|
Post by impulse on Aug 27, 2021 13:57:30 GMT -5
The biology of Zombies makes no sense. If by "zombie", you mean the word applied to reanimated / flesh-eating types, I do appreciate writers who at least try to explain the cause, instead of being like Robert Kirkman, falling back on the cop-out "its not about that," as if a theory in the fictional realm of zombie stories is going to overtake whatever the story happened to be.
Others have provided explanations--other than traditional voodoo--and no matter how "out there" the theory is, its addressing the "how and why", which is what naturally comes across many readers' / viewers' minds.
In Kirkman's defense, it's not just that it's not about that, but also that the characters in his story would not have a means to figure it out, which is true. He is aware that people would want to know, and he is pretty candid about feeling the explanations don't really hold up and not wanting to do it. He also is the one who said the characters don't have a way to find out in the story he is telling so he doesn't spend a lot of time on it. I think they have even discussed at once or twice, but more pressing things come up. I used to read all of the letters columns where he goes into a lot of this detail, but I admit it has been a while since I have, so take it with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Aug 27, 2021 14:31:58 GMT -5
In Kirkman's defense, it's not just that it's not about that, but also that the characters in his story would not have a means to figure it out, which is true. That's why for the TV series' 1st season finale ("TS-19", Darabont & Fierro (the episode's writers) had the characters going to the CDC to seek answers or a cure. The last doctor (Jenner) there laid out some basic facts about how the virus (or whatever caused it) reactivated the body, going to reveal that before global communication was lost, the CDC's French equivalent believed they were close to finding a solution, but with the grid's collapse, he would never know whether they found a cure or not.
The point of that episode was to have characters act as real life people would--yes, they are in survival mode, but as early as the episode was in the timeline of the outbreak, it was rational and expected that some would want to know the "how and why". After that point, there were no cure-related storylines in the series, especially after Rick Grimes informed his group that the living are all infected. Apparently, Kirkman did not like the episode, but I took that as his being butt-hurt that the subject he avoided was not only one of the standouts of The Walking Dead's first season, but (now) of the entire series. It was that strong and was the logical bridge for the early timeline / characters moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Aug 27, 2021 14:58:01 GMT -5
If by "zombie", you mean the word applied to reanimated / flesh-eating types, I do appreciate writers who at least try to explain the cause, instead of being like Robert Kirkman, falling back on the cop-out "its not about that," as if a theory in the fictional realm of zombie stories is going to overtake whatever the story happened to be.
Others have provided explanations--other than traditional voodoo--and no matter how "out there" the theory is, its addressing the "how and why", which is what naturally comes across many readers' / viewers' minds.
In Kirkman's defense, it's not just that it's not about that, but also that the characters in his story would not have a means to figure it out, which is true. That was one of my favourite parts about Kirkman's approach in the comic, and the reason I really disliked the first season episode set at the CDC (where a semblance of explanation for zombies is given). True! A moment I really enjoyed is when Eugene notices that some zombies aren't moving much anymore; his scientific curiosity is rightfully aroused, but there is never any time to explore things further (which is both a pity, in a scientific sense, and a blessing, in a storytelling sense... because any "rational" explanation would have been nonsensical).
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Aug 27, 2021 15:37:36 GMT -5
That's why for the TV series' 1st season finale ("TS-19", Darabont & Fierro (the episode's writers) had the characters going to the CDC to seek answers or a cure. The last doctor (Jenner) there laid out some basic facts about how the virus (or whatever caused it) reactivated the body, going to reveal that before global communication was lost, the CDC's French equivalent believed they were close to finding a solution, but with the grid's collapse, he would never know whether they found a cure or not.
