Spoilers and Speculation

[Smad]

So can we talk comics in here because I want to speculate as to why Carl when it comes to the future.

[CrazyDog]

I thought it sounded like he just has one more episode. I'm seriously annoyed (and sounds like Chandler's dad is NOT happy with his son's character being bumped off, even though, of course, no one on this show should feel safe) that this was all Gimple's idea, and not, as was being reported, because Chandler wanted to go to school. Carl had so much more story ahead of him. But yeah, Carl had to die so he can convince Rick not to kill Negan, or something lame.

This also does not warm me up to Siddiq either - is he supposed to be a major character? Because, moral lesson, blah blah, Carl gets bit taking out some random walkers for his new buddy. Lame. I did like his semi-bluff to Negan, and allowing the other Alexandrians to escape, but still. Not the heroic death I was kind of hoping for this character when the spoiler was first reported. 

I'll still watch this show to the bitter end, but I think killing off Carl is a huge mistake, and the feedback I'm seeing online seems to agree. 

Edited December 11, 2017 by CrazyDog

[peach]

So, I've finally talked to a friend who thinks Negan is a great character, funny and "unpredictable" (??), and much better than Rick.  So there's one at  least.  I just kind of wonder if the show wants to get rid of Rick and keep Negan as the main.  Because they also seem to treat him as the hero of the show.  I guess this one guy would like it.  

[nodorothyparker]

16 minutes ago, Smad said:

So can we talk comics in here because I want to speculate as to why Carl when it comes to the future.

This thread is spoiler tagged so nothing's really off limits here.  Speculate away.

[SnarkyTart]

13 minutes ago, CrazyDog said:

And from the note by Chandler to the Spoiler Group (hope it's OK to mention it here), referring to the "last few seasons" of Walking Dead, sounds like they might be wrapping up the series, soon-ish, which could mean 3 years, 5 years, etc. But it was an interesting mention.

In case Chandler's note to the Spoiling Dead Fans facebook page didn't get posted on another thread, I'm going to drop it here for anyone who hasn't seen it.  I can respect the spoiler page making the decision to honor Chandler's request, especially in light of all the information now showing that Chandler got royally screwed on the altar of Gimple's incompetence.  Killing Coral purely for the sake of justifying Rick's decision not to kill Gimple's alter ego, Negan, should be the death of Gimple's career as a showrunner.  But nooo...he's being rewarded by AMC giving him control of FTWD now too.   

[numbnut]

Just saw this Variety blurb about Carl (RIP): The father of a key “Walking Dead” character vented his frustrations with the show and showrunner Scott Gimple on social media following his son’s onscreen death in this Sunday’s midseason finale. “Watching Gimple fire my son 2 weeks before his 18th birthday after telling him they wanted him for the next 3 years was disappointing,” William Riggs, father of Carl Grimes actor Chandler Riggs, wrote on Facebook. “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!”

[CrazyDog]

10 minutes ago, SnarkyTart said:

In case Chandler's note to the Spoiling Dead Fans facebook page didn't get posted on another thread, I'm going to drop it here for anyone who hasn't seen it.  I can respect the spoiler page making the decision to honor Chandler's request, especially in light of all the information now showing that Chandler got royally screwed on the altar of Gimple's incompetence.  Killing Coral purely for the sake of justifying Rick's decision not to kill Gimple's alter ego, Negan, should be the death of Gimple's career as a showrunner.  But nooo...he's being rewarded by AMC giving him control of FTWD now too.   

Thank you, I wasn't sure about posting their content here, so I edited my post, but if it's allowed here, great! Chandler's note was very classy, and I respect the group for not posting the final confirmation.

[SnarkyTart]

1 minute ago, CrazyDog said:

Thank you, I wasn't sure about posting their content here, so I edited my post, but if it's allowed here, great! Chandler's note was very classy, and I respect the group for not posting the final confirmation.

No problem.  One of the rules of the Spoiling Dead Fans Army facebook page is that it's okay to post their content as long as they are given credit for it.

[Smad]

I wonder if the reason is related to behind the scenes stuff. First of all Chandler will be 18 soon so they would have to pay him like an adult and him and his parents had the biggest bargaining chip, the comics. And we all know how AMC is with money. Or is it Kirkman signing that deal with Amazon and AMC in retaliation thumbed their noses at him and were like 'lets screw with the comic material for real'. Though I don't see why that would change TWD but who knows what went on there.

