Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
ElectricBoogaloo

The Walking Dead in the Media

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:

SAG award nomination:

Outstanding Action Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Comedy or Drama Series

That seems kinda morbid given that a stuntman died during filming this season, the cause of which I understand is still under investigation.  Even though the award would be for season 7, the nomination would have occurred after the fatality.

Edited by SnarkyTart · Reason: clarity

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/14/2017 at 0:31 PM, ElectricBoogaloo said:

SAG award nomination:

Outstanding Action Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Comedy or Drama Series

Wait, for THIS show?  Oh, wait, it's for the stunt people, not the actors?  That's gotta sting.  lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

‘The Walking Dead’s Cooper Andrews Cast In ‘Shazam!’
by Amanda N'Duka  December 19, 2017  
http://deadline.com/2017/12/the-walking-deads-cooper-andrews-shazam-new-line-1202229944/

Quote

EXCLUSIVE: Cooper Andrews, who co-stars as Jerry, loyalist to the Kingdom, on AMC’s The Walking Dead, has come aboard the DC Comics universe in New Line’s David F. Sandberg-directed Shazam! Zachary Levi is stars as the title character, who’s the adult superhero version of Billy Batson, played by Asher Angel.

Billy is able to transform into Shazam by uttering the moniker, an acronym of the ancient world gods and historical figures Solomon, Hercules, Atlas, Zeus, Achilles and Mercury. Andrews will play the foster parent at the group home where Billy lives.

Edited by tv echo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The award winners will be announced by ComicBook.com on Facebook at 7 pm ET on December 28, 2017...

2017 ComicBook.com Golden Issue Awards Promo [VIDEO]
By COMICBOOK.COM STAFF - December 21, 2017
http://comicbook.com/2017/12/21/video-2017-comicbook-com-golden-issue-awards-promo/

The 2017 ComicBook.com Golden Issue Awards Nominations for TV
By CHARLIE RIDGELY - December 21, 2017
http://comicbook.com/tv-shows/2017/12/21/2017-golden-issue-awards-nominees-tv/

Quote

Welcome to the 2017 ComicBook.com Golden Issue Awards, where we here at ComicBook.com take a look back at the year that was and choose the best of the best in comics and comic book-related media.
*  *  *
To be considered for an award, the series needed to air episodes at some point in 2017 and be based on a comic book or graphic novel. It's as simple as that.
*  *  *
SLIDE 1/12 – BEST RETURNING TV SERIES
...
The nominees are:
Arrow (The CW)
Agents of SHIELD (ABC)
Legends of Tomorrow (The CW)
Riverdale (The CW)
Fear the Walking Dead (AMC)
*  *  *
SLIDE 3/12 – BEST TV ACTOR
...
The nominees are:
Lennie James as Morgan Jones - The Walking Dead
Jon Bernthal as Frank Castle - The Punisher
Michael Cerveris as Professor Pyg - Gotham
Rhenzy Feliz as Alex Wilder - Runaways
Dan Stevens as David Haller - Legion
*  *  *
SLIDE 5/12 – BEST ENSEMBLE CAST
...
The nominees are:
Marvel's Runaways (Hulu)
Legends of Tomorrow (The CW)
Gotham (FOX)
Fear the Walking Dead (AMC)
Legion (FX)
*  *  *
SLIDE 6/12 – BEST TV HERO
...
The nominees are:
Alicia Clark (Alycia Debnam-Carey) - Fear the Walking Dead
White Canary (Caity Lotz) - Legends of Tomorrow
Jessica Jones (Krysten Ritter) - The Defenders
The Tick (Peter Serafinowicz) - The Tick
Supergirl (Melissa Benoist) - Supergirl
*  *  *
SLIDE 7/12 – BEST TV VILLAIN
...
The nominees are:
Lenny (Aubrey Plaza) - Legion
Negan (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) - The Walking Dead
Penguin (Robin Lord Taylor) - Gotham
Herr Starr (Pip Torrens) - Preacher
Billy Russo (Ben Barnes) - The Punisher
*  *  *
SLIDE 10/12 – MOST SHOCKING MOMENT
...
The nominees are:
"Frank's Interrogation" - The Punisher
"Tommy Merlyn as Earth-X Prometheus" - Arrow
"Madison Kills Troy" - Fear the Walking Dead
"Butch Revealed as Solomon Grundy" - Gotham
"Lian Yu Explosion" - Arrow
*  *  *
SLIDE 11/12 – MOST TRAGIC DEATH
...
The nominations are:
Martin Stein - Legends of Tomorrow
Shiva the Tiger - The Walking Dead
Sasha Williams - The Walking Dead
Ofelia Salazar - Fear the Walking Dead
The Patriot - Agents of SHIELD
*  *  *
SLIDE 12/12 – BEST EPISODE
...
The nominees are:
"Crisis on Earth-X" - Arrowverse
"Bury Me Here" - The Walking Dead
"Chapter 7" - Legion
"Home" - The Punisher
"Worst Behavior" - The Defenders

