For me his craziness was shown at least 2 times. The room with the zombie heads in the fish tanks and combing his zombie daughters hair. Pretty crazy stuff there.
Those are crazy, but still in control. The head wall is creepy and the daughter attachment is weird, but both are still sane. What I mean is that I'd like to see him freak out, maybe just a little bit, to establish that he really doesn't have a plan and is, in fact, just making the whole thing up as he goes along. That is, of course, assuming that he even continues to matter after the midseason finale, which might be a little bit up in the air. If he's going to be an ongoing character, though, I'd like some clear feel as to whether he's a David Korresh community annihilator type with a messiah complex or if he's just a petty thug who likes having a stable of obedient humans into whom he can submerge his member or if there's something else going on.
I get the feeling that he's a distraught man who lost his family. He snapped mentally, but still is capable. He's chained his daughter up and has his research buddy determining a way to bring people back from being zombies. For him to be able to do that he needs to control and lead. He has his safe zone, he has people depend on him for protection, and he kills anyone he thinks will be a problem.
So Glenn smashes a chair and ownzones a zed, while Maggie gets a fake rape. Why do I keep turning this on?
I don't understand how you can type the statement (A) and yet ask the question (B). As we say in the law, res ipsa loquitur.
I was wrong about which character would have a rape scene, but 100% right that it was coming. Although I'm sure Michigan is in for a rape scene soon enough. How else do you show a woman is emotionally tough after all?!?! Definitely not the writing.
I've already said it in this thread, but wow: this season is such a huge improvement over the last one. I don't think there's been a single episode so far that I would describe as filler.
Everything that happens is all filler, so sponsors can sell you products and tasty treats, like: Seems this was noticed by many and picked up by the media.
You picked up on the fact that The Walking Dead exists in a universe where a duo in that situation would most likely endure that kind of shit?
It's more the unpleasant gender dynamic reinforcement at play. Glenn gets to be a heroic badass, Maggie is a helpless victim.
You're complaining about gender dynamic reinforcement in an episode that had one of the main female characters stab a zombie in the head and had a supporting female character decapitate multiple zombies while badly wounded? ETA - that's not to say that 'Walking Dead' hasn't had some genuinely questionable sexual politics in the past - recall the season two conversation that Laurie had with Andrea about doing laundry and cooking. This has the potential to turn into another pointless cluster-fuck like the Open Letter thread so this is probably all I'm going to say.
Agree with dermot. Yeah, the rape threat scene was creepy, and I wish they hadn't gone there, but this show has NOT been about female victimization at all. I took it that since the Governor knew that Maggie had been part of a small group of survivors, he probably also assumed she wouldn't respond to normal threats. So he tried getting rapey, and that didn't work either. Nothing worked until she saw Glen being threatened.
I did NOT pick up on that, even when Aeon alluded to it, because raping Maggie just seemed like something the governor would do. Now, Andrea throwing herself at him doesn't sit particularly well with me.
Okay, exactly ONE of the 50-something people who attended my training yesterday recognized that I was using WD characters in my examples. She got a big high-five.
It turns out that "show that sometimes has a fairly progressive view of gender politics" isn't incompatible with "show presents a couple of scenes that are somewhat squicky." I'm not judging the entire show based off of one scene, but I'm also not going to ignore that it happened and deny that I saw the same implicit contrast that Aeon did.
I dunno, a couple of women stabbing zombies in the forehead plus adding Michonne, who is 2 dimensional at best, doesn't quite make up for the entire rest of the series, which has had one lame female stereotype after another, with Lori being the worst example. I *thought* it was getting better, but this week's episode seemed to be slipping back to form.
I'm not particularly inclined to give a show that literally had a "get back in the kitchen" moment a free pass on this ish.
I didn't see it as sexist in the slightest, because the helpless situations happened unilaterally and helped drive home the point that humans are more vicious and dangerous than zombies. Given that you have Glenn and Maggie, who are pretty evenly matched in terms of physical capability and survival skills, and put them both in similar situations - the end result isn't showing that Glenn = strong while Maggie = helpless, it shows that zombies = relatively easy to dispatch even when tied to a chair because they're slow, clumsy, and nonadaptable while the Governor and Merle were both in definite positions of power and advantage. Glenn was able to kill the zombie because he knew exactly how it would react - come at him relentlessly, always take the straightforward approach (hence blocking it with the table, the bed frame, etc) while both Merle and the Governor used headgames and psychological unpredictability to establish dominance.