Isn't Kirkman also suing AMC?

Or is it really because of future storylines, especially the Whisperer arc. However for that Carl doesn't need to be gone from the show, his relationship with the daughter can just be switched to someone else.

Edited December 11, 2017 by Smad

[catrox14]

You know I don't blame Chandler on that point. It was a kind thoughtful request. Nothing demanding. I'm okay with them respecting his request.

[peach]

41 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

You know I don't blame Chandler on that point. It was a kind thoughtful request. Nothing demanding. I'm okay with them respecting his request.

Right.  He's a pretty humble kid for all the attention he gets, and I'm happy with Chandler/Carl getting "a last request" esp since he got blindsided by this. 

[TVFan17]

I was just coming back here to comment on the Chandler messages to the TSDF Army folks -- both his original request to the admins of TSDF (shown above in this thread) and his subsequent message to the TSDF community (which they asked him to write).  

I found it interesting that, in the second message, Chandler acknowledged the "drastic decrease in twd’s ratings" -- and, in the first message, he said that this (Season 8) is "one of the last few seasons of the show."  Two very enlightening comments.

So there must be a clear end game in sight at this point.  They must all know when, more or less, this show is going to wrap up, and all that we are seeing now and will see in Season 9 is working towards that ultimate conclusion.   Season 10 seems like a good place to end a series.  Do we think they will try for a Season 10 series finale (which wouldn't start until October 2019, presumably, and end in 2020), or will they try to make it to Season 11?

And, if Gimple and company are in the process of mapping out the last couple of seasons (if the show ends in the next couple of years), are they going to continue killing off more of the major characters we have come to know, just to go out with a loud bang.... or will they start trying to settle things down and give everyone a sense of peace and stability once again, so they can build a new world??

[The Mighty Peanut]

I'm glad Chandler and his dad, and most of the reviews that I've read, are less than happy with Gimple and being vocal about it. Chandler is acting with the most dignity, and I'm glad TSTD showed him the respect he didnt get from SG. Killing Carl so the pendulum can swing back yet again in Rick's fucking endless every-other-death struggle between staying humane and and adapting to a brutal world? Like when Dale,  Hershel, Andrea, Tyreese, Beth, Lori, Glen, Abe, Shane, and Sasha died? We get it, Rick  is a walking existential crisis. How is this news?

Edited December 12, 2017 by The Mighty Peanut

[peach]

57 minutes ago, TVFan17 said:

I was just coming back here to comment on the Chandler messages to the TSDF Army folks -- both his original request to the admins of TSDF (shown above in this thread) and his subsequent message to the TSDF community (which they asked him to write).  

I found it interesting that, in the second message, Chandler acknowledged the "drastic decrease in twd’s ratings" -- and, in the first message, he said that this (Season 8) is "one of the last few seasons of the show."  Two very enlightening comments.

What was the second message?

[TVFan17]

7 minutes ago, peach said:

What was the second message?

This was posted by TSDF's admins on The Spoiling Dead Fans' page, in the same post with the message from Chandler shown above.  They apparently asked him to write a message, and he obliged:

 

Quote

dear tsdf:

i don’t really know how to start this other than saying thank you. though we (cast & crew) have kinda always been super frustrated with this community, seeing how dedicated you all are to the show over the last few weeks really gives me a new appreciation for you all. up until 701, i hated seeing our hard work getting leaked-but once 701 aired with a large chunk of the fanbase knowing what would happen, it made me realize that knowing what happens doesn’t always take away the integrity of the show. though many people knew who was going to die, they still cried and shook in terror seeing the characters they loved getting killed.

that being said, i reached out to ninja a few weeks ago asking to not reveal the end of 808, since a lot of my performance relied on how the episode ends. ninja & shiny knew that they would take a lot of heat from this decision, but them caring more about how i felt towards this episode than their reputation gave me a massive new level of respect and appreciation towards them.

and seeing how dedicated and consistently excited you all are about the show despite the drastic decrease in twd’s ratings made me the most excited about this episode than i’ve been in years. though i don’t necessarily approve of the spoiler content being released on this forum, fans like you are the reason that i’ve had a job for the last 8 years. people like you have given me the chance to live my dream, and have given me the opportunity to go on to do bigger and more exciting things than twd. you all have let me make you shake in nervousness in fear of your most beloved character in danger, yell in excitement at a victory for "the group", scream at your television in frustration of carl "not staying in the house" (also please stop yelling that at me at conventions lmao), and cry out of empathy when your favorite character suffers a grave loss. and now, i invite you to be excited to see how carl’s story ends, and how my story continues to unfold both musically & theatrically.

thank you again for giving me this opportunity of a lifetime. i won’t let you down.

