Stone Cold Jane Austen Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 As someone who read about 30 of the comics in the build up to the show, I'm not sure there is a best of the source material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 The Walking Dead is garbage, both the TV show and the comic. And I never miss an instalment of either. Â Skins is alright, but they're definitely out of worthwhile ideas. Â It just reinforces the opinion that young people are all about having sex and drugs and booze and shit. They are, unless they're an emo fuckwit or have a really nerdy interest in motorbikes or trains or something (and a few Skins characters fall into those categories anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members FLips Posted March 11, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2012 I enjoyed the first season of Walking Dead, aside from some stuff in the last few episodes. I think the episode with the black guy and his son having to shoot his zombie wife was fantastically done, and the tense feeling of having a handful of people trying to survive was great. Then it suddenly had about 12 main characters, a romantic sub-plot and turned into a dull hack-n-slash instead of the survival horror-ish thing it should have been. I heard season 2 was appalling though so didn't bother with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Arch Stanton Posted March 11, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2012 The Walking Dead belongs in Ian's 'Half Decent Television That Isn't Exactly Class' thread. I really enjoy it, if I'm honest, but I wouldn't attempt to defend it against any of its criticisms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Astro Hollywood Posted March 11, 2012 Moderators Share Posted March 11, 2012 Walking Dead is incredible in the way that it's a fucking TV series about zombies, yet somehow manages to be deathly slow and boring. It's 42 minutes of people standing around having pained, earnest discussions, followed by a character making a really bad decision to bring about a minute's forced excitement or movement in the plot. Â Can you even imagine how un-rewatchable this season's going to be, now that we know what happened to Sofia? You'll get nothing out of it the second time around, as opposed to the very, very little that you do now. And T-Dog has to be the most useless character in any show ever. I saw a timeline somewhere the other day - the official timeline - and the amount of time that had passed from the moment Rick woke up in the hospital in episode one to the day Hershel went into town to drink? TWO WEEKS. Fucking kid was running around after being shot and sewn up by a vet in about a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patiirc Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Walking Dead is incredible in the way that it's a fucking TV series about zombies, yet somehow manages to be deathly slow and boring. It's 42 minutes of people standing around having pained, earnest discussions, followed by a character making a really bad decision to bring about a minute's forced excitement or movement in the plot. Â Can you even imagine how un-rewatchable this season's going to be, now that we know what happened to Sofia? You'll get nothing out of it the second time around, as opposed to the very, very little that you do now. And T-Dog has to be the most useless character in any show ever. I saw a timeline somewhere the other day - the official timeline - and the amount of time that had passed from the moment Rick woke up in the hospital in episode one to the day Hershel went into town to drink? TWO WEEKS. Fucking kid was running around after being shot and sewn up by a vet in about a day. Â I've gotta agree with this, gave up with The Walking Dead, before the end of the first six episodes, but tuned in for the finale because someone said to me it picked up. They were clearly lying. Â I didn't think zombies could be made deathly dull but somehow this managed to do it and then some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Astro Hollywood Posted March 11, 2012 Moderators Share Posted March 11, 2012 And if Rick didn't know Lori was pregnant, WHAT DID THE CDC GUY WHISPER BEFORE HE BLEW UP THE LAB?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItsClobberingTime Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I think for me, sure it's a show about zombies, but it's not like they have the chance to have the intensity and action that a zombie horror movie would have on a weekly basis. It almost HAS to be the way it is. Â Now I'm not saying they have the balance right at all, but I can understand how they're trying to approach it, much like they have in the comics. Â I didn't have any issues with the first season at all. It was short and to the point. The first part of the second season I can accept every criticism thrown at it, although I was one of the few that liked the pay off (no, I don't mean it was surprising or anything). I think they've ironed out SOME of the crap since it came back, but there's still a long way to go. Â Some of my favourite characters aren't even in it yet, so that's why the best is yet to come for me personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Astro Hollywood Posted March 11, 2012 Moderators Share Posted March 11, 2012 I think for me, sure it's a show about zombies, but it's not like they have the chance to have the intensity and action that a