The Walking Dead Season 2

four60 · November 15, 2011, 9:20pm

[quote]polo77j wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]polo77j wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:
I meant the farm folks, not cabin people.[/quote]

ok

then to discuss your theory: then why haven’t they just led Rick’s group into the barn like cattle to slaughter (before this last episode of course). They’re none the wiser as to what the barn houses.

The farm folk (aka Herschel’s clan) have other motivations for keeping those walkers in the barn. I don’t think it’s anything as sinister as feeding them with stray little girls. I’m thinking they’re keeping them around in the event a cure is found (Herschel implied he thought a cure would be found in one of the previous episodes).

Word.[/quote]

Why keep the zombies around waiting for a cure without feeding them? I think there is definitely something sinister going on with Hershel. Hershel would sacrifice Rick’s group if he thought it meant saving his zombie family. He is just waiting for the right time. Last episode he made a big deal about no guns at the farm. He wants to have the group unarmed for a reason, and I don’t think that it is about gun safety.[/quote]

I didn’t say they didn’t have a sinister motivation, I just don’t think they’re feeding living humans to the barn zombies. If that was the case, why tell Rick and his group that they best be moving on when they can just round them up in the middle of the night and herd them into the barn?

I def. think there’s some twisted shit going on, though. As far as the guns go, I think that has a lot to do with his barn zombies and not wanting Rick’s group to lay waste to them should they stumble across them (as Glenn has). Herschel’s clan obvi. haven’t been killing them. That was evident when T-Dog smashed the well zombies head in and Maggie had to turn away. I’m sure there is more than one reason they want them disarmed. The other reason might be to get the drop on them down the road?

This is turning into an awesome season regardless[/quote]

I think the old guy has seen enough to know he does not NEED to feed them to keep them alive. Plus the old fart has to much “respect” for life with all that HOPE and FAITH talk to be feeding the living Dead people. Now don’t get me wrong. That is one crazy old fucker, Ijust don’t think he has slipped that far down…yet.

polo77j · November 15, 2011, 9:33pm

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]polo77j wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]polo77j wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:
I meant the farm folks, not cabin people.[/quote]

ok

then to discuss your theory: then why haven’t they just led Rick’s group into the barn like cattle to slaughter (before this last episode of course). They’re none the wiser as to what the barn houses.

The farm folk (aka Herschel’s clan) have other motivations for keeping those walkers in the barn. I don’t think it’s anything as sinister as feeding them with stray little girls. I’m thinking they’re keeping them around in the event a cure is found (Herschel implied he thought a cure would be found in one of the previous episodes).

Word.[/quote]

Why keep the zombies around waiting for a cure without feeding them? I think there is definitely something sinister going on with Hershel. Hershel would sacrifice Rick’s group if he thought it meant saving his zombie family. He is just waiting for the right time. Last episode he made a big deal about no guns at the farm. He wants to have the group unarmed for a reason, and I don’t think that it is about gun safety.[/quote]

I didn’t say they didn’t have a sinister motivation, I just don’t think they’re feeding living humans to the barn zombies. If that was the case, why tell Rick and his group that they best be moving on when they can just round them up in the middle of the night and herd them into the barn?

I def. think there’s some twisted shit going on, though. As far as the guns go, I think that has a lot to do with his barn zombies and not wanting Rick’s group to lay waste to them should they stumble across them (as Glenn has). Herschel’s clan obvi. haven’t been killing them. That was evident when T-Dog smashed the well zombies head in and Maggie had to turn away. I’m sure there is more than one reason they want them disarmed. The other reason might be to get the drop on them down the road?

This is turning into an awesome season regardless[/quote]

I think the old guy has seen enough to know he does not NEED to feed them to keep them alive. Plus the old fart has to much “respect” for life with all that HOPE and FAITH talk to be feeding the living Dead people. Now don’t get me wrong. That is one crazy old fucker, Ijust don’t think he has slipped that far down…yet.[/quote]

I agree.

and to answer your question from earlier … If push came to shove and Herschel (or whoever) was forcing me and mine off his farm then I don’t think there’s any other choice than to throw the fuck down and with good reason.

Firstly, you want to keep your group safe at all costs. Assuming all other diplomatic avenues have all reached a dead end and you have no other choice.

