This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Zombies
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Adamsm
I just torrent mine and use Cbr to open them up.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Gone
RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
I AM GOING NUTS WAITING FOR 9:00!
Post by
Gone
I'm glad Maggie didn't get raped, but IMO it would have been better if he had either gone through with it, or just not shown the scene at all. Having him act like he's going to do it, then stop makes him seem redeemable, like it would be too much, and that's not the Governor.
Good episode though, I expected a bit more to happen. The mid season finale is going to be crazy, can't wait till next Sunday!
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I don't think it made him redeemable- it just means he's not someone for whom rape is an appealing idea. His fetish is control, and his actions with the shirt were to assert that he had control over her and could do what he wanted. He was hoping the realization would break her, and make her give up the information. Once he realized that she was willing to be raped rather than tell him where her camp was, the rape served no point in getting him to his objective, so he abandoned the idea in favor of threatening to shoot Glen instead.
If she had shown more fear of it, and indicated that she might give break if he proceeded, I have no doubt that he'd have gone through with it. But he reads people very well- it's why he's such a good manipulator. He knew it wouldn't get him what he wanted from her, and he wasn't interested in it for any other reason.
Post by
Gone
Yea I didn't think of it that way, what i got from it was that he either pussed out, or he just considered it going too far, what you say makes sense too though. Or it could have just been forshadowing of what he's going to do to Michonne if they go down that road.
I'm getting more and more convinced that the mid season finale will end with Merle cutting off Rick's hand
Post by
Gone
See my problem atm, is that Merle seems more evil than the Governor, killing his own men and such. The Governor is supposed to be the big villain, I feel like the look Merle gave him when he said he was going to question Maggie and him making her strip down was an attempt to make him seem worse, but it kinda filed to me when he failed to go through with it.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I don't think Merle is worse than the Governor- I think that they're just different animals.
Merle is an angry, violent, racist, completely self-serving SOB, and doesn't place any value on other human life (except maybe his brother's- we'll see). He also has zero impulse control- he doesn't think about what the ramifications of an action will be- he just goes with whatever whim hits him. That's why he almost killed Glen, even though he needed him. Everything he does is emotional and out of control, and that's why he is constantly doing things that are crazy and horrible.
The Governor is a sociopath, but is patient and intelligent. He plans his schemes out, for maximum benefit, rather than losing his cool. He was responsible for every death that Merle was, other than his own men, because he ordered them. He collects trophies from his kills- heads, and he wanted Michonne's sword- which indicates that he has much more of a need and desire to kill, vs. Merle who seems to just not have a problem with it.
Every "kindness" and reasonable concession made by him is designed to meet his ends. He didn't want Michonne to stay- he wanted Andrea to think he did so he could separate them. All of his BS speeches and apparent righteousness in the eyes of his town is about keeping them under control and feeding his ego. I imagine he's rather sexually predatory as well, preferring to manipulate women rather than force them (he had one in his bed before Andrea, and I don't imagine she'd last long before being replaced). His attachment to his Zombie daughter might seem very human, but I have a feeling that his relationship with her when she was alive might have been rather disturbing.
Merle might seem worse than the Governor, but I think it's just because his methods are more up-front and immediate. I think the more we see of Woodbury, the worse the Governor is going to look. And the fact that he can do horrible things calmly, with a smile, is worse than someone who has no control of their emotions, IMO. At least Merle's motivations are somewhat logical- self preservation, revenge, family. The Governor is much more twisted.
Post by
Gone
Well the comic Governor is every bit as violent as Merle, even more so. idk he just hasn't really done anything that horrible yet. He's ordered some deaths, and that one scene where they kill all those soldiers was awesome "yea, we found you too!" I LOVED that line. But ever since then we haven't seen any of the spectacularly
evil
stuff that makes the Governor such a great villain.
