Cannes Film Festival 2013

Review: 'The Walking Dead' - 'Judge, Jury, Executioner': Over hill, over Dale

Dale argues for a man's life, while Carl goes exploring

<p>Jeffrey DeMunn as Dale in "The Walking Dead."</p>

Jeffrey DeMunn as Dale in "The Walking Dead."

Credit: AMC

Are you a fan of The Walking Dead?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

A review of tonight's "The Walking Dead" coming up just as soon as I make some new arrows

"The world may be gone, but keeping our humanity? That's a choice." -Dale

After last week's episode succeeded with a more narrow focus, "Judge, Jury, Executioner" expanded its scope again, returning to the farm and bringing in every character to deal with the question of what to do with Randal. But for the most part, it stuck to two points of view: Dale as he tried to convince the others(*) to let Randal live, and Carl as he wandered through this new violent world like it's just a big, amoral playground. 

(*) Though, as usual, T-Dog drew the short end of the stick. If Dale bothered to petition him, we didn't see it.

And though I don't know if it all worked, it was still a step up from most of the earlier farm episodes. It ultimately telegraphed Dale's demise — when a character talks about how he doesn't want to live in a world like this anymore, he tends to get his wish — but it did much better by the character than he'd been treated since the end of last season.

Dale has done some very dumb things over the course of this season (trying to hide the guns in the swamp chief among them), and at times he's come across as either jealous that Andrea slept with Shane, or horribly naive about their situation. Even here, I think he's ultimately in the wrong — there's too much risk in freeing Randall, and too many people already tapping into Herschel's resources — but his ideals are taken seriously. When he goes to Shane, of all people, to make his case, it could seem an absurd gesture, but instead his convictions impress Shane — not enough to change his vote, or, I suspect, to make him keep his word about abiding the results if the vote went Dale's way, but enough to at least listen to the old man and stop laughing in his face.

And the Carl section of the episode does help argue Dale's point for him. Carl is being corrupted by this environment, and watching his father put a bullet in Randal's head would have accelerated that moral rot. There are certain pragmatic choices you have to make in this terrible new world, but the thing that separates the Rick/Herschel group from Dave and Tony's friends is that while they'll do what's necessary to survive, they've still held onto some semblance of their morals from the days gone bye. They aren't raping the women they find — and someone should have thrown that back in Dale's face when he asked what made them any different from the other group — and if most of them ultimately decide to kill Randal, it's not a decision that comes easily to anyone but Shane.

Carl's too young to appreciate that, though. He thinks it's cool to see a prisoner, and to watch his dad kill that prisoner. He thinks it's fun to taunt a walker trapped in some muck by the creek — and his actions ultimately encourage the walker (who had given up without the promise of fresh meat nearby) to free itself, kill the cattle, and then kill Dale.

And by sending Dale to talk to the group one-by-one, we also got to see different sides of the other characters. They don't have the same relationship with him that they do with Rick or Lori or Shane. Where Daryl's been pushing everyone else away since Sophia died, and he tries with Dale, but Dale at least gets him to talk a little. (And the script also makes it more believable that Daryl would have figured out about Otis than it seemed when Dale made that guess a few episodes back.) And though Rick has, to this point, been positioned as the member of the group who makes the hardest choices and does the killing the others don't have the stomach for, it's Daryl who's the only one who has it in him to put Dale out of his misery with a bullet and a lament of, "Sorry, brother."

Not all of the conversations make the characters more interesting, though. Carol's already a character who's been condemned by the audience for being too passive during the long search for her own daughter, and now she angrily demands to be left out of this huge decision. There's probably something interesting to be done with a character determined to contribute very little to the group (aside from what she, Lori and Herschel's daughters do on the domestic side of things), but that's not how she's been used. She's just... there, and here gets peeved when asked to be even slightly more than that.

Dale wasn't particularly well-used for most of this season, but at least there was the idea of him as a moral counterweight to Shane. It's a role he strongly, loudly embraced in "Judge, Jury, Executioner," and though he died not knowing that his words got through to Rick, he maybe did make an important difference in who both Carl and the group are going to be going forward.

Or maybe the lack of a bearded angel on one shoulder is going to make Rick all the more susceptible to the Shane-looking devil on the other shoulder.

A few other thoughts:

* Ace makeup artist Greg Nicotero took on added responsibility this week as the episode's director.

* This week in "The Walking Dead" Loves "Lost": after giving Daryl a variety of Sawyer-esque moments this season, he gets to open this week's episode as the Sayid to Randal's Sawyer, torturing him for information about the other group.

Finally, let me remind you again of this blog's No Spoiler rule and how it applies to this show, as I've had to delete a bunch of comments the last few weeks that violated it. Basic things to remember before commenting:

1. No talking about the previews for the next episode.

2. No talking about anything else you know about upcoming episodes from other sources.

3. No talking about anything that's happened in the comic that hasn't happened in the TV show yet. Dale's death obviously complicates things, as this isn't what happens to him in the comic, but I want us to focus on "The Walking Dead" as a TV show rather than making endless comparisons between the two versions.

With that in mind, what did everybody else think?

Alan Sepinwall may be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Alan-sepinwall-sm
Alan Sepinwall
Sr. Editor, What's Alan Watching
Alan Sepinwall has been reviewing television since the mid-'90s, first for Tony Soprano's hometown paper, The Star-Ledger, and now for HitFix. His new book, "The Revolution Was Televised," about the last 15 years of TV drama, is for sale at Amazon. He can be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
Next 323 Comments
  • Default-avatar

    Alex T.

    Definitely an improvement on the farm episodes. Expected Dale to die since they were putting extra focus on him and also surprised by Carl's immediate turn to a stupid, misbehaved child; quite the change from earlier in the series.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:03PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      A fan Pretty annoying that no one bothers to watch that kid. The zombie should have eaten him when he had the chance.

      March 5, 2012 at 3:46AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Bryan L Agree about the kid. Once again, they strain our disbelief by showing this kid wandering around without any supervision. It's one thing in the real world, and quite another in zombie world.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:09AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tag8833 They really, really made Carl unlikable this episode. Embracing all the things we hate about kids in genre shows. My girlfriend was begging for the zombies to eat him.

      I think I have a strong case for Laurie being the most unlikable character on the show, but she insists that Carl is worse.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:23AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I I can understand some of Carl's progression. I think under the circumstances it would be totally believable for a child to act out or be confused in some ways. I do not think we can really complain too much about that. Even in a post-apocalyptic society, kids will have growing pains. Not to mention he just saw the death of the only other kid in their group (maybe the last girl in the world as far as he knows), survived getting shot, the fall of civilization, and pretty much close to literally the worst case scenario possible.