Edited by tv echo

Share this post


Link to post

I wasn't really sure which topic this goes under, so I will just put it here.  There isn't much else going on.  Of course when the show was on air, their wasn't much going on either.

They talk about Carl's real life dad and Carl.  If this story is true, I wonder if it played any role in Carl getting bitten, and I assume will get killed off the show.

Could be considered a spoiler, so click at your own risk.

http://blindgossip.com/?p=80518

There wasn't much being done on the show with Carl anyway.  The cast really needs to be trimmed down by a bunch.  Of course if the Saviors ever get taken out, that can only help matters.  And oh by the way, someone needs to take out the trash (people) too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Huh, now that is interesting. I know nothing about Chandler or his father but my first thought when his father posted that message about AMC and Gimple...uh oh, looks like someone is angry they lost their income. I'm not kidding, that was my very first thought. Why else make such a fuss? You don't see parents of kids in movies or tv franchises make such noise when they are off the show/movie. Unless they are living off of their kid. And in this case apparently also living off of the people at the location where they film. If that article is true.

I don't see his father's anger as anything else really. It can't be on behalf of his son because his son has every opportunity open to him. From what I read here he has another movie, he has music, he has college and enough money that he bought a house at freaking age 17. Most kids aren't that lucky, not even close. And usually parents are happy when their children have so many opportunities and can afford them to boot.

Edited by Smad
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, icemiser69 said:

hey talk about Carl's real life dad and Carl.  If this story is true, I wonder if it played any role in Carl getting bitten, and I assume will get killed off the show.

Could be considered a spoiler, so click at your own risk.

http://blindgossip.com/?p=80518

Snort.  That is one the least blind, blind items I've ever read.  There was no attempt at subtlety there.  LOL.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/24/2017 at 2:14 PM, icemiser69 said:

I wasn't really sure which topic this goes under, so I will just put it here.  There isn't much else going on.  Of course when the show was on air, their wasn't much going on either.

They talk about Carl's real life dad and Carl.  If this story is true, I wonder if it played any role in Carl getting bitten, and I assume will get killed off the show.

Could be considered a spoiler, so click at your own risk.

http://blindgossip.com/?p=80518

There wasn't much being done on the show with Carl anyway.  The cast really needs to be trimmed down by a bunch.  Of course if the Saviors ever get taken out, that can only help matters.  And oh by the way, someone needs to take out the trash (people) too.

I saw this.  I actually saw that post when it was first posted and before it was "solved".  You could tell it was talking about Chandler's dad.  

If this is true, it's kind of weird.  I could see AMC and the show and people in town being annoyed with Chandler's father because of the tours he does.  Maybe Chandler's dad is annoying on set.  But since Chandler was let go shortly before his 18th birthday, you'd have to think his new contract would apply to him being a legal adult now, right?  Once Chandler was 18, it's not like he'd need a parent with him on set since he'd be a legal adult.  So if Chandler's dad was really the problem, they could have just said "Hey, once you're 18, we'd prefer your dad not be around as much".  Maybe they did say this and Chandler didn't like it?  Maybe Chandler was a problem too?  I don't know a lot about Chandler, but from how Andrew Lincoln and other cast members talk about him, they always say he's very professional and mature and I know Andrew has even joked in the past how Chandler was more adult than most of the actual adults :/

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎12‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 10:07 AM, jls1792 said:

I saw this.  I actually saw that post when it was first posted and before it was "solved".  You could tell it was talking about Chandler's dad.  