–chandler

Edited December 12, 2017 by TVFan17

[Morrigan2575]

That kid impresses the hell out of me. Very nicely written note.

Edited December 12, 2017 by Morrigan2575

[ParadoxLost]

13 hours ago, numbnut said:

Just saw this Variety blurb about Carl (RIP): The father of a key “Walking Dead” character vented his frustrations with the show and showrunner Scott Gimple on social media following his son’s onscreen death in this Sunday’s midseason finale. “Watching Gimple fire my son 2 weeks before his 18th birthday after telling him they wanted him for the next 3 years was disappointing,” William Riggs, father of Carl Grimes actor Chandler Riggs, wrote on Facebook. “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!”

Well this sounds like they are in a contract renewal cycle.  I wonder if all the original cast signed for 6 years and then re-upped for 2 yrs.

If they have the actors for Rick, Carl, Daryl, and Carol all negotiating their next contract, killing off Carl could have been a negotiating tactic to try to gain leverage over the others.  Ratings are still high enough to keep the show on the air but the way they are falling it probably gives the main actors some leverage because its less certain the show can keep going no matter who dies.  AMC and Gimple likely hate that and are trying to convince the actors not to play as much hardball in negotiations

Now that I think about it, that makes more sense than Gimple taking this kind of risk with Carl because he cares that Rick's decision making has some kind of tangible foundation.

Edited December 12, 2017 by ParadoxLost

[peach]

16 minutes ago, TVFan17 said:

This was posted by TSDF's admins on The Spoiling Dead Fans' page, in the same post with the message from Chandler shown above.  They apparently asked him to write a message, and he obliged:

 

Thanks for sharing that.  What a great kid.  I feel sadder now, but sure wish him the best post TWD.
 

 

18 minutes ago, TVFan17 said:

scream at your television in frustration of carl "not staying in the house" (also please stop yelling that at me at conventions lmao)

too funny

[TVFan17]

10 minutes ago, peach said:

Thanks for sharing that.  What a great kid.  I feel sadder now, but sure wish him the best post TWD.
 

 

too funny

 

I laughed at that comment that he threw in!  I can only imagine what the "fans" yell at actors at these conventions.

 

It made me sad to read too.  I was not even a Carl fan for the first few seasons of the show.   And now I feel terribly guilty for not liking him (or The Hat) early on.  It's obviously meant a lot to him to be on this show, and it likely stings to be let go from it.   I'm sure his fellow cast members love him, support him and will stay in contact with him, and he will go on to do great things.

Edited December 12, 2017 by TVFan17

[raven]

Thanks @SnarkyTart and @TVFan17 for posting Chandler's notes.  He's only 18 and I'm sure he will be just fine.  He now has a lot of experience in the good and bad of the business I suppose.    He really does come across very well, very thoughtful.   Call me sappy but I don't mind now that the site honored his request and didn't release the spoilers; not that it made the episode any better, but that's not Chandler's fault!

51 minutes ago, TVFan17 said:

scream at your television in frustration of carl "not staying in the house" (also please stop yelling that at me at conventions lmao),

This made me laugh as well!

3 hours ago, numbnut said:

“Watching Gimple fire my son 2 weeks before his 18th birthday after telling him they wanted him for the next 3 years was disappointing,” William Riggs, father of Carl Grimes actor Chandler Riggs, wrote on Facebook. “I never trusted Gimple or AMC but Chandler did.

Hey William Riggs, I don't know anyone who trusts Gimple either!

[Anela]

I remember Steve yeun talking about teasing him, when he first had scenes with Enid, like friends or brothers would. They all sound like a big second family, which I've always envied a bit. 

*Now* I'm getting all teary-eyed. I like him a lot more, now that I've seen what he wrote, and heard about it all. I respect the way he's taking it, but am also glad that his dad said something. You don't tell someone they'll have a job for three more years, at least, and then do this. 

Edited December 12, 2017 by Anela

[Smad]

1 hour ago, TVFan17 said:

It made me sad to read too.  I was not even a Carl fan for the first few seasons of the show.   And now I feel terribly guilty for not liking him (or The Hat) early on.  It's obviously meant a lot to him to be on this show, and it likely stings to be let go from it.   I'm sure his fellow cast members love him, support him and will stay in contact with him, and he will go on to do great things.