      That said, I hate they made him so stupid. I can see him being jaded or rebellious. However, I think it was a mistake to have him be stupid instead of developing into a more calculating and cold character. I like the implied conflict or Rick acting to preserve their humanity (Carl's in particular, his and the group secondarily), I just hated the presentation. Had Carl just shot the zombie and not played with it, I'd have been fine with it. I guess I want him more Ender and less mid-series Harry Potter (not a great analogy, but I think it kind of works). However, this could pay dividends later in the series if/when we see Carl grow as a character. Still, I will probably always think this was a mistake and a bit inconsistent with the character.

      Plus . . . WHERE ARE THE PARENTS? Who doesn't watch their kids in a Zombie Apocalypse? Not to point fingers, still, that is a bit of a stretch.

      -Cheers

      March 5, 2012 at 1:01PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Jim Agree with Dave regardibg Carl. He's become unlikable but that seems to be logical. He's a kid growing up in a grim, dark world. He's not gonna be like video game playing, Nickelodeon watching kids that we know. Also, he was absolutely sure that he was going to find Sophia... It seemed to be the first real dream he'd allowed hinself... And it was shattered in the worst possible way. That grim darkness fell on him all at once. Plus... He does have a moron for a mother...

      March 5, 2012 at 2:19PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Alex T. Definitely agree with all that Dave is saying about Carl, I always figured he would act out because of the way the world has turned and all the bad things going on around him, I just thought he went way too crazy and too damn stupid too fast, and it was only made worse by the way his parents and the other adults have treated him (as in they barely watch what he's doing). I think it would have been better if that change was more developed over a longer period of time. If only this show had decent writing with good character development all around.

      March 5, 2012 at 3:22PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Ted

    So glad Dale is dead! The show instantly gets significantly better by eliminating one of the worst characters in all of television.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:03PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Kyle Dale has been one of the best characters on the show from the beginning. They should have been killing off the worthless women instead of someone who offers a great balance to Shane and Rick, who's slowly moving towards Shane's line of thinking.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:16PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      venus Definitely not miss the way he would whine/moan Andrea's name. I expected them to be rid of TDogg (ugh that awful name) or Carol first though.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:30PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      venus Definitely not miss the way he would whine/moan Andrea's name. I expected them to be rid of TDogg (ugh that awful name) or Carol first though.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:30PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      John I think Tht post deserves a big FUCK U

      March 5, 2012 at 2:34AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I "The show instantly gets significantly better by eliminating one of the worst characters in all of television."

      I'm not a fan of Dale (the TV version at least). However... Couldn't better writing have eliminated "one of the worst characters in all of television"? I'm fine with Dale living or dying. I'm NOT fine with them killing them if it was because they made him too annoying or could not figure out what to do with him. Plus, I liked him in the comics so it's not like he is an unsalvageable character from conception.

      I think this is a bit of a larger problem I'm having with the TV series. I still like the show. That said, it is a mistake to keep around characters just because they're popular or killing them off because they are not. Look at The Wire. I got the impression nobody was safe on that show and some unpopular or simply seemingly unimportant characters (ones I hoped would leave or thought would end up throw-away characters) ended up having great arcs and becoming central to the show.

      Point being, I hope they are able to do a better job with the overall writing and progression. Not to say this has to be The Wire, however they should definitely take a look at how that show worked, how the characters grew, and maybe revisit what made some of the characters in The Walking Dead books work where they really are not in the TV show.

      -Cheers

      March 5, 2012 at 1:07PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Ale Piero Ted, bravo bravo! Could not have said ti better myself. There are 4 types of characters in this show: zombies, women, men, and the bitch: Dale. The most uselesss, selfish character in the group. Never seen him do anything but sit within a 10 ft radius of his POS RV. Not survival of the fittest he said, yes it is buddy. His acting was painful to watch. In every scene he had the same face, as if he was about to be penetrated. Yes the writing of the show is crap, and the plots for this season were horrendous, but they did one thing right, and that was kill off Dale the bitch.

      March 8, 2012 at 3:11PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      BadNate Ale Piero, then I suppose we should kill you first since you're clearly one of the weakest being you feel you have the right to judge on who gets to live and die. If a zombie appocolypse ever does happen, I hope people like you and your butt buddy Ted are the first to get torn to shreds

      March 10, 2012 at 2:42AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Stef

    The whole prisoner storyline just made me miss Benjamin Linus. I'm so frustrated with this show. I feel like it's lost most of its energy once they landed on this farm. I enjoy the moral/existential conversations but I find almost all of the characters completely unlikable at this point. Darryl is the only one who's fun to watch.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:07PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Chris Thank you! While watching the episode, all I kept on thinking about was Ben Linus and how his storyline was played on Lost. I want the Walking Dead to have me question this prisoner the same way that Lost had me questioning Ben Linus.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:25PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Elle Yes! I agree. The budget cuts have been painfully obvious with these last two episodes. They have spent way too much time on the farm and debating this kid, Randall. I especially feel that last week's episode was just thrown away. It really didn't advance the story at all. They ended up in the exact same place at the end of the episode than where they were in the beginning. And I'm starting to like the characters less and less. They're making each one focus on their own problems and their own point of views and not getting anywhere. I'm quickly becoming more and more disappointed with how AMC is handling this show ever since they fired Frank Darabont.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:28AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      mike J The show to me is actually getting BETTER. the problems that they deal with episode to episode is FULLY believable in a post zombie apocalypses world. It was kind of "just thrown out there" with the whole transformation of Carl. all the characters might not be stable but they all play their roles well to compliment the main two, Rick & Shane.

      March 5, 2012 at 4:32AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      czwij if someone was to watch just the second season, the first episode may prove worthwhile, then downhill from there. W/o Darabont, this show has really gone downhill. we are all so desperately waiting for the return of the magic of season 1. but after ten episodes of virtually nothing, i can't believe there are still blogs about this show. i no longer wait in anticipation for it. just another forgetable show with a good premise. hear that writers and execs? you've made the apocalypse boring to watch.

      March 5, 2012 at 5:39AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Col Bat Guano I think this is over valuing Season 1. While the zombie threat was better played in S1, the character development has always been a problem with this show. With the lack of zombies in S2, it's just more obvious. I don't think Darabont would have made that big a difference.

      March 5, 2012 at 1:50PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Jim If it was a never-ending zombie shooting gorefest, it would get boring and the walkers would lose all their impact. As it is, its a dram with some moments of sheer terror. My wife was truly afraid for Carl while he was taunting the walker! Having gotten stuck in the mud just like tjat zombie, I knew making him move around was a big mistake... Particularlyi when it started twisting around bkth ways. That's just how you get outta that mess!

      March 5, 2012 at 2:24PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave Yeah ever since they stopped at the farm, the action has been stuck in a rut!

      March 6, 2012 at 2:13PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Mike

    Finally some progress. Dale could have been a good character but he just never contributed enough to interesting things on the show and I'm really not sad to see him go. This also means the incredible story of a character that was but left for dead after the first episode has a chance for an all time great comeback story as Carl freeing that zombie tonight makes him the current leader for season MVP at this point.

    Also, does anyone know if T-dawg is allowed to talk? Is he being for punished for something I missed?