If this is true, it's kind of weird.  I could see AMC and the show and people in town being annoyed with Chandler's father because of the tours he does.  Maybe Chandler's dad is annoying on set.  But since Chandler was let go shortly before his 18th birthday, you'd have to think his new contract would apply to him being a legal adult now, right?  Once Chandler was 18, it's not like he'd need a parent with him on set since he'd be a legal adult.  So if Chandler's dad was really the problem, they could have just said "Hey, once you're 18, we'd prefer your dad not be around as much".  Maybe they did say this and Chandler didn't like it?  Maybe Chandler was a problem too?  I don't know a lot about Chandler, but from how Andrew Lincoln and other cast members talk about him, they always say he's very professional and mature and I know Andrew has even joked in the past how Chandler was more adult than most of the actual adults :/

He may be legally an adult now, but its possible that there is a situation going on that its not that easy to separate Chander's father from production. Who knows how "serious" Chandler's representation is?  What if his father is acting as a manager?  What if he has no lawyers or agents that are of a caliber to counter a "stage dad"?  I could see a scenario where Chandler's father or his reps were spamming the works in negotiations and no one from the show can take Chandler aside and intervene because of contract negotiations.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ParadoxLost said:

He may be legally an adult now, but its possible that there is a situation going on that its not that easy to separate Chander's father from production. Who knows how "serious" Chandler's representation is?  What if his father is acting as a manager?  What if he has no lawyers or agents that are of a caliber to counter a "stage dad"?  I could see a scenario where Chandler's father or his reps were spamming the works in negotiations and no one from the show can take Chandler aside and intervene because of contract negotiations.

This was my thought as well; that while Chandler Riggs was a minor, his father had himself established as CR's manager in a legally binding manner which extended past Chandler's coming of legal age.  A 5 or 10 year management contract, for example, containing specific declaration the contract couldn't be prematurely voided when/after Chandler reached age 18.

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/30/2017 at 10:07 AM, jls1792 said:

I saw this.  I actually saw that post when it was first posted and before it was "solved".  You could tell it was talking about Chandler's dad.  

If this is true, it's kind of weird.  I could see AMC and the show and people in town being annoyed with Chandler's father because of the tours he does.  Maybe Chandler's dad is annoying on set.  But since Chandler was let go shortly before his 18th birthday, you'd have to think his new contract would apply to him being a legal adult now, right?  Once Chandler was 18, it's not like he'd need a parent with him on set since he'd be a legal adult.  So if Chandler's dad was really the problem, they could have just said "Hey, once you're 18, we'd prefer your dad not be around as much".  Maybe they did say this and Chandler didn't like it?  Maybe Chandler was a problem too?  I don't know a lot about Chandler, but from how Andrew Lincoln and other cast members talk about him, they always say he's very professional and mature and I know Andrew has even joked in the past how Chandler was more adult than most of the actual adults :/

That was a weird item. It mentioned someone not having a license like the others but there was no mention action taken because of that, so maybe it was never required. And if his side gig was as haphazard as they wrote, who would even believe his threat?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Looks like Norman isn't too happy about Chandler's exit.

Norman Reedus Warns 'The Walking Dead' To Be Careful After Carl

Quote

Norman Reedus doesn't sound thrilled about Chandler Riggs' departure from The Walking Dead and now finds himself asking, "Who's left?"

The actor who has played Daryl Dixon on the AMC zombie drama since its first season opened up about Riggs' sudden exit while chatting with EW. "The people that started this show, to me, are the heart of the show," Reedus said. "When you lose those key members, it's such a big blow to the show, and to the fans, and to us that are there. Who's left? There's only a few of us left out of all those people. If you wanted to turn it into a totally different show, you get rid of those people. But if you want to hold on to what made the show special, you've got to be very careful what you do with those people."

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds like Norman is very much aware that AMC could kill Daryl off despite the character's popularity like it did with Carl.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, SimoneS said:

Sounds like Norman is very much aware that AMC could kill Daryl off despite the character's popularity like it did with Carl.

