None of the characters mentioned even matter though. Why would the writers waste time on them? It doesn't further the story at all. It's not lazy, it's limited time to cover the things that are important to the story narrative, and throw-away characters don't do that.

 

Lets don't go there, I bet Daryl and Tyreese can peel the paint off of those prison walls.

 

Yep, bet they're smelling pretty ripe by now too. None of the characters ever mention it, so they must not stink, more lazy writing.

 

Now that you mention it, they do this too with "important" scenes. For example in this season, they did not show us exactly what happened with Karen & David, all they gave us was the scene of Patrick the night before & some dialogue between Carol & Rick when they went to town. They didn't recreate the crime scene. Some people imagine Karen & David turning for the worst quickly and ending up like Patrick. Some recall Karen coughing & imagine Carol killing her in that state. Others believe it's all a lie and that someone else killed her & David. The didn't show the conversation with Rick & Hershel either. Some see sadness in Hershel. Some see support of Rick. We never actually saw the conversation, though, they left it up to our imaginations. Some things are implied, some things left out. Not sure how much of this is intentional and supposed to be left to our imaginations, which things are lapses on the writers' parts, or how much is "lazy" writing, where they just figure "f^*# it, no one will remember Dr Stephens" (heehee, just kidding, @Neuropyramidal)

 

Not only is it NOT very important to take time in the episode to explain what happened to all of the minor 1-line characters that disappeared, but it could also replace some of the short, important scenes, like The Governor standing outside of the prison.
And it could also take time away from the development of characters we don't know TOO well yet, like Tyreese, Sasha, and Bob.

Plus, if they decided to randomly throw in "Oh Dr. Stevens got shot and killed by The Governor 6 months ago" that wouldn't make any sense. I couldn't even think of a reason for someone to say that at this point in time.

 

My original "Lazy Writing" remark was not a comment on how many hours the writers put in or how hard they work. I'll bet they work their asses off. (I've never written a TV show but I have completed and published 8 novels and I know it takes considerable effort and committment so I have nothing but respect for the WD writers.) My comment was aimed at the shortcut they took, in my opinion, to create the drama they wanted. They wanted another brutal blood bath inside the prison but, again in my opinion, they set the stage in a loose way. Leaving sick people free to roam within the quarantine area--people who they knew were at high risk of dying in the middle of the night while everyone around them was sleeping--seems very foolish and not something a thoughtful man like Rick or Hershal would have done when they first decided to seperate the sick from the well. Sure, by espisode 5 it was too late but I think it should have been an issue back in espisode 2 when the "council" met to discuss action. It just seems to me they would have taken steps to avoid another catastrophe and so it appeared the writers may have skipped over that logic to get to the biting. I like the show and will continue to enjoy it, but for it to remain a quality show it can't have too many "ARE YOU KIDDING ME?" moments. That's one of the things that seperates the good shows from the bad. Just my opinion.

 

I paid for EVERYTHING ELSE.
He was a scumbag. I wish he saw Twilight. LOL!!! He deserves to!

 

I think the slow conversations have to do with the directing, not the writing.
But anyways, I've read something on the internet where some people complaining that Carol killing Karen and David was out of character and was lazy writing.
How is it lazy when a character does something they wouldn't do before? This is good character writing when your characters are changing. Before, people saw her as a burden and a useless women and she knows that. It's why she stepped up and did something even the stronger survivors wouldn't do. if these characters acted the same throughout the entire show, then it wouldn't be interesting.

Obviously, people who seem way too critical over the writing on TWD probably never attempted to write a script for anything. Or make a good story.

Why is it there are douchebags on the forums that say the writing sucks yet these are the same people that want these characters to wield miniguns and drive nuclear submarines?
My god....

 

Well we should figure out things ourselves. Think for yourself.

Look, we don't need characters making forced conversations of themselves over-describing past events in an attempt to close some minor details.

 

I don't need to have written a screenplay to know if something works or not, just like I can determine if I think a novel is good or bad, never having written one. That's just silly. Can you not tell if you like the looks of a car just because you've never designed one?

In my mind, Carol killing Karen and David was out of character, but not because she was a "useless woman", but because last season she was a strong but nurturing woman. She was the one taking care of Judith. She watched out for Beth when Axel was hitting on her. She had Daryl's back, even with Merle. And she went through the intervening months, where they built up the prison and things were seemingly pretty good by becoming a cold-hearted killer for no apparent reason? Nah.

 

Well... what would you think about her, once you find out she didn't kill them but dealt with the aftermath of finding out that Lizzie killed them????



Lizzie kills them, Carol finds out or witnesses it too late and then drags the bodies out to burn them and takes the blame to protect her new daughter.

That would change things wouldn't it? That would be more in line with the "old" Carol.

 

Carol did not become a cold-hearted killer for no apparent reason. She explained the reason behind her actions to Rick, and - while (in my mind) she was not justified in making that decision without the others' consent - she did have a personal justification that made sense. Carol believed that in killing Karen and David, who seemed too far gone to save, she was saving the lives of everyone else. This was not out of character; this was Carol, who's character has been slowing adapting and changing as the world becomes more fierce. In my opinion, this was a portrayal of something that could easily happen in the face of any type of apocalypse. The really scary thing about apocalypses...if one did happen, I think a lot of people would be shocked, not only to see just how rapidly society would collapse, but they'd also be shocked to see the changes that would take place in people, themselves included. To me this was good solid writing for Carol's character.