Second, for the good of the group, you have to maintain your integrity as the leader. How weak would you look if you packed your shit up and left? Guarantee there’d be a legitimate power struggle in the wake of the fiasco. And you know you don’t want to live under the iron fist of Shane and, even though Daryl has survival skills, he doesn’t really have any leadership skills and I don’t think he can think past two or three moves down the road. So, in order for the group not to fall into Shane’s evil hands, you have no choice than to fight to “take” the farm.

Third, fuck Herschel. He’s a crazy, dictator. He’s the reincarnation of Quadaffi.

roybot · November 15, 2011, 9:34pm

[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:
I wouldbt mind being eaten by a zombie if they didn’t make that damn noise.

[/quote]

… and they always chew with their mouths open. Being dead is no excuse for poor table manners. [/quote]

I’ve yet to see a single zombie actually finish a meal either. They could have a fresh kill and only take a few bites from it before chasing a living person. What gives? [/quote]

As undead monsters go, zombies are uncouth binge eaters; they rarely finish the plate before starting another. Dracula is the fine diner of the supernatural world (hence the dinner suit). He’s a wine taster and people are hideskin flasks of vino.

Edward Cullen is the awkward kid giving his girlfriend a sly hickey on the swings.

polo77j · November 15, 2011, 9:40pm

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:
I wouldbt mind being eaten by a zombie if they didn’t make that damn noise.

[/quote]

… and they always chew with their mouths open. Being dead is no excuse for poor table manners. [/quote]

I’ve yet to see a single zombie actually finish a meal either. They could have a fresh kill and only take a few bites from it before chasing a living person. What gives? [/quote]

As undead monsters go, zombies are uncouth binge eaters; they rarely finish the plate before starting another. Dracula is the fine diner of the supernatural world (hence the dinner suit). He’s a wine taster and people are hideskin flasks of vino.

Edward Cullen is the awkward kid giving his girlfriend a sly hickey on the swings.[/quote]

Well, as far as vampires go, Dracula was technically an aristocrat. Edward Cullen’s just some middle-lower class punk who got bit and now lives forever as whiney bitch.

If you want to compare vampires and zombies, I’d go with Keifer Sutherland from the Lost Boys or maybe the vampire blood orgy/rave at the beginning of Blade as being comparable to zombies.

But then again, I don’t think vampires and zombies are similar at all. Vampires have all their mental faculties and decision making skills and consciously live forever (barring a few unfortunate encounters). While zombies shuffle around and are only driven by their compulsion to consume living flesh. They have no, nor recognize any, complex social order, nor do they house even rudimentary problem solving skills.

Zombies only have two real weaknesses. Sever brain trauma or full decomposition. Barring those two things, they’re relentless

roybot · November 15, 2011, 10:01pm

[quote]polo77j wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:
I wouldbt mind being eaten by a zombie if they didn’t make that damn noise.

[/quote]

… and they always chew with their mouths open. Being dead is no excuse for poor table manners. [/quote]

I’ve yet to see a single zombie actually finish a meal either. They could have a fresh kill and only take a few bites from it before chasing a living person. What gives? [/quote]

As undead monsters go, zombies are uncouth binge eaters; they rarely finish the plate before starting another. Dracula is the fine diner of the supernatural world (hence the dinner suit). He’s a wine taster and people are hideskin flasks of vino.

Edward Cullen is the awkward kid giving his girlfriend a sly hickey on the swings.[/quote]

Well, as far as vampires go, Dracula was technically an aristocrat. Edward Cullen’s just some middle-lower class punk who got bit and now lives forever as whiney bitch.

If you want to compare vampires and zombies, I’d go with Keifer Sutherland from the Lost Boys or maybe the vampire blood orgy/rave at the beginning of Blade as being comparable to zombies.

But then again, I don’t think vampires and zombies are similar at all. Vampires have all their mental faculties and decision making skills and consciously live forever (barring a few unfortunate encounters). While zombies shuffle around and are only driven by their compulsion to consume living flesh. They have no, nor recognize any, complex social order, nor do they house even rudimentary problem solving skills.

Zombies only have two real weaknesses. Sever brain trauma or full decomposition. Barring those two things, they’re relentless[/quote]

Not people, brains:

Zombies aren’t stupid:

polo77j · November 15, 2011, 10:12pm