Maybe Norman wants to be fired? I don't know if he watches the show or pays attention to what his character is doing but the Daryl hate has been ramping up since he got Glenn killed. And since then it's been one idiotic action after another. Though really the only way you could probably tell is if the merchandise for Mr. Dixon has gone down. Which I'm sure is all AMC cares about anyway, the money.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Smad said:

Maybe Norman wants to be fired? I don't know if he watches the show or pays attention to what his character is doing but the Daryl hate has been ramping up since he got Glenn killed. And since then it's been one idiotic action after another. Though really the only way you could probably tell is if the merchandise for Mr. Dixon has gone down. Which I'm sure is all AMC cares about anyway, the money.

I highly doubt that Norman wants to be fired, no actor does. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, SimoneS said:

I highly doubt that Norman wants to be fired, no actor does. 

Get off a sinking boat while you still can?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Smad said:

Get off a sinking boat while you still can?

Most actors are just like the rest of us, they like steady work because they have families to support and bills to pay. They aren't happy to rush into unemployed, especially when they have steady work that pays well. 

Kudos to Angela! Nice to see a woman of color taking on the role of showrunner. It is so rare, especially for Asian women.

Edited by SimoneS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Artsda said:

Urgh. That's bad news. Don't keep it in-house. They need fresh blood on the creative team. An actual show runner and better writers. Angela Kang did stinkers like 'Still' and 'Coda' so her promotion is supposed to be good news? Seriously AMC, how stupid are you?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, SimoneS said:

I highly doubt that Norman wants to be fired, no actor does. 

Yeah, he wants to stay on "forever".

I laugh at Gimple about his so-called "bravery" at killing Carl.  If he were really brave, he would kill Daryl; who, as much as I like Norman, has had no story since the Claimers.  To be fair, no one really does, but IMO there were more directions with Carl.  The show has a remarkable lack of planning for the future.  Not sure how far I will make it into the second half of the season.

Kudos to Angela as well!  Even if I don't like the direction of the show, millions of others do, so it is good to see. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/11/2018 at 10:42 AM, jls1792 said:

Looks like Norman isn't too happy about Chandler's exit.

Norman Reedus Warns 'The Walking Dead' To Be Careful After Carl

EH, looks like Norman is warning TPTB not to kill him off the show (like they would).

On the one hand, glad to have a woman in charge. On the other, hate that it's a writer who wrote the worst episodes of the series. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

As far as I can tell, here's a list of the episodes Angela Kang wrote or co-wrote; might as well consider all of them.

206  "Secrets"   Angela Kang   November 20, 2011
211  "Judge, Jury, Executioner"  Angela Kang   March 4, 2012
305  "Say the Word"  Angela Kang November 11, 2012
311   "I Ain't a Judas"   Angela Kang   February 24, 2013
402   "Infected"  Angela Kang   October 20, 2013
412   "Still"   Angela Kang   March 2, 2014
416   "A"   Scott M. Gimple & Angela Kang   March 30, 2014
503   "Four Walls and a Roof" Angela Kang & Corey Reed October 26, 2014
508   "Coda"   Angela Kang   November 30, 2014
515   "Try"   Angela Kang   March 22, 2015
603   "Thank You"   Angela Kang   October 25, 2015   
610   "The Next World"   Angela Kang & Corey Reed   February 21, 2016
613   "The Same Boat"   Angela Kang   March 13, 2016
703   "The Cell"   Angela Kang   November 6, 2016
707   "Sing Me a Song" Angela Kang & Corey Reed   December 4, 2016
714   “The Other Side” Angela Kang  March 19, 2017
716   “The First Day of the Rest of Your Life” Scott M. Gimple, Angela Kang, Matthew Negrete April 2, 2017
805  "The Big Scary U"  David Leslie Johnson & Angela Kang  November 19, 2017
806  "The King, the Widow, and Rick" Angela Kang & Corey Reed November 26, 2017
808   "How It's Gotta Be" David Leslie Johnson & Angela Kang December 10, 2017

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Hmm - Anglea wrote some stinkers there, along with some good ones: "I Ain't a Judas." Really, anyone or anything can't help being an improvement over Gimple. He did invent the insane Garbage People trash, didn't he?

I don't think even John Steinbeck could save this trainwreck, nonsensical idiocy, but I guess we'll find out.

OH, and just what is a "Chief Content Officer" anyway? Is it some made-up bullshit title that will keep his sticky fingers off the story?

