The Walking Dead

I don't see this as good news. Not at all. The pilot remains an incredibly strong episode, arguably the best of the entire series (up to this point). And a great big part of that is due to Darabont, his style and the feature quality the pilot has.

So for stylistic purposes alone, his absence will be felt.

"Hmm" indeed...

Just saw this news this morning well that sucks.

I don't know if he'd consider it or not but what about George A. Romero? He's the originator & knows zombies but whether he's too old & decrepit now to consider it or just wouldn't want to do it, I know not. Another suggestion would be Sam Raimi because of his EVIL DEAD stuff but whether he'd want to do TV, I know not. Also, those films were actually funny to me moreso than horrifying. JJ Abrams would be a good choice but he's still doing FRINGE. Another choice would be Rob Zombie but the problem there is, he'd turn it into white trash/trailer park trash but at least he'd include 'classic rock' for the soundtrack a la SUPERNATURAL so that part would be OK but the other? Meh. And don't forget, he'd have to include his wife Sherri Moon & that bald guy. There may be other suggestions that would be good.

Actually I haven't even watched this show yet. Is it better than the usual zombie fare we get at the theater?

It's relative. This is a more character-driven thing. The zombie apocalypse could just as easily have been a nuclear apocalypse. The story is about the characters struggle to survive more than it is about zombies. Have you read the comics? The tone is similar even if the story breaks away from that fairly regularly.

News on who is taking over:
http://www.deadline.com/2011/07/glen-mazzara-to-succeed-frank-darabont-as-walking-dead-showrunner/

It's funny, since it can't happen now, but Zack Snyder would be PERFECT for 'The Walking Dead'.

Apologist Puncher wrote:It's funny, since it can't happen now, but Zack Snyder would be PERFECT for 'The Walking Dead'.

Maybe it was here or maybe it was some place else but someone tossed out George Romero as a replacement. You have to admit the guy understands the genre...

thecolorsblend wrote:Maybe it was here or maybe it was some place else but someone tossed out George Romero as a replacement. You have to admit the guy understands the genre...

Have you seen Snyder's 'Dawn of the Dead' remake???

Apologist Puncher wrote:

thecolorsblend wrote:Maybe it was here or maybe it was some place else but someone tossed out George Romero as a replacement. You have to admit the guy understands the genre...

Have you seen Snyder's 'Dawn of the Dead' remake???

I certainly have. And it ruled.

In fact, I sort of have a problem. I can't figure out if the Dawn of the Dead remake is the best zombie movie ever or if it was simply the best until Zombieland came along.

thecolorsblend wrote:
I certainly have. And it ruled.

In fact, I sort of have a problem. I can't figure out if the Dawn of the Dead remake is the best zombie movie ever or if it was simply the best until Zombieland came along.

Since 'Zombieland' pretty much riffed off of Snyder's opening, I would have to say:

1. Snyder's 'Dawn of the Dead'
2. 'Zombieland'
3. Shaun of the Dead

...

Yeah, actually, I can get onboard with that list.

thecolorsblend wrote:...

Yeah, actually, I can get onboard with that list.

No one with good taste couldn't.

Let's not forget Sam Raimi's 'EVIL DEAD' films but like I said previously, they were more like comedy to me than horror. Kinda like 'Shaun of the Dead' tried to be intentionally( & was). EVIL DEAD 2 was basically a remake of sorts of the first, low-budget film. There were some changes, definitely, but it was so obviously a ripoff of the first film. I never completely watched the 3rd film, ARMY OF DARKNESS. Anyway, I laughed so hard on that 1st film! But yeah, a zombie film should invoke horror, right? Unless, like 'Shaun', the intent is to be funny. But something you may not know. In 1970 there was an amateur film made called EQUINOX that was so well made for the limited budget & the time it was in & all that it got a 'remake' the following year with a bigger budget & was a little longer. However, the story riffed hard on the 1st film & my point here? If you watch these films first & then go watch Raimi's 1st 2 films, you'll see that Raimi ripped them off! I kid you not! Even right down to the 'flying red devil'! I have Equinox on an Anchor Bay DVD which I saw before the Raimi films & it was as obvious as the nose on your face. However, has Raimi ever acknowledged this? I don't know.