I don't want to be that person after this episode but my issue with the character has always been the acting. From what little I have seen of Carl in the comics, what an awesome character. I even find TV Carl a much more mature character than Rick. But the Carl in the comics, besides being younger, is way more screwed up but ultimately tons more entertaining. I don't think they ever could have gone there with TV Carl because CR doesn't have the chops to do it. Even in 8x08 at the beginning, the flashback with Rick, he took those dramatic pauses in the middle of a sentence several times. He's always done that for no reason that I can see. It's so weird. I also find him completely bland, like nothing stands out in his performance. But acting ability, like on screen chemistry, is subjective...it's just how I feel. When Carl isn't on screen I don't even remember that he exists.

[Dobian]

My wild speculation is that this is a total fakeout, including the comments by Riggs and his dad.  That Carl is bitten and sick but has some immunity to turning.  Or that whole business  about FPP being ill with who know what is actually the key to an antidote for Carl.  They played up this whole illness thing with FPP when there really was no narrative reason for it.  And they made it a point to put FPP together with the doctor and on the way back to Maggie so it feels like a setup for something.  Of course, it could simply be that there is no good narrative reason and Carl really is going to die and Gimple just sucks.  But we'll see.

[loki567]

I'm seeing a lot of good points for why Carl's death might have been a decision handed down by AMC. I'm actually sympathetic to Gimple from the perspective of there's probably never been such a financially successful television show that's been completely creatively hamstrung by its network this much. Hell, HBO gives the GoT producers way more leeway than this. 

[CrazyDog]

6 minutes ago, Dobian said:

My wild speculation is that this is a total fakeout, including the comments by Riggs and his dad.  That Carl is bitten and sick but has some immunity to turning.  Or that whole business  about FPP being ill with who know what is actually the key to an antidote for Carl.  They played up this whole illness thing with FPP when there really was no narrative reason for it.  And they made it a point to put FPP together with the doctor and on the way back to Maggie so it feels like a setup for something.  Of course, it could simply be that there is no good narrative reason and Carl really is going to die and Gimple just sucks.  But we'll see.

I had a fleeting wish about how coincidental it was that the doc was suddenly heading back to Rick's group, but I can't see Chandler lying to fans outright. Gimple yes, but not the actor. But I might try to be in denial here and there until it actually happens. 

[Kiki777]

Is the rest of the season in the can? Maybe there will be so much backlash that they will figure out a way to keep Carl. 

[TVFan17]

26 minutes ago, Kiki777 said:

Is the rest of the season in the can? Maybe there will be so much backlash that they will figure out a way to keep Carl. 

Yes.   They've finished filming the whole season sometime in November, I think.  They should begin filming the next season in April or May, if they stick to the same schedule they usually have each year.

[Anela]

1 hour ago, Dobian said:

My wild speculation is that this is a total fakeout, including the comments by Riggs and his dad.  That Carl is bitten and sick but has some immunity to turning.  Or that whole business  about FPP being ill with who know what is actually the key to an antidote for Carl.  They played up this whole illness thing with FPP when there really was no narrative reason for it.  And they made it a point to put FPP together with the doctor and on the way back to Maggie so it feels like a setup for something.  Of course, it could simply be that there is no good narrative reason and Carl really is going to die and Gimple just sucks.  But we'll see.

Hopefully so, but I don't remember Glenn/Steve yeun saying anything. Did he? During dumpster-gate. He said he had to avoid people for ages, except for the cast, I guess. 

[Nashville]

On 12/10/2017 at 10:22 PM, ParadoxLost said:

The one nice thing about this is that I think Chandler Riggs is being 1000X more candid about this than Gimple would want him to be. Ha. Ha.

What the hell can Production do to Chandler now - fire him?  ;>

 

13 hours ago, SnarkyTart said:

In case Chandler's note to the Spoiling Dead Fans facebook page didn't get posted on another thread, I'm going to drop it here for anyone who hasn't seen it.  I can respect the spoiler page making the decision to honor Chandler's request, especially in light of all the information now showing that Chandler got royally screwed on the altar of Gimple's incompetence.  Killing Coral purely for the sake of justifying Rick's decision not to kill Gimple's alter ego, Negan, should be the death of Gimple's career as a showrunner.  But nooo...he's being rewarded by AMC giving him control of FTWD now too.   