Edited by AngelaHunter
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

That list of episodes doesn't exactly make things better for me. I mean she co-wrote this MSF. Which parts did she write? Because it was full of freaking speeches (as it's been for 2 Seasons now). And people don't talk like real people (speeches aside). In what world would Carol ever say 'your majesty' when no one from the Kingdom is around? When has she ever called him that, period? Guess it was too much to hope for that AMC might go all out and hire fresh blood, you know some people who actually know what they are doing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Smad said:

Guess it was too much to hope for that AMC might go all out and hire fresh blood, you know some people who actually know what they are doing.

You mean hire actual grownups with talent who have some idea as to how real people think, talk and act during times of crisis, instead of teenagers who are huge comic book fans? Well, I guess we could hope. I mean, I know Jerry is a huge favorite around here, but I just see him as one-dimensional comic relief - the court jester - who isn't particularly funny, seems to be mentally delayed and is being used by the King - another dreary comic book cutout.  If they want to aim this show at children, they need to cut out the graphic gore and air it at a much earlier timeslot.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

OH, and just what is a "Chief Content Officer" anyway? Is it some made-up bullshit title that will keep his sticky fingers off the story?

That is the question.  As much as I'd like to  confidently state that the show couldn't possibly get any worse with Kang as the showrunner, it actually could as long as we don't know what the hell a "Chief Content Officer" does.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

You mean hire actual grownups with talent who have some idea as to how real people think, talk and act during times of crisis, instead of teenagers who are huge comic book fans?

Hey now, that's a low enough bar for any show. Writers who can write actual people. And I don't think they are teenagers. After all teenagers would know how teenagers talk and think. How many times over the years have people complained that Carl and Beth got things to say that made no sense for children their age? That they don't sound like that.

22 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I mean, I know Jerry is a huge favorite around here, but I just see him as one-dimensional comic relief - the court jester - who isn't particularly funny, seems to be mentally delayed and is being used by the King - another dreary comic book cutout.  If they want to aim this show at children, they need to cut out the graphic gore and air it at a much earlier timeslot.

I like Jerry fine as just that, comic relief. This shows needs a little light spirit in the midst of all the dreary stuff. And Jerry seems just natural at it, unlike Beth. The actor who plays the King saying Jerry would be the best candidate taking over his position should he die, just no. Jerry is not grounded enough for that.

The show needs to get away from the stuff that only works in comics. That's been a major problem for me with Ezekiel/Shiva and Negan. They are so comic book-y that I'm always taken out of the show when it comes to them. Some things just simply don't work when you translate it from a comic page to live action. It needs to stop, though it's way too late now IMO. Get back to the survivalist horror wrapped in a character drama. Shrink that damn cast down, write interesting characters and character interactions. I miss those early Seasons. Have people actually talk like normal human beings instead. And no one talks in speeches. No characters acting to the masses (King) or 7 years olds wrapped in a man's body talking about pee-pee pants.

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

OH, and just what is a "Chief Content Officer" anyway? Is it some made-up bullshit title that will keep his sticky fingers off the story?

From the sound of it, he will be in charge of all TWD content. Meaning TWD, FTWD and maybe even the games. Basically he makes sure it's one universe. The problem a lot of people are missing because they are too buy celebrating that he's finally gone as showrunner, is that he's still in charge. Angela Kang chosen as showrunner makes perfect sense in that regard, she's been his right hand woman forever and he can still do whatever he wants because she is under his thumb. So they now have a showrunner who will still do whatever Gimple and AMC want without being a problem for them. NOTHING WILL CHANGE.

Edited by Smad
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Smad said:

From the sound of it, he will be in charge of all TWD content.

So he's getting a promotion for ruining this show and stomping it into the dirt? I don't watch and have never watched any of that other stuff. Maybe I will if my masochism reaches critical levels.

59 minutes ago, Smad said:

No characters acting to the masses (King) or 7 years olds wrapped in a man's body talking about pee-pee pants.

Pee-pee pants and shitting pants and I'm hard,  my dick, my balls, my ballsack, rubbed one out - TPTB think this is riveting, exciting, sexy or whatever, coming from a 50-year old man? I find it distasteful and ridiculous in the extreme. Well, it would appeal to 14-year old boys, so there's that. I guess.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

So he's getting a promotion for ruining this show and stomping it into the dirt? I don't watch and have never watched any of that other stuff. Maybe I will if my masochism reaches critical levels.