The point of that episode was to have characters act as real life people would--yes, they are in survival mode, but as early as the episode was in the timeline of the outbreak, it was rational and expected that some would want to know the "how and why". After that point, there were no cure-related storylines in the series, especially after Rick Grimes informed his group that the living are all infected. Apparently, Kirkman did not like the episode, but I took that as his being butt-hurt that the subject he avoided was not only one of the standouts of The Walking Dead's first season, but (now) of the entire series. It was that strong and was the logical bridge for the early timeline / characters moving forward. I highly disagree that the CDC episode was a high point. I thought it was pretty cringe-inducing and cheesy and tonally at odds with the other serious, practical-minded episodes that season. Then again, the first season was VERY inconsistent tonally, and the whole show was very uneven, so nothing surprising I guess. I agree with Kirkman. The explanation of an absurd concept has already been done to death, and his attempt wouldn't be any better than anyone else's. The show trying to touch on it kinda proved him right in my opinion, though I will say one good thing to come of it was the knowledge that everyone was infected. That was a useful tool. The first season largely coasts by on the zeitgeist of the time and the quality of the first episode IMO. There I said it. Wait, wrong thread... In Kirkman's defense, it's not just that it's not about that, but also that the characters in his story would not have a means to figure it out, which is true. That was one of my favourite parts about Kirkman's approach in the comic, and the reason I really disliked the first season episode set at the CDC (where a semblance of explanation for zombies is given). True! A moment I really enjoyed is when Eugene notices that some zombies aren't moving much anymore; his scientific curiosity is rightfully aroused, but there is never any time to explore things further (which is both a pity, in a scientific sense, and a blessing, in a storytelling sense... because any "rational" explanation would have been nonsensical). Yes, totally agreed. I am glad that if they absolutely had to touch on an explanation that they didn't go any further. I agree that the idea of showing Eugene wondering but just not having time to think about it was very on-point with the intent and tone they were going for and was very believable. If The Walking Dead tried to be Return of the Night of the Land of the Living Dead part 7 it would have been another SyFy-fare footnote in TV history tossed in the dumpster.
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Aug 27, 2021 15:48:22 GMT -5
How about - Supporting Cast Member Has Long Known/Probably Knows Superhero's Real Identity for Years.
It's one thing if Commissioner Gordon keeps getting snuck up on in the middle of the night by a dark, mysterious, gravelly voiced cloaked figure moments after bidding his friend Bruce Wayne good-night, but it's entirely another if he's known for years that said dark, mysterious figure is his actually his friend Bruce Wayne sneaking around the corner, putting on his costume, and returning moments later speaking in a gravelly voice from a cape draped in front of his face.
It just makes the hero look like an idiot - "What do you mean you've known all this time who I am? You mean you knew that all those 'I am vengeance, I am the night!' speeches in my Clint Eastwood voice was being done by the same guy you saw pretending to trip over a birthday cake and urinate himself earlier in the day just to keep you off my trail?"
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 27, 2021 16:42:56 GMT -5
How about - Supporting Cast Member Has Long Known/Probably Knows Superhero's Real Identity for Years. It's one thing if Commissioner Gordon keeps getting snuck up on in the middle of the night by a dark, mysterious, gravelly voiced cloaked figure moments after bidding his friend Bruce Wayne good-night, but it's entirely another if he's known for years that said dark, mysterious figure is his actually his friend Bruce Wayne sneaking around the corner, putting on his costume, and returning moments later speaking in a gravelly voice from a cape draped in front of his face. It just makes the hero look like an idiot - "What do you mean you've known all this time who I am? You mean you knew that all those 'I am vengeance, I am the night!' speeches in my Clint Eastwood voice was being done by the same guy you saw pretending to trip over a birthday cake and urinate himself earlier in the day just to keep you off my trail?" Depending on who is supposed to know this one does or does not bother me. Jim Gordon is an accomplished detective. The idea that he hasn't figured out that Bruce Wayne is Batman strains my suspension of disbelief more than the idea that he has. And I personally feel that Robbie Robertson figured out Peter Parker was Spider-man in the 70s. But superhero funnybooks are so inherently silly that it's a tightrope walk.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Aug 27, 2021 17:05:22 GMT -5
n again, the first season was VERY inconsistent tonally, and the whole show was very uneven, so nothing surprising I guess. I agree with Kirkman. The explanation of an absurd concept has already been done to death, and his attempt wouldn't be any better than anyone else's. Oh, it was far more plausible than "Trioxin" chemical waste ( The Return of the Living Dead", and other films/TV series' attempts to explain it, nd again, the doctor only spoke of the process of infection/death and reanimation, but did not know the cause, so Kirkman's complaint was not justified, or he did not understand that audiences--if placed in the same situation--would look for explanations and/or a cure. "TS-19" held more believable human reaction / drama than some later seasons entire arcs, where it often became a game of "which Big Bad / group is going to sadistically kill off a main or supporting character in the mid-season or season finale?". Rinse and repeat.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Aug 27, 2021 17:20:51 GMT -5
oice from a cape draped in front of his face. It just makes the hero look like an idiot - "What do you mean you've known all this time who I am? You mean you knew that all those 'I am vengeance, I am the night!' speeches in my Clint Eastwood voice was being done by the same guy you saw pretending to trip over a birthday cake and urinate himself earlier in the day just to keep you off my trail?" I thought Captain Stacy's dying words--admitting he knew Peter was Spider-Man--was arguably the best/most satisfying example of a hero being caught by surprise that his secret had been known for some time. Stacy's experience had been used to hint he might suspect in issues leading up to TASM #90, but the big reveal punctuated the tragedy, with Spider-Man's reaction playing out as one would expect.