Let's also not forget THE RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD. Another film intentionally meant to be funny, I about rolled the 1st time I ever rented the video back in 1986!

As for 'serious' zombie films though, I can agree with your list. I too love Snyder's remake much better than the original, even if TERMINAL didn't! But I guess something does have to be said about the original Romero films but I actually like NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD better than Romero's version of 'Dawn'. But have you seen LAND OF THE DEAD? That's also pretty good. So is DAY OF THE DEAD, the remake that is, & there's one of those 'Paranormal Activity'-type of zombie films if I could remember the name of it.

non_amos wrote:Let's not forget Sam Raimi's 'EVIL DEAD' films but like I said previously, they were more like comedy to me than horror. Kinda like 'Shaun of the Dead' tried to be intentionally( & was). EVIL DEAD 2 was basically a remake of sorts of the first, low-budget film. There were some changes, definitely, but it was so obviously a ripoff of the first film. I never completely watched the 3rd film, ARMY OF DARKNESS.

BLASPHEMY!!

Anyway, I laughed so hard on that 1st film! But yeah, a zombie film should invoke horror, right? Unless, like 'Shaun', the intent is to be funny.

SOTD did have it's fair share of gruesome zombie kills though. It wasn't all played for laughs.

But something you may not know. In 1970 there was an amateur film made called EQUINOX that was so well made for the limited budget & the time it was in & all that it got a 'remake' the following year with a bigger budget & was a little longer. However, the story riffed hard on the 1st film & my point here? If you watch these films first & then go watch Raimi's 1st 2 films, you'll see that Raimi ripped them off! I kid you not! Even right down to the 'flying red devil'! I have Equinox on an Anchor Bay DVD which I saw before the Raimi films & it was as obvious as the nose on your face. However, has Raimi ever acknowledged this? I don't know.

No idea, but directors hardly ever do.

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=20445

Wowza, Darabont Fired from Walking Dead?
Source:The Hollywood Reporter
August 10, 2011


Everyone was a bit taken aback when news broke Frank Darabont departed The Walking Dead.

Some speculated he had a feature film coming up and he need to make time for that, but THR did some digging. According to the trade paper, Darabont was fired. The cast and crew were separately informed and, says THR, they're afraid to speak about the situation because AMC is being rather aggressive about keeping the firing under wraps.

THR says Darabont was fired after trying to salvage an episode in which the footage - from another director - was deemed unusable. More from THR's article: "What remains a central mystery, even to those closely involved, is what triggered AMC's move to fire Darabont. As noted, AMC's decision to cut the budget dated to the previous fall, when the network instructed Darabont to produce 13 episodes for a second season, up from six for the first season, for less money. Not only would the show get a lower budget, but AMC also decided that Walking Dead would no longer reap the benefit of a 30 percent tax credit per episode that came with filming in Georgia. Now the network was going to hold on to that money."

Is the show facing a financial crisis? Did AMC bite off more than it could chew? It's an interesting read, folks. Head on over to this spot for more.

Other spot:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/walking-dead-what-happened-fired-221449

More than I want to read right now. Thoughts?

ya sucks he is gone, remember hearing the news a few weeks back.

Hollywood and the entertainment biz in general is all about ego. Who came up with what, who should get the credit, etc. Y'know, all the shit that nobody will remember or care about even a year from now.

But stuff like firing Darabont? The show will never be the same.

I've written before that the pilot set up a certain scope and style that was never quite matched by subsequent episodes. Obviously taking a show into series will do that. Less time for overly-thoughtful, laborious filmmaking. Par for the course.

But even that only takes you so far. Subsequent episodes featured radically fewer zombies running around. Why? That saves time, make up expenses, wardrobe expenses, personnel expenses, probably even catering expenses. It may make good business sense but it makes no creative sense.

Season 2 is when this all boiled over but you get the idea that money and production issues were problems even back in the first season when the show went into production proper.

In the end, this could ruin what was already a good show. Not a great one, maybe. But a good one. How often in life do you get a visionary feature director on a TV show? Darabont and his sensibilities are not easily replaced, esp by someone who's natively a TV guy.

