Morgan's wife was part of the initial batch of zombies that acted differently. We're constantly told that we shouldn't base zombie behavior on that batch. Zombie canon for TWD is that if they are in sight of a living human they never lose interest unless faced with a flashier distraction. Now, I agree that it could have been distracted by something, but not showing that distraction is always going to get a "What the hell?!? It just decided to leave him alone?" reaction.

I also agree about these things not being impossible. It is also not impossible that someone jumped out of a plane sans parachute and didn't die. Now, people have been saying the building they were in was in a sparsely populated area, I don't know if everyone here lives in London or New York so their idea of population density is skewed, but in most of the world, sidewalks and multistory apartments only appear together in what people consider population centers (even if not on the density scale of the really big cities). In other words, there should have been many thousands of people, at least half of whom should be shuffling around wishing for brains to eat. Based on previous TWD action, dashing out into such an environment to grab another duffel full of Slim Jims would instantly cause <BAMF!!><BAMF!!><BAMF!!><BAMF!!> as zombies teleport all around you. You would either kill them or die. You would not continue making the runs safely for a year and a half without having to engage.

I can live with any number of incompetent survivors showing up. Like I said before, I have no problem with Ana or Sam. I just have a problem with their trying to justify the survival of these people in such unfeasible ways. Given the scenario that this group has lived in, there really should be pockets of survivors everywhere (as opposed to the handful that have been encountered in 2 years), so you run into the problem that it should have been impossible (or rather, technically possible, but not really possible) or there should be tons more survivors running around.

Y'know, I try to stay away from the "so-and-so was a slut" discussions because I believe a healthy libido is a good thing, but if they've been doing body shots with zombies... well, I can feel my judgmental gene aching to vent...

 

Sure fair enough

What were the odds of rick surviving his coma without medical equipment + being paralyzed near zombies + finding his wife and kid. Not very likely. Therefore the writers are lazy or everyone should be reunited with all of their family all the time.

What were the odds of Rick winning against Shane when all he had was a knife and Shane had a gun. Not very likely. Therefore the writers are lazy or guns should be obsolete in TWD universe.

See where I'm going?

The reason we appreciate these anyway though is because it is still possible and its more interesting than them just being dead.

 

These were isolated incidents. If Rick comes out of comas on his own and is reunited with his family every day for a couple of years, then things get silly. The thing about the apartment dwellers - if they'd had a single event where they were unbelievably lucky, fine. What they did, though, was defy the entire TWD universe that frames each day as a struggle for survival every day for a couple of years. Because of this, you have to either accept that the only thing people needed to do was hunker down, dashing out for supplies every now and then, to survive (in which case there'd be a ton more survivors) or that their survival through this method is impossible.

I'd call it a little lazy when the writers decide to get rid of the more competent (whatever you think of his personality) leader to make it easier to justify the group getting into constant life and death situations. Yes, it's a little more work to make the environment so dangerous that people are constantly endangered IN SPITE of good decisions than to have them endangered BECAUSE of bad ones.

It's an unpopular position, but I believe a couple of characters, like Rick or the Governor, would be more interesting dead.

Character prejudice aside, I think it would be far more interesting that the ZA be such a dangerous time that only those who can adapt to it survive. Having people waltz through it with no skills (either existing or developed through necessity) by taking the same approach that seems to have gotten most of the rest of the world killed (holing up somewhere and running out for supplies) cheapens the world they've tried so hard to create. Now you can look at every zombie shuffling and hissing its way along the streets and say, "Idiot!! If only he'd thought to close his apartment door, he'd be alive right now."

 

This poignant jewel summed up my entire frustration with "Live Bait" beautifully. Thank you!!

 

exactly. the show must stay internally consistent, but does not need to be consistent with "reality" as we know it.

 

You mean like in season one where the group voted in Obama and not Romney? Oh wait... that was real life, not the show. Granted if they showed that on TWD you'd never believe people would do something like that, but there you go. Sometimes truth is stranger and less "realistic" than fiction.

 

There's one thing we agree on, that helicopter/roof thing was just *bad*.

 

Surely Axel and co were different as they were hidden in part of the prison and hadn't had access to walkers? And did Sam and Ana note know? Because I find that slightly odd.

 

See you're treating it as an everyday they should die type of situation. With the rick example you could either say he got lucky 3 times or that every moment he was still alive he got lucky which is what you are saying about these guys in an apartment. To make an argument you have to be consistent.

I won't get into a Shane rant with you because those things are horrible. I disliked that they killed an amoral character and I think he would have made a great co-leader in the same way the merle would have. I think it would be terrible writing if the only way people survived this far was to be incredibly lucky and very smart apocalypse wise. A show where everyone made the perfect decision yet still died would be very bad and horribly unrealistic.