Given Gimp's current track record, that means we won't be saddled with FTWD for too much longer.  Scott Gimple is turning into the Ted McGinley of showrunners.

 

9 hours ago, Anela said:

You don't tell someone they'll have a job for three more years, at least, and then do this. 

You do if you're a two-faced backstabbing shit of a person.  (HI SCOTT!!!!!!!)

[HighMaintenance]

I wonder if being Carl on this show for the last 8 years will typecast Chandler Riggs.  Should he choose to continue as an actor - he could have a tough go of it.  The majority of child actors peak early in their careers and never regain that same level of fame.

I don't think the show's writers have enough creativity to "save Carl".   I do think they put red herrings in the show that never really develop into anything - other than speculation by the viewers, (the helicopter, Jesus' ninja skills, Maggie's pregnancy).

Edited December 12, 2017 by HighMaintenance

[RedheadZombie]

4 hours ago, Nashville said:

What the hell can Production do to Chandler now - fire him?  ;>

 

Given Gimp's current track record, that means we won't be saddled with FTWD for too much longer.  Scott Gimple is turning into the Ted McGinley of showrunners.

 

You do if you're a two-faced backstabbing shit of a person.  (HI SCOTT!!!!!!!)

Can they block his participation in the cons?  Isn't that a lucrative business for the actors?

[The Mighty Peanut]

I really don’t think there will be any sort of immunity plot since Chandler and his dad are saying definitively that Carl has been killed off and Chandler was fired by Pimple (Yes, I know it’s immature. I don’t take it back and I’m not sorry). Even though Pimple has no respect for the comic, immunity/antidotes would make TWD a different show. Which maybe would be better, IDK. 

This death just feels wrong. I didn’t like when Hershel died, but it made sense. How long could an old amputee survive that world, realistically? I didn’t care when Beth died, but it made sense. Ty was expendable, so was Abe (who had died already in the comic), and same with Glen. Carl’s death doesn’t make any fucking sense. Rick losing his son will change him in a way that makes no thematic sense, and making him into Morgan 2.0 after his son fucking dies makes even less. Nothing about this makes sense and it’s pissing me off IRL! Fuck this show. I’m not done, I’ll see it through, but I’m mad.

Edited December 12, 2017 by The Mighty Peanut

[peach]

15 hours ago, TVFan17 said:

Chandler:  i don’t really know how to start this other than saying thank you. though we (cast & crew) have kinda always been super frustrated with this community, seeing how dedicated you all are to the show over the last few weeks really gives me a new appreciation for you all. up until 701, i hated seeing our hard work getting leaked-but once 701 aired with a large chunk of the fanbase knowing what would happen, it made me realize that knowing what happens doesn’t always take away the integrity of the show. though many people knew who was going to die, they still cried and shook in terror seeing the characters they loved getting killed.

I thought this was kind of interesting, in Chandler's remarks.  That they've all seen the spoilers as some kind of attempt to damage the integrity of their product, that they work hard on.  And then him discovering that it's just another niche of hardcore fans who actually LOVE the show and are completely invested in it.  Certainly the Spoiling Dead Army makes an effort to keep from literally "spoiling" it for people who do NOT want to know.  I used to hate being spoiled, I avoid spoilers like the plague.  I even avoid trailers of movies sometimes because they give too much away.  But my goodness, the way the stressful and infuriating way this show operates drove me to this board, and I'm all about spoilers now!  lol

[Nashville]

7 hours ago, RedheadZombie said:

Can they block his participation in the cons?  Isn't that a lucrative business for the actors?

Doubtful.  Humongous Productions trying to blackball from cons a kid who was arguably one of the biggest fan favorites, for no other reason than speaking his mind?  PR nightmare.  Besides, CR’s comments haven’t been particularly rancorous - yet - so any significant studio response would probably be seen as overboard.

one other thought which just came to me: if CR isn’t working for Production any more and Production did try to get him blackballed, could that be legally considered restraint of trade?

Edited December 12, 2017 by Nashville
Expansion

[numbnut]

An online petition was launched, calling for series showrunner Scott Gimple to be fired.