    March 4, 2012 at 11:07PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      mike I have been thinking the same thing. T-dog has been nearly invisible for the last 3 episodes. Maybe "T" stands for "Token" or are they going to eventually write some lines for this guy? The show should share the wealth, and at least show what all the characters are doing in the episodes, heck, he could have been shown helping Hershal collect cattle, that would have at least given him some positive action in the group.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:24AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Earl D Yeah, I have to agree. The way they treat T-Dog is shameful. Give the man a decent character and some dialogue or kill him. Now, if you wanted to shake up the farm, have Herschel find him in bed with his suicidal blond daughter.

      March 5, 2012 at 3:53AM EST
    • Bubba to Earl D . Now that woulda been seen as sterotype......blk man with a white girl and a blonde to boot then it woulda turned to racist cause the Asian kid was given a watch and a welcome into the family and the black man was given a rope and a good ol southern send off ....... Awkward

      March 5, 2012 at 12:54PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Tony I agree we haven't too much of T-Dog. I mean he was in the episode just a a very small role. LoL in bed with blonde daughter. He's probably going to have a bigger role later on in the series.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:57PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Jim Its a horror movie trope that the monority characters die so T-Dog and Glen have had a target in them since S1E1!! Glen is the obvious first to go, between them, as soon as he finally tells Maggie that he loves her.

      I have higher hopes for the Walking Dead writers, though.

      March 5, 2012 at 2:33PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Kujo T-Dog's been M.I.A. all season, and it's been extremely frustrating to say the least.

      March 6, 2012 at 8:18AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Iris Jim--how many white people have died..? lol i like how white people can die first but as soon as a minority dies its 'the minority died first'. not that i'm saying that doesn't happen often in horror movies, but its not the case here.

      March 8, 2012 at 9:47PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    yolo

    I think you meant that Sophia died, not Carol.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:11PM EST Reply to Comment
    • And you just proved by no one cares about Carol

      March 4, 2012 at 11:18PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Kevin

    The Death of Dale is horrible he was the only one thinking of the moral ramifications and while cold hard logic says its ok to just kill or carry weapons with no real feelings of responsibility it was his voice that rung true to humanity and continuing a civilization ruled by law and justice

    March 4, 2012 at 11:12PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      joel Dale was living in the past. Sorry, but he was trying to keep alive a world that is long since gone. They might create a civilized world again sometime in the future, but there is no law in chaos. It's a simple fact.

      Dale made a lot of good points, and I generally agree with him that killing Randall is a horrible solution. But this is about survival, and Randall represents a threat to that on every level. Give Shane the gun, let him do it. After everything they've done, they've given Randall the impression they mean him harm. He has every reason now to escape and find his "friends." Which is exactly what Shane predicted, and I hate when Shane is right.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:51AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      excpired This is a reply to Joel. The chaos is far exaggerated from the reality of the thing. Zombies are not witty creatures, and are probably not even as deadly as a pack of hyena's - it is generally peoples stupidity that gets them killed by zombies (walking into a city w/ 6 million of them might be a good example), or in Dales case walking out in a tall grass field at night, not watching your back, and not keeping your gun locked loaded and in your arms.

      The reality is if Randall is all about survival he would more than likely tow the line when he groups up with these individuals - there is nothing about him that shows he has any loyalty to the other group; especially since they left him for dead, and Rick went and saved him. Had they incorporated him into the group he would most likely have integrated into the group. At this point, who knows, he probably thinks they want to kill him and now hes trying to escape.

      The purpose of law is to temper chaos, so saying there is no law in chaos is like saying you can't cook a raw egg. It is up to the collective to initiate law and make sure it is upheld.

      I agree that Randall is probably going to find a way to escape at this point, I mean they damn nearly killed him so why wouldn't he. But maybe they can turn things around with him if they tried; its all up to the writers I guess.

      March 5, 2012 at 2:32AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Jason Also @ Joel, the biggest argument IMO for keeping Randall alive is because he could have been anyone of Our Group.

      Andrea and her sister were fortunate to find a group that didn't rape them. T-Dawg and Glen were fortunate to find one that didn't torture them. (how did this disparate group of people join forces anyway? I don't recall any backstory about that)

      Now, Our Heroes are riding the slippery slope to becoming Those 30 Guys Out There.

      March 5, 2012 at 5:28AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Huell Goodman Its odd that Randall's going to school with Maggie didn't come up again. After all, that's the reason why they didn't leave him at the Parks & Rec Dept.

      March 5, 2012 at 9:20AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      joel "Joel, the biggest argument IMO for keeping Randall alive is because he could have been anyone of Our Group." But he's not and never was, he was part of another group that showed a threat of deadly force to get what our group has. End of story. Discovering later that this other group is 30-men strong and has raped young teenage girls sort of reinforces the argument that they exist in a lawless world.

      Our group does have law and order, within their own unit. Allowing Shane to go free even though they all have figured out he killed Otis doesn't really establish a very high bar, but our group isn't generally raping and murdering people either. Randall now represents a liability and, if he returns to his own group, a threat. It could be a different situation had it been handled differently from the start, but they botched that completely.

      Since there is no higher authority to maintain law and order beyond the farm, there is effectively no law and order. Good intentions, high moral standards, and human decency only extend as far as everyone is willing to accept and abide by those values. The 30-strong army of murdering rapists won't give one thought to killing everyone in our group given the chance.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:39AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Joseph Agreed. Dale was so obviously in the wrong, it was frustrating that no one in the group called him out. The old rules no longer apply and will only get them killed. What no one pointed out was, this was not a young man they found on his own struggling to survive. This was a man who was part of a gang of rapists, murderers, and thieves. He may or may not have participated in the rapes, but he sure didn't do anything to stop them, and he was most definitely would have shot Rick/Herschel/Glenn at the bar if given the chance. The decision to kill him is a no-brainer.
      I didn't see Dale's death coming, but I'm glad he's gone.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:23PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I Joel . . . "But he's not and never was, he was part of another group that showed a threat of deadly force to get what our group has. End of story."

      That is not the "end of story" if there is still a legitimate debate to be had, now is it?

      Plus, you can make a legitimate argument that Randal(l?) is as far as we know a likely decent guy (with no real evidence to the contrary) that was part of a group of bad guys who did things he may have (and said he did) found heinous yet he had no other choices. Randal shot at Rick & crew AFTER they killed two guys that were at best part of the group helping to keep him alive. A group that left him for dead in lieu of the group that saved his life. At least until Shane talked Rick into killing them and Daryl into torturing some confession out of him.

      As for there being no higher authority or law & order . . . Maybe. Still, everybody has SOME sort of internal moral compass. I think Dale was onto something with that, and I think Carl's apparent degradation of humanity sort of highlights that there SHOULD be some sort of counter-point to your (and Shane's) argument. Besides, even in "uncivilized" societies, there is some sense of law & order, right & wrong. That may vary, and maybe it evolves into eliminating any threat in this instance. Still, the group has to decide what those values will be in this new world. Don't they?

