Telltale, please read this article.
And please keep it in mind while you're putting together the rest of season 2.
http://secrethideoutblog.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/confusing-realism-with-pessimism/
This discussion has been closed.
And please keep it in mind while you're putting together the rest of season 2.
http://secrethideoutblog.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/confusing-realism-with-pessimism/
Comments
But the game is realistic... the characters are never 100% pure evil and no character is 100% good. Still even if it is a little overly dark what is to be expected from a post apocalyptic world
I know, what do people expect? Its the end of the world. In reality, this is how people would act. This is how people act now.
The article is certainly well thought out, and in some ways i agree with most of it. But in the end it isnt realistic. Its just fantasy.
Years ago, i read a book called "The Road" Its about some kind of apocalypse that causes the complete breakdown of western society. In the book, the world is very similar to the world Kirkman is trying to create. But except for zombies there are cannibalistic humans. Desperate folks scratching and clawing for survival. In the end, its all just a genre of fiction. I don't look for reality in it at all. In reality, a zombie outbreak never happens to begin with.
The zombie apocalypse genre is about pessimism. Robert Kirkman, as mentioned in an earlier thread, has said that in The Walking Dead things only get worse. That is a problem as storytelling goes, because after a while audiences are sure to get sick of being asked to care about characters that the writer is liable to dispose of, but it's what writers and audiences for zombie apocalypse stories know they're signing on for. You can subvert this aspect of the genre, which was well done in Shaun of the Dead and World War Z (the book). But Kirkman's vision is of the bleak no-help-coming and-then-there-were-none kind. He just draws it out longer than is usually done in the movies. And Telltale is working with Kirkman to tell this story.
The point about realism vs. pessimism is well taken, but the genre is about pessimism, whether it's realistic or not. The best you can hope for is that they tell these tragic stories well, and so far I believe they have. But I stopped reading the comic when they were in a relatively peaceful state, so that I wouldn't have to see it all fall apart. I generally avoid zombie movies, because the people who write them seem to fear being called pussies if they don't ultimately undermine all hope. I'm sticking with the game because it's a Telltale game and I think they're telling the story well. But its not going to ever be a happy story.
So you want the rest of the season to be sunshine and rainbows..?
All hail Donut Funn, King of the Straw Men!
it seems if a character changes in anyway and is not like how they are in the first game then people will cry bad writing. people it's chracter development clem went through tragic events she is not the same little girl anymore you have to accept this.
Gotta disagree with you there. Kirkman's zombie apocalypse is definitely about pessimism, but George Romero's movies (the most obvious influence for Kirkman's series) were more cynical than pessimistic. WARNING, spoilers for the films to follow:
NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD: All the principal characters, including the hero, are killed, but we're given the impression that the zombie uprising is under control.
DAWN OF THE DEAD: Stephen and Roger bite the dust, but Romero allows Peter and Fran to fly away to an uncertain future.
DAY OF THE DEAD: We're offered an ambiguous ending that could possibly be a dream.
LAND OF THE DEAD: Riley and his team abandon Fiddler's Green and head towards Canada, firing the last of their fireworks into the sky.
(I haven't heard good things about DIARY or SURVIVAL, so I didn't go out of my way to see them.)
In all of these scenarios, Romero tampers the bad with the good to varying degrees. But with Kirkman, absolute tragedy is always guaranteed. It's bad storytelling because it kills suspense as well as conflict - why do we even bother to root for the heroes if Kirkman is going to slaughter them in some grisly fashion later on? If anything, Kirkman seems more inspired by the nihilism of Lucio Fulci's zombie movies, where all the characters are basically screwed before the opening credits even roll. But whereas Fulci's bleakness at least had a macabre poetry to it, Kirkman's brand of gloom is shallow, commercial, and one-sided.
