S05.E02: Strangers

[TexasChic]

I wouldn't mess with a Great lakes island. First of all, they'd already be full of rich boating club members, who may or may not have become zombies, but either way are not going to peacefully welcome you into their haven.

Secondly, those lakes freeze. 

One reason that state-to-state population counts of wolves vary so much during the winter is that they cut right across lake corners wandering from one state into another. And Zs don't even have any self-preservation. So if the only barrier is occasional patches of thin ice, every Z that falls through and is hanging onto the thicker stuff ahead provides a stepping stone for the next one behind it.

The lakes would be colder during the winter than they are now, too. I think a lot of global warming "science" is bullshit, but as far as the Great Lakes go.. of course they'd be colder. There's no more electrical plants using them as a coolant system.

Now, granted, a huge sea of ice isn't that hard to defend. You could spot the zeds a mile away, move in closer,and kill them with slingshots loaded with icicles.

But during the summer, you've got a whole 'nother problem in most of the Great lakes region. Zombienados.

Even if they don't freeze, what's to stop them from walking through the water? In World War Z (the book, not the movie) they raised this issue. If you were close to a body of water, you never knew when a zombie might walk out of it. They just walked along the bottom. Of course, this would speed decomposition, but the show has shown walkers last for long periods of time in water, so I could see this happening in the WD universe.

[Ohwell]

I said "eat dirt" because there's a scene in The Good Earth where people are starving and there's a rumor that one of the families has meat.  The others crash the hut and see the wife stirring a pot of dirt soup (they have no other food) and she says at least it's warm and nourishing.  But the point is that I still don't think that the Termites have justification for eating people. 

[NoWillToResist]

To me, there's a massive difference between eating people because you feel like you'll starve otherwise and....what the Termites did/do.

 

They trapped innocent people, traumatized them, stole from them, murdered them and ate them...all while being perfectly happy about it all. Hell, in the case of Bob, they fucking taunted him as well. That's just....evil.

 

If they took the odd straggler off the rails, brought them in, fed them and cared for them, basically gave them a nice last day if you will, and then drugged them before humanely killing and eating them, I'd have less of a problem with it. But the Termites...they ENJOY the trauma, the hunt, the kill. That's very far afield from 'we need to eat people to survive'...

[Macbeth]

Judith if you made the wrong decision - Rick may banish you from the group.

 

Continuing on with Bob and Sasha's game of making good things out of bad - Get bit or scratched in the leg - leg gets chopped off to feed some cannibals. 

 

I want to be hopeful - but I think Bob will end up dead by the end of the next episode.

[Mindymoo]

 

They trapped innocent people, traumatized them, stole from them, murdered them and ate them...all while being perfectly happy about it all. Hell, in the case of Bob, they fucking taunted him as well. That's just....evil.

They were full on in the "Most Dangerous Game" territory. It's pretty freaking terrifying.

[Mattipoo]

Poor Bob, I knew when he was featured heavily and had lines in so many scenes earlier in the episode that something bad was going to happen to him. He is probably the most dispensable of the main cast other than Tara and maybe Rosita so I fully expected he will be offed at some point this season, but his fate is quite cruel and unusual even by TWD standards. I am not liking the new priest character but seems like he will play a major role this season possibly as one of the big bads along with the surviving termites. Damn Tyrese! You had one job, to kill that annoying hat termite but you screwed it up!

[Nashville]

Edited out - reposted to next episode's thread.

Edited October 27, 2014 by Nashville

[Bruinsfan]

I'm thinking that people's gardens and such would be a pretty good source of food now that the population has fallen so drastically. I mean, in the absence of a zombie apocalypse we're all a few weeks from starvation if the supply chains break down, but if you're the one survivor per thousand walkers it wouldn't be that hard to raid gardens, orchards, and abandoned greenhouses. Heck, look for those stacked tire potato planters that some people make.

[Janimo]

Does anyone know what actress was in that photo standing with Father Gabriel? believe she was short, blonde and wore glasses. To me she resembled Melissa Rauch, who plays Bernadette Rostenkowski on The Big Bang Theory,
Just wondering...:)

[NoWillToResist]

I don't understand why, upon hearing rustling in the bushes, Michonne left the relatively open space she was in to walk half into the bushes where potential attackers would have a much easier time taking her by surprise. Why wouldn't she just wait near the church porch and see who came out?

[Nashville]

I don't understand why, upon hearing rustling in the bushes, Michonne left the relatively open space she was in to walk half into the bushes where potential attackers would have a much easier time taking her by surprise. Why wouldn't she just wait near the church porch and see who came out?

