TWD TV - That Season 3 ending...
I honestly was expecting the governor (Philip) to be killed but nope, Andrea, that kid, the crew who was with him pretty much were all dead because of him or his actions.
It was unsatisfying and this is Andrea's fault mainly, because if she had slit his throat while he was asleep only he would have died.
Oh yeah, since they were awaiting them at the prison they could've locked them down and shot them all like a bunch of walkers, and/or throw grenades to blow them up if they had any left.
It was unsatisfying and this is Andrea's fault mainly, because if she had slit his throat while he was asleep only he would have died.
Oh yeah, since they were awaiting them at the prison they could've locked them down and shot them all like a bunch of walkers, and/or throw grenades to blow them up if they had any left.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I thought that it was mediocre from the beginning. The comic is much better, Telltale's writing is much better, and shows like Breaking Bad, The Wire, and Game Of Thrones shit all over it.
Watches TV Prison Arc.
Dafuq happened here?
wo wo wo... easy man. Don't touch Game of Thrones ( removed on motives of the nice novel ) Breaking Bad - this TV series have the best acting game I have ever seen. You can't compare The Walking Dead with these soap operas.
I'm not saying that the whole series shit, I like it, but the last time he was very spoiled because of differences with the scenario of a comic book.
I felt a lot worse when Merle was killed. Not only that, even though Allan had a bigger (and less pointless) role in the comics, I didn’t give a shit about him, either.
I will say this, though: Carl is probably going to turn into a Shane by half-way through Season 4.
Ha, imagine finding him at Alexandria!
I'm not opposed to happy endings (relatively speaking in TWD of course). I like how the last season ended. The farm was lost, Shane died never to redeemed, a bunch of farmhands got eaten, but it was still a happy ending of sorts. There was resolution to some of the on-going problems with that season.
But with this finale, ugh, I posted my reasons in the first thread so I won't repeat them here. It's just not up to par to what a finale should be.
I liked the ending to Season 2 as well, but it certainly didn't feel happy to me. They lost everything and people died. I know it goes against the drama and theme of the series, but I'm always hoping for them to eventually be safe and at peace. I agree with you that the finale didn't end with a bang and had us craving for more though.
Ditto. Andrea was an irredeemable ditz, in my view. From shooting Daryl to her failure to Kill Phil.
Hell, Merle the racist redneck was more likeable.
It's not like the signs weren't there; how many people of good character and sound mental health do you know who keep human heads in fish tanks? Or force two brothers to fight to the death? She also had her former group tell them he killed one of them for grins and giggles, beat the piss out of another, along with her only friend for the past eight months tell her "yeah, he also sent a guy to kill me the day I left and he would've done the same to you".
She doesn't even deny the guy's evil. She wanted to "save everyone" (the governor included) and it basically results in the death of every able-bodied fighting-age person in Woodbury. Sun Tzu warned us about that kind of mindset "He who tries to defend everything defends nothing".
Wow really?
I thought season 1 was awesome, but season 2 was really getting boring to me. A lot of my friends stopped watching The Walking Dead because of season 2. I stayed in there, and absolutely loved season 3.
I think David Morrisey is an amazing actor, but I didn't like the governor. He annoyed the hell out of me. I know he's supposed to, but I kinda hoped he would die at the end of the season.
A lot of people saying that he is just a kid and he saw a lot of bad things and his mother died and all, but srsly he's not the only one who lost his family/friends etc.. and why in the world would they give him the gun in the first place? Teach him how to use it is one thing, but allowing him to use it just like that is wrong.
I'd be more happy if Carl would have died instead of Andrea. The only thing why I don't want him to die, is because I think Rick would really lose it..
As for season ending.. I think it was a bit weak, bit shocking but weak. But that's just me.
I do understand people disliking him though.
As for the ending... yeah, it didn't have a cliffhanger like the other seasons, but I still thought it was a great episode. It felt more like a mid-season finale. They could have done better, I totally agree, but being a huge Walking Dead fan, I can't complain that much.