But they did have skills. They arent complete imbeciles. Ones a nurse, helpful nutrition wise and for any diseases that crop up and another knows how to use a gun. They were very clever on day one and because of their amazing teamwork and good decisions on day one they survived by laying low in an apartment. All the other people who tried that would probably have been fighting over the last pack of rice at the supermarket or died of disease. Its still a combination of luck and skill thats gotten them this far. But they were almost out of food and so their decisions did not help them permanently.

 

As for the first part, I'm assuming you weren't responding to me. It does make sense that there would be more survivors. It's speculation, but I'd imagine instinct for people at the beginning of the ZA would be to bolt the doors and hope someone resolves things. Now, when that doesn't occur they have to make supply runs. For the prison group who we have seen kill hundreds of zombies, these supply runs are still treated by the writers as a life or death proposition. Does it make sense that someone has been dashing out to the convenient truck for a couple of years and not encountered zombies enough to have either learned to kill them or died trying?

Maybe on this point we'll always disagree, but I think it takes more work to write danger into a show with a competent, unlikeable leader than a bumbling leader who walks face first into clean glass doors.

I still contend that you're talking about differing things in terms of situation. The entire outbreak period would be one event (maybe many hazards during the period, but one event). Good luck could let you survive this event and bad luck could kill you, regardless of personal competence or preparedness. Now, again, the TWD universe would have us believe that sticking your head out your front door attracts a herd of teleporting zombies. This family has been doing so regularly for a couple of years - risking the same thing that we've seen kill dozens of characters (and presumably virtually all of humanity) and hasn't encountered this phenomenon? Incredibly lucky would be getting away from the herds every single time. Simply not encountering them in a formerly well populated place is beyond belief.

Again, I'm not talking about some incredibly skilled survivalist making a neverending series of ideal decisions and executing magnificent plans to survive. I'm just saying that given what we've seen from the TWD world, you're not regularly dashing out to the truck for years without having to fight zombies pretty often.

Being a nurse isn't necessarily an advantage in terms of nutrition or fighting disease any more than being a doctor is automatically an advantage in field surgery. The conditions they study for and the resources they're taught to use are a far cry from the conditions and resources they're dealing with.

Anyone over the age of 4 knows the very basics of using a gun (point away from you and pull trigger). Any adult who didn't ride the short bus could figure out the rest in a couple of minutes.

None of that is my issue.

My issue is the not having had to fight zombies. If they'd managed to move an entire supermarket worth of preserved food into their apartment during that initial scramble, cool. The fact that going out of your secure location is pretty much a guarantee of running into zombies (less now, but they were EVERYWHERE in the first couple of seasons) means everyone who had to do so even a couple of times would probably have been killed or found a way to put zombies down. Having done so for a couple of years changes that probably to a definitely and makes having gone so long without learning this impossible.

Like I said in an earlier post, I'm fine if they know nothing because they've supposedly been with someone who did know how to do such things (Ana, Sam and the Woodbury crew). I just have a problem with the entire premise of the first couple of season - namely, that leaving a secure location was a guarantee that you'd encounter hordes of walking corpses who would try to eat you, being subverted by this miracle family. Remember, the danger of the world they live in is that moving about is deadly every time you try it. If they have been able to do so with not just no self defense (in zombie terms) skills and even not encountered so many zombies that they've been forced to learn means that there are probably people like them living in apartments everywhere, dashing across the street to grab something off the shelf of a nearby store.

 

This makes me laugh -- solely for the reason that the walkers falling through the roof was the most interesting part of that episode. (meaning that, for the entertainment value -- since watching Rick farms pigs & plants, walk around in the woods without a gun and not put down a crazy woman or the walker head she kept was beyond ridiculous)-- For entertainment's sake, you set aside wondering how in the Team Prison did not notice a giant crashed helicopter on the roof; or why the roof didn't collapse when the helicopter crashed; or why the walkers on the roof couldn't hear the same music that the walkers on the ground could; or why there are no walkers in the woods etc. weren't also attracted to the boom box ETC.) I thought the walkers falling through the roof was dramatic, complex, well-played, frightening and way more entertaining than the rest of that episode (after you set aside the other nagging questions) . Why? Because I could not have taken 5 more minutes of that boring, stinking prison or Rick and his ridiculous new life style -- so that's why I liked the helicopter roof collapse [However, it was truly a shame to see all that booze die with the roof: alcohol is a great antiseptic; a better anesthetic than none; and a great addition to flavoring in food.



I really never had these kind of "credibility issues" with Season 1 which was breath-taking; Season 2 which was occasionally slow, but not unrealistic and breathtaking it its culminating moments (like Barnageddon) and even big blocks of Season 3.

 

Season 1 is also my favorite season [quite an accomplishment seeing as its only 6 episodes long...that says a lot for the talent of Frank Durabont], but I think we tend to minimize the credibility issues in the seasons we love, and maximize them in the seasons we dislike. I love season one but it actually had some of the worst absurdities: Rick somehow surviving without food and water for a month, and being able to ride a horse within one day of waking up from a 30 day coma; Glen somehow knowing the frequency of the radio in the tank; etc etc. I think we've had to suspend belief every season. But my favorite is still season one, and season 4 is coming in a close second so far..