      -Cheers

      March 5, 2012 at 1:22PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      joel "Uncivilized society" has to be the best oxymoron I've heard in quite some time. A society is, by definition, civilized. To be uncivilized is equal to barbarism, which is the lack of civilized behavior or rules.

      I stated that yes, the group has some moral order. That does not extend beyond the farm. They can live to whatever lofty goals and ideals they want to, and when another superior force takes advantage of their weakness, then we'll see the value of it.

      Randall might be a great guy, might not. Should they risk everything for the sake of one person who fraternized with a gang of murdering rapists?

      March 5, 2012 at 8:23PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I "Uncivilized society" has to be the best oxymoron I've heard in quite some time. A society is, by definition, civilized. To be uncivilized is equal to barbarism, which is the lack of civilized behavior or rules."

      Yeah, not bad, eh? ;)

      You get what I'm saying though, right? There are shades of gray. Even barbarians had some level of civilization and rules of order.

      I agree (I think I'm agreeing with you a/o general sentiment) that the rules have to be changed since the structure of society pre-disaster are no longer entirely enforceable. However, should they just throw away the values that went into them? To answer your question: should they risk everything for the sake of one person who fraternized with a gang of murdering rapists? I would ask; should they throw away the mores and values they have held their whole lives, and in Rick & Shane's cases are sworn to uphold, simply because this man might be a threat based on the actions of others he confessed to yet has claimed to not only have not partaken in and expressed disgust over? Not to mention the circumstances wherein, let us be perfectly frank, he had no choice.

      Personally? I say they should give him a chance to prove himself. There is not enough evidence to kill him with a clean conscience and I think there is a very dangerous precedent in killing somebody with no actual proof he did anything wrong without giving him even a chance to prove himself one way or the other. I realize it is dangerous and I realize it is not the easy answer. However, I also believe life is worth enough to give him that chance. Not to mention they should work on a defense strategy since killing Randall does not ensure they will never be overrun by a band of militants, giant pack of zombies, or even some sort of act of God like a drought, tornado, or whatever that might force them to leave or search for other sources of food & shelter. The cost of shooting a possibly innocent man seems like too high of a cost at least to me personally.

      -Cheers

      March 6, 2012 at 11:11AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Printin' Mike @Dave: I think you’re downplaying his guilt. Leaving aside whatever his “gang” may have done in the past (rape, murder), about which crimes Randall claims that he’s totally innocent; he still is guilty of at least having participated in a deadly, unprovoked attack against Rick/Hershel/and Glen. He fired upon them, unprovoked, and his felonious assault resulted in at least one death that we know of (his co-conspirator), which should result in a Felony Murder charge. And, remember: Randall admitted that he knows the type of people he’s with – they raped a couple of teenagers in front of their dad. So, when he hears Rick say that the Jersey boys drew on them first, Randall had every reason in the world to believe Rick. What did Randall do? He shot at Rick, et al.

      Bottom line: in my opinion, the question of Randall’s criminal guilt isn’t in doubt. That doesn’t mean that executing him is the morally right thing to do. But, I think that those (Dale) who try to make his guilt morally ambiguous are wrong. I suppose that Randall could try the Patty Hearst defense, but I’m not buying it. He didn’t claim that he was held against his will. If he didn’t like the gang he was with, he could have left them. I doubt very much they would have complained about having one less mouth to feed.

      There’s a difference between guilt and punishment. He’s guilty of a plethora of major felonies (Felony Murder, for one). Does that mean his punishment should be death? That question should be open to debate, I agree. And, yeah, there are some pretty significant extenuating circumstances (i.e. zombie apocalypse). But, let there be no doubt: he’s guilty. I know that Rick’s group isn’t framing it this way – they’re primarily making a claim that Randall “might” go back to his gang and lead the gang to him. And, it does sound morally ambiguous (to say the least) to kill someone for something they “might” do. But, I’d frame the debate quite differently. i.e. “We know, beyond any doubt, based both on what Randall has admitted to and what we’ve seen with our own eyes, that Randall is a part of a criminal gang, that he has committed the crime of Felony Murder, and that he should be punished.” I would then leave his punishment up to the jury of the entire group. But, as for his guilt? There’s no doubt.

      March 6, 2012 at 6:09PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I "@Dave: I think you’re downplaying his guilt. Leaving aside whatever his “gang” may have done in the past (rape, murder), about which crimes Randall claims that he’s totally innocent; he still is guilty of at least having participated in a deadly, unprovoked attack against Rick/Hershel/and Glen."

      Well, can you blame me? We do live (currently) in a society of innocent until proven guilty. Plus, Randall shooting at Rick & Co. can easily be explained any number of ways. No Patty Hearst alibi required. You can legitimately argue duress, that they thought Rick murdered their "friends", that he was guilty of firing on the guys but still not guilty of anything warranting execution. Is he entirely innocent? No. Is he definitively guilty of anything warranting killing him? Not enough information for that as far as I can see. I am still not buying him guilty of felony murder any more than somebody in a gang fight who shoots and misses is guilty of his buddy getting shot by the rival gang. That's not how it works.

      "But, I’d frame the debate quite differently. i.e. “We know, beyond any doubt, based both on what Randall has admitted to and what we’ve seen with our own eyes, that Randall is a part of a criminal gang, that he has committed the crime of Felony Murder, and that he should be punished.”"

      What has he ACTUALLY admitted to? Being a part of a group of bad guys in a situation where his life depended on their help? Not stopping them? It is unsavory, and he bears some guilt of that to be sure. That is not the same as proof he is a criminal or bad guy worthy of killing, or even that he is a threat to betray them. I would not trust him, and he may very well sell them out if given a chance. I think it is wrong to just kill him now based on what little they know of him, even considering the risks.

      -Cheers

      March 7, 2012 at 12:07AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Printin' Mike Dave: I'm going to beat a dead horse for a while longer.

      Actually, that’s exactly the way Felony Murder works. Let’s say you and your buddy Darrel are in a gang, and you and your co-conspirator decide to break into your neighbor’s house and steal his Xbox (a felony). You have no intent to harm, let alone kill, anyone – in fact, you don’t even bring any weapons with you. As you’re breaking into your neighbor’s house, the neighbor hears you, grabs his gun, and confronts you. You try to knock the gun away from him, the gun discharges during the struggle and your co-conspirator is hit by a bullet and killed. You, my friend, are guilty of Felony Murder (i.e. someone was killed in furtherance of the felony that you were committing). It doesn’t matter what your intent was, it doesn’t matter that you didn’t even aim a weapon at the victim, it doesn’t matter that it wasn’t your gun, it doesn’t matter if you didn’t even touch the gun.