I agree,it was really bad and hard to watch and spend 40 minutes watching.I invested in watching this series because of how well written it was,the finale episode summed up how bad season 3 was,and by the looks of things season 4 will be more of the same...
Likewise. I tended to place blame for the way he was in Season 2 on his mother though; Lori just couldn't keep an eye on the kid.
Carl definitely made the right call in shooting the kid. As I said in the other thread, the kid was told to drop his weapon and he didn't. It's one of the first things I was taught in basic, as long as somebody's armed, they're still a combatant. If somebody (particularly somebody that was just shooting at me or my buddies) has a weapon pointed anywhere even remotely in my general direction, I'm not taking chances.
Hell, we even see how that scene with the kid could've gone like five minutes later, when the governor looks like he's about to surrender to Allen.
I think you are wrong here. Yes, the kid was told to drop his weapon, but he didn't even had a chance to do so. If someone points a weapon at you, you don't just drop it. You do everything slowly, because as we know in situations like this you can't do any sudden moves. He was handing a shoutgun with one arm and there's no way a kid could shoot his weapon in any fast way.
What is more, Hershel was the one who told the kid to drop his weapon and he was armed, therefore it was his call to shoot or not, not Carls.
Yeah, I agree that Lori did a terrible job as a mother in season 2. Yet I feel that Rick has no control over Carl anymore, and that's bad.
Shotgun kid was told to drop his weapon. And he had plenty of time of do so. Re-watch the scene again. He was given the chance to comply. He was even thinking straight enough to tell Hershel and Carl to take his shotty. He continued walking up "to hand over" his shotgun. That's just stupid and asking to be killed if he truly intended to surrender. Someone who actually wants to surrender--when you have a bunch of people aiming their weapons at you--would lay down their weapons on the ground as instructed.
All that said, I'm not 100% sure that Carl was even thinking about all that. I think he simply wanted to kill someone. He was super pissed off before the battle started. Even Glenn said he's never seen Carl so pissed off before. At the same time, Carl could've just capped shotgun kid the moment he showed up. Any thoughts? Regardless, Carl killing shotgun kid may or may not be inspired by the right motivations, though it probably prevented shotgun kid from pulling off some stunt.
My guess is that in season 4 Carl will be the one to shoot the Govenor, since he doesn't afraid to kill a human anymore and he himself looks forward to killing, but I will be disappointed if Carl will survive in the future season. Just my personal opinion.
As said, the kid had ample time to do what he was told and instead kept his weapon pointed in their general direction with his finger near the trigger while still moving toward them. Generally speaking, if an act would pass legal scrutiny today, I'm inclined to think it should probably get a pass in a post-apocalyptic world too.
And it's not like grade school either, just because Hershel called shotgun (pun definitely intended) doesn't mean he's the only one that gets to decide to shoot him or not.
It may have just been a stupid mistake for the kid to decide to "surrender" like that, but it's a case where giving him the benefit of the doubt can easily end up with one of your own dead. And as long as he has a weapon in hand, it's a chance you can't really afford to take. Even if I personally believed he was legitimately surrendering and was willing to bet my own safety on it, it'd be downright irresponsible of me to wager the safety of the other people I'm with.
What I meant to say was, Hershel is older than Carl. As Rick is the group leader, Hershel was a leader of their 2 men group (if that makes seance) So it wasn't who called shotgun, but who's making choices. And it wasn't up to Carl to make the choice.
Although the kid with the gun was scared he didn't drop or put it down, he just kept it on his arms. I'm sure the kid would have killed some of Rick's people if he had the chance to (other than meeting with Carl & Hershel), so Carl in the end did what was for the best.
Too bad he didn't kill the governor, but the governor would've killed Carl & Hershel in a blink of an eye just like he did to that guy who aimed a gun at him.
Carl's going to become one hell of a shooter without mercy.
