The Walking Dead in the Media

[Raven1707]

Found this:

http://contentmarketinginstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Chief-Content-Officer-Job-Description-Sample.pdf

I'm thinking it's been tweaked in this particular instance.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Tom Payne discusses the new season of The Walking Dead:

[Smad]

Darabont is suing AMC again. Some more.

 

http://variety.com/2018/tv/news/walking-dead-lawsuit-frank-darabont-sues-amc-again-1202668281

[Janimo]

More financial problems for AMC:
http://uproxx.com/tv/the-walking-dead-lawsuit-john-bernecker-cheap/

[Nashville]

On 1/24/2018 at 1:19 PM, Janimo said:

More financial problems for AMC:
http://uproxx.com/tv/the-walking-dead-lawsuit-john-bernecker-cheap/

I found this line from AMC’s response interesting, if more than a little sad...

”Out of respect for the family, we will have no further comment on this litigation.”

...which basically means AMC has already decided upon a defense strategy of Blame the Victim.  :(

[tv echo]

Every time I listen to Kirkman talk, I just think, 'What a jerk'...

'The Walking Dead's Robert Kirkman Confirms Whether Negan Is A First Or Last Name
By CAMERON BONOMOLO - February 19, 2018
http://comicbook.com/thewalkingdead/2018/02/19/the-walking-dead-negan-first-last-name/

Quote

The Walking Dead's Negan is "definitely" a first name, creator and executive producer Robert Kirkman said during a Walker Stalker Cruise panel alongside series stars Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Norman Reedus.

A sea of fans assembled at the Q&A session wanted to know: what's Negan's full name? The crowd hurled cries of various crude epithets.

"Negan A—hole?" said Morgan, who plays the bat-wielding villain. "Why yes, you nailed it."

"That works," said Kirkman. "I haven't given Negan a last name."

"No, he doesn't have a last name," Morgan added. "It's like Madonna, Cher, and Negan."

A minute later, a persistent fan asked again: what's Negan's full name?

Kirkman: It's actually Negan A—hole. Yeah, I don't know, I do things to entertain myself that — then when the comic gets turned into a TV show, its super weird. But I just think it's funny to not give characters last names because I don't know, it's interesting to me. It really doesn't play well on panels though, I'll tell you that much. But when I'm at home and I'm writing, I'm like, I'm not doing this, because you gotta come up with a list of names and then pick one and its never interesting.

Morgan: Do we think Negan is a first name or a last name?

Kirkman: Negan is definitely a first name.

"His last name is Smith, there we go," joked an almost-always sarcastic Kirkman, attempting to placate the crowd.

Edited February 20, 2018 by tv echo

[bad things are bad]

Negan...Kramer? Kosmo Neegan??

 

Uproxx is saying that Maggie might not be back for S9

http://uproxx.com/tv/scott-gimple-lauren-cohan-walking-dead/

[Nashville]

5 hours ago, tv echo said:

Every time I listen to Kirkman talk, I just think, 'What a jerk'...

'The Walking Dead's Robert Kirkman Confirms Whether Negan Is A First Or Last Name
By CAMERON BONOMOLO - February 19, 2018
http://comicbook.com/thewalkingdead/2018/02/19/the-walking-dead-negan-first-last-name/

Really?  I always figured it was a reference to a local school/sports collective.  Kinda like “We are Marshall”.  But different.

(Actually, I’ve always thought Negan’s full name was Negan Von Fuckstick.  The family similarity is obvious.)

 

3 hours ago, bad things are bad said:

Uproxx is saying that Maggie might not be back for S9

http://uproxx.com/tv/scott-gimple-lauren-cohan-walking-dead/

Another rat deserting a sinking ship...?

[Smad]

1 hour ago, icemiser69 said:

No great loss.  I loath the character.  That said, TWD has already had one character die during child birth.  I seriously doubt that the writers will head down that same path.  I suppose they could just let Maggie wonder off to parts unknown, leaving her story line up in the air.

Before they can actually off a woman during child birth the woman first has to actually be pregnant. I'm still not convinced Maggie is. Unless Gimple & Co. know nothing about how long human pregnancies are and they gave Maggie an elephant's gestation period. She's in her second trimester and still not showing, odds are she's not actually pregnant.

[festivus]

Never cared about Maggie, but LC should abandon that sinking ship. Swim girl, swim!

Edited February 20, 2018 by festivus

[Nashville]

13 minutes ago, Smad said:

Before they can actually off a woman during child birth the woman first has to actually be pregnant. I'm still not convinced Maggie is. Unless Gimple & Co. know nothing about how long human pregnancies are and they gave Maggie an elephant's gestation period. She's in her second trimester and still not showing, odds are she's not actually pregnant.

I’m not absolutely certain how conversant Gimp is with the physical act which initiates pregnancy, so ignorance on the actual gestational process wouldn’t surprise the hell outta me.

[nodorothyparker]

16 hours ago, Nashville said:

I’m not absolutely certain how conversant Gimp is with the physical act which initiates pregnancy, so ignorance on the actual gestational process wouldn’t surprise the hell outta me.

So we think it's possible he really does believe Bisquick and pancakes are involved?  Suddenly the truth behind one of the dumber than average bits of dialogue over the past few seasons comes out.

[bad things are bad]

If Maggie doesn't have the baby, and Carl is killed off, it makes this show that much more nihilistic. There has to be some hope for a future. 

