thebuzzardman wrote:NYSPORTSNUCCA wrote:J9Starks3 wrote:Last 2 episodes were understandably "set up" type episodes... but after the first 3, these just seemed so slow. I know it would be impossible to keep up the level of intensity of the first 3 episodes - the problem is, they focused on 2 people that most folks, including myself, really don't care too much about. Beth is just... well Beth. Abe isn't too bad, and I guess the symbolism of him ending up in the same situation as right before he met Eugene is clever... I just am not super attached to him.
I think the intensity should pick up again though as it looks like they'll be going to rescue Beth.
Abraham at least had a goal that wasn't JUST survival. Other groups that we've seen. That's all it really was.., Gareth, The Govenor and so forth. He chose to live for a purpose and it wasn't to just keep running to one haven after another.
That's what we want to see. We want to see how other people are choosing to go forward. Abraham would've been less interesting he just chose to be another one of Rick's followers. "Let's just walk around and see if we can find food.......,". That should be what gets old before watching another faction trying to do something else.
Not to mention., Rick was in a coma when everything started. Abraham., had to deal with this from the beginning and he spent way more time alone and protecting others before Rick did.
This episode was well made.
Hmm. Maybe you misread the intent of the show sometimes. To me, the crux of the show is what kind of moral/ethical decision someone makes in the situation, plus some sort of commentary on how society organizes itself - I see each of the living situations as some sort of analogy to human development; they were in the "hunter gather" mode in the trailer caravan, the villages tend to have some sort of charismatic/violent leader which seems to be like a medieval situation - serfs following the Duke/Lord, whatever.
Abraham was another character thrown in to explore moral choice. He wasn't that good a person, drove his wife away, got his family killed basically, had regrets, and seized on something "bigger than himself" to keep from going bat sh*t crazy. I think there is a reason they have him as an ex soldier - someone who wants to give himself a cause - not my opinion of why people might serve, just I see that as a choice the writers made.
To me, all this was clear enough in the graphic novel, but the whole moral thing stands out even more in the tv show. The two things that I recall from the graphic novel series (I last read it a year ago) is that every village situation seemed to get bigger and have a bigger maniac running it (which I took as a commentary on how societies developed - I'm sure the first kings were not ruling because they were great guys, but capable but violent men) and that, damn, no characters stick around but Rick, ultimately
Morality and ethics aren't an instinct., survival is and at this point in the series., it's more about survival than it is anything else. Survival is the "crux".
You break morals and ethics like you break rules. They are taught and changed accordantly depending on the situation. Most people have already accepted this even before the zombie apocalypse. But, to break someone's will to survive.., their instincts..., that's something else. When Abraham lost his family., that is what happened. He lost his will to survive and Eugene gave him that back. There's no morals and ethics with him., what you will and wont do Is all there is, with Abraham.., the "why" and "how".
You talk about reading "intent". Are there more you need to know? This is not existential. They already exist. Now can they continue to? And., if they choose to......, why? That's what I read with Abraham and all characters on this show. I even read it with the Zombies. I'm sorry..., The Walking Dead.
My thoughts on this show and, its been this way since ep. 1, are if you going to survive, whatever your reason., you will have to be a "maniac". And, anyone alive now., are (or at least willing to be) "maniacs"., so to speak. That already is and always will be the "society" we live in. I'm passed that. I want to look at motives and the journey. The journey as far as what made you alter your "ethics" and "morals". Usually your answer will be survival instinct.