale for NOT having guns in the first place?

Seems like the only reason is to allow someone else to control you later.

Like most things - its part of the plot.............watching tonight

@yak

I think they don't bring all of that stuff up right away for several reasons:

1) They see how soft everyone is off the bat and the single dude with a gun meeting them and figure with or without guns they can handle it.

2) They aren't 100% staying at the time of the interview so the community plans don't matter yet.

3) They dont' even think about the someone turning in their sleep because they are all young to middle aged and can handle the situation with their meelee weapons and so dont' really think about it.

I think those questions will start to be asked more now that he's in charge of basically internal security. I also think it's partially plot devices to allow for tension in the community over later episodes.

And considering Aaron seems like the only competent field guy they seem to have they probably aren't really worried about it. I did think the congress woman's son carrying the cannon for a run was hilarious. And little Glenn dropping him without trying was pretty hilarious.

Also Norma Reetus is awesome. You could feel the animal in him in every scene he's not with his "family". Never still, always prowling, always watching. And Carol is amazing too.

 Hulksmash wrote:


Also Norma Reetus is awesome. You could feel the animal in him in every scene he's not with his "family". Never still, always prowling, always watching. And Carol is amazing too.

I think Glen and even like Carl are finely tuned 'operators' at this point.