Here's my random Fear the Walking Dead thoughts: The series premiere for The Walking Dead was so strong and really well done, and I watched it several times afterwards. Do I think the premiere of Fear the Walking Dead was better than the series premiere for The Walking Dead? Not at all- not by a country mile. Do I think the Fear the Walking Dead premiere was better than some of the episodes from the last season of The Walking Dead? Yes. The dialogue was a little rough at spots and frankly I don't care much for the main characters yet. Hopefully they develop more, and hopefully it's not just going to focus solely on them and they bring in much more cast. Do I think AMC is keeping the cast small and the walkers (also the need for practical FX and CGI) minimal so as to keep this a low budget show? It's not fair to say this early on a show, but it certainly feels that way. Fear the Walking Dead broke viewer records. AMC was smart to start the show before the season starts for The Walking Dead- this way they start with an audience who's been waiting for quite a while for more. I guess we'll have to find out in the upcoming shows how good the series will really be.
They could be doing this to let us get to know the cast. My family watched the first three episodes of "The Last Ship," and my son said he still didn't know or care about any of the characters.
I gave it 2/5. I didn't hate it and I want it to work. One of my rating rules is the score automatically drops 1 star if I find myself fast forwarding through meaningless dialog. I found myself reaching for the FF button multiple times which almost never happens in a season premier of anything. Usually the season premier is fast paced to get you hooked. This was the slowest season premier I may have ever seen. I expect the next episode to be even slower and I will not sit through it unless I read post stating otherwise. If I have to sit through E2 being slower than E1 while being just as poorly written this will drop to 1/5 and I'd be done for sure and I really want it to work.
Kim Dickens is fabulous. Loved her as the detective in Gone Girl and before that Deadwood, Sons of Anarchy and everything else Ive seen her in. She is so believable and I know that her character will grow into the Rick of this show. I love that it is taking time to explore a bit. We all know the lots of Zombies are coming but it is interesting to watch these characters slowly discover what is happening. Not sure what the rush is.....
I don't mind the slow pace at all. I do mind the awful dialogue and the incredibly uncreative set up I snoozed through last night. There are so many opportunities for creative revelations in showing us the world reacting as the zombies move in. Instead, we get a family in peril and a fairly straight-forward, just-like-we-thought narrative. Whoever wrote the lines for the son must have researched cool drug lingo on the internet to keep it all real. Ugh. Shalom, y'all! L. Bangs (not talking through the powder, man...)
As someone else alluded to, my recollection is that Kirkman has said, and I'm very loosely paraphrasing, that that aspect doesn't matter and they don't intend to get into it. I can understand the idea of it being about the human element rather than some sort of sci-fi mythos (e.g. the living people *are* "the walking dead", not the zombies... whoa man! ). But frankly, the writing isn't good enough on "The Walking Dead" (doesn't seem so on the spinoff, but it's only one episode in), certainly not consistent enough, to easily swallow the idea that all the mythos behind the story "doesn't really matter." I'm not saying they have to spend multiple episodes in flashbacks at the CDC, and Kirkman has already said, as I recall, that they won't flash over to some other city (though they will apparently spinoff into another city). But I thought the CDC stuff in Season 1/2 was some of the best, creepiest, most suspenseful stuff. A *little* more of that, and a little less of an hour of zombie beheadings and moustache-twirling villains would be nice. I suppose we have a shot at this at least a tiny bit with the new spinoff.
I read an article the other day about things you WON'T see on Fear The Walking Dead, and I think Kirkman gave them the three C's - cause, cure, cross-over. There will not be a cause identified. There will not be a cure. And there will not be a cross-over with WD characters appearing. The guy running FTWD presented a few ideas to Kirkman about a cause or cure, but he said Kirkman shot every one down as he doesn't want that. I think he also said that he thought the CDC section was the most regrettable part of the show, in his opinion. I'm with him.
I would like to comment on a strange scene no one else has commented on. The sister climbed into bed with her brother, began feeding him by hand, and held hands with him. I had no choice but to conclude they were not brother and sister by birth, but had developed a romantic relationship while living under the same roof, however, nothing in the script indicated they were anything but full brother and sister.
He was in restraints and therefore unable to feed himself. At first I thought she was straddling him, but when the camera panned away she was only seated on the side of the bed. I think it was innocent.
I definitely don’t have any interest in a cross-over, nor do I feel a need for a cure being presented. I don’t even need a definitive answer about a cause; but I feel like that early-era look at the unfolding aspect of the outbreak is interesting, and it’s already looking like “Fear the Walking Dead” will be less about that (even though it’s rooted in a timeframe where it would be even easier to get into that), and more like simply “Walking Dead West” as someone else mentioned. I don’t seek out a ton of what Kirkman says about the show, because, while the guy is clearly a genius considering the success of his empire (truly no sarcasm intended), I’ve never been very impressed with him. Whenever he talks about the show (or the comic book), he doesn’t sound like a super-sharp guy story-wise. He has a vision for things, and he kinda sometimes strikes me as a sort of more kindly, hipster version of George Lucas, only with a better ability to delegate a lot more stuff. To me, Kirkman’s premise for the show (and the comic book) is the genius stroke. Everything else has been extremely spotty. The comic book is both better and worse than the TV show from what I’ve read. The comic book doesn’t have to make some of the concessions that the TV show does as far as being TV-friendly. But the comic book is even more poorly-written in terms of dialogue. Absolutely cringe-worthy dialogue sometimes, even factoring in the concept that comic book dialogue is fundamentally different from TV show dialogue.
Why not? It's creepy and suspenseful, and for a minute or two we couldn't tell if we were in a pre- or post-apocalyptic scene?
he was in restraints...how the hell else was he supposed to eat? as for hand holding...she obviously loves him as his sister and has seen him get clean, fall of the wagon, get clean, fall off, many times and wants to believe him when he says he'll get better and is holding his hand to show support. as for the romantic relationship...
probably because the 'star' of that episode is a junkie? it's not all that far of a leap to suppose he doesn't shoot up in his bathroom at his parents house.
My wife and I both also thought there was a romantic vibe. Not sure if it was as intentional, the result of bad acting, or, as the other user politely hinted, the outcome of us all being crazy. Shalom, y'all! L. Bangs
Just in: FTWD has a laid back feel to it. I'm looking forward to next weeks show. I like the way it stated...
