Jump to content

The Walking Dead Season 6: "Who's Neegan?" (no comics spoilers)


MisterOJ

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

Chris Hardwick is blaming the complaints on binge obsessed, low attention span, spoiled modern audiences. Andrew Lincoln has complained that people just don't "get it". Clearly, Gimple must be a genius ushering in a new age of television storytelling.

It's a prime example of rationalizing.

That particular argument pisses me off because he's a shill for a show with the slowest episodes, coupled with a half season break and is STILL the most popular show on TV and he says bullshit like this? 

 

Seriously, watch his 30 minute explanation video. I don't begrudge someone who likes the episode, but he is doing that thing fans do where they become advocates and attackers for works they like. 

Chris sells himself as a nerd's nerd so I guess he is just playing the role :P

 

21 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

It's laughable to even consider that the show would completely and permanently remove Rick from the position of leadership.  They've never done it before.  They've even gone so far as to have an entire episode devoted to all the characters describing how wonderful their new set up is, how they have food and people working and safe walls and a good council, but they totally still needed Rick at the head of the table for some reason.  

I wasn't talking about that? I mentioned Negan's possible motivations. I don't think I said anything about him being removed.And, I don't know what role it plays in Negan's calculations given that Gregory, who is far more feckless, wasn't removed. 

Of course, any other villain would kill most of them, "rightfully" so, as right as anything can be when you're a post-apocalyptic cult leader like the Governor or Negan. But...for Negan's particular brand of negotiation, the point was to force Rick to suck his dick, like Gregory. 

Rick would have to go and explain how he utterly failed. Again, makes no sense numerically, more people should die, but that's the general point. 

But, if you want to look at it from a meta-perspective: of course he's not getting removed. If I had to bet: this is the moment in the show where the protagonist fucks up and has to work their way back. 


 

Quote

 

lol, sure, let's not get into the main character of the fucking show.  *rolls eyes*

 

 

 

 

It's not that I don't want to discuss Rick. If I didn't I'd delete the post. I had originally gone into what was his fault and what wasn't WRT the Wolves and Deanna and...I just didn't see the need right then. It wasn't particularly relevant and I knew if I got into it, we'd get into a discussion about such and such event and what it meant and...it wasn't necessary for the thing I was noting. 

I wasn't asking you not to discuss Rick. I was providing an explanation for the edit for anyone who saw the post before it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Relic said:

this conversation over who died is fucking dumb. the writers/producers haven't decided who died. 

I'm around 90% convinced of this very thing.

As for Chris Hardwick, I think I'd just keep my mouth shut right now.  He's just proven himself beyond all reasonable doubt to be a shill for the show, which I can understand - it's a sweet gig and it's gotten him some nice benefits, and he'd lose it if he told Gimple and Kirkman to their faces all the things we've been talking about.   But even he must know in his heart of hearts that this season ender sucked. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm on the other side and I believe they know. But, on the other hand, I can't help but believe that AMC really would Negan some of their top actors to keep the rest in line. Hold Lucille to their heads and make an example out of the one that wanted most money :P

I think they have a concrete idea, and are hedging their bets in the meantime. Every day there's a new argument in another direction, including the ones where people analyze the POV that we were shown throughout the episode.

What I really resent though is that even discussing this is giving them what they want.

 

Also: does the stuff being spouted remind anyone of the talk  after the BSG finale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been amused with the passive aggressive pose to the audience regarding the WD cliffhanger, not just from Hardwick, producers and cast members are cicling the wagons with similar arguments. "If you are upset, you are entitled to that opinion, but it is wrong." They dismiss criticism as a purely emotional response, and then claim that that emotional response displays the value of the ending because art and entertainment are meant to evoke strong feelings. You couldn't possibly criticize the storytelling because the story is still being told and you have to trust them to deliver come season 7.

Gimple's oft repeated defense of the cliffhanger makes no sense. Season 6 was all about Rick, he says, about his fall from a state of certainty and hubris. The finale was all about Rick's world collapsing. The story of who died is next season's story. Putting aside the ridiculous hard line dividing Rick's story from the larger context, how does that fit with what we saw? If that were what season 6 was "all about" shouldn't the final shot have been Rick's horrified reaction to the murder and not a comical POV scene straight out of a video game complete with cheesy blood effects?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Morpheus said:

I have been amused with the passive aggressive pose to the audience regarding the WD cliffhanger, not just from Hardwick, producers and cast members are cicling the wagons with similar arguments. "If you are upset, you are entitled to that opinion, but it is wrong." They dismiss criticism as a purely emotional response, and then claim that that emotional response displays the value of the ending because art and entertainment are meant to evoke strong feelings. You couldn't possibly criticize the storytelling because the story is still being told and you have to trust them to deliver come season 7.