At time of this writing, the petition has almost 30,000 signatures. The petition’s summary highlights how Gimple promised actor Chandler Riggs that his character would be on the show for another three years. Riggs is on record saying he’d postpone college to continue acting on the series. According to the post, Riggs was fired from the show just two weeks prior to his 18th birthday, with Gimple’s explanation being that the death simply served the show’s story.

https://www.change.org/p/amc-tv-a-petition-for-scott-gimple-to-be-fired-from-the-walking-dead

Edited December 16, 2017 by numbnut

[BasilSeal]

On 11/12/2017 at 6:57 PM, Smad said:

The problem is that this show always proves the pacifist characters wrong. And the audience has learned the lesson already a thousand times over. So not only do those pacifist characters look stupid to us, they look stupid to the main characters (aka Team Rick) because they have also learned over and over where it leads. It seems like every Season one or two characters need to play pacifist, sometimes for no reason at all (like Jesus because that came out of nowhere) but usually just because of plot. I thought at least Morgan made sense in a way because he was still just as insane as when he was 'clearing' and his pacifism was simply his lifeline not to go crazy in the other direction again. And they made it a point that his pacifism doesn't work when you are in a community that needs protecting, that you will kill when forced to make a choice where there is no other way. So in the end it was useless really because you can only practice pacifism when you are by yourself.

Apologies for the pedantry but this really bugs me, i agree largely with the points made in that post but why do people on this forum keep using the word pacifist when they mean people displaying morality or compassion rather than following a pacifist philosophy?

The literal definition of pacifism is: "the belief that war and violence are unjustifiable and that all disputes should be settled by peaceful means."

Clearly characters like Jesus and even non killy Morgan aren't refusing to participate in fighting, or seeking non violent resolutions to the conflicts, they just choose moral solutions over pragmatic ones when it comes to how they deal with people they've won fights with. A more suitable word would be mercy, but you're quite right, when characters do this, it never ends well.

[Smad]

1 hour ago, BasilSeal said:

Apologies for the pedantry but this really bugs me, i agree largely with the points made in that post but why do people on this forum keep using the word pacifist when they mean people displaying morality or compassion rather than following a pacifist philosophy?

The literal definition of pacifism is: "the belief that war and violence are unjustifiable and that all disputes should be settled by peaceful means."

Clearly characters like Jesus and even non killy Morgan aren't refusing to participate in fighting, or seeking non violent resolutions to the conflicts, they just choose moral solutions over pragmatic ones when it comes to how they deal with people they've won fights with. A more suitable word would be mercy, but you're quite right, when characters do this, it never ends well.

Pacifism, morality, compassion...it's all the same in the world of TWD. People who walk on that end of the spectrum always die. Pacifism is just the easiest way to express myself. Everything else takes longer to write and I don't have forever. Everything from 'all life is precious' to 'we have to live with these people after' to 'stick-fu only to protect myself and psychopaths'...it's all really rather long. Only have time for the long way around when I actually do have time, which I usually don't. Everyone knows what it means though in the context of the character discussed because most people have seen the recent episodes. That's all that matters in the end...

Edited December 16, 2017 by Smad

[Anela]

2 hours ago, BasilSeal said:

Apologies for the pedantry but this really bugs me, i agree largely with the points made in that post but why do people on this forum keep using the word pacifist when they mean people displaying morality or compassion rather than following a pacifist philosophy?

The literal definition of pacifism is: "the belief that war and violence are unjustifiable and that all disputes should be settled by peaceful means."

Clearly characters like Jesus and even non killy Morgan aren't refusing to participate in fighting, or seeking non violent resolutions to the conflicts, they just choose moral solutions over pragmatic ones when it comes to how they deal with people they've won fights with. A more suitable word would be mercy, but you're quite right, when characters do this, it never ends well.

Jesus got a lot of people killed early last year. Deliberately. Suddenly he's the morality police. 

[BasilSeal]

1 hour ago, Smad said:

Pacifism, morality, compassion...it's all the same in the world of TWD. People who walk on that end of the spectrum always die. Pacifism is just the easiest way to express myself. Everything else takes longer to write and I don't have forever. Everything from 'all life is precious' to 'we have to live with these people after' to 'stick-fu only to protect myself and psychopaths'...it's all really rather long.

So you choose a word that doesn't mean any of the above, if you're wanting to be brief and concise then surely choosing a single word which actually embodies the concept you're trying to convey would be better? morality and compassion are single words which actually mean what you're trying to say, pacifist doesn't.