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Aug 27, 2021 17:20:57 GMT -5
How about - Supporting Cast Member Has Long Known/Probably Knows Superhero's Real Identity for Years. It's one thing if Commissioner Gordon keeps getting snuck up on in the middle of the night by a dark, mysterious, gravelly voiced cloaked figure moments after bidding his friend Bruce Wayne good-night, but it's entirely another if he's known for years that said dark, mysterious figure is his actually his friend Bruce Wayne sneaking around the corner, putting on his costume, and returning moments later speaking in a gravelly voice from a cape draped in front of his face. It just makes the hero look like an idiot - "What do you mean you've known all this time who I am? You mean you knew that all those 'I am vengeance, I am the night!' speeches in my Clint Eastwood voice was being done by the same guy you saw pretending to trip over a birthday cake and urinate himself earlier in the day just to keep you off my trail?" Depending on who is supposed to know this one does or does not bother me. Jim Gordon is an accomplished detective. The idea that he hasn't figured out that Bruce Wayne is Batman strains my suspension of disbelief more than the idea that he has. And I personally feel that Robbie Robertson figured out Peter Parker was Spider-man in the 70s. But superhero funnybooks are so inherently silly that it's a tightrope walk. Good point on Gordon. Still, unlike Peter Parker, Batman too, is an accomplished detective. No reason, of course, that a detective should be as skilled at concealing the truth as he is at uncovering it, but he should know that keeping his identity a secret from Gordon should require more finesse than, say, Harvey Bullock. Nevertheless, we've never seen him acknowledge the craftiness required to keep Gordon in the dark by taking extra precautions with him in this department. On the other hand, perhaps "I trust you with my life and you've proven time and again that you can keep a secret, but I can't tell you my real name" is an even more tired trope.
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Aug 27, 2021 17:26:20 GMT -5
oice from a cape draped in front of his face. It just makes the hero look like an idiot - "What do you mean you've known all this time who I am? You mean you knew that all those 'I am vengeance, I am the night!' speeches in my Clint Eastwood voice was being done by the same guy you saw pretending to trip over a birthday cake and urinate himself earlier in the day just to keep you off my trail?" I thought Captain Stacy's dying words--admitting he knew Peter was Spider-Man--was arguably the best/most satisfying example of a hero being caught by surprise that his secret had been known for some time. Stacy's experience had been used to hint he might suspect in issues leading up to TASM #90, but the big reveal punctuated the tragedy, with Spider-Man's reaction playing out as one would expect. Actually, Spider-Man's an excellent exception to this - a 15 year old kid would certainly be unaware of all the necessary measures required to hide his identity. "Wear a mask, listen to Spidey-Sense" would about cover it and as you and Slam have noted, there are those who would notice little tells Peter doesn't even realize he's giving away.
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Aug 28, 2021 10:12:05 GMT -5
Jim Gordon is an accomplished detective. You'd think so, but... the Adam West TV series had a lot of fun with this secret identity thing, sometimes, it got really insane.
I don't recall offhand which episode, but there's one where he openly admits that for quite a while, he suspected Bruce Wayne was Batman, but he's since had it proven not to be the case (heh).