I'm sure I don't need to tell you this (but I've been writing this reply in my head for a couple of minutes and it's too late to stop now), but the title "The Walking Dead" does not refer to the zombies. Any story set in this universe is, by default, about dead men, women and children who just haven't hit the ground yet. The theme of the work isn't to get to a narrative point-of-no-return where things are good (or at the very least, less sucky), but the trials of momentary evasion of the inevitable. Death is coming for these people. There's no getting around it. The suspense, the joy, the beauty, the agony is how they put it off for another moment, through honor and decency, or the lack thereof.
This is the part of the comment where the corny term "metaphor for the human condition" gets used. Telltale (and AMC and Robert Kirkman) just made our impending deaths in an indifferent, senseless universe quite a bit more literal than it is in real life.
You can disagree with a work of art, and that's fine. You can dislike the work, and that's fine. You can give up on the work, and that's fine. But asking the work to defeat its own purpose is patently unreasonable.
I. Preliminaries
The main problem with Alec Goodwin's article is that he failed to adhere to his topic. And his topic undoubtedly is:
That's what he's searching for in The Walking Dead. So it shouldn't surprise us that he's not too content with the franchise.
And that is an actually positive interpretation of Alec's article. Of course he speaks about superhero comics exclusively and misses his thematic target with it. After all, if his argument actually was that ALL comics should present an optimistic outlook on life, what understanding of the entirety of the sequential art form could we still attribute to the author? Are all comics that happen to portray sad truths about the human race works that "confuse realism with pessimism" and are therewith inadmissable? Is Art Spiegelman's Pulitzer winning "Maus" just forgettable trash because:
I have no idea how savvy Alec is in the world of comics, but what he tries to do is to cut off modes of artistic expression because he prefers others. Can't say I like it much.
II. The Walking Dead comic and pessimism
The zombie apocalypse has never been a particularly optimistic genre. So if I choose this genre to make a comic in, what did Alec expect to happen during its ten year run? They find a cure? They find a safe haven forever? The Walking Dead follows the rules of its genre. A zombie franchise in which at the end, the heroes are "ultimately triumphant" would be one thing exactly: a bad representative of the genre.
III. The Walking Dead games and pessimism
I made one long post last year which Sean Vanaman actually praised out of the blue, but, fuck it, I can't find it any more of course.
It was about TWD Season 1 being more or less the antithesis of the contemporary idea of a 'video game' in that it tries to avoid almost every instant gratification mechanism that a game would normally have. The choice mechanic of the "dilemma", by definition, will only yield outcomes with the very same degree of shittyness; the usual adventure game satisfaction of puzzle solving is out of the equation; whomever you save, you save only temporarily; building relationships is futile, as the deaths of those characters is always just around the corner; all hope introduced into the storyline just serves to be crushed only minutes later; every action of the hero is only ever a stall in the face of the inevitable.
That is as pessimistic as it's ever going to get. I certainly don't like it, but it IS the franchise, and it is even more so the game. If Telltale "read this article" and acted accordingly, what came out would neither be in the spirit of the comic nor would it be following in the very decided footsteps of the first Season.
Well, we have to wait to see how Kirkmam ends the comics before we can say is absolute tragedy. In the comics we can find good people and good sentiments, love, sacrifice, etc. So maybe in the end there is hope too in TW world.
There's nothing remotely unreasonable in what I'm asking. You're imbuing a non-existent subtext into my posts, and I'm a little offended by that. I'm simply criticizing a work of art and pointing out what I perceive to be its flaws, because that's my right as someone who's paid money to view said work. But you seem to think it isn't.
I also believe you're misreading the title. THE WALKING DEAD refers to the zombies as well as the humans. But in the case of the humans, the actual "walking dead" are people who have allowed themselves to become zombies without even being bitten; individuals like Larry, Roman, Lily, and the other antagonistic characters Lee and his friends encounter along the way. My version of Lee chose to be alive.
I suppose that's one reason why I found the video game more appealing than the tv show or comic book; I had the option of allowing my character to say "fuck you" to the zombie apocalypse's rules, even if it resulted in their demise. But the second season seems to be more in line with the tone of the comic book, and if that turns out to be true, then I'll probably "give up" on this particular work as you suggested, because I prefer my dark pieces of art to have at least a certain beauty to them. Kirkman's vision of the zombie genre is just crass and ugly.