      March 7, 2012 at 2:06PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dave I Mike, you're right. I still think any decent lawyer could get him off that charge, especially under the circumstances. Reviewing the law, yeah, you are right at least in your example. At minimal it would go to trial. It would also help your case if Randall shot first (as opposed to somebody else shot, then Rick shot, then Randall returned fire in self defense). Plus, you would have to prove Randall & crew were doing something wrong leading up to the event. They were not robbing anybody or necessarily intending to do something. Michael Raymond-James did, however Randall and the other guys fired upon hearing that Rick had killed their friend. If I were a lawyer, I would argue heavily it was not like they were in the act of a crime, plus you have no proof Randall shot first or acted in anything out of self-preservation or to save his friends (or since I'm using lawyer speak, the accused rapist dirtbags who nonetheless were part of the group helping keep Randall alive). But man, that is getting tedious just thinking about it.

      Anyway, I'll concede your point on Felony Murder. I still think Randall would walk from those charges. I mean, his co-conspirator was killed by zombies. That has to count for something.

      I will still argue killing Randall for that is morally wrong even though Randall's actions in watching and not interfering with the rape of the girls in front of their father was despicable. It is an interesting argument, however there is nothing really sticking to Randall at this point proving he is enough of a threat (or any of one) to justify killing him in cold blood.

      -Cheers

      March 7, 2012 at 3:16PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    EA All Day

    thought last weeks episode was pretty good but this one very weak. slow plot movement with too many characters not saying anything important.

    andrea is a lawyer in a former life? she doesnt have very convincing arguments for the randal situation.

    rick, your kid throws like a girl.

    i was openly cheering for dale to get killed. i thought he might get away for a minute but am glad his wide-eyed stare will be gone from this show. he was constantly annoying and rarely did anything positive for the group.

    randal's knee looked gnarly in the opening scene... there's no way he'd be able to move around on it as easily as he does.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:13PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      EA All Day another question: why is dale walking out in the middle of the field at night? wouldnt you think, regardless of what the zombie situation on the farm has been for the last several weeks, that the rule would be: no one goes outside at night unless it is absolutely necessary...?

      March 4, 2012 at 11:30PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Pizpot Gargravarr I laughed at the idea of Andrea being a civil rights lawyer when Dale mentioned it (I couldn't recall that being brought up before but I could be wrong) I don't buy that back-story for a second.

      Also yeah, Carl has a pretty weak arm doesn't he?

      March 6, 2012 at 3:18AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Lindy I thought the exact same thing about Andrea. She's a lawyer and should be leading the debates with persuasive arguments.

      March 6, 2012 at 10:14PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Iris hahahaha the comment about Carl xD

      March 8, 2012 at 9:59PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    ThatWasMyWatchDad

    I did enjoy the fact that Herschel forgot he had a son, too.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:13PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      mike that's too funny, I missed that fact when he gave the watch away :)

      March 5, 2012 at 12:27AM EST
    • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

      armofatlas He doesn't have a son, does he? I thought that was a boy from town that Herschel accepted responsibility for after the outbreak.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:50AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      megan I don't think that's his son. Beth (the blonde) said that she was dating that guy before the zombies. I think he just happened to be on the farm when everything went down

      March 5, 2012 at 11:07AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Lindy The fact that Hershel gave his watch to Glenn I interpreted as meaning he is mostly giving up. At this point one would assume Hershel would want the group to stay - heck, even move into the house. But since common sense says they are going to be leaving the farm soon, it presents a few options: I doubt they would just leave Hershel and daughters to fend for themselves (which they clearly cannot do) and the farm is no longer a safe haven. So I imagine something is either going to happen to Hershel and maybe a daughter or two, or something happens that forces them to leave, and Hershel simply refuses to leave the farm, accepting the inevitable outcome. Because of the watcth, I think Maggie will leave with the group.

      March 6, 2012 at 10:26PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide We learned in an earlier episode that Hershel's stepson was killed by walkers.

      Dale's contribution to the campfire stories, in "Wildfire", was responding to Glenn's ribbing by explaining the significance of the timepiece and his faithfully winding it. Hershel's watch had the same significance and more, as:

      ...a family heirloom (passing it on meant welcome to the family, Glenn)
      ...its having been passed down from ancestors from the Old Country (we both descend from immigrants, who made this country what it was pre-ZA, and forgive my having acted like a bigoted a-hole; I've been cured), and
      ...you have my blessing to carry on with Maggie (who's so much like my dearly departed first wife. Her picture on the wall behind me approves.)

      March 29, 2013 at 3:34AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    eric_balsam

    "Heaven is just another lie, and if you believe it, you're an idiot". It's dialogue like this, that makes me not want to watch the show

    March 4, 2012 at 11:17PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Steve Kando 1. It's true. What Carl said.
      2. Do you expect some 9 year old kid to speak profoundly? Huh?

      March 4, 2012 at 11:27PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Cody I'm pretty sure at least some characters would be thinking like that. In the world they're living in .. a zombie outburst and the end of the head.. it's reasonable. ALSO, every character in every show,movie,etc..is not going to share your ideas and beliefs. So stop bitching.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:37PM EST
    • Lol, both you missed my point. It's terrible dialogue. People in real life don't say that. It's dialogue that blatantly says to the world "here's what our writers are trying to tell the audience"

      March 5, 2012 at 12:02AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      FatRyan Huh? That dialogue isn't remotely unrealistic. People definitely would say something like that. Especially in a freaking zombie apocalypse.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:06AM EST
    • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

      armofatlas It's not bad dialogue. Just bad acting. It's supposed to foreshadow Carl's downhill spiral. "In the absence of God, anything goes." This kid has had no school/church/societal influence. Where would the world be if there was no moral compas? We get to find out now that Dale is dead. The whole group will slip, but they will be forced to face their descent in the words and actions of Carl.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:27AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      joel "This kid has had no school/church/societal influence." Why is that remotely important? The kid has TWO PARENTS. I think they can do as good or likely better than church, school, or society. Carl's problem is that he lives in a world of death and horror at every turn.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:55AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      anon.Z.moose My vote for poorly set up dialogue of the episode: near the end where Rick is pointing the gun at the condemned kid, Randal, and Karl walks in and says "do it dad". Just didn't feel natural. First of all - would he really interrupt his dad at that point? He might as well have said, "cool, can I watch?" or "light 'im up, dad". A very small change could have made this dialogue seem more natural: Carl walks in, Rick notices him out of the corner of his eye and pulls back, and then Carl says, "do it, dad."

      March 5, 2012 at 1:10AM EST
    • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

      armofatlas That's true. And there's no doubt that they are really crappy parents (ESPECIALLY the ho bag mom!). But you prove my point. Without some sort of sculpting the kid will "learn" whatever he wants. Now he's learned that it is equally acceptable to kill people as it is to kill walkers. Carl is starting to embody what we would be without our "humanity"

      March 5, 2012 at 1:25AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      excpired I could see someone saying that. He snapped at her, he misses her and there her mother is trying to justify her death with heaven. It was a statement of anger, and he may not even necessarily believe it.