Hardwick also gave us a classic from the arsenal of defensive nerds everywhere: the "well, that's not objective fact man, it's just your opinion. Meanwhile: take a look at this objectively cool piece of art/story-telling!"

It's stuff like this that makes me believe that he really is a true believer at heart. Which is okay I guess.Just don't pretend that I'm mad in a Red Wedding-way and not in a "Dexter finale" way in order to dismiss me. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was hard, and I followed the finale up by not sleeping much.

The main problem with the Savior's trap is it wouldn't have worked on its own, not without Maggie also having pregnancy complications that forced the Group to press on into Savior roadblocks when they'd have normally called it quits for the day after the first encounter.  So unless the Saviors poisoned Maggie themselves.... it doesn't make sense for them to pick the same day. 

Also, the obvious choice for who's dead is Rick.   

(IF you forget about the comics for a second, which is easy for me because I've never seen 'em.)   But if you go just by what makes sense for the show to do right now, Rick emerges as the big winner.   He's just been unmade, so it's the perfect time for him to go, or else he'll just be a sad sack.  (Which is also "valuable" as plot fodder, sure, but it's a shimmering opportunity to just off him entirely too, as THE way to cap off his era and start something else.  The makers on Talking Dead spoke a couple times about how this death sets up the new direction they want to go in.... would Sasha's or Abraham's death accomplish that?   I say not.   Maybe this is where the show departs from the comics.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Pecan said:

Nah, they're not going to kill Rick. It would be kind of cool, but they aren't going to stray that far from the comics.

Also, they're not going to do anything ballsy, and that would be ballsy. The only way AMC would kill off one of the major characters instead of a redcoat is over contract renegotiation. AMC wouldn't want to piss off the fan base in that manner. This show is about squeezing out every last bit of money from a gullible audience, not about making a good show.

I think it's extremely amazing that anyone could give this show the benefit of the doubt and think that AMC would do something that might lower the ratings (say, kill off a favorite character). Even this crap cliffhanger is not intended to lower the ratings, nor will it likely. People will bitch about how much the show sucks, and then keep watching and keep bitching about how stupid the show is...and keep watching. Because that's the audience of this show, and AMC knows it. But if well-liked characters like Darryl are killed off, people will stop watching, because that's changing things up and being brave and trying to be a good show, and the audience doesn't want a good show. They want The Walking Dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, The Mother of The Others said:

It was hard, and I followed the finale up by not sleeping much.

The main problem with the Savior's trap is it wouldn't have worked on its own, not without Maggie also having pregnancy complications that forced the Group to press on into Savior roadblocks when they'd have normally called it quits for the day after the first encounter.  So unless the Saviors poisoned Maggie themselves.... it doesn't make sense for them to pick the same day. 

 

They have Glenn, Michonne, Darryl and Rosita. They could work something out. 

And they were behind Rick's group too, so the confrontation could have happened if a group left then tried to turn back. The really weird bit was them being run into a specific clearing. That's pretty convenient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't count on the death not being a major character, but it won't be Rick.  The show is really about Rick and, in my opinion, the show is better when whatever Rick is doing is the centerpiece.   If they kill him it's going to become even more confusing and disjointed than it already is as they struggle to fill the shoes of the main character with someone new.  They may kill Rick eventually, but it'll be at or near the end of the series.

I do think it could be anyone in the clearing except for Rick though.  I think it needs to be someone that was there from the start or there won't be much impact.  Nobody is going to give a shit if it is Abraham, Rosita, or Eugene.  I like those characters but it wouldn't live up to the billing of this cliffhanger which already pissed most people off.  I think it'll be Glenn or Darryl. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't be Rick. To paraphrase, Negan said "if anybody moves cut the boy's other eye out and feed it to his father" A bit hard to feed someone that's having their skull caved in.

It's either Glenn, Michonne or Daryl imo, probably Glenn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, S John said:

I wouldn't count on the death not being a major character, but it won't be Rick.  The show is really about Rick and, in my opinion, the show is better when whatever Rick is doing is the centerpiece.   If they kill him it's going to become even more confusing and disjointed than it already is as they struggle to fill the shoes of the main character with someone new.  They may kill Rick eventually, but it'll be at or near the end of the series.

I do think it could be anyone in the clearing except for Rick though.  I think it needs to be someone that was there from the start or there won't be much impact.  Nobody is going to give a shit if it is Abraham, Rosita, or Eugene.  I like those characters but it wouldn't live up to the billing of this cliffhanger which already pissed most people off.  I think it'll be Glenn or Darryl. 

Well, people are pissed off at the cliffhanger and the finale ruining such an incredible, iconic moment from the comics...yet the showrunners don't care, and why should they? The very people who are bitching are going to watch the show anyway. Critics will hate it, but critics have been trashing this show for years and it hasn't affected the ratings. TWD doesn't have to concern itself with quality.

