Robert Kirkman On THE WALKING DEAD Season 5

best show on tv

Glad Rick is getting back to survival mode like when he killed Shane......farmer/passive Rick wasn't cutting it...Tyrese need to be improved more....he's really pathetic right now.

It's going to suck when Negan kills Daryl.

""It’s what we’ve been doing with The Walking Dead comic from day one. You’ve made people love and know and identify with these characters -- and then you kill them. Those deaths don’t matter if you’re not invested in the characters."

Does anyone who watches the show honestly believe that they know ANY of these characters? It's 5 seasons in, and I still know next to nothing about the main character Rick...apart from the fact that he used to be a sheriff. And that the zombie apocalypse forced him to be a leader. And he's screwed up a bunch of times. That's literally it.

Bob? Tyreese? Tyreese's sister? Eugene? Abraham? That chick that hangs out with them? The lesbian woman? Heck, even fan-favorite Daryl? I literally know next to nothing about those characters, despite how many episodes they've been on already, because the show couldn't care less about making them into actual living, breathing characters. That's why I'm not invested in them, and that's why their eventual deaths do nothing for me. Their deaths really don't (and won't) matter at all.

And now I realize he's talking about the actual comics, not the show haha. I feel a bit silly right now...

#weknowbmblowsw/outyoss

#yosslives

Awesome series Rick Grimes is badass

What astounds is that the people that dislike the show continue to watch it. If you don't like the show then why watch it?

@MightyZeus I never implied that flashbacks are the missing ingredient here. What's missing is character development. But yes, flashbacks would definitely be one way to show us what actually makes these characters who they are (I couldn't care less about "what they've done before the walker apocalypse went down" I care about who they were. And seeing how our past has a pretty significant impact on what type of person you are, I really don't think that's too much to ask for). Heck, they've shown flashbacks in this show before.

But again, that's not even what I'm trying to say. It'd just be nice to actually be invested in these people. To become invested in these people, one actually has to know something about them. Can you name 5 things about Rick and his motivations that are character-based, and not plot-based? I sure can't. I can't do that with practically ANY of the characters, except maybe Carol or Daryl.

In fact, Carol is probably the one character who has had the most character development in the entire show. She went from an abused, battered, passive wife to a badass, take-charge, courageous leader who has finally learned what it takes to survive in such a harsh environment. Practically no one else has had a complete character arc like hers. And the best part is: it was completely natural and believable.

Again, I can't say that about the 99% of the other characters. Andrea and Lori were two of the most wildly inconsistent television characters that I've ever seen. They'd just do things because the plot called for it, not because it made any sense for the characters. The Governor just acted crazy for the sake of acting crazy: he had no motivation. T-Dog (LOL) never even got enough lines of dialogue in order to be considered a character in the first place. By the way that she has never even asked about her ever since last season, Maggie seems to have completely forgotten that her own sister even exists, and has been kidnapped by strangers.

love the show,not the best show on tv but its definitely the show based on a comic book.

@Reasonnnn
maybe u are idk, can u see things?

I would argue Glen has had the same amount if not more development than Carol.

@MightyZeus

"You care about who these characters where rather than who they are now."

First off, I never said that. Second, why does it have to be either/or? Who they were has EVERYTHING to do with who they are now. Otherwise, there was no point in watching seasons 1-4 of this show. Using your logic, Rick would simply be acting the exact same way now that he did in season 1. Same with Carol, Carl, Michonne, and everyone else. Obviously, that's not the case. If their past in seasons 1-4 matters, then why wouldn't their past from before the zombie apocalypse matter?

"There are too many characters on this show as to know who they where, some aren't all that important but we do get an understanding of who they are and what there motivations are."

You're VERY lucky that the filmmakers behind The Avengers movies, Batman v Superman, Lord of the Rings movies, and X-Men don't think the same way you do. If they just used the "too many characters" excuse to just be lazy and not create well-written, 3 dimensional characters, then those movies would all be significantly worse. If shows like Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, and others can balance their enormous casts AND flesh out practically every character, then what excuse does The Walking Dead have?

"If you want flashbacks on every character on this show then it'll be a waste of time."

Again, I never said that I want flashbacks for every character.

"We've got a few more seasons to go to know about each of these characters..."

To return back to one of my original points: it's season FIVE right now, and we barely know a single thing about Rick. The main character. How many more seasons do they need to flesh these guys out? We should've had a basic understanding of the majority of these characters after EPISODE 1. And we're in season 5, and that still hasn't happened yet.

"...most character's aren't of importance and don't need there origins fleshed out through a whole episode but the audience does get some idea of who these people where eg. Bob. Most people assumed he was working for the Governor but he used to be an alcoholic."

If most characters aren't of importance...then why are they in this show? That would just be ANOTHER example of bad writing. If a character isn't important enough to merit character development, then they should have never been written in the first place. And if the only thing we actually know for sure about Bob is that he was an alcoholic at some point in his past...well, that's exactly the bad writing that I'm talking about. Being an alcoholic doesn't tell us ANYTHING about him. It's a shallow, surface-layer concept that APPEARS to give him depth, but means nothing if they don't do anything with that. Which they didn't.

It's no coincidence that you can sum up characters by things like this: "Rick's the one who used to be a cop! Michonne is the one with a sword! Daryl is the one with the crossbow! Maggie is the hot one! Glenn is the Asian! Bob was the alcoholic!" If that's all the definable features that they have, then that isn't character development. They are caricatures. Try to sum up any character from Game of Thrones in one sentence like that. Or Lost. Or Breaking Bad. It'd be nearly impossible.

"Character development is central to this show, and it's done remarkably well."

If you take a look around the internet, or just talk to people in everyday life, you might find you're in the minority in that opinion. Look up reviews for this show on sites like AVClub.com. Or IO9. It's pretty widely-accepted that the character development on this show leaves MUCH to be desired. I'm really not just pulling this stuff out of mid-air.

"You praise Carol's development but you go on to say that the writing on this show is awful and terrible."

If there's one good apple in a basket full of rotten ones, I'm not all of a sudden going to say that ALL of them are great and good to eat. Has the show done SOME things right? Of course. It's not ALL bad. But the bad most definitely outweighs the good. I can credit their work with Carol and still criticize ALL the other areas that are lacking.

If Beth dies we don't riot...we celebrate #stopsinging

@McGee

They kill Daryl then Dwight is allowed on the show

@muttonman But here's my point: not only do we not know who they were before the apocalypse, but we barely even know most of them NOW. For example, I have no idea what Rick's personality is supposed to be like. The writers tried making him a competent leader, then he realized he had to become more ruthless (the "Ricktatorship"), then he became a farmer, then he got back in the action game, and now he's kind of back to square one. None of that has anything to do with what kind of character he is, though. It's just writers trying out different things for him to do and hoping that something sticks. There's no character arc. No progression. It just seems like he's a different person in every season.

Personally, I'm not really attached to any of them. Just because we've followed them since Season 1 doesn't mean that the show has made any effort to get us to actually like them, sympathize with them, or even understand them. There are a few bright spots and exceptions (Daryl, Carol, and maybe Glenn and Maggie to some extent), but the overwhelming majority is...lackluster. I'm so indifferent to most of these characters, and it's usually REALLY easy for me to fall in love with characters. The Walking Dead doesn't make it easy, though. That's all I'm really trying to say here.

How is it that Negan kills Daryl when Daryl is not in the.............OH......I get it..................................................................................................................................................................................