The guy was Allan, Ben's(the kid that took the shot for the Governor and that Merle killed basically twice as he also ate him while undead)father, who was at the prison with Tyresse and Sasha and his dying wife. He wasn't prepared to kill the Governor, and who'd think(besides us
you are clearly wrong, it was murder
i think he did want to kill someone, he wanted to prove a point that he could and also (probable because he is scared) he thinks killing people that may be any kind of threat is the best option, but obviously it isn't, it not only morally wrong it is also just not the smart thing to do to kill everybody you meet, he may have ended it it a spectacularly bad way but the governor built up a community and you can't do that if you just kill everybody
Hershel also didn't tell the other people with him to stand down. Just because he gave the kid the order to drop it doesn't mean everybody else is obligated to wait until he either complies or tries something.
Murder's typically defined as the illegal killing of one human being by another; if there's no law, there technically can't even be murder, right?
More seriously, as double u and I pointed out, even today it'd easily pass scrutiny under international law. As long as somebody has a weapon in hand, they're still a combatant (and thus fair game to be shot), period. For the practical reason as to why, we see as much just a few minutes later with the Governor. I doubt anyone would've called foul if Allen had killed him.
I cried... i love andrea.
The governor also required newcomers give up their weapons when they came into Woodbury. I'm also inclined to doubt he had a welcoming attitude to people that were shooting at him or those he cared about just a few minutes earlier.
Nobody's talking about "killing everybody you meet", we're talking about killing someone acting suspiciously while he has a weapon in hand and pointed in the general direction of you and your friends (the fact he had just taken part in an attack on the place you sleep is incidental, yet important).
Carl says it best: he couldn't take the chance. All the kid had to do was move his weapon a bit to the left and pull the trigger and that's potentially Carl, Hershel, or Beth exceeding their recommended daily allowance of lead.
well carl is full of bullshit, it was murder even if law doesn't exist, murder is just as much about the morality of the situation as it is the specific laws of whatever country it happens, the kid had clearly given up and was handing over his gun
I understand you are making a strong moral objection here, but we can't dismiss some of the facts of the situation.
First, can you explain what makes you think that shotgun kid "had clearly given up?"
From my perspective, I do not think shotgun kid has demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that he has given up. When people surrender, they naturally obey everything they are told to do because they fear for their lives. Heck, even soldiers who speak different languages, when they surrender naturally lay down their arms immediately and put up their hands to prove they are not a threat. Laying down your arms is both logically and instinctively the right thing to do if you want to surrender and save your own life.
Hershel clearly instructed shotgun kid to drop his weapon. But instead of following instructions for surrendering, shotgun kid walked towards Hershel and Carl with weapon in hand. Any soldier or police officer will tell you that any time someone does not comply, they need to be treated as a threat because they might attempt to pull a fast one.
Also take a look at where the action is on the shotgun. It's pushed forward which means a shell is chambered. All shotgun kid has to do is slightly swing the weapon towards Carl when he's "handing over" the weapon and fill him with buckshot.
While perhaps Carl and Hershel can be criticized for not warning shotgun kid again (i.e. "Freeze! I said drop the fucking gun!"), he didn't prove that he was going surrender simply by not complying with instructions. Carl's shot, IMO, was justified.
This thing about the shotgun kid is sorta biased because we really don't know what the kid was thinking, it looked to go about 50/50. I think he personally shot the kid for enjoyment, but that there was a good reason for doing so. However, I think he is turning down the wrong path.
Apocalypse or no, if you fired first - it's a murder. If you fired second - that's a cross fire. Police would not shoot if the suspect would not follow orders on the first command. They would give second one, then the third one if needed. And if that wouldn't help, they would start a slow approach to the suspect. If a suspect tried to pull anything, they would shoot his foot or hand, they wouldn't go for a kill. It's all about neutralizing not eliminating.
Because if Carl made the right call, then the Govenor isn't wrong for killing all his people. They disobeyed him so now he shouldn't take any chances with them.