Pee-pee pants and shitting pants and I'm hard,  my dick, my balls, my ballsack, rubbed one out - TPTB think this is riveting, exciting, sexy or whatever, coming from a 50-year old man? I find it distasteful and ridiculous in the extreme. Well, it would appeal to 14-year old boys, so there's that. I guess.

Yep, his new position is basically a freaking promotion. The idiocy in AMC runs deep.

The way Negan talks is exactly why I can't take him seriously. He's not the least bit intimidating. Simon is intimidating, as long as he doesn't speechify like in 8x08. I can understand why the Negan of the comics would be a menace, despite his little boy language. The guy is Tyreese level of huge, physically. But even then, in live action no matter how you look, that sort of talk is stupid.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Smad said:

The idiocy in AMC runs deep.

AMC makes millions of dollars from TWD every week, no matter what we think of it.  That's why they're doing what they're doing.  Until the show's ratings suffer significantly and advertisers pull out, they're going to keep on.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, raven said:

Until the show's ratings suffer significantly and advertisers pull out, they're going to keep on.

Wasn't it 17 million for the S7 premiere and now they are down to 7 million and dropping? If that's not significant, I don't know what is. My impression was that they wanted the show to go on for many more Seasons. That's not going to happen if AMC doesn't have the balls for major changes.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I know ratings are down, but as far as money:

They seemed pretty happy in November.

Quote

Third quarter net income was $87 million, or $1.35 per share, compared with $65 million, or 91 cents per share a year ago.

He credited The Walking Dead franchise (which he said could keep rolling for years, if not decades), though the newest, eighth season began after the quarter’s Sept. 30 close, and other top-performing shows like Better Call Saul.

Maybe there's something more recent, I don't know.  Maybe ratings aren't as important as money.  I'm sure they have some kind of barometer; are advertisers pulling out, that kind of thing. 

I don't think the show is going to be cancelled any time soon and I don't think AMC cares if it wins any awards.  Of course, the promotion of Kang and moving of Gimple could be a reaction to the ratings, maybe they are losing confidence in Gimple but I don't think so.

Just because I think the show is repetitive and lacking direction, and that Negan is the worst, doesn't mean everyone does, sadly.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, raven said:

I know ratings are down, but as far as money:

They seemed pretty happy in November.

Maybe there's something more recent, I don't know.  Maybe ratings aren't as important as money.  I'm sure they have some kind of barometer; are advertisers pulling out, that kind of thing. 

I don't think the show is going to be cancelled any time soon and I don't think AMC cares if it wins any awards.  Of course, the promotion of Kang and moving of Gimple could be a reaction to the ratings, maybe they are losing confidence in Gimple but I don't think so.

Just because I think the show is repetitive and lacking direction, and that Negan is the worst, doesn't mean everyone does, sadly.

That money means nothing. They have multiple lawsuits going against them. All the way back to Frank Darabont up to Robert Kirkman himself. I'm pretty sure the total of all those lawsuits is well over 1 billion dollars. If those lawsuits go through, they can kiss a lot of money good bye. That's why, if they want to continue the show for more than 1-2 more Seasons, their main focus should have been to make it a quality show again. Instead they seem committed to running it into the ground.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Smad said:

That money means nothing.

We'll have to agree to disagree.  Money is everything.   Would AMC like to have a well reviewed show that makes money?  Sure.  But they'll take one that's not so well reviewed as long as it's making them money; that's why they're in business.

The lawsuits will probably be settled.  Canceling the show won't change that.

ETA - there are still some things about the show I like and am interested in seeing.  Unfortunately there is more crap that I have to wade through to get to that stuff.  Once I get tired of doing that, I won't watch anymore.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, raven said:

We'll have to agree to disagree.  Money is everything.   Would AMC like to have a well reviewed show that makes money?  Sure.  But they'll take one that's not so well reviewed as long as it's making them money; that's why they're in business.

The lawsuits will probably be settled.  Canceling the show won't change that.

Except when ratings continue to slip, advertisers will pull out. For them it's just a business like it is for AMC. If no one watches TWD, the advertisers have no need to pay AMC to play their ads. Or AMC can only play them for less and less money.