      Also in tragedy and poverty people are more likely to believe in a higher power, and in heaven. It is a rationalizing force people use to maintain their sanity and face adversity. So saying living in a bad world would make you atheist is simply not corroborated by the statistics. Just look at the most religious countries in the world, they are all poor, starving and living with low human rights quality.

      March 5, 2012 at 2:37AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Madel Bad writing.

      March 5, 2012 at 6:58PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide Agree w/ Cody, FatRyan, Excpired. Also...

      Carl views the mired walker and Randall similarly, and recognizes that poking a beast (some character used that phrase earlier, in another context) or potential threat can be lethal. Safer to shoot it in the head and be done with it.

      Carl knows Pops is a waffler. Plus, he wants adults to stop trying to shield him from what's really going on, because he knows the real deal and can handle it (he thinks).

      March 29, 2013 at 3:50AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Jim

    When this show talks, it does a poor job of it. I, for one, will not miss Dale and his endless, endless talking. The moral and ethical dialogue is not that profound or original. The show just spins around and around and around with the endless, mediocre talking. But this show is far, far more effective when it shows rather than tells. The scenes with Carl, with the prisoner and the walker were marvelous and far more telling and profound than the awful hackneyed dialogue.

    Sorry brother but I won't miss you.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:19PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Elle Truth. Dale was one of the better characters in the comics but in the show he's not as strong. The writers are really struggling this year ever since Frank Darabont was fired and AMC is giving the show a much smaller budget for these 13 episodes than they gave for the 6 of the first season and it's showing. They've hired mediocre writers who are limited with what they can do which leads to a downward spiraling show.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:32AM EST
    • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

      armofatlas The fact that Dale wasn't profound or original is what made his voice so important. He was constantly in a position where he was forced to remind people of the most basic human rights. He wasn't campaigning for spiritual growth. He was trying to preserve humanity. Not the preservation of human life... The preservation of humanity.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:36AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Warren You sound like the stereotypical zombie-movie fan with a short attention span. If moral and ethical dialogue, whatever that may be, isn't profound or original I really don't understand how shooting zombies (aka: shows) is profound. It's the juxtaposition of plot development via dialogue and the consequent actions that follow that dialogue that make this show unique in comparison to the all action night of the living dead style movies (which I enjoy but you can't try to force this show into that mold)

      March 5, 2012 at 12:46AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      joel @Elle: The writing this season isn't any worse than last season. I honestly can't tell any difference between these episodes and those or where Darabont ended and the new showrunner started. The only thing that is obvious is that they've severely cut the budget for make-up, extras, locations, and effects.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:58AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Bob7 This show is still looking for story and characters. They have a premise--zombie world--but a situation does not make a story.

      March 5, 2012 at 2:22AM EST
    • Hallows_talkback_profile

      mcd410x This. "When this show talks, it does a poor job of it."

      March 6, 2012 at 10:51PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    alynch

    Well, if the show's goal was to get the audience to hope for the brutal death of a 10 year old boy, then mission accomplished.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:24PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Godzillavseaster_talkback_profile

      Dezbot I don't want Carl to die a brutal death, but that little fucker needs to be punished.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:32PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      anon.Z.moose Amen @alynch. I really dislike it when the show seems to move the plot forward based upon characters behaving in exasperating ways. Some actions understandable in our current world do not make sense in the universe presented by the show. Dale hiding the guns, for example. Now we have Carl forgetting to mention there's a zombie on the loose. The closest analog in the real world to his experience is that of child soldiers who very much cease to be children during their abduction and become very pliant - which is one reason why they are targeted for this role in spite of their small stature. (There are documentaries and other media stories on the process of trying draw them out and help them regain a lost childhood afterward.) Like Carl, they have almost all watched a family member brutally murdered. Hence, I don't see a kid like Carl, having gone through his own unimaginable horrors, wandering around in the woods like Sandy Duncan in a wheat field. Even if we grant that he had a gun and might go out exploring it's even harder to imagine his not mentioning that swamp thing broke free and is out there somewhere. Doesn't have to tell the whole back story to get that out and I think a self defense mechanism at this point is much more believable that what we're meant to understand - that he became frightened, embarrassed and thus went into denial. Yes, this makes for a nice turn of his character later, as Alan mentions, but advances the story at the expensive of a credible narrative.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:43PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Col Bat Guano So while living in a zombie apocalypse and having been shot in the chest only weeks(?) before, Carl has no problem wandering around in the woods? Are these folks ever going to acknowledge the world they live in?

      March 5, 2012 at 4:12AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      anon @col bat guano: THANK YOU!!! how is this kid walking around in the woods ALONE when everything that has happened to his group this season has more or less occurred while walking around in the woods?!

      March 5, 2012 at 9:46AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tag8833 This episode was all about making us despise the characters more. Carl who had the benifit of being a likable kid was turned into an annoying one. The most potentially likable character, Dale, decided to pursue the argument strategy of brow beating everyone into submission. Demanding that they listen to his arguments while he ignores theirs. Resolute Rick, became a waffling pussy, and for no reason at all. Laurie, the least likable character on TV, proved she was incapable of handling her kid. Carol, a frustratingly passive character, stuck to her guns with: "I don't want any part of this decision."

      I think someone should remind the writers of TWD that we need someone to cheer for. Even an anti-hero like Glen Mazzara's old flame, Vic Mackey, had some redeeming quality.

      I am searching my memmory for last show I watched with such an ulikable set of characters. The closest I can come is the early days of Spartacus, but even that show had an appealing set of villians in Lucy Lawless and John Hannah.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:37AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Steve Kando

    I am actually curious to see if comic fans bitch about the changes or if they're on board.

    Personally I think the changes are cool, as people who read the comics can still be surprised. You never know what will happen.

    Even though Dale made the number 1 stupidest choice in the history of the show: hiding every gun in the middle of the swamp - he WAS a good character, and a very decent dude, so he shall be missed.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:26PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

      armofatlas I'm a fan of the comic, but don't mind the changes. Even in comics, there's a rebirth/reinterpretation at some point. I'm glad they didn't drop the ball and stuck to their guns. I may not agree with the pace but I trust their ability to wrap things up well by the end of this season.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:54PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Elle I am a fan of the comics and I don't mind the changes. As long as they keep a good story line going and keep the characters true to who they are but I'm afraid they are dropping the ball on that one. The pace is MUCH, much slower this season and it's disappointing. Tonight's episode was better than the last two or three so I'm hoping they'll redeem themselves and finally get off this damn farm.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:34AM EST
    • Cropped_corky_talkback_profile

      Kensington Well, I've read all of the comics that have been collected so far, and I'm fine with the changes. If I wanted something that was moment by moment identical to the comics, I could just read the comics.

      March 5, 2012 at 3:14AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      jcpdiesel21 I'm fine with the changes from the comic as well, as long as they are worth the detour. I really liked Dale in the comics, but not so much on the TV show, so I am not too upset but certainly surprised that he got killed off.