I agree on the topic of every franchise just getting darker, because... well it seems to be hip, or something. New Spiderman: dark. Batman is "the dark night". Superman got darker. It seems lazy that every franchise think "progress" means "getting darker". That's just boring.
But in TWD it makes sense, doesnt it. Romero might have had a different take on that. But Kirkman always said "it's just getting worse". You can like this premise or you don't. I think it's more an issue on established franchises that just get darker for the hell of it. TWD was always dark and pessimistic.
I don't know if TWD was ever intended to be realistic. It's certainly pessimistic but I don't think that's by confusing it with realism. I think Kirkman is aware that his comic is pessimistic as fuck. It is so by design.
Thats major reason i stopped reading Marvel and DC superhero titles years ago. It just got to be ridiculous with the apocalyptic stuff. I was pretty much done after age of apocalypse and onslaught crossovers in the late 90's. But some of the Marvel titles from the mid 2000's were decent.
Ironically i started reading more indie titles (like the walking dead) around that time.
It's interesting you mention MAUS, because I was thinking of that book myself. But again, it's all about context, context, context. MAUS is about the Holocaust, for crying out loud; there's no way to tiptoe around a subject like that. But even Spiegelman made an active effort to counterbalance the relentless horror with the joys and upswings of life. I've read interviews with Spiegelman where he talks about walking that fine line between sugary sentimentalism and despondent nihilism.
THE WALKING DEAD, on the other hand, has zombies, and zombies do not exist. I agree with you about Goodwin misunderstanding the thematic content of "superhero comics" vs. THE WALKING DEAD, but what does it say about the writer when MAUS, a story about real-life monsters, transcends its own pessimism, whereas THE WALKING DEAD, an entirely fictional work featuring patently unrealistic monsters, does not?
Please look at my above post that addresses George Romero's films. If we're to follow the logic you've laid out here, then we have to conclude these legitimately great movies are bad representatives of their genre. Let's also not forget movies like SHAUN OF THE DEAD and WARM BODIES subvert the very rules of the zombie genre you described. Yes, they're comedies, but they still work as movies, and that's important.
Maybe the problem lies with the presentation of this season, as opposed to what actually happens in the story. I can't put my finger on how the first season appealed to me personally, regardless of the chaos and turmoil that dogged the characters wherever they went. Dave Fennoy's charisma definitely helped a lot. But now that Lee's gone, we only have a little girl to guide us through an increasingly ugly and vile world. If, as Robert Kirkman says, "things are only going to get worse", it's probably a good idea that I call it quits. The nastier the series becomes (in tone, events, AND dialogue), the more issues I'm going to have with it, and the more I'm going to clash with the bulk of the forum. And that's not what I come here to do.
But you didn't criticize the work. You posted a link and (apparently) implied you wanted the work to be something it wasn't. It's one thing to look at a bleak work and say that it sucks at being bleak. It's another thing to look at a bleak work and wish that it wasn't so bleak when bleakness is the entire point of the piece.
But criticism, much like art, gets easier to apply your own meaning to the more vague it gets. There is only so much one can divine from one line.
So COME, MY FRIEND! Criticize the game so that we may meet upon the level and debate its minutiae as adults! With, like, brandy snifters and cardigans 'n' shit.
Wrong again. I posted that link because I felt it's important for Telltale (and anyone who's a writer at all) to acknowledge there's an extreme to every mindset, be it optimistic or pessimistic.
Come to think of it, why are you so certain that your "everybody's fucked" interpretation of THE WALKING DEAD is the correct one? If bleakness, as you said, is the entire point of the piece, why is Rick Grimes still alive? Why is Clementine? There's a reason why the most depressing stories aren't that long; thematically speaking, it's easy for them to outstay their welcome. Otherwise, they're stuck in a septic tank with nowhere to go.