I mean like I said I'm glad he didn't rape Maggie, but IMO they shouldn't have even shown that scene if they were going to water it down (and they did water it down). Same deal when he pointed the gun at Glenn, he could have shot him in the leg or something, but just pointing the gun seems like such a generic thing, especially after Merle had been kicking the @#$% out of him for the past hour.
So far there's been nothing particularly evil about the Governor since that second episode. That scene just made him seem more reserved when he pulled back, I'm sure we will see more @#$%ed up stuff from the Governor, but this episode didn't add much to his legend.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
You also have to remember that this TV show has a much broader and less specialized viewer base than the comics. They can't be as harsh, or they're going to lose a lot of their audience. There are certain things that a more general audience won't be able to swallow. They can't kill off too many favorite characters- at least not too quickly- because they'll lose audience. If they had cut off Glen's nose- leaving him horribly disfigured for the rest of the show- I think that would have been too graphic and horrible for the average viewer, and it would have lost them somewhat. Merle was ok to lose a hand, because they did everything in their power to make you hate him in the one episode he was introduced in. But for someone like Glen- who is the most innocent and one of the better liked characters, it would have been a lot harder to swallow.
I think, for Maggie, they only had 2 options. One would be to imply it happened, and have a scene not nearly as graphic before it cut to black. The other was what they went with- a graphic scene, that ended with it almost happening. I don't think that an average audience could have sat through that much tension, and invest that much empathy with Maggie, and not have had the ending be a relief and she avoided it.
In mainstream media, the worst things happen to the worst characters, or the characters who get the least screen time. In the comics, they want to break that stereotype, but in the show they're going to have to find a balance between tragedy and horror in this post-apocalyptic world, and a continuing series of triumphs and small wins for well-liked characters that keep people connected to the story.
I personally didn't get far in the comics, because they kept bringing in new characters only to have them die a few pages later in swarms. I didn't feel like I was all that connected to the story, or the deaths- it moves too fast and was too impersonal. With the show the cast is smaller, and you're more attached to each one, so each tragedy is more effectual, but they also have to keep from ruining the appeal of the show for most viewers by destroying the characters people are following.
BTW- I don't disagree with your prediction about the end of the season (I don;t necessarily think it's a given, but I could see it happening) but that would be a major event to send a season on, and in some ways kind of poetic with the way it happens. They can't have that stuff happen all the time, though.
Post by
Gone
I think you're underestimating the audience. I mean people getting ripped apart and eaten is ok, but a rape scene is too much? Season 5 of Dexter had about the most violent gang rape I've ever heard of on television and nobody had a problem with that. Season 2 of Sons of Anarchy opened with one of the characters being raped and she won an Emmy for her performance that season. I mean they didn't show it happen in the comics either. %^&* what happened to Lori in the show is more brutal than if the Governor had raped Maggie, she gets cut open, alive, then her son shoots her in the head?
The whole "rape is more brutal than murder, torture, genocide, extinction of humanity, and is the worst thing that can ever happen to a character ever" thing is a cliche. It's an ugly thing to see happen, but it's really just a plot device and if used correctly and not gratuitously it can add to a characters story (again, still glad it didn't happen to Maggie). But I feel like they treated that scene like it was so bad, that the very threat of it was waaay beyond anything we had seen happen, and what Merle had been doing to Glenn.
This is not a show where bad stuff happens only to bad people, I get what your saying that they can't keep pace with the comics, if only for lack of good actors who can pop in and out every few episodes. But even then, they should have just skipped the scene all together, having the Governor strip her down, then walk out almost seemed like he was bluffing. Rather than making him a more intimidating/menacing villain, it just made him seem more vanilla. That's the kind of thing they do with a basic cable show like Burn Notice or something, where they don't have the balls to cross those kind of lines. The Walking Dead, even the tv version, bills itself as a show that goes there, that isn't afraid to cross lines, to kill of characters, to have bad things happen to characters.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
Maybe- but I know a lot more middle aged vanilla type people who watch Walking Dead than who watch Dexter or Sons of anarchy.