Exactly - it came across as two different applications of psychological breakdown techniques. Merle sees Glenn as someone who's always been weak, the runner, the scout, "beta as fuck", etc. This showed in his utter surprise when Glenn stood up to him and then killed the walker. So the beating was less to try and get Glenn to give up information and more of "this is to let you know who's boss". Releasing the walker - that was Merle just being crazy Merle. At the same time, you have the Governor coming in to Maggie's cell after she's heard Glenn being beaten and threatened, but (assumedly) nobody's come in to contact her or talk to her or question her. He starts out being civil, even deferential ("Do you mind if I sit?") but the moment she shows resistance, he exerts his authority via depriving her of her dignity. When that doesn't break her down, he uses force - but with the implicit tone of "I made you expose yourself to me, this is just to show you that I have the power here".
It's was also a pretty goddamn mild scene compared to what happened in the comics (but to another character).
I didn't really read too much in it. I figured it was just Kirkman going back to the source, since..... I would still have preferred that it either wasn't included or that the show would have gotten more interesting with the genders, but this isn't the worst.
Best thing I have ever seen this season, regarding on-screen bodycounts for all the main characters: I laughed far too hard at that.
Oh, no. That was from a live discussion thread I was having with some friends while watching. Trying to figure out who's directly killed the most actual people, as opposed to walkers. - Rick: 4 (Shane, two dudes in the bar, Tomas) - Daryl: 1 (Dale) - Merle: 1 ("Neil") - Michonne: 3 (crazy hermit dude, Merle's two hunting buddies) - Oscar: 1 (Andrew) - Judith: 1 (Lori)
I just finally caught up but The Governor is by far my biggest issue with this season. We have no idea about his motivation, which is fine for a while but it's really getting to the point where he's little more than a cartoon villain doing evil stuff just because he's evil. Why does he risk his men by going out and kill other survivors for no apparent reason? I get the feeling we aren't going to get those answers and he's going to be a completely hollow character much like Michonne has been.
I don't think it's unclear at all - everything he does can be seen as either a) for the survival of Woodbury by any means necessary, or b) his relationship with his zombie daughter. Killing the National Guardsmen, the interrogation of Glenn and Maggie, all that stuff is easily category A - neutralize any potential threats to the town's safety. Even the zombie heads in fishtanks can fit this part - it's desensitization. If he can become comfortable with the physical symbols of atrocity and horror, then he won't hesitate to do the unthinkable when necessary. As last episode showed, Milton's experiments (especially with Mr. Coleman) are all geared towards the Governor trying to hold onto his daughter. Experimenting with a dying person to determine if any personality remains in a walker? Obviously it's the Governor wanting some hope that some of his daughter remains in that shambling thing he keeps locked up in the closet. She's basically his morality pet, but now that he's been told that basically "Nope, they're just mindless shells with no link to their former existence", then I think it's that knowledge that'll drive him over into full-blown sociopath instead of well-intentioned sociopath.
I think we do know his motivation. It's to bring his daughter back to life, a life of some sort. Why he kills people who aren't members of the community seems simple to me. Any outsider who knows this settlement exists is a danger to the settlement. It's great at protecting against zombies, however, how will it be against an armed and organized assault? I don't agree with you that he is as hollow as Michonne. Michonne has had maybe 3 lines this whole season, while the Governor has had ample talking and time to show he is a dynamic character. I'm hoping there is some underlying reason for his psychotic behavior, I suppose there is a bit of me concerned you're right that he is hollow and there is no reason for him to be crazy.. But he is no Michonne, imo.
Pretty much. If Rick and co. were willing to kill the kid from "Rescue Me" to prevent anyone knowing about the farm, of course the Gov. would do the same to protect his town.
B I have no issue with. A doesn't necessitate hunting down every outsider especially when they don't actually do that as they let Merle, Michonne, Andrea and likely several others in. He's entirely inconsistent about who is and isn't permitted and there's no rhyme or reason to it (other than dramatic tension for the show). The survival of Woodbury doesn't require them to kill everyone and venturing out just to kill others strikes me as incredibly risky as they will lose people doing and weaken the community. Additionally, Woodbury is going to require more people to maintain it, letting in other survivors would be required and is beneficial to the community. He was part of a group that was openly hostile to them, not just some other survivors that weren't even aware of their existence.