[Nashville]

28 minutes ago, bad things are bad said:

If Maggie doesn't have the baby, and Carl is killed off, it makes this show that much more nihilistic. There has to be some hope for a future. 

Oh, I dunno.  TPTB could just take The Negan Show on the road, get to random indiscriminate killing, and let God get to sorting.  

I’m not going to watch that shit, of course, but still....

[rab01]

5 hours ago, icemiser69 said:

I have no clue how much story line time has passed from the beginning of the series until now.  This series could seriously use a date time stamp at the beginning of each episode.

I feel like it's only been about three weeks of show time between Glenn's death and now.  I think we saw Savior's first collection run on ASZ within a day or so of the murders, then we saw them come back and kill the congresswoman's son a week later and then the war started before the next collection run.  (I may have forgotten one ASZ collection run but that would still be less than a month.)  Similarly, I think we saw 2 collection runs at the Kingdom, the first with pigs and the second with melons.  As crazy as it sounds, I don't think they're messing up the continuity on Maggie's pregnancy.  We just have to ignore how the actors are aging ... 

[Smad]

52 minutes ago, rab01 said:

I feel like it's only been about three weeks of show time between Glenn's death and now.  I think we saw Savior's first collection run on ASZ within a day or so of the murders, then we saw them come back and kill the congresswoman's son a week later and then the war started before the next collection run.  (I may have forgotten one ASZ collection run but that would still be less than a month.)  Similarly, I think we saw 2 collection runs at the Kingdom, the first with pigs and the second with melons.  As crazy as it sounds, I don't think they're messing up the continuity on Maggie's pregnancy.  We just have to ignore how the actors are aging ... 

But then there is Judith. I don't remember but did we know before or after the time jump in 6B that Maggi was pregnant? The time jump itself is 2 months of pregnancy then. And Judith was still much smaller then compared to what she is now. I know actors aging and what not but they always were careful with Judith, hence so many babies/little girls playing her. And Maggie said herself she is in her second trimester. She should be at the middle or end of said second trimester by now so she should be showing.

[Nashville]

1 hour ago, rab01 said:

I feel like it's only been about three weeks of show time between Glenn's death and now.

FYI - Most of the TWD wikis still aren’t caught up on Season 8; depending upon the source, though, it’s been somewhere between 12-26 days since Glenn got bashed.

[Artsda]

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

When a 'big' name like LC is looking for an out, you know a series is struggling.

Of course, it could be more about Maggie - sorry, ahem, I meant "The Widow" - only getting a few minutes an episode every other episode or two, as well.

I think its obvious how they'll kill her off, should it come to pass. 
(hint:  it involves hostages, a fake deity, a spineless ex-leader, a group of people who do the exact opposite of their namesake and feces hitting a spinning wind machine)

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

On 2/25/2018 at 10:15 PM, Artsda said:

Wait a minute... the article leads off with "Outgoing Walking Dead showrunner Scott Gimple"...  Is he really being replaced at the end of this season!?

Assuming they don't actually kill Rick off, then there's a slight chance this show can be pulled back from the precipice.  (won't be holding my breath, though)

[tv echo]

^^^ Scott Gimple has been "promoted" to the newly-created position of Chief Content Officer (overseeing both TWD and FTWD and any other spin-offs), while Angela Kang will be the showrunner for Season 9 of TWD. (Variety)

Another interview with Gimple (ugh!) and some post-mortems...

The Walking Dead EP Scott Gimple Reflects on 'the Ending of an Era' and the Episode's Mysterious Last Shot
By Charlie Mason / February 26 2018, 6:00 AM PST
http://tvline.com/2018/02/26/walking-dead-season-8-finale-spoilers-interview-scott-gimple/

Quote

TVLINE | OK, walk me through the decision to veer again from the comics and kill Carl.
We wanted to tell a version of the comic story that kept emotions similar to what you’d get when reading the [source material] but in different ways, so that the comic-book-reading audience didn’t expect what was going to happen. We plan to do that moving forward as well — sometimes pulling moments from the book in sort of verbatim ways and sometimes in ways that are very different, with the goal of heightening the message in some way. Carl’s death fell into that [category]. This in many ways is sort of the ending of an era for The Walking Dead and the starting of a new one.

TVLINE | Mm-hmm. But why Carl?
He needed to be the person who pushed the world in a certain direction, who put out a certain message. That message might even be denied, but we wanted it to have the incredible weight of coming from this young hero in the most serious of circumstances. And [his demise] can show that this world is still the world of The Walking Dead, where these things happen. It couldn’t have had more gravity [if it had happened to another character].

TVLINE | So, Carl’s dying wish was for everybody to just get along and tell the Saviors, “Bygones.” How on earth is Rick supposed to sell that notion to, say, Glenn’s widow?
I’ll just say that it isn’t a slam-dunk that Rick can just accept the vision that Carl has. Other people may need to try and sell him on it.

TVLINE | Even if Rick gets on board, Negan doesn’t strike me as the type to bury the hatchet unless it’s in someone’s head.
Yeah, not after what happened. [The AHK alliance] messed the Sanctuary up good! And even if Negan really did want to jump into [a cease-fire], he is someone who is very conscious of optics… and his image, so that makes it harder for him to make a deal with the wrong people… or who are maybe looked upon as the wrong people.

TVLINE | What was with that last shot of Rick under the tree? Had he hurt himself deliberately, or was that blood just a side effect of having buried Carl?
Those are great questions that I probably shouldn’t answer. But I will say there are answers to that coming. There’s a great deal of meaning on that shot.

