knut
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 7,431
- Reaction score
- 20
lol but monkey ZOMBEIS!
you're going to get nowhere with this argument, i've tried it countless times. as long as stern is happy with the show and there is a figure somewhere on AMC's site that he can pull up saying that a million other people are enjoying the show then he isn't going to back down and just let you have a logical criticism. not in a million years.
the problem with this whole thing is that stern is going to keep going back to suspension of belief argument because he believes this whole thing goes straight into the ''unrealistic'' pile just because he hasn't got the imagination to believe in a grander scale then what's going on in his front garden. yes, stern - the dead no not walk. also, alien lifeforms do not burst out of john hurt, dragons never did fly in medieval england, there would never be a rescue mission of 8 soldiers in occupied france 1944... i mean, does the whole back to the future trilogy not appeal to you because it is actually scientifically impossible to go backwards in time? what about the cup of the holy grail in indy 3? cloning dinosaurs and putting them into a theme park? robots coming from the future to change the flow of time? bumbling comedians that BUST GHOSTS?
they are all suspensions of belief but they exist within their own universe where the director and writer has an artistic license to play to his design and script. with the walking dead, they imagined a society on collapse because the walking undead, much like romero has done before. i think when you lost all that belief out the window from the get go then you probably should of stopped watching then, surely? you keep telling us to stop watching because we dislike it but never once do any of us with criticisms dislike this show because of it's premise. no, we have the imagination or the open-minded acceptance to appreciate the setting, the context. it doesn't bother us one bit. what does bother us? like monkey said, the real suspensions of belief like unlimited ammo, amazing accuracy, awful, overly dramatic characters like lori who change face almost every ten minutes, the lack of exposition between characters, furthering us as viewers away from ever feeling anything for them (i mean, who the **** was jimmy anyway?! oh yeah, another excuse to pull a fake body apart and splash some blood everywhere, that's what! amazing character writing!!! glad the writer who made him up got paid well right guys!), awful decisions made by characters like shane and carl in the previous episode with the ''execution'' location... eh just go through the thread for the criticisms, there all there.
i mean, if you like it when you like it and you'll hear no fuss from me. i and some others don't and this being a forum and all is a good enough place to talk about it, so we'll keep doing just that and you'll just have to either respond with some actual defence to our points, because the ''unrealistic'' argument just isn't enough for me.
you're going to get nowhere with this argument, i've tried it countless times. as long as stern is happy with the show and there is a figure somewhere on AMC's site that he can pull up saying that a million other people are enjoying the show then he isn't going to back down and just let you have a logical criticism. not in a million years.
the problem with this whole thing is that stern is going to keep going back to suspension of belief argument because he believes this whole thing goes straight into the ''unrealistic'' pile just because he hasn't got the imagination to believe in a grander scale then what's going on in his front garden. yes, stern - the dead no not walk. also, alien lifeforms do not burst out of john hurt, dragons never did fly in medieval england, there would never be a rescue mission of 8 soldiers in occupied france 1944... i mean, does the whole back to the future trilogy not appeal to you because it is actually scientifically impossible to go backwards in time? what about the cup of the holy grail in indy 3? cloning dinosaurs and putting them into a theme park? robots coming from the future to change the flow of time? bumbling comedians that BUST GHOSTS?
they are all suspensions of belief but they exist within their own universe where the director and writer has an artistic license to play to his design and script. with the walking dead, they imagined a society on collapse because the walking undead, much like romero has done before. i think when you lost all that belief out the window from the get go then you probably should of stopped watching then, surely? you keep telling us to stop watching because we dislike it but never once do any of us with criticisms dislike this show because of it's premise. no, we have the imagination or the open-minded acceptance to appreciate the setting, the context. it doesn't bother us one bit. what does bother us? like monkey said, the real suspensions of belief like unlimited ammo, amazing accuracy, awful, overly dramatic characters like lori who change face almost every ten minutes, the lack of exposition between characters, furthering us as viewers away from ever feeling anything for them (i mean, who the **** was jimmy anyway?! oh yeah, another excuse to pull a fake body apart and splash some blood everywhere, that's what! amazing character writing!!! glad the writer who made him up got paid well right guys!), awful decisions made by characters like shane and carl in the previous episode with the ''execution'' location... eh just go through the thread for the criticisms, there all there.
i mean, if you like it when you like it and you'll hear no fuss from me. i and some others don't and this being a forum and all is a good enough place to talk about it, so we'll keep doing just that and you'll just have to either respond with some actual defence to our points, because the ''unrealistic'' argument just isn't enough for me.