zombie horror movie would have on a weekly basis. It almost HAS to be the way it is. Â It doesn't have to be badly acted, badly written, or boring. You'd struggle to find worse dialogue than that speech Daryl did to Carol a couple of episodes ago. That was amazingly terrible. Â I thought the first season caught a lot of unfair flack, because 6 episodes was nowhere near enough breathing room, although the finale set alarm bells ringing with how terrible it was. But season 2? So bad. What blows my mind is the amount of people who think it's the best thing on TV. Have they never seen any other shows before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vamp Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Skins is alright, but they're definitely out of worthwhile ideas. Â I'd mostly agree with this. There's been decent moments in the show. Admittedly it looks more decent because it actually tried to do something a little different with teen TV compared to what the other shows were doing. And while sometimes it's treatment of mental illness has been iffy to say the least, it has presented it for discussion more than a lot of teen shows which I think is pretty important. I'd struggle to name many shows that handled a lesbian relationship as well as Skins. Actually, Skins has always been pretty good on gender and sexuality representations, a couple of mishaps here and there maybe, and I know that the level of sex is pretty unrealistic for teenage life for the most part (although I do often feel like bashing my head into a wall when people complain that Skins isn't a realistic representation of teen life because I fail to see how you can't understand what a TV show designed for teenagers is trying to do, they're almost as bad as those "teens will watch this and then act like it" idiots who belong to the 50's) but it's often pretty fair with it. The times its really been shit, and there have been times, are more often than not because it falls in love with itself too much. But then it is a show about teenage life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted March 11, 2012 Awards Moderator Share Posted March 11, 2012 I think for me, sure it's a show about zombies, but it's not like they have the chance to have the intensity and action that a zombie horror movie would have on a weekly basis. It almost HAS to be the way it is. Â It doesn't have to be badly acted, badly written, or boring. You'd struggle to find worse dialogue than that speech Daryl did to Carol a couple of episodes ago. That was amazingly terrible. Â I thought the first season caught a lot of unfair flack, because 6 episodes was nowhere near enough breathing room, although the finale set alarm bells ringing with how terrible it was. But season 2? So bad. What blows my mind is the amount of people who think it's the best thing on TV. Have they never seen any other shows before? Â Which one's Daryl again? And, er, which one's Carol? Â I swear I've watched every episode. But the only characters whose names I've been able to learn are the ones who look similar to how they did in the comics (which I actually really like)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JNLister Posted March 11, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2012 Skins viewers may be amazed to discover this, but we do actually have police in Bristol. Â Series 1&2 was stuff that largely didn't happen to me, but I certainly believe happened to people I knew in sixth form. Series 3&4 was stuff I doubt happened to anyone I knew, but I certainly can believe could happen. Series 5&6 is stuff I can't believe happens to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Thunderplex Posted March 11, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2012 Love the comic, love the show. I've seen plenty of TV over the years, and at the moment I do fuck all else, and I really enjoy walking dead. Is it the best thing ever? no, but it's better than most of the shit they spread on the screen these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 On the Skins debate - it always struck me that Skins was made for adolescents to sell them the glamourised image of what their late teens was going to be like, while The Inbetweeners was more for young adults to laugh about looking back at what their teens was actually like. Until they spoiled it all in the film by letting them all pull Hollyoaks types for the Hollywood ending to hook the Skins audience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 On the Skins debate - it always struck me that Skins was made for adolescents to sell them the glamourised image of what their late teens was going to be like, while The Inbetweeners was more for young adults to laugh about looking back at what their teens was actually like. Until they spoiled it all in the film by letting them all pull Hollyoaks types for the Hollywood ending to hook the Skins audience. The Inbetweeners is no more realistic than Skins, in terms of sex and drugs. There was plenty of drugs and sex going on around me in my late teens, just not much that I was involved in because of being a wrestling fan. I never had a mate who got hit by a bus and went mental, but I never had a mate who got into a feud with a bus of mongols who destroyed his car either. I never had a mate. Â And nobody at all went to see The Inbetweeners movie because they were a Skins fan with a Hollywood-ending addiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.