      March 5, 2012 at 10:49AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Blake I read the comic and have stopped watching the show. The changes in personality, not situation, are part of the reason: unlikable Andrea and Dale, catatonic Carol.

      In theory I would think it's a good thing that the show is forging its own direction. It's just such a bad show.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:35AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tag8833 Rick, Shane, or Dale needed to go, and it wasn't going to be Rick. The moral space occupied by Rick in the books was taken by Shane, and exagerrated to give Rick space in the middle. Rick moved into a waffly position somewhere in the middle, and Dale had to become more extreme to suit the other two. This was a problem.

      My first choice would be that they ditched Shane, as his unlikability levels were much higher than Dale, but this is TV, and Jon Bernthal is younger and hotter than Jeffrey DeMunn, so I understand, even if I don't like the way they went with it.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:43AM EST
    • Bubba . I see a lot of back an forth on which is better , the comic book or the series. I was and still am a big fan of Highlander the series but a lot of people disliked it saying the movies were better but then those who liked the movies started arguing over the changes made to them .... Sci -Fi versus Adventure . Some felt the movies shoulda kept their sci -fi story telling while others liked the adventure story telling . I'm not really sure how the fans were able to break it down cause to me it was both as for the series it was historical and adventurous. Anyway that's how it goes from video games to books to tv to movies no one person will agree when someone takes their favorite character or story and makes it different from how they see it.

      March 5, 2012 at 1:11PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Blake Steve: Have been thinking about this question since I replied above, and I want to expand on it.

      In the comics, it's probably safe to say now that Dale and Andrea are a couple. Not only that, Andrea is 18 when we meet her, and Dale is about 65.

      They are in many ways the heart of the comic. Through this odd relationship, Kirkman makes many statements about life post-apocalypse, particularly about the quest for companionship.

      The TV producers' original sin, I now believe, was in aging Andrea because they were afraid of how a 65-18 couple would look on TV. In the comics, she's nice and we learn of her toughness little by little. On TV, she's tough from the beginning, and if she's nice, I stopped watching before that emerged.

      Moreover, the love she has with Dale in the comics is real. There is no such love from anyone on TV, and it's a big flaw I never noticed until your question.

      Love and loneliness are something Kirkman explores a lot in the comic and this would help the TV show.

      Specifically regarding the way Dale and Andrea's character changes hurt the show: Andrea is unbearable, and so is Dale. TV viewers wonder why he seems jealous when he learns Shane and Andrea get together. He shouldn't: in the TV world, he has no reason to. But the writers have read the comic, so Dale has this residual inexplicable longing for Andrea on TV.

      With a woman by his side who he can't believe is with him, Dale in the comics is an older, wiser man, not a busybody snooping on others.

      When you wrote "changes," you may have meant "plot changes." Those actually help the TV show. The CDC visit, not in the comics at all, was the highlight of season 1.

      But the changes to the characters of Andrea and Dale may be the main reason the TV show is so annoying. There's no love on the TV show, and that makes it hard to care about any of them.

      March 5, 2012 at 8:51PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide I don't read the comics (and don't plan to, until the TV show wraps), so I have no preconceptions about the characters or plot. I perceive the Dale-Andrea relationship as that of protective adoptive guardian-and-willful, immature, self-absorbed, ungrateful daughter/younger sister/niece. In that vein, Dale's reaction to the Andrea-Shane liaison is as understandable as the pre-enlightened Hershel's response to the Maggie-Glenn romance.

      March 29, 2013 at 4:06AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Teklanika

    I'll miss Dale. Too bad it wasn't Rick's wife who bought it. Getting tired of the farm. Seems this whole season will be on it though. Show's getting stale. Hopefully next seaon's better.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:29PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Elle Agreed!
      *fingers crossed for next year!*

      (BTW, how sad is it that fans just want this season to end and get to the next one before it's even over cause it's been so disappointing?)

      March 5, 2012 at 12:36AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Tony In the sneak peak for Episode 13 weren't they going to leave the farm? I mean they were gathering in their cars knowing that walkers were attracted to farm.

      March 5, 2012 at 1:07PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide Lori can't buy it 'til they get more mileage out of her pregnancy.

      March 29, 2013 at 4:09AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    fuck you

    I can't understand why anyone thinks this episode was better than the early farm episodes. This to me, was much, much worse. Nothing happened as this show continues to think that boring ultimately pointless dialogue is the way forward. It says a lot that Dale was probably right and it was extremely hard not to hate him. And who will miss him at all, oh god the annoying moral scold is gone, how...... terrible? Honestly I don't know why I keep watching this schlock, I guess I'm a masochist.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:31PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Elle I think you're right. Ever since they got on the farm the episodes have been HIGHLY disappointing! They do need to talk things out but AMC has failed to realize that you HAVE to have balance.
      Tonight's episode was a bit better cause something ACTUALLY happened. They've had wayy too much we-need-to-get-things-figured-out/we-have-to-talk-it-out dialogue going on and they've taken away from the fact that these people are in the midst of the zombie apocalypse.

      If the zombie apocalypse does come around, I hope it's as safe as this one!

      March 5, 2012 at 12:40AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Carl Perhaps a masochist... perhaps a whiny jackass. If you hate dialogue you picked the wrong show to watch because it's the dialogue that makes it worth watching. Without the dialogue this show would be a combination of the road and night of the living dead. there was about 2 words throughout most of the road and lots of token running from zombies in NOLD. if you have that short of an attention span you're probably not cut out for watching a show like this.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:55AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      keith FY, you win this week's comment I most agree with.

      Carl, you're saying if you hate dialogue you shouldn't be watching a zombie apocalypse series? Because zombie apocalypse films are notoriously lacking tension? I say if you want to write a crappy soap opera go and work on a crappy soap opera. Leave the zombie apocalypses to the people who understand how human nature would work IN A ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:10AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tag8833 To me, this was the worst episode the show has ever done. Everything we learned about any of the characters made them less likable. Carl pursued a stupid path to rival Laurie's car ride to get Rick, and Dale decided to use an argument style so repulsive that it was sure to fail.

      The episode pulled a Homeland, and tried to have its cake (everyone decing to kill Randal), and eat it too (Rick wussing out, and then ignoring the wishes of the group) Bait-and-Switch story telling. The worst part is that since Randal's fate is still in flux, we can do it all again next episode.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:51AM EST
    • Bubba. I agree this is turning out to be a bad version of a night time soap. It's like Dallas with zombies, rick plays the role of bobby , likeable, reasonable while shane plays the role of j.r mean an ruthless. What next an episode titled who shot shane ? In season one this group barely made it to the cdc in Atlanta , they were short on fuel, food, water , weapons and ammo. When season two started nuthin changed until the highway near the farm then they started having feelings of guilt for scavenging ..... Really ? Now towards the end of this season they're only starting to figure out that supplies are needed to survive and those with the most will to survive will while those who don't have them will perish. They might also want to be thinking about more fire power and learning how to use things such as bows & arrows and blades like machetes . As It's said in one of my video games ..... " A well armed society is a polite society" .