 

Season 1 is what hooked me; you are so right about Frank Darabont's talent. For me, his talent & vision was something that hooked me & kept me watching long past his leaving (which you enlightened me about in another thread), but I can't say that I have enjoyed any season as much as the first one. I'd like to stick it out as long long as Daryl, Carol and Rick are still there. But I have a question for you since you really seem to know your stuff about the production of the show...where do you think the show would be now, if they had kept him? I've been reading about the split and it seems that certain actors were brought in by him, and were killed off after he left. Jon Bernthal in particular mentioned a loyalty to him. Did the original cast members that were killed off leave, at least partially by choice because he was fired? Do you know what his plans were for the other seasons and why they were axed?

 

Durabont likes to work with a trusted group of actors. Jeffrey DeMunn [Dale] was in The Green Mile and The Mist. Laurie Holden [Andrea] and Melissa McBride [Carol] were both in The Mist, as was Morales. Jeffrey DeMunn was the only one who quit specifically because Durabont was fired. Andrea, Carol and the others didn't quit, but from what I've heard in a couple interviews, AMC put kind of an unofficial gag order on them, not allowing them to say anything negative about AMC in relation to the Durabont-AMC feud. So for a short while there, it was probably a somewhat tense work environment. DeMunn actually later changed his mind and decided he wanted to stay, but they had already written his death scene, and AMC told him 'too late'.
Durabont originally had planned on the first episode of season 2 being a backstory telling about the walker in the tank, and how his group ended up there, maybe tying it in with at least one main character from season one.

http://geektyrant.com/news/2012/1/7/the-walking-dead-frank-darabont-reveals-incredible-original.html

 

Well your exact point was that it shouldn't be about not making bad decisions but instead making good decisions and catastrophe still happening. If thats the case then the people who make bad decisions would all get done pretty fast and all you are left with is people consistently making good decisions and still failing

Well it is definitely better than not being a nurse. I'm sure that on average nurses know more about nutrition than lawyers. Same with being a cop. Some gun training is better than training yourself.

I feel like this argument only comes down to whether or not it is possible for any member of the apartment crew to get food without having to kill a walker. Between two people how much food is it possible to carry timewise between four people. With bags maybe about 3 days worth? 10 trips a month 18 months gives you 180 trips. Therefore It would have to be consistent no walkers. However there is also plenty of storage space in the apartment. They could just move a large amount at once. What if they backed up the truck and completely unloaded it into the apartment on day one? That seems feasible. Failing that, lets say they didn't do that. Lets say they did the 180 trips. Its a decently sized town so they couldn't just run around the walkers. Two scenarios. A) the walkers all moved off due to a helicopter. B) the people all moved off. A is pretty self explanatory, B requires a bit more explaining. Although I just realised that B couldn't happen as anyone leaving their apartment would see all the food. Going on that I would have to say that they used the head start they had on everyone by simply having everything they needed when things started to get a brown coating, to move everything into their apartment rather than fighting to the death in the supermarket over a bag of rice. There is absolutely nothing saying this is impossible or even very lucky, just good planning. As for any issues someone might bring up on the walls not breaking down from walkers in the apartment, they would probably be more likely to leap out the windows to try reach gunfire or people.

 

You know the funny irony of this discussion? I'm generally guilty of applying our world logic to the TWD world.

For example, I say to myself, "Self, if half the population overnight became shambling mindless creatures that take only a mild blow to the head to put down, would they eliminate the rest of humanity?", and my answer is, "Of course not, self! Within hours, there'd be bands of people patrolling the streets, clubbing them down wherever they are to be found."

I might see that zombies in the TWD world hiss constantly and ask myself, "Self, is it possible to be surprised and completely surrounded in an area where you have good sight lines in all directions by such creatures?", and must keep myself on point by saying, "Self, the TWD humans are simply less capable than humans in our world. They can't hear hissing, so they get surrounded."

Pretty often, my tendency to judge the TWD world by our standards has me here debating why the actions of its populace seem completely stupid while others who simply accept that TWD humans are gimped try to get me to accept the rules of that world as they've been written.

Here's where the irony kicks in...

We have a family of TWD humans breaking the entire premise of the show - the fact that zombies are everywhere and incredibly lethal and my complaint is that having a group that regularly heads outside without encountering zombies is like having a pearl diver who never gets wet... and a lot of the same people who argue against me when I apply real world logic to the show are justifying this egregious break of TWD canon by arguing how their survival is possible under real world conditions.

Again, I agree that if TWD zombies suddenly appeared in our world, this family could have easily been safe based on what they did. After all, TWD zombies are about as dangerous as venomous snapping turtles made of glass and equipped with beepers to let you know where they are. The point is that the TWD universe holds that zombies are incredibly dangerous (again, because of their subhuman humans) and everywhere. By in-show precedent, this family could not have survived.