Non of the characters in the walking dead are pacifists, Jesus is an active participant in a war where he's prepared to use lethal force, ergo he is not a pacifist. He's prepared to kill in combat but he doesn't want to kill prisoners in cold blood, which is a moral viewpoint versus the short term pragmatic choice to murder the prisoners to get round the practical difficulties of feeding and imprisoning your enemy. As you say this in TWD this is always proven to be the wrong choice, and the characters who make it are usually portrayed as annoying and wrongheaded. 

1 hour ago, Smad said:

Everyone knows what it means though in the context of the character discussed because most people have seen the recent episodes. That's all that matters in the end...

TBF no, it doesn't matter, but i did say it was a pedantic point at the outset, and although i've quoted your post i wasn't having a go at you specifically since loads of people use the same phrase.

[peach]

5 hours ago, BasilSeal said:

So you choose a word that doesn't mean any of the above, if you're wanting to be brief and concise then surely choosing a single word which actually embodies the concept you're trying to convey would be better? morality and compassion are single words which actually mean what you're trying to say, pacifist doesn't.

No, that doesn't mean what he's trying to say.  He explained that he meant people who refuse to kill.  Calling it morality assumes that Jesus is taking the moral position, which is what is being debated.  Using the term "pacifist" in this discussion for not killing, means not killing.   Whether it's moral, or even compassionate, in this case, is the question.   The writing is terrible because Jesus was all about killing these same people in their sleep...getting other people to do it FOR him, actually, so I hardly see him as more moral than anyone else. 

[Enero]

20 hours ago, numbnut said:

An online petition was launched, calling for series showrunner Scott Gimple to be fired.

At time of this writing, the petition has almost 30,000 signatures. The petition’s summary highlights how Gimple promised actor Chandler Riggs that his character would be on the show for another three years. Riggs is on record saying he’d postpone college to continue acting on the series. According to the post, Riggs was fired from the show just two weeks prior to his 18th birthday, with Gimple’s explanation being that the death simply served the show’s story.

https://www.change.org/p/amc-tv-a-petition-for-scott-gimple-to-be-fired-from-the-walking-dead

Even if Gimple is canned I doubt it would have a positive impact on the direction of the show. I’m sure the decision to fire Chandler, as horrible as it is , wasn’t made in a vacuum.

[BasilSeal]

1 hour ago, Enero said:

Even if Gimple is canned I doubt it would have a positive impact on the direction of the show. I’m sure the decision to fire Chandler, as horrible as it is , wasn’t made in a vacuum.

I wondered if the decision is in part to do with the difference in time scales between TWD and the real world, Chandler was 10 when TWD started, two years or so has passed in the world of TWD and he's now 18. If he did another three years and say, 6 months passed in the show's time line he'd be 21 when he should be 13, but the baby sister born when he was eleven is still  two. As a viewer i don't really care about this issue but when he got into his 20's and the character he's playing is supposed to be a child it might look a bit daft.

[jls1792]

3 minutes ago, BasilSeal said:

I wondered if the decision is in part to do with the difference in time scales between TWD and the real world, Chandler was 10 when TWD started, two years or so has passed in the world of TWD and he's now 18. If he did another three years and say, 6 months passed in the show's time line he'd be 21 when he should be 13, but the baby sister born when he was eleven is still  two. As a viewer i don't really care about this issue but when he got into his 20's and the character he's playing is supposed to be a child it might look a bit daft.

I could be wrong, as I haven't read the comics, but I thought I saw somewhere that there's a two year time jump after All Out War.  I think Carl's about 14 on the show right now (I think he might have been playing a bit older when he first started), so if they did a 2 or even 3 year time jump that would put Carl at 16-17 years old, with Chandler being 18-19.

[BasilSeal]

3 hours ago, peach said:

No, that doesn't mean what he's trying to say.  He explained that he meant people who refuse to kill. 

That's not what the word pacifism means though, the definition of pacifism, which i've already posted once is: "the belief that war and violence are unjustifiable and that all disputes should be settled by peaceful means.". the pacifist response to Negan would be to hold a sit in a sing protest songs, not launch an attack on his compound with potentially lethal force. Jesus isn't arguing against armed conflict, he's saying they shouldn't murder people either out of revenge or for pragmatic practical reasons. That's not pacifism it's just basic human decency.

 

3 hours ago, peach said:

Whether it's moral, or even compassionate, in this case, is the question.

not really, killing the saviours after they've surrendered is murder, that's an objective fact, it's not really open for debate. Whether making a moral choice like this is a luxury that can be afforded in the violent post apocalyptic world of TWD is another matter, but that doesn't make Jesus wrong.