Doesn't matter if the lawsuits get settled. Those people won't be happy with a few million. TWD made big money, so they want their share of it.

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, Smad said:

If no one watches TWD, the advertisers have no need to pay AMC to play their ads. Or AMC can only play them for less and less money.

Right, the money is everything.  I'm sure AMC has a breaking point, for lack of a better term, of slippage (x number of viewers = x number of dollars).  TWD is (I think, and I'm not interested enough to look it up) still their highest rated show, still making good money, no advertisers are out (I guess).   Does AMC want to get back viewers, sure, but their reasons for viewers leaving may not include "because the show sucks".

28 minutes ago, Smad said:

Doesn't matter if the lawsuits get settled.

I don't think the lawsuits matter at all as to whether or not TWD continues, but I was responding to your comment about their being lawsuits at all.  As soon as they were filed, AMC put aside a nice slush fund to pay for whatever they may have to pay, I'm sure.  To clarify, I don't think the lawsuits will be enough financially to take AMC down, their share value is going up.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, raven said:

Money is everything.   Would AMC like to have a well reviewed show that makes money? 

Sure, everyone would like critical acclaim for their creations/productions, but it seems "critically acclaimed" is not usually what draws the bulk of mainstream audiences, although there is certainly an audience for such properties. No acclaim for revolting trash-about-trash like The Kardashians or Honey Booboo, but they must make money and yes, of course, "money is everything."  I've seen that there are a lot of people who are rabid fans of Negan and are all for TWD, even with the depths to which it has sunk. There must be people eating up all the stupid merchandise/action figures/spin-offs and whatever else is being pimped out too.

 

1 hour ago, raven said:

.  I'm sure they have some kind of barometer; are advertisers pulling out, that kind of thing. 

Seems the only thing that would trigger sponsor bail-out is if Negan slips in a *gasp* "fuck" somewhere  and we know that is one thing that will never happen. He can rant endlessly about his dick and pricks and his balls, but saying what he does with them is a biiiiiiiig no-no.

Personally, this whole season is just one blur of guns and darkness and explosions interspersed with speeches and non-sensical stupidity in my mind - a kaleidoscope of WTF-ery. It makes "The Punisher" look like a documentary and actually by now I'd find the appearance of"Jigsaw" more realistic and sympathetic than the Trash People, Negan or Simon who all seem like exaggerated video game villains. 

TWD has nearly devolved, IMO, into "so bad it's good" where people watch just to jeer at it. I say "nearly" because it's not entertaining enough to reach that category. What does AMC care about scathing reviews? I'm sure they "cry all the way to the bank."  My sincere wish is that no one watch the next opener, but that's not going to happen.

So: How DID Eugene get all those walkers to leave, anyway? Tune in next season to find out that and more!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

So he's getting a promotion for ruining this show and stomping it into the dirt?

Personally, I’m hoping it’s a case of AMC kicking Gimple upstairs and out of reach of anything meaningful before he can do any more damage to one of its most popular current series - but I ain’t holding my breath.  :P

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'm hoping the same thing, but without knowing what exactly a "Chief Content Officer" is I'm not holding my breath either.  I've realized I'm past the point of really expecting much.  The show is at that point.  What is Gimple going to do, make sure both shows in the franchise are equally terrible and nonsensical?  As long as it continues to draw enough even diminished ratings to make money it seems unlikely we're going to see any large changing of course, particularly not if AMC is promoting Kang, who seems to be largely responsible for a greatest hits of episodes I'm likely to use as a break to run to the store or do some vacuuming or something during marathons.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Nashville said:

Personally, I’m hoping it’s a case of AMC kicking Gimple upstairs and out of reach of anything meaningful before he can do any more damage to one of its most popular current series

Yeah, as I said at first. I was thinking it was some invented baffle-speak title where he'd be shoved into a fancy office and given some sort of harmless make-work. "Here Mr. Gimple. As Chief Officer of Content, you need to read the scripts and make sure all commas are in pairs on every second page and red-pencil any that aren't. Very important." Sighs of relief are heard in the halls. "That should keep him busy and out of trouble."

But if there's no one any better (or at least no worse) than he to take over, what difference will it make?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×