      March 5, 2012 at 1:26PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide Building and running a Western society that's not a dictatorship or military outfit requires the often-tedious, contentious process shown in this ep. As Rick told Shane in "18 Miles Out", there are no rules...so the group has to undergo the painful process of forming-storming-norming-performing, in order to figure out how to figure things out. Some may prefer "adjourning" (Andrea, Shane, Daryl, and Beth have all considered checking out, in various ways.) But those who stay have to work through the process of bitching it out...maybe multiple times over the group's lifecycle.

      Carol will go along with whatever program, as Ed conditioned her to, at least until she finishes mourning and then discovers her own voice. Carl's angry statements might help accelerate that process.


      Hershel will honor Rick's decision, whatever it is, because he's come to respect and trust Rick and realizes the Greenes are ill-equpped to make sound ZA-era decisions.

      March 29, 2013 at 4:32AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    lexington88

    I hate to be the guy to say this, but I really did completely forget T-Dog was on the show. If you are going to make a half-assed effort to be "diverse" (I don't care if a show does or not), shouldn't he at least have a bigger role? It's almost offensive. There's enough room on this show for everyone, especially with its propensity to be so talky. I will give the show credit though, I'm enjoying Part 2 of this season after pretty much giving up by the mid-point.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:34PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Earl D Amen, brother. It IS starting to get offensive, and at this point appears intentional. My one thought would be was T-Dogg a character in the comic books and was he as silent and stupid in them? If not, they need to either fix him or kill him. Even his slouched over body language is starting to annoy me.

      March 5, 2012 at 4:07AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tag8833 When he showed up at the final debate, I was sort of expexting him to make some sort of impassioned speech that would sway everyone's decisions, just to give him something to do. To me, it was a missed opportunity.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:53AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Pizpot Gargravarr Yeah, during the episode I was wondering whether his character had died a few episodes ago and I had just forgotten about it, until he showed up in the final scene.

      March 6, 2012 at 3:27AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide So far, TWD has demonstrated a continuum for black characters: talky ones (Duane, Morgan - status: MIA, even by walkie-talkie, after one ep.), moderately talky (Jacqi- status: lasted several episodes, but now dead), and background dressing (T-Dogg - status: posters above said it all). Based on those observations, I predict the more screentime and lines T-Dogg receives, the redder his shirt.

      March 29, 2013 at 4:42AM EST
  • Godzillavseaster_talkback_profile

    Dezbot

    I liked Dale, and was sad to see him go, especially so horribly. Would have preferred if it was Carol or Lori or that little brat Carl. Only two more eps to go and hopefully, they'll be leaving the damn farm and getting back on the road so they can meet more people.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:34PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      spongebob Pretty sad that the events of this show seem to rely on the (limited) AMC budget. The characters are only stuck on the farm because AMC doesn't want to spend money to take them out on the road. The episodes have lost their urgency and suspense ever since the group stopped moving and are now living a semi-comfortable life on the farm!

      March 5, 2012 at 3:35AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      David Niall With Lori appealing to Rick to have him ask Hershel about moving into the house for the winter, they obviously have no intention on leaving anytime soon, especially with no destination in mind and thinking that their original destination is over run. Also, with the pace of the show and only 2 episodes remaining this season, leaving the farm is out of the question for season 2.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:31PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide We've received multiplevon-the-nose signals the farm's not safe unless the group fortifies it (which we haven't seen or heard tell of happening):
      - Beth predicted the farm might be overrun and and no one can protect them, so she would rather commit suicide in bed than get gutted,
      - Six steers breached the fence, so if creatures can get out, others can get in...plus, lotsa beef's been lost and there are now fewer studs to mate the cows with,
      - The creekbed mire is no longer an effective moat,
      - Randall's heavily armed, marauding gang (and heavens knows how many others like it) knows about and wants to relocate to the farm.

      March 29, 2013 at 4:54AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    David

    I'll admit I didn't see Dale's death coming, but is was too obvious Randal wasn't going to die. I don;t mind that they didn't kill him, I mind that the writing and direction never made me feel like he would actually be killed. Plus, I agree that the dialogue has always been this show's (very) weak link.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:39PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      anon.Z.moose I actually thought that some how the swamp zombie was going to eat the kid before they got to him while he was tied up. It wasn't until Dale started looking long for this world that I understood for whom the bell tolled. That idea would have been really dumb by the way so I'm glad to have been wrong.

      March 4, 2012 at 11:51PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      David I also cannot stop thinking about Jeffrey DeMunn's character in 'X-Files: Fight the Future' saying, "That impossible scenario we never planned for... Well, we better come up with a plan."

      March 5, 2012 at 12:00AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Usty

    If a Dale dies on a farm and no one cares, does it really die?

    March 4, 2012 at 11:45PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Radom idiot...

      March 5, 2012 at 1:02AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      keith Lol, good one. And good riddance.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:13AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    jeneva_jerron

    Dale's death leaves the burden of morality on Rick's shoulders. As long as Dale was around he could let Dale be the voice of reason. That's no longer an option. He now has to be strong and unwavering in his decision making. Unfortunately he has Lori whispering in his ears so this might not end well.

    Kudos to Darryl for figuring out Shane. I was so so so happy to see that he saw right through his lies.

    Andrea was a lawyer??? I just can't see her sitting through law school.

    I don't know if this is typical kid behavior given the circumstances but after Carl got that big scare with the walker in the woods, you would think he would listen to his parents when they tell him to do in the house.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:45PM EST Reply to Comment
    • do u know tonighy code words please

      March 5, 2012 at 12:17AM EST
    • Sorry I don't. FF through the commercials.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:22AM EST


  • Even though I'm happy to see that they finally put Dale out of his misery , I would have liked to see his executioner have been Randall not the zombie. Dale never really understood how dangerous this new world was , the zombies are a threat but the humans are an even bigger threat and if the rest of the group continue thinking like Dale they won't last long in this new world either. It's important to hold onto ones humanity but It's also important to survive for mankind must not be extinguished.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:49PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      keith Randall killing Dale in a backstab would have been dramatic and emotionally fraught. It would therefore miss the tone of the show.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:15AM EST
    • Not necessarily , remember It's a show about survival . While the zombies are the stars of the series we also have to remember that in any apocalypse there are gonna be other types of dangerous situations we encounter. We as a people want to believe in our fellow man so much that we tend to forget that man is considered one of the most dangerous predators out there. So having Randall kill Dale would serve as a reminder that one has to prepare against all threats living or dead and that this new world is about survival of the smartest and the most fit to live in it .

      March 5, 2012 at 1:45PM EST
    • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

      armofatlas If Randal had killed Dale, it would have settled the debate over the moral quandary in killing strangers (especially armed ones in a group). As poetic and powerful as that would have been (not to mention awesome!), it would have immediately steered the group to Shane as the new leader since Rick's head would explode after making yet another horrible decision.

      March