 

Because:

1. If the rustling bushes aren't growling and snarling, it's probably not a walker; either animal or human.
2. If it's an animal, then relatively low personal threat (anything big enough to hurt her would probably be growling as well) and the chance of food.
3. If it's a human, then next question - friendly or unfriendly?
4. If friendly human, then see if they need help.
5. If unfriendly, then Michonne is out in the open and exposed to a potential assailant she can't see; direct approach into the brush decreases her vulnerability and increases her adversary's.

 

Absent threatening noises accompanying the rustling, Michonne's best advantage in every scenario is to approach.

In any case, Michonne has never shown herself bashful about taking the fight to her enemy.

[kikismom]

 

1. If it's an animal, then relatively low personal threat (anything big enough to hurt her would probably be growling as well) and the chance of food.
2. If unfriendly, then Michonne is out in the open and exposed to a potential assailant she can't see; direct approach into the brush decreases her vulnerability and increases her adversary's.

 

Absent threatening noises accompanying the rustling, Michonne's best advantage in every scenario is to approach.

In any case, Michonne has never shown herself bashful about taking the fight to her enemy.

I hate to disagree with you. But I will : - )

1) Bears don't growl on the hunt. Nor do panthers (or cougar/mountain lion/whatever you call them where you live). Nor do snakes. Yes, they can and do hunt at night for rodents. rustle leaves etc., and if a person approaches they will strike.

2.) Out in the open is exposed, yes. But going from light into dark, and your eyes not having a chance to adjust, is bad tactics. Someone in the brush, remaining hidden, while looking at a silhouette backlighted, has advantage.

She also does not have any idea how many possible adversaries there are; while she is easily identified as a lone individual.

She does not have any idea what weapons she could be facing; the opposition could easily see she has the katana.

She could not see any booby-trap or what is called an "automatic ambush" set-up. The opposition could see clear ground around her.

 

Really not that different than a cop going into a dark house from outside; not hearing a threat made does not indicate lack of danger.

In the open?...A perp in the house could see the cop approaching the house in the open yet that doesn't mean her safety increases by direct approach into the darkness.

Indirect approach is better in both cases; using the angles to lower vulnerability.

 

As far as bashfulness:

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread

Discretion is the better part of valor.

Failing to plan is planning to fail.

etc.

Sneaky isn't really being bashful. After all, if it is an adversary---why aren't they making a direct approach if it's an advantage? If if was an enemy sneaking up on you, it is so you don't see them coming and can't prepare.

Even when we know now that it isn't any enemy---it's Daryl!---why is he sneaking up instead of walking up directly...in fact, even after he reveals himself as a friendly he has still made someone else remain in the shadows for the all-clear , someone he thought shouldn't come directly out yet?

 

It's a fun debate.

[mandolin]

But we know the real reason. Because: TV. 

 

Same as when people who can make headshots all day long miss, or when those that always miss make a critical shot, etc, etc.

 

:P

[Nashville]

I hate to disagree with you. But I will : - )

1) Bears don't growl on the hunt. Nor do panthers (or cougar/mountain lion/whatever you call them where you live). Nor do snakes. Yes, they can and do hunt at night for rodents. rustle leaves etc., and if a person approaches they will strike.

2.) Out in the open is exposed, yes. But going from light into dark, and your eyes not having a chance to adjust, is bad tactics. Someone in the brush, remaining hidden, while looking at a silhouette backlighted, has advantage.

She also does not have any idea how many possible adversaries there are; while she is easily identified as a lone individual.

She does not have any idea what weapons she could be facing; the opposition could easily see she has the katana.

She could not see any booby-trap or what is called an "automatic ambush" set-up. The opposition could see clear ground around her.

 

Really not that different than a cop going into a dark house from outside; not hearing a threat made does not indicate lack of danger.

In the open?...A perp in the house could see the cop approaching the house in the open yet that doesn't mean her safety increases by direct approach into the darkness.

Indirect approach is better in both cases; using the angles to lower vulnerability.

 

As far as bashfulness:

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread

Discretion is the better part of valor.

Failing to plan is planning to fail.

etc.

Sneaky isn't really being bashful. After all, if it is an adversary---why aren't they making a direct approach if it's an advantage? If if was an enemy sneaking up on you, it is so you don't see them coming and can't prepare.

Even when we know now that it isn't any enemy---it's Daryl!---why is he sneaking up instead of walking up directly...in fact, even after he reveals himself as a friendly he has still made someone else remain in the shadows for the all-clear , someone he thought shouldn't come directly out yet?

 

It's a fun debate.

 

Yep!  Truthfully, I thought it was a dumbass move myself; I was just playing devil's advocate, as well as trying to think up any teevee reason the writers might've had to make a survival-savvy character act so bone-headed.  :D