I've got a very bad feeling about this.

'The Walken Dead'. Freakin' HILARIOUS:

Well the season 2 premire just finished. Was great to finally have the show back. After its long between season hiatus. I thought tnoight episode was well written and acted. The drama on hiway and sophia missing was good. I hope she is ok, and boy was shocked at the outcome of the episode. All in all a solid premire.preview of the season looked good. Some nice stuff coming up. Also I like that they are leaving the atlanta area for other areas.

I enjoyed it. More and more, I'm starting to think of the Walking Dead show as a completely different animal from the comics. That helps me appreciate the show a little more. The problem is that the departures from the comic book canon emphasize why Kirkman made the choices he did in terms of pacing, character development, character deaths, etc. I don't want to get too specific or spoilery here but something happens at the end of the premiere that shouldn't happen until the character undergoes MAJOR change/growth. It really affects Rick's character arc through the initial, oh, maybe 12 or 13 issues of the comic book. He finds himself thrust into seemingly impossible situations and he has to cowboy up at each step of the way to protect the group and his family.

But the show isn't reflecting that. It's trapping him inside one particular (and brief) character arc from the comics. I can accept that certain things might need to change when moving from one medium to another but this is starting to go too far.

That's the bad news.

The good news is that the actors playing Shane and Dale both ARE those characters for me now. Their looks, their voices, their general acting, the whole burrito, they seem ripped right out of the comics. Amazing performances, if you ask me.

The dark side there is that other cast members aren't quite as representative of their characters. Good as Lincoln is, he doesn't really embody the way I always thought Rick would look and sound in live action. Ditto the chicks who play Lori and Andrea.

Overall, it's definitely worth watching but nothing will touch those comics for me at this point.

Apologist Puncher wrote:'The Walken Dead'. Freakin' HILARIOUS:

For those who missed it....

I liked the premiere, but nothing really happens until the very end of the show. And I agree with colors, it was too soon for that.

But hey, if they can fire Frank Darabont for wanting MORE out of the show, who are we to them?

Apologist Puncher wrote:I liked the premiere, but nothing really happens until the very end of the show. And I agree with colors, it was too soon for that.

Either that or something else is happening waaaaaaay late. Pick one.

But hey, if they can fire Frank Darabont for wanting MORE out of the show, who are we to them?

And there's the rub. Of all things, a Walking Dead TV show should practically write itself. The fact that season 1 had the problems it did from about episode 4 on and the, ah, end of the premiere... it just doesn't make sense.

That said, season 1 is okay if you can somehow process it outside the comics canon. And season 2 is so far a step up. But one thing I was kind of looking forward to was the group going to that subdivision and trying to make a go of it before getting forced out by the zombies. A running thing the comics had going was that the group would settle on a place and assume they'd FINALLY found a safe house... before it came crashing down around the ears through no fault of theirs. It sells the peril they're in, that there's literally no place safe for them.

Maybe it's a nitpicky thing, I don't know, but there you have it.

One nice thing though is that the season 2 premiere didn't skimp on the zombie effects. You go back and watch season 1 and in some episodes you'd get maybe only one or two zombies or other creature effects. Anything can happen between now and the finale but I'd like to think they've learned valuable lessons from last year.

I hope.

One other thing.

Spoiler:

And incidentally, I can't remember if you ever read a WD trades or not. Have you? I thought there were one or two you'd picked up but I wasn't sure if you're a hardcore fan or not.

thecolorsblend wrote:Either that or something else is happening waaaaaaay late. Pick one.

Or won't happen at all....

One nice thing though is that the season 2 premiere didn't skimp on the zombie effects. You go back and watch season 1 and in some episodes you'd get maybe only one or two zombies or other creature effects. Anything can happen between now and the finale but I'd like to think they've learned valuable lessons from last year.

One thing I noticed, and it cracked me up, was that one of the "cadavers" on the freeway moved his leg out of the way when the zombies came shuffling by. I thought it was maybe Norman Reedus' character, but I made sure to pay attention to his footwear. Wasn't him.

If you watch it again, see if you can notice it too.

I hope.

You and me both.