The Walking Dead: Chandler Riggs reveals most painful final scene
DALTON ROSS February 25, 2018 AT 10:22 PM EST
http://ew.com/tv/2018/02/25/walking-dead-chandler-riggs-carl-honor/

Quote

We spoke to Riggs — who also has filmed the movie Inherit the Viper and makes music under the name Eclipse — all about his last days on set, including the most difficult scene for him to film and saying goodbye to the cast and crew. He also reveals his favorite episode ever. (Read what Riggs’ costar Andrew Lincoln had to say here and showrunner Scott M. Gimple’s thoughts here.)
*  *  *
How and when did showrunner Scott M. Gimple explain to you that this time jump from the comic that we first started seeing play out in the season premiere was actually Carl’s vision of what the future could be?
I found out when Scott was telling me that Carl was getting killed off. I was super juiced because I was in the flash-forwards, I guess to just to kind of throw off viewers. So one of my questions to him, was, “So how does that fit in?” He told me that it was Carl’s vision of what the future could be like, and I think it’s definitely possible. So if Rick actually listens to Carl, and really wants to pursue a better life for Judith, that’s what’s he’s going to have to do.
*  *  *
I remember talking to Steven Yeun after Glenn died on the show, and Steven said the whole experience was kind of like getting to see his own funeral. Did you have that same weird sensation, in a way?
Yeah. It was really bizarre because I’ve gotten so close with Carl. I have grown up with him. Really having to say goodbye to that whole part of my life was super, super weird. But kind of a relief in a way knowing that I get to go and do other stuff, and movies, and things like that. It was very bizarre.

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Media rejection of Gimple's explanation for killing off Carl (the first Collider article below quoted from the previous Collider article below, so I decided to post that article as well)...

‘The Walking Dead’ EP Attempts to Explain the Reasoning Behind Carl’s Fate
BY ALLISON KEENE      FEBRUARY 26, 2018
http://collider.com/the-walking-dead-carl-death-explained/

Quote

If you think that there’s a good answer for why Chandler Riggs‘ Carl Grimes was killed off on The Walking Dead, I am sorry to tell you that there is not. Carl is one of a handful of characters that remain on the show from Season 1, which is a meaningful thing for fans. But even beyond that, he’s also a character who is very much alive and well in Robert Kirkman‘s graphic novels. And yes, a TV show is not beholden to doing things exactly as source material dictates (in fact, sometimes it’s much better when it doesn’t), but there still needs to be some reasoning behind the changes. In the case of Carl’s death, I’m not entirely sure there is.
*  *  *

TV Line’s Charlie Mason pushed him though on why Carl, why now, asking: “So, Carl’s dying wish was for everybody to just get along and tell the Saviors, ‘Bygones.’ How on earth is Rick supposed to sell that notion to, say, Glenn’s widow?” Gimple said that “it’s not a slam-dunk” for Rick to accept it. As for Negan?

Yeah, not after what happened. [The AHK alliance] messed the Sanctuary up good! And even if Negan really did want to jump into [a cease-fire], he is someone who is very conscious of optics… and his image, so that makes it harder for him to make a deal with the wrong people… or who are maybe looked upon as the wrong people.

So … what? What was the point then? Yeah, it doesn’t seem like there is much of one. What is the most interesting, perhaps, is that the show has been picked up for a ninth season with a new showrunner, Angela Kang. Kang will now have to clean up this mess and try to not only win fans back, but find ways to have other characters pick up Carl’s comic book story line.

For many fans, Carl’s death is the final straw when it comes to this show, and it may not even matter if Kang can right the ship if Gimple’s reign ends with fans leaving the show en masse. Still, for The Walking Dead faithful, there are surely more twists and turns to anticipate — whether they deserve your attention or not.

‘The Walking Dead’ Midseason Finale Was Perfect for a Show That Hates Its Fans
BY DAVE TRUMBORE      DECEMBER 11, 2017
http://collider.com/the-walking-dead-season-8-midseason-finale-death

Quote

Longtime fans of both Collider and AMC’s The Walking Dead may have noticed that the former’s coverage of the latter has been lessening over the last couple of years. It was never planned to be that way, it just kind of happened. Reviewers, recappers, and readers, myself included, simply lost interest in the weekly bludgeoning of drudgery that the series has become over the years. A good number of fans are sticking with it, even if it looks like the ratings are on their way back down from a series high, but the show itself seems more willing than ever to double-down on just how much they despise the fanbase.
*  *  *
In a Facebook post that’s been deleted/blocked, the elder Riggs (a proxy for the elder Grimes) said the following (via THR):

“Watching Gimple fire my son 2 weeks before his 18th birthday after telling him they wanted him for the next 3 years was disappointing. I never trusted Gimple or AMC, but Chandler did. I know how much it hurt him. But we do absolutely know how lucky we have been to be a part of it all and appreciate all the love from fans all these years!”
*  *  *
In another chat with THR, Gimple didn’t field questions about Season 28, but he does envision the show going to at least Season 10 and beyond. He was understandably yet frustratingly vague or cryptic about the future of the show, except to say that they’re, and I’m paraphrasing here, tired of having to jump through hoops to stick to the comics when the cast of characters between the two are so different. So when it comes to Carl Grimes and his likely exit in the midseason premiere this February 25th, Gimple, the guiding hand behind that particular decision, kept it vague once more:

“It’s all having to do with the greater story of the season. It will be very apparent, the relationship of this awful incident — this very intense story turn — to the greater story.”

