Random Thoughts — Page 265

ray_afraid said:

^I'm with ya! The show is lame (well, I did dig the first season), but I love the comics!

I enjoyed season one as well. You'd think Kirkman's involvement on season two would have improved it, but it was awful. I wonder if Frank Darabont would have been involved in seasons two and three if they would have turned out better?

I read the books month-to-month, but decided to hold off for a few months so I'd have several unread issues to read through at once. As of yesterday (issue 112 came out), I now have five unread issues and don't think I can hold off any longer. That is almost a half a year of self control, haven't read it since February, and it'll probably take only about an hour to read all of those.

I've read the comics (until the January issue I think) and watched the Series. I like both very much.

CP3S said:

 Everybody just adores Daryl for his looks. It is pretty lame.

 We have just had a film/tv collectors event in London and there were two main cast actors from Walking Dead there. Norman Reedus and Sarah Wayne Callies. Sarah was on one of the normal tables for all to see but Norman appeared to be the No1 attraction and they hid him away behind the screens to stop people crowding and killing each other to get a look at him.

Where's Bingowings?

I think the subject















of post-mortem photography is woefully underrepresented in the horror film genre.

Leonardo said:

In this one, it's briefly glanced upon:

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Others_(2001_film)"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Others_(2001_film)" title="en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Others_(2001_film)" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Others_(2001_film)</a></a>

If you haven't seen this one, don't read any synopsis, you'll spoil it!

ray_afraid said:

CP3S said:

ray_afraid said:

^I'm with ya! The show is lame (well, I did dig the first season), but I love the comics!

I enjoyed season one as well. You'd think Kirkman's involvement on season two would have improved it, but it was awful. I wonder if Frank Darabont would have been involved in seasons two and three if they would have turned out better?

I really think Darabont was a key to the first seasons success... But I'm a bit biased as I'm a fan.

Darabont has done some pretty great stuff, and was a perfect fit for bringing The Walking Dead to life. It is a shame they sacked him.

But hey, AMC learned their lesson: Why keep a guy with great creative vision around who is going to make a fuss about silly things like budget cuts, and creating a quality production when all you have to do is produce a mediocre show and flash Norman Reedus on the screen a couple of times per episode to keep the ratings high.

I think Kirkman made something really great with The Walking Dead, but for the last couple of years it has really done a lot of meandering, which is entirely unwelcome when you have to wait a month between stories that only take you ten minutes to read. The events at Hershals farm only filled a small handful of issues. I am pretty sure it filled less than five issues, but I don't remember for sure. Yet a lot of stuff happened during that time. The prison was a longer story, but it kept moving and interesting things kept happening. For the last while in the book, nothing significant or that exciting has taken place. I feel like the Negan storyline isn't going anywhere (I'm still five issues behind, so maybe it has, but I am not holding my breath). Which is pretty much the state of the tv show. Nothing ever happens. It is so slow moving, meandering, and boring. There are so many interesting ideas to explore, so many characters to learn more about, so many events that could happen. Instead we drag the Governor on for another season.

Hopefully people will get tired of gawking at Reedus, rating will drop, the show will get cancelled, and Kirkman will refocus his attention on the book and it will start heading back to its former glory.

Oh yeah, and thanks for all the creepy pictures of dead kids, Dur. We all needed that.

That was the look on my face after watching TPM for the first time. Also, being morbid, the kids in 1 and 6 part 2 don't look alive. Though in 1's case that looks through sheer boredom.

AntcuFaalb said:

SilverWook said:

Who's dead in pics three and four?

3=beats me!

4=little kid?

In three, it is the one sitting in the awkward position of course. Ever try to stand up a dead person? It doesn't work so well. Once rigor mortis kicks in, there is no balancing them, and before that they are like a rag doll. Different parts of the body weight different amounts, and the stagnant fluids are not evenly distributed. 

And for four, it is the little kid on the horse. That picture is the creepiest of the lot.

Man, you guys aren't exactly encouraging me to start watching WDs2.

ray_afraid said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

I think the subject of post-mortem photography is woefully underrepresented in the horror film genre.

You mean you want horror films about living people posing for pictures with dead people? Doesn't sound too exciting or scary to me... I love postmortem photography and I actually collect photos, but a horror movie about it? I dunno...

You love post mortem photography and collect such photos?