I actually think that the game, at least in season 1, is pretty optimistic compared to the (bi)monthly misery porn Kirkman sells. Sure, most characters died horrible and un-heroic deaths, but the ending showed some hope and ended on a bittersweet note: Clem is still a small, vulnerable child, but she is ready to face this world without being overcome by the horror and tragedy. I understand that there is a limit to what you can show the players, and a couple of things in episode 1 are close to crossing it, but I think it's a bit too early to judge season 2 and that Telltale will let the game have his own separate identity from Kirkman's work like in season 1. We will see how it progresses.
And by the way, 28 Days Later, THE movie that more or less revitalized the whole zombie genre, was a realistic, dark and cynical tale, but it ended with a happy ending and wasn't critically bashed. It's just that Kirkman's misery porn has become too popular for some reason and that's what people expect from zombie related media now.
Then... don't you think you should have said that? Or better yet, not posted the link at all and posted your own thoughts instead, like you have been doing quite ably through the rest of this thread? You can't have a debate with a few words and a link. You, on the other hand, I like debating.
They're alive because killing everyone immediately doesn't make for a good story. No matter how dire it gets, The Theory of Narrative Causality is still in effect. These things don't happen to them because they're the main characters. They're the main characters because these things happen to them. If they die right off the bat, we wouldn't be hearing about them because there would be nothing to tell.
Are you seriously comparing an account of one of the darkest moments of the entire history of mankind to the Walking Dead? I think it's a bit exaggerated. And other real stories about the persecution of the Jews during WWII are slightly more optimistic and show that some people have kept their humanity despite the atrocities surrounding them, like the Pianist, If This is a Man and Schindler's List.
EDIT: I know that Maus is also based on a real story
I love the realism. In the old forums, I always said how this game is amazing and different because it is realistic. No character who has died come back to life, nothing that has happened is extremely unlikely . . .of course in the context of a zombie apocalypse. I and I believe most would agree after actually thinking about it, that the realism in this game is the one thing telltale should NOT take out.
I assumed the post alone was clear enough. I keep forgetting you have to spell everything out in giant Sesame Street letters (or dozens of emoticons) when you're on the internet.
What I don't like about Robert Kirkman's version of the zombie apocalypse is that all the suffering and torment is built on a weak foundation. For the concept of the apocalypse itself to work, we have to accept the governments of the world are almost hilariously incompetent dealing with an enemy that's so fucking stupid. All the zombies have on their side is the sheer enormity of their numbers, and even that can be quickly whittled down when you train your military to simply shoot them in the head.
What they had to say about TWD the comic and show don't really apply at all in the game. The game is all about the hope of showing people who are willing to band together and who care about and love each other and fight back against the encroaching darkness. Terrible things happen, yes, but it's far from the camp of people just doing absolutely terrible things to each other for no better reason than society's gone and they just enjoy hurting people. Sure, there are pockets of shitheads and bandits, but the actual action and emotional weight of the series is all about hope, love, and bonding together.
We haven't gotten to see much of that this season because the only group of people we've met are people that we've only had the tiniest handful of scenes with. But I see nothing in that article that comes close to accurately describing the games at all.
I've never been one of the genre's fans, because this stuff tends to give me the deep blue wiggins, so the direct explanation at the beginning of Land of the Dead was the first understanding I had that in Romero's world everybody was going to turn when they died. People who got bit only turned sooner. If that's your premise, it's downhill all the way. There is no hope. And I certainly don't think the ending of Land of the Dead was at all hopeful. The protagonist seemed to believe the premise that the zombies were an oppressed people who were just looking for a home. They've got a home -- the whole world! It's the living people who didn't want their flesh torn off of them who had no place to go. Yeah, there were jerks in the city that were oppressing people, but they weren't ganging up and ripping them apart with their teeth. It's almost like Romero was making fun of his own reputation for brilliant social commentary.
For that particular movie, I don't buy that there is any hope. Incoherence, pretentiousness and stupidity maybe. But not hope. They were better off before.
That's just a side issue with me venting my gripes about that particular movie, sorry. Otherwise I take your point, except that the 'everybody turns' is in itself inherently pessimistic.