3 hours ago, peach said:

The writing is terrible because Jesus was all about killing these same people in their sleep...getting other people to do it FOR him, actually, so I hardly see him as more moral than anyone else. 

Can't argue with the first part of that re the writing, but in the case of the saviours they kill at the listening post, whilst this is portrayed as the characters crossing a moral line by killing in cold blood, the men they kill are still enemy combatants in the field of play at the time. they were a direct threat to both the hiltop and alexandria, and killing them was intended to neutralise that threat. The rules of war don't stipulate it has to be a fair fight, creeping up and killing them in their sleep may not be very sporting but it's no different from killing your enemies by dropping a bomb on them whilst they sleep. Killing the enemy is a necessity of war, killing unarmed prisoners after they've surrendered to you isn't, so i don't think Jesus condoning killing the saviours at the listening post was incompatible with him not wanting to kill the prisoners later.

This is however exactly the same argument they were having 6 seasons ago at the farm over the guy rick pulled off the fence, that's how far this series has moved on.

38 minutes ago, jls1792 said:

could be wrong, as I haven't read the comics, but I thought I saw somewhere that there's a two year time jump after All Out War.  I think Carl's about 14 on the show right now (I think he might have been playing a bit older when he first started), so if they did a 2 or even 3 year time jump that would put Carl at 16-17 years old, with Chandler being 18-19.

Ah, that would make more sense

[Nashville]

7 hours ago, BasilSeal said:

I wondered if the decision is in part to do with the difference in time scales between TWD and the real world, Chandler was 10 when TWD started, two years or so has passed in the world of TWD and he's now 18. If he did another three years and say, 6 months passed in the show's time line he'd be 21 when he should be 13, but the baby sister born when he was eleven is still  two. As a viewer i don't really care about this issue but when he got into his 20's and the character he's playing is supposed to be a child it might look a bit daft.

Then you get a younger actor, not kill off the character.  :P

[Janimo]

For what it's worth, the petition to fire Gimple is up to 45,100 and climbing.. I signed.
https://www.change.org/p/amc-tv-a-petition-for-scott-gimple-to-be-fired-from-the-walking-dead))

[tessat]

I think the kid has class for sure. I'm not a poster on this show forum but did read the article in the paper and wondered how posters were handling it. I'm actually surprised at all the anger as many like myself quit watching TWD years ago because we were sick of Carl and couldn't stand the character - he survives where better people were written off. I may have to tune back in next year to see if things are different without him.

[Anela]

17 minutes ago, tessat said:

I think the kid has class for sure. I'm not a poster on this show forum but did read the article in the paper and wondered how posters were handling it. I'm actually surprised at all the anger as many like myself quit watching TWD years ago because we were sick of Carl and couldn't stand the character - he survives where better people were written off. I may have to tune back in next year to see if things are different without him.

He became one of the better characters. Smarter than his dad at times, until they needed him to be a stupid kid, while his dad was off being even more stupid, with garbage people who aren't even in the comics. Literal garbage people. 

I remember he seemed to be a budding sociopath at the farm. He's much better now. Bonding with michonne seemed to help, after losing his mother. 

[BasilSeal]

6 minutes ago, tessat said:

I think the kid has class for sure. I'm not a poster on this show forum but did read the article in the paper and wondered how posters were handling it. I'm actually surprised at all the anger as many like myself quit watching TWD years ago because we were sick of Carl and couldn't stand the character - he survives where better people were written off. I may have to tune back in next year to see if things are different without him.

He actually got less annoying as he got older, but Carl, sorry, CORAL, is not the worst thing in this show by a long stretch. In fairness the walking dead has always been an awful show, but it used to be an awful show that was compelling viewing nevertheless. now it's just awful.

[Ohwell]

I remember Carl at the farm and I did think that he was a budding sociopath.  It's one thing to kill because you have to, but he seemed so cold and unfeeling.  I'll never forget when he shot that kid who was slowly putting his firearm down.  Guess he didn't put it down quickly enough to suit Carl.  It was at that point that I began to really dislike him.  Of course, Rick and Michonne weren't exactly great role models either, because I'll also never forget the three of them in the car passing up that hitchhiker, and then later on going back to get his backpack after he'd been eaten by walkers.  Maybe it was at that moment that Carl learned to be a sociopath.   

I agree though that he did seem to become more "human," although I'm not sure if Michonne gets full credit for influencing him.