But then there's the episode where Pinky Pinkston tells him that Colonel Gumm had come up with the idea that Bruce Wayne was The Green Hornet, and Britt Reed was Batman. Instead of dismissing this outright, he foolishly says, "We'll have them in here and confront them with it!" --totally ignoring the whole point of HIS ALLY Batman maintaining a secret identity. It's the daffy Pinky who then points out to him, "Do you really think they'd admit it, after spending so much time keeping their identities a secret?"
Then of course you have the whole Batgirl/Barbara Gordon thing ("BG"). In one episode, Barbara goes into Gordon's office and calls Batman on the Batphone. After she hangs up, Gordon comes in, they say hello, she leaves, but then Batman calls back asking if Batgirl is still there. And Gordon just DOESN'T make the connection.
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Aug 28, 2021 12:27:21 GMT -5
I thought Captain Stacy's dying words--admitting he knew Peter was Spider-Man--was arguably the best/most satisfying example of a hero being caught by surprise that his secret had been known for some time. Stacy's experience had been used to hint he might suspect in issues leading up to TASM #90, but the big reveal punctuated the tragedy, with Spider-Man's reaction playing out as one would expect. Actually, Spider-Man's an excellent exception to this - a 15 year old kid would certainly be unaware of all the necessary measures required to hide his identity. "Wear a mask, listen to Spidey-Sense" would about cover it and as you and Slam have noted, there are those who would notice little tells Peter doesn't even realize he's giving away. There's an amusing scene in Star Brand (maybe the only enjoyable part) where John Byrne, at a comic convention, explains to the title character why his full-face mask doesn't really do much to hide his identity at all.
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Aug 28, 2021 12:44:02 GMT -5
How about - Supporting Cast Member Has Long Known/Probably Knows Superhero's Real Identity for Years. It's one thing if Commissioner Gordon keeps getting snuck up on in the middle of the night by a dark, mysterious, gravelly voiced cloaked figure moments after bidding his friend Bruce Wayne good-night, but it's entirely another if he's known for years that said dark, mysterious figure is his actually his friend Bruce Wayne sneaking around the corner, putting on his costume, and returning moments later speaking in a gravelly voice from a cape draped in front of his face. It just makes the hero look like an idiot - "What do you mean you've known all this time who I am? You mean you knew that all those 'I am vengeance, I am the night!' speeches in my Clint Eastwood voice was being done by the same guy you saw pretending to trip over a birthday cake and urinate himself earlier in the day just to keep you off my trail?" Depending on who is supposed to know this one does or does not bother me. Jim Gordon is an accomplished detective. The idea that he hasn't figured out that Bruce Wayne is Batman strains my suspension of disbelief more than the idea that he has. And I personally feel that Robbie Robertson figured out Peter Parker was Spider-man in the 70s. But superhero funnybooks are so inherently silly that it's a tightrope walk. I've heard that there was a reveal in the late 1990s or early 2000s when Aunt May said that she knew Peter was Spider-Man. I think it was part of May dying, but later getting retconned away as an actress disguised as her. That's a pretty awful idea, because Aunt May often complained about Spider-Man to Peter. If she really knew, then she would have been really screwing with her nephew's mind all those years.
|
|
|
Post by The Cheat on Aug 28, 2021 13:19:33 GMT -5
Depending on who is supposed to know this one does or does not bother me. Jim Gordon is an accomplished detective. The idea that he hasn't figured out that Bruce Wayne is Batman strains my suspension of disbelief more than the idea that he has. And I personally feel that Robbie Robertson figured out Peter Parker was Spider-man in the 70s. But superhero funnybooks are so inherently silly that it's a tightrope walk. I've heard that there was a reveal in the late 1990s or early 2000s when Aunt May said that she knew Peter was Spider-Man. I think it was part of May dying, but later getting retconned away as an actress disguised as her. That's a pretty awful idea, because Aunt May often complained about Spider-Man to Peter. If she really knew, then she would have been really screwing with her nephew's mind all those years. Same applies to Mary Jane. If she knew all along, then all those times she explicitly points out that Peter is missing while the gang watch Spider-Man is a bit of a dick move.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Aug 28, 2021 14:23:59 GMT -5
Well, young Mary Jane could be a real B*#ch.
|
|