I think it will be Rosita or Eugene (even Abraham is probably too important at this point)...or possibly no one at all. I can see the showrunners saying an important person is going to die, then going for the fake-out. People may be upset and trash the show, but then continue to watch and it will just be another Glenn hiding under the dumpster moment. You shake your head at the ridiculousness, but tell yourself that's the nature of the beast and keep watching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no way that episode needed to be 90 minutes long (or whatever it's claimed to be, extended runtime anyhow). There is so much filler in this show! 

And I think it's super lame that they used the same splattergore 'trick' to end two consecutive episodes. How lazy. 

Also, it's not going to be Rick. That's clear from Negan's speech alone. Rick needs to be punished (by watching people he is supposed to be protecting get beaten, abused and or killed). Rick is also the one who is going to make his group toe the line and give make sure that Negan gets half their shit, like he asked for. Because after this (whatever the fuck 'this' was) Rick will make his group obey Negan so that nobody else gets the same treatment (out of guilt at being a shitty leader?).  Whereas if Rick is gone, maybe his group doesn't have another leader who will make the group do 'the sensible thing', they will maybe get a headstrong leader  who takes them down in a blaze of glory, rather than live under the yoke. Not as useful to Negan in the long run. 

Anyway, fuck this show. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Ricks reaction is entirely in keeping with a guy who's realising that he has been completely outthought, outplayed and out manoeuvred and might be facing his last moments of life.

 

I reckon that Custer will have lost his swagger pretty quickly at Little Bighorn for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will open myself up to get blasted.

We are all bitching about the story, about the ending etc, me included. But, it isn't OUR story. It isn't OUR show. It's theirs and we are just along for the ride. The bitching and constant complaining amounts to a big Cleveland steamer. If one of us was the boss on the show we would be doing it as WE saw fit, not how some vocal fans want it done. WE would have our vision and our end in sight and wouldn't change it because WE would believe that we know best how to tell OUR story. Ask GRRM about this.

All that said, I hate the ending, hated the Glen fake out more. But, I am interested in the future. I am more interested now that our group isn't the Alpha group. Did Maggie get poisoned by Enid, remember the pickles! Did the Hilltop group set our group up to fail, did they know how large of a group the saviors are? Who are the guys on horseback?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, dbunting said:

I will open myself up to get blasted.

We are all bitching about the story, about the ending etc, me included. But, it isn't OUR story. It isn't OUR show. It's theirs and we are just along for the ride. The bitching and constant complaining amounts to a big Cleveland steamer. If one of us was the boss on the show we would be doing it as WE saw fit, not how some vocal fans want it done. WE would have our vision and our end in sight and wouldn't change it because WE would believe that we know best how to tell OUR story. Ask GRRM about this.

This is another thing I see in online debates and I'm not sure what purpose people think it serves.In general, describing things in response to criticism always seems to not actually say much.

We're aware that it's their show, but there's a relationship between artist and the audience for a reason.There's a reason that they stay connected even in times like this. No one is under the impression that they have some sort of unlimited right to a show anymore than they're under the impression that complaining to a friend about their flakiness means that that friend is now absolutely obliged to change. Yet we still do the latter, why? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can tell the story their way, and as a viewer you can criticize them as bad, hack storytellers. The thing is, there is no possible storytelling justification for this cliffhanger, it is a stunt, as with the Glenn fake out, story and character are thrown out the window to generate interest and buzz. It is silly to suggest that role of a viewer is to quietly consume and nothing can be said againt the creators because- "Vision". There is also a matter of trust, TWD has broken the audience trust already this season with Glenn, and to a lesser degree with Daryl, there is no cause to believe they know what they are doing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, I disagree with this sentiment. Yes you can criticize, as I did because I dislike the cliffhanger, but to now call it hack writing and what not, it's the same writers that got you hooked in the beginning right?

I look at it like this, I may like 90% of van Goghs' paintings, does that mean the other 10% are hack finger painting? Or does it mean, HIS paintings just don't fit MY thoughts on what the van Gogh should do? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dbunting said:

See, I disagree with this sentiment. Yes you can criticize, as I did because I dislike the cliffhanger, but to now call it hack writing and what not, it's the same writers that got you hooked in the beginning right?

I look at it like this, I may like 90% of van Goghs' paintings, does that mean the other 10% are hack finger painting? Or does it mean, HIS paintings just don't fit MY thoughts on what the van Gogh should do? 

Lucas made Star Wars then he made the prequels. Some like to consider him uniformly a hack and give all credit to his collaborators...I don't. You can do something good and still do something hacky or become hacky in general yourself. Something isn't good just because you say "it's my vision".

It doesn't really help here that TWD has gone through at least two changes in head writers and leans heavily on its genre roots. As someone who's watched three seasons live (s1,s3 and now s6) who do I credit for hooking me? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...