That’s fine, I guess, for the folks who are sticking with this story, but for me and many others, The Walking Dead has become just so much background noise. It used to be appointment television for me; now, it’s an unwritten requirement of the job to keep up with it. It’s not worth the effort in this Golden Age of Television. The show’s ever-present barrage of gunfire now fades to white noise, the barely lit scenes featuring vaguely familiar characters I don’t care about march on in succession as the show continues to masquerade as some sort of (literally and metaphorically) dark artistic representation of the soul, or some nonsense. The Walking Dead has taken all the wrong lessons from superior shows like Breaking Bad and even Game of Thrones, and by repeatedly beating their fanbase about the head with their baseball bat, they’re just pushing to see how far they can go before those faithful followers turn rabid and bite back. Or more likely, before they turn off completely.

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

The Walking Dead's Latest Death Is A Tragedy It Will Not Recover From
Paul Tassi   Feb. 26, 2018
https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2018/02/26/the-walking-deads-latest-death-is-a-tragedy-it-will-not-recover-from/#663136a13c87

Quote

Despite all of this, despite the fact that his death was “done well,” I cannot get past how it remains an absolutely terribly decision to kill off Carl in the first place.

No matter what was done the past two episodes, the core of the issue, the decision to kill Carl, was the wrong one, and it’s a death that I do not think The Walking Dead can recover from.
*  *  *
Carl’s death is different than Glenn, Abraham, Sasha, Andrea, Tyreese, Beth or anyone else from the lengthy kill list the show has been building for eight years. The issue is that The Walking Dead is, and has always been, Carl’s story to some extent. Sure, Rick is the star, but Carl is a character we have literally seen grow up in the zombie apocalypse, both in terms of the timeline of the show, but also in real life, as we’ve seen Chandler Riggs age from a tiny ten year-old to a much more compelling young adult.

The death of Carl feels like the death of hope on The Walking Dead. Unlike the show, the comic understands Carl’s role, which is why they’ve been giving him bigger and bigger parts as the series has gone on to the point that he’s essentially the co-lead of the story. Rick will die eventually, but Carl Grimes will “beat the world” as his mom once told him. There’s a popular piece of fan art that shows a grizzled, old Carl with one eye, Rick’s revolver, Negan’s bat and Michonne’s sword slung across him. The idea being that he’s the one to “win,” to survive.

Every member of the cast has expressed their extreme displeasure with Carl’s departure, and after supporting the decision initially, series creator Robert Kirkman even said that Carl was probably one of two deaths he would take back (the other was Tyreese).
*  *  *
Carl is simply not replaceable. You cannot just bring in another teenager and have them pick up where he left off. Few other shows allow fans to invest this much into character we get to see grow up onscreen, and The Walking Dead grew Carl into someone pretty great over the years. But now that’s gone. His future storylines are gone, his potential to “beat the world” is gone and for what? Two sad episodes? AMC and Scott Gimple are trading a few quick hits of “emotion” for eight years of character development and the derailing of the central storyline of the series. It still strikes me as insane.

I know the plan is that Carl's death will probably "change" Rick and his dream of a more peaceful future may lead to the end of this war, but that's something that was shoehorned into Carl's characterization at the last possible moment to make this death try to mean something, when that's never really been who he is. It would have made more sense for Rick to finally listen to Morgan's years of preaching pacifism (before he went off the deep end again). Trying to justify this by making Carl the grand unifier in the last few episodes of his life does not work.
*  *  *
Last night’s episode was a good one. Possibly even a great one. But it should have never happened at all. I understand that The Walking Dead is a show that is trying to out-do Game of Thrones with its use of the “no one’s safe” trope, but taken to an extreme, that destroys the ability for fans to invest in characters. Sometimes you have to keep certain people off limits when it makes sense for the story and they’re especially well-developed characters. The Walking Dead will never be able to “grow” a Carl like they’ve done in the past eight years ever again. The best they can hope for is some huge time jump where suddenly hey, Judith is a teenager and we do this dance all over again, but that won’t be the same.

Fundamentally, this was a mistake, and fans are right to be furious about it, even if their anger has shifted into grief after last night. While I have issues with other TWD deaths (Glenn’s, mainly), this feels like it’s in a different league. It wasn’t brutal, but it was cruel and unnecessary and just…dumb, both as a story decision and off-screen, planning for the long term future of the show.

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Ratings for Sunday's TWD episode (8x09) were 3.6 (demo) and 8.22 (total viewers)...
https://www.spoilertv.com/2018/02/final-adjusted-tv-ratings-for-sunday_27.html

Carl's death episode did give TWD an uptick in ratings from the previous episode (8x08), but it'll be interesting to see what happens to ratings next week.

Overall, Season 8's ratings are still averaging well below Season 7's ratings.

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Why I'm done with 'The Walking Dead'
Kelly Lawler   Feb. 26, 2018
https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2018/02/26/why-im-done-watching-walking-dead/366994002/

Quote

I'm breaking up with The Walking Dead. And it's long overdue. 
*  *  *
I held on for years as the aging show spiraled downward in quality (and more recently, ratings, though it's still tops on cable) just because I once loved it so much. Dead is the kind of show that has peaks and valleys. Its best seasons and episodes could knock you off your feet with shock and awe. Its worst could have you shouting at the screen in frustration. But the fact that it had been so good kept me thinking that it could be good again. Eventually, I thought, the downswing would be over, and I'd remember why I liked the series in the first place. 