Post by
Gone
Actually last year TWD and SOA were neck and neck setting records for ratings last year, and they share a demographic. I can't even talk about Dexter, I just finished last nights episode and this season started out so good, but got so $%^&ing terrible it makes me want to cry...
But anyway, even without that, some of the deaths we see in TWD are a lot more brutal than most rape scenes in TV.
Post by
Adamsm
Which is the point; the brutal deaths from the zombies are suppose to be seen as a force of nature; a rapist is kind of meh.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
HiVolt
See my problem atm, is that Merle seems more evil than the Governor, killing his own men and such. The Governor is supposed to be the big villain, I feel like the look Merle gave him when he said he was going to question Maggie and him making her strip down was an attempt to make him seem worse, but it kinda filed to me when he failed to go through with it.
Warning: This reply contains TVTropes links! Click at your own risk!
See
The Big Bad
(The Governor) and
The Dragon
(Merle).
Post by
Gone
See my problem atm, is that Merle seems more evil than the Governor, killing his own men and such. The Governor is supposed to be the big villain, I feel like the look Merle gave him when he said he was going to question Maggie and him making her strip down was an attempt to make him seem worse, but it kinda filed to me when he failed to go through with it.
Warning: This reply contains TVTropes links! Click at your own risk!
See
The Big Bad
(The Governor) and
The Dragon
(Merle).
I'm familiar with the roles, just saying atm Merle seems worse. That second episode where the Governor kills the soldiers and then goes home to his TV set was awesome. You could see how crazy, and how evil he was.
The scene with Maggie and the governer was probably one of the most uncomfortable things I've ever seen on tv. I'm really happy more didn't happen, even if it would possibly add to the sotry.
I agree, in which case it should have just not been shown at all. Having him strip her down and then leave the room was just weak. Either don't touch the rape thing, or just go through with it. The whole "chick almost gets raped, but somethings tops it at the last second" thing is so @#$%ing old.
Like I said it would be better if they just skipped that scene. If your going to pussyfoot around a subject, just don't touch it at all.
Post by
Patty
Not in this situation. The Governer had already completely stripped Maggie of her agency and demonstrated that he had control over her. She has the psychological fear that
if
the Governer ever wanted to rape her, he was capable of doing so. He basically achieved what he would have by going through with it, by not going through with it.
Post by
Gone
No I get that, it's just the kind of cliche I expect to see from pretty much every other show on TV, TWD is the kind of show that usually pushes the boundaries, it certainly bills itself as such. Your justification and ElhonnaDS both make sense, and I'm sure that's what the writers were goingf or, it was just handled poorly.
In TWD the zombies are never supposed to be the bigger danger, like Adam said they're just a force of nature. It's always the people who are the biggest threat, the Governor, Neagen, the Hunters, Shane (kind of), the human villains are always the ones capable of true evil. That's why I loved the first Governor episode, he just seemed so spectacularly evil, just like the great villain he is in the comics, you can really just hate him so much. But I just felt the way he was handled in that episode was too meh.
If Merle has never laid a hand on Glenn just tied him up and threatened him, maybe pushed him around, he would have still shown dominance over him, but it would also be a weak ass scene and nobody would think of him as threatening or intimidating as a villain... like at all. It goes back to that cliche where rape is so bad that the mere threat of it is worse than physical violence,
as long as we're linking tropes
.
I wanna again point out, I'm not saying they should have gone through with the rape, but that they also shouldn't be drawing attention to the line they aren't willing to cross. It would have been better if they didn't even address the scene.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
See- I thought it was handled extremely well. He seemed like more of a psycho to me because of how quickly he changed modes, how coldly he evaluated the situation and switched to whatever he felt would be the most effective way to manipulate her. Like it was a game he was trying to win. I think that an actual rape would have been more of a cliche than this kind of power-dominance mind game.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.