But the decline isn't ending. The series became more popular and is lasting much longer than anyone could have imagined. But aging series inevitably lose the magic that earned them such long runs. We are past that point with Dead. 
*  *  *
I thought, for a while, that Negan (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) was the problem. The scenery-chewing, bat-swinging villain was a bore from the moment he appeared onscreen, and his long-teased arrival was bungled and underwhelming. But Season 8 made it clear that the real problem is the series ran out of stories worth telling. Villains show up and wreak havoc on Rick and his family, but our survivors keep going and eventually win. Some people die. The walkers keep coming, against all odds. This happens over and over and over again. Only the details change.  And I'm just not interested in watching it anymore. 

Sunday's midseason premiere was, essentially, a 56-minute exercise in thumb-twiddling and time-wasting. The writers managed to draw out Carl's (Chandler Riggs) inevitable death for the entire episode, a torturous, maudlin affair that felt cheap and runs counter to the rules the series has established in the past – remember how quickly Sasha (Sonequa Martin-Green) turned into a walker less than one season ago?
*  *  *
I'm tired of that. I'm tired of the rules changing all the time, just for plot convenience. I’m tired of suspending my disbelief when it comes to the endless supply of zombies, or the infallibility of the protagonists and sometimes, their antagonists. I’m tired of the show's internal one-upmanship that leads its writers to come up with increasingly gross, bloodier and more violent ways to shock its audience. Executive producer Greg Nicotero told Entertainment Weekly  the series will soon feature its first "fully nude" zombie, in a staggeringly transparent and cheap ploy. How does that serve the show?

The best part about giving up on something you once loved is that you don't have to be angry about it anymore. Go ahead and have your naked zombie, Walking Dead. Keep Negan alive forever and redeem him, as the vision in Sunday's episode seemed to indicate. Keep the zombies coming for 100 years into the future of this post-apocalyptic Earth.

I just won't be watching to get infuriated by it.

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

The Walking Dead returns with the same old lines
Zack Handlen  February 25, 2018
https://www.avclub.com/the-walking-dead-returns-with-the-same-old-lines-1823306763

Quote

... “Honor” is another entry in the long-standing Walking Dead tradition of misery posts, an episode that spends a considerable amount of time attempting to find both grief and transcendence in the exit of a familiar face. Given that Carl has been with the show from the start, and also given that he served as a major motivational force for the protagonist, his death should carry some weight. In theory, at least, this is all justified. It’s just a shame that you can feel the air leaking out of the tires almost from the start.
*  *  *
The downside, of course, is that the lack of surprise or twist turns the ensuing episode into a slow miserable march toward an inevitable conclusion, punctuated occasionally by scenes of people doing comparatively exciting things before we go back to the end of Carl. And as mentioned, how much you care about the end of Carl depends an awful lot on how much you care about Carl himself. ...
*  *  *
That means a lot of shots of Carl getting progressively paler while familiar characters (usually Rick and Michonne) try and say comforting things through increasingly obvious tears. It should be heart-wrenching, and the actors do their best, but the longer it goes on, the closer it comes to self-parody. ...
*  *  *
As usual, it’s a moral struggle that doesn’t really work on a show that has repeatedly told us that mercy is a sign of weakness that will inevitably lead to your death. This season has paid occasional lip service to the idea that people have to find a way forward that isn’t just constant murder, and the fantasy sequences—which turn out to have been Carl’s vision of a utopian future—seemed to promise a tomorrow where that might actually happen. But it’s all a muddle, made even more painfully obvious by the quick vision of Negan himself, all defanged and sweet, greeting Judith in a garden that will never grow. Are we supposed to admire the fullness of Carl’s vision? Feel sympathy that he’ll never see this come to pass? I don’t know. I was too busy laughing.

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Farewell To The Most Annoying Piece Of Shit On ‘The Walking Dead’
by PATRICK LENTON  27 FEBRUARY 2018
http://junkee.com/the-walking-dead-carl/148508

Quote

People who still watch The Walking Dead must feel a lot of kinship with the characters of the show — they’re both a desperate, beleaguered bunch of survivors, a tiny remnant of a stubborn and bedraggled society, who spend their lives watching more of their number disappear. And much like Rick Grimes and his wacky crew of post-apocalyptic survivors, we have to wonder exactly why Walking Dead fans still bother?
*  *  *
After that, things start to get into a bit of a blur. Remember Andrea? Remember Shane? Seems like a million years ago. But the show seemed to truly bludgeon the shark to death with the egregiously gruesome death of show favourite Glenn at the beginning of season seven.

Smashing Glenn’s melon so ruthlessly seemed to point The Walking Dead firmly down the path of deaths-for-ratings replacing meaningful plot development.
*  *  *
Carl was the weathervane of just how batshit The Walking Dead’s plot was. With his death, we lose what was left of the The Walking Dead’s remaining purpose. As Rick says during Carl’s death:

“It was all for you. Right from the start. Back in Atlanta. The farm. Everything I did, it was for you …”

Seems difficult for the show to come back from this, in anything less than the shambling, unthinking corpse of its former self.

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[SnarkyTart]

Whoa, absolutely savage media reactions.  Good.

[tv echo]

Why I’m breaking up with The Walking Dead
by Patrick Schmidt   Feb. 26, 2018
https://fansided.com/2018/02/25/the-walking-dead-trash-stop-watching/

Quote

I’m breaking up with The Walking Dead. We had some good times together. I’ll never forget when I finally started watching the show in season 2. AMC was having a marathon and I DVR’d all the episodes and had a binge-watch session to see what all the hype was about over this new show. I really enjoyed the show and the characters who were trying to navigate this scary new world. The characters were engaging, it was easy to root for others, hate others and feel emotionally attached to them. It was hard to say goodbye to beloved characters throughout the years, but as the seasons have gone on and characters have said goodbye, the show has fallen off so much that it’s time to pull the plug and walk away before this toxic relationship gets any worse.

I’ve hate-watched the show for the last few seasons because I felt committed. I’d guess this is what parents say when they stick it out until the kids go to college. My heart was out of it but I still tuned in to see what was happening to the characters. There wasn’t one single episode or event or death that made me walk away, but rather a culmination of bad episodes, poor storytelling, repetitive narratives and an undertow that pulled us further and further away from what first brought us together.
*  *  *
That loving feeling has been lost and now it’s gone, gone, gone.

And I’m not alone as the ratings for the first half of season 8 dropped to new lows not seen since season 3. The show has clearly passed its peak and no longer holds the same attention on the pop culture scene as it once did. Sure, there are still plenty of great fans who will stick through the good times and the bad times, but I’m out. I’m done. It was good while it lasted and I’ll cherish the time we spent together and all the Sunday nights I could count on you being there for me, but relationships are supposed to be two-sided. I felt like I was doing all the work and that’s just not healthy.

While I’m breaking up with The Walking Dead, it would appear that many are walking out with me.

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

The Walking Dead: 7 Reasons Why Carl's Death Was A HUGE Mistake
James Hunt   26th Feb 2018
http://whatculture.com/tv/the-walking-dead-7-reasons-why-carl-39-s-death-was-a-huge-mistake-2

Quote

7. It Repeats One Of The Show's Worst Habits
...
One of the problems with the show's approach to death, though, is that it's often done purely for a sake of shocking viewers rather than serving the plot and its characters. We've seen it happen with the likes of Andrea, T-Dog, and Beth and, while the show's shock value used to be high, it has dwindled after so many fake-outs and the Negan cliffhanger.

This is a repeat of their tendency to try and leave viewers shook. Carl is such an important figure, and one considered so completely bulletproof, that it's hard to see any other cause for the death other than to prove to its declining fanbase that they can still cause an upset and no one is safe.
*  *  *
3. It Invalidates Rick's Arc
...
We went through that for eight years of close calls, struggles, drama, and eventually got to a place where there's a chance of making a better world, and then Carl dies. Obviously The Walking Dead tends to be an incredibly nihilistic series, flipping between its twin themes of hope and despair, but killing off Carl at this juncture makes it harder to see what the point was of everything that came before it.

7. It Repeats One Of The Show's Worst Habits
6. Another Dragged Out Death
5. It Really Screws The Comics
4. It Wastes Carl And Negan's Relationship
3. It Invalidates Rick's Arc
2. Nothing To Fight For
1. There's No Future

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

What Can Save The Walking Dead? An Expiration Date
Allen St. John, CONTRIBUTOR    FEB 25, 2018
https://www.forbes.com/sites/allenstjohn/2018/02/25/what-can-save-the-walking-dead-an-expiration-date/#18bfa655247f

Quote

The Walking Dead, which returns for its mid-season premiere tonight on AMC, is in a bit of a slump, at least by its own lofty standards. It remains one of the most popular shows on television, but in the the first half of season Season 8, ratings were down substantially.

More troublesome however, fans and critics alike have been grousing about the current story line, the showdown between Rick Grimes and Negan which has been going on for 24 episodes and counting, since the beginning of Season 7.  As you watch tonight's episode and the rest of Season 8, it's important to remember that the second half of the season is already in the can. Perhaps there’ll be a satisfying end to this narrative arc--it'll likely depend on how show runner Scott Gimple and the rest of the creative team deal with the Carl Situation.
*  *  *
But if The Walking Dead is to find its voice again in Season Nine and beyond I think it needs one thing: an expiration date.
*  *  *
The Walking Dead? It's an open-ended engagement. Robert Kirkman has suggested that the Walking Dead could go on for 20 years, maintaining that the monthly comics offer more story than he'll ever get to use in the series. More recently Kirkman has suggested that he does have an ending in mind. "But it's a very long way off."

Maybe it shouldn't be so long. ...

Edited February 27, 2018 by tv echo

[ShadowHunter]

4 hours ago, tv echo said:

Ratings for Sunday's TWD episode (8x09) were 3.6 (demo) and 8.22 (total viewers)...
https://www.spoilertv.com/2018/02/final-adjusted-tv-ratings-for-sunday_27.html

Carl's death episode did give TWD an uptick in ratings from the previous episode (8x08), but it'll be interesting to see what happens to ratings next week.

Overall, Season 8's ratings are still averaging well below Season 7's ratings.

Season 9 should be the last one. They will probably drag it to season 10 then that should def be the last season.

[nodorothyparker]

8 hours ago, tv echo said:

a Show That Hates Its Fans

They ought to go ahead and change the show name to this, or at least add it as a subheader.  I'm trying to remember when I last saw a show shit on its own history and legacy so egregiously.  Or one that seemed so determined to fuck with its fans just to see what they'd put up with and then tell them it's their own fault if they didn't appreciate the brilliance of it.

[Nashville]

6 hours ago, tv echo said:

The Walking Dead's Latest Death Is A Tragedy It Will Not Recover From
Paul Tassi   Feb. 26, 2018
https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2018/02/26/the-walking-deads-latest-death-is-a-tragedy-it-will-not-recover-from/#663136a13c87

Out of this article, IMHO the most bullseye accurate line of them all:

AMC and Scott Gimple are trading a few quick hits of “emotion” for eight years of character development and the derailing of the central storyline of the series. It still strikes me as insane.

 

6 hours ago, tv echo said:

Ratings for Sunday's TWD episode (8x09) were 3.6 (demo) and 8.22 (total viewers)...
https://www.spoilertv.com/2018/02/final-adjusted-tv-ratings-for-sunday_27.html

Carl's death episode did give TWD an uptick in ratings from the previous episode (8x08), but it'll be interesting to see what happens to ratings next week.

Overall, Season 8's ratings are still averaging well below Season 7's ratings.

If they’re anything like me, a sizable chunk of that viewership tuned in simply to pay homage to Carl’s swan song - and to Chandler Riggs.

Me?  I think I am done.  I’m taking TWD off my DVR list.  

I may hang around here for a while to chat with y’all, but that’s it.

[festivus]

Oh, I already quit the show. I don't want to see Carl's death. I will still be reading the threads and hearting posts though until this show chokes on its own vomit. The snark is just too good.

Edited February 27, 2018 by festivus

[maystone]

9 hours ago, tv echo said:

The Walking Dead's Latest Death Is A Tragedy It Will Not Recover From
Paul Tassi   Feb. 26, 2018
https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2018/02/26/the-walking-deads-latest-death-is-a-tragedy-it-will-not-recover-from/#663136a13c87

I agree with everything he says. I was angry when I first heard that they were killing off Carl, but now I'm just sad and resigned. I hope that the rest of S8 isn't the clusterfuck that it looks like it's setting up to be, but I'll be there to see it through however it plays out. I'm feeling ridiculously loyal to a cast who, let's face it, don't know that I exist, but I'm not going to give up on them because TPTB have lost their minds. I'm really glad that Gimple is out, and all I can hope is that Kang can pull the show back on course and bring it to a satisfying end - which should be in S9, but dear God please no later than S10.

[rab01]

They didn't even get that many viewers. This was the lowest rated midseason premiere they've ever had.

[tv echo]

Speculation (no TV spoilers, just a comics spoiler which I've hidden with spoiler tags)...

The Walking Dead just revealed how it'll replace Carl (maybe)
BY MORGAN JEFFERY  26 FEBRUARY 2018
http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/the-walking-dead/feature/a850621/the-walking-dead-season-8-episode-9-carl-henry-spoilers/

Quote

Ever since it was announced that Chandler Riggs would be exiting The Walking Dead, his character Carl Grimes meeting a tragic end, fans have been speculating how the series would deal with the character's absence going forward.
*  *  *
Our first clue came in December last year, when showrunner Scott Gimple revealed that the series still plans on "telling those comic stories". "It just will have to be with different people," Gimple said. "It's a different way to tell those same stories, but we hope to still fulfil what those stories do."
*  *  *
Surely it's no coincidence that running in parallel to Rick (Andrew Lincoln) and Michonne (Danai Gurira) lamenting the loss of Riggs's character – their 'Corrral grief', if you like – is a sub-plot that explores the growing darkness within young, male Hilltop resident Henry (Macsen Lintz).

We've been wondering for a while whether Henry could end up inheriting some, if not all, of Carl's comic-book material – much like how Enid (Catelyn Nacon), a TV series original not present in the source material, has taken on storylines originally written for Carol's daughter Sophia, long dead on television.
*  *  *
Eventually, after much hand-wringing, Morgan is spared the grim task. In a surprise twist, it's young Henry who kills Gavin with a pointy stick to the throat. "I had to," he insists. Gavin, though, was unarmed and helpless. This was a cold-blooded killing.
*  *  *
Yes, Henry seems destined to fulfil the role of angry kid, traumatised and shaped by a violent world, that Carl used to – a period in his life, funnily enough, that a dying Carl reflects on in this very episode.
*  *  *
Like Carl, Henry has experienced great tragedy, great loss – the former losing his mother, the latter his older sibling Benjamin. "They killed my brother!" Henry tells Carol in 'Honor'. "I can do it – I can help you. Morgan taught me the stick, you taught me the gun."

The door is now open for Henry to inherit Carl's role from the comic books, a role which the TV version of Carl had outgrown, both physically and in terms of his character arc.

Spoiler

Henry can be the angry troubled pre-teen who's the devil on Rick's shoulder, urging him to kill Negan in their final stand-off. He can be the smitten kid whose stubbornness instigates a war with the show's next major threat, The Whisperers.

Ladies and gents, meet Carl Grimes 2.0.

Edited February 28, 2018 by tv echo

[festivus]

Ah, fuck that noise. It's Coral or nobody for me. This show SUCKS.

[Christi]

Blah blah blah Henry is a cardboard cut out...do they honestly believe that little fucker will just replace 8 years of Cooorrraall?

Fuck Off, Shark Jumper...way to ruin a once great show ?

[tv echo]

Ratings for this week's episode (8x10-The Lost and the Plunderers) were 2.86 demo and 6.82M viewers. That's a 21.43% drop in demo and a 17.65% drop in viewers from the previous week.

Source:  https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/walking-dead-season-eight-ratings/

To put these ratings in context...
Sunday cable ratings: ‘The Walking Dead’ at lowest point since Season 1
RICK PORTER  MARCH 6, 2018
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/sunday-cable-ratings-march-4-2018/

Quote

“The Walking Dead” hit its lowest adults 18-49 rating since Season 1 on Sunday.

Airing opposite the Oscars, the show scored a 2.9 in the 18-49 demographic. It was the first time “The Walking Dead” dipped below 3.0 since the next-to-last episode of Season 1 in November 2010. It was off seven tenths of a point from the previous week’s 3.6.

Sunday’s 6.82 million total viewers was the smallest audience for the show since exactly six years earlier: The March 4, 2012, episode late in Season 2 drew 6.77 million people.

Edited March 6, 2018 by tv echo

[peach]

6 minutes ago, tv echo said:

That's a 21.43% drop in demo and a 17.65% drop in viewers from the previous week.

To put these ratings in context...
Sunday cable ratings: ‘The Walking Dead’ at lowest point since Season 1
 

Boom!

[Nashville]

1 hour ago, tv echo said:

Ratings for this week's episode (8x10-The Lost and the Plunderers) were 2.86 demo and 6.82M viewers. That's a 21.43% drop in demo and a 17.65% drop in viewers from the previous week.

Source:  https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/walking-dead-season-eight-ratings/

To put these ratings in context...
Sunday cable ratings: ‘The Walking Dead’ at lowest point since Season 1
RICK PORTER  MARCH 6, 2018
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/sunday-cable-ratings-march-4-2018/

Somebody better tell Gimp’s end-of-season replacement not to get in too big of a rush updating their resume....

[rab01]

If they had only waited two more weeks so as not to compete with the Olympics and the Oscars   . . .   We would have been able to point to these god-awful ratings as absolute proof of the results of their garbage decisions. 

As it is, we'll just have to be patient and wait one more week ;)

[peach]

Softening up the audience.  They started running "could Carl really die?" stories months in advance.
"Here Are 10 Ways 'The Walking Dead' Could End"
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/m/ccd36930-6ae1-3997-b345-0ee59225811b/here-are-10-ways-'the-walking.html

Edited March 8, 2018 by peach
added title

[tv echo]

Ratings for Sunday's episode (8x11-Dead or Alive Or) were 2.80 demo and 6.60M viewers.

To compare...

Last week's ratings (8x10) were 2.86 demo and 6.82M viewers (lowest since Season 1).  So this week's ratings were a further drop of -2.10% in demo and -3.17% in viewers from the previous week.

Sources: 
https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/walking-dead-season-eight-ratings/
https://www.spoilertv.com/2018/03/final-adjusted-tv-ratings-for-sunday_13.html

Edited March 13, 2018 by tv echo

[tv echo]

Sunday cable ratings: ‘The Walking Dead’ goes even lower
RICK PORTER   MARCH 13, 2018
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/sunday-cable-ratings-march-11-2018/

Quote

It turns out “The Walking Dead’s” lows last week weren’t just a result of the show airing opposite the Oscars.

The AMC series still led Sunday’s cable ratings by wide margins, but it did so with even smaller numbers than the previous week — which were below anything “The Walking Dead” had drawn in at least six years. Sunday’s 2.8 rating in adults 18-49 and 6.6 million viewers were down from 2.9 and 6.82 million a week earlier.

Edited March 15, 2018 by tv echo

[peach]

7 hours ago, tv echo said:

Sunday cable ratings: ‘The Walking Dead’ goes even lower

Wow.  Sad.  And yet predictable to every single person on Earth, except for Scott Gimple.

[tv echo]

‘The Walking Dead’ Is Still Struggling in the Ratings
By Brandon Katz • 03/13/18 5:04pm
http://observer.com/2018/03/tv-ratings-walking-dead-amc-struggling/

Quote

The midseason premiere of AMC’s The Walking Dead two weeks ago posted the show’s lowest return ratings in its eight seasons. Last week’s episode posted its lowest overall live viewers since season two and its smallest key demographic viewership since season one.

Things did not get better for Sunday night’s episode.
*  *  *
In other words, AMC may want to rethink its ambitious plan to further spin-off The Walking Dead into a multi-media franchise. As of right now, the show doesn’t possess the demand to support such expansion.

If you’re looking for positives in these numbers, there are a few.

For starters, this week’s numbers are still good enough to claim the top-rated and most-watched spots for cable in that time slot. For all its slippage, The Walking Dead is still a hit a show. This week’s declines are also the smallest dips this season in Live+Same Day viewership and much better than the 20 percent plummet the series took between the midseason premiere and last week’s episode. Talking Dead is still performing well too, so there are silver linings.

But overall, this continues a two-year downward ratings trend for the zombie drama.

It’s not 2013 anymore when AMC could bank on eight-figure audience totals every week. It’s also not as if the network’s other shows are making up the difference. Fear The Walking Dead (0.88, 2.3 million), Into the Badlands (0.79, 1.9 million) and Better Call Saul (0.59, 1.6 million) are all solid performers, but none are topping the charts.

AMC needs to start developing an heir apparent for The Walking Dead.

Edited March 14, 2018 by tv echo

[peach]

It's irritating that the tone the article is taking is that people have just naturally lost interest over the years.  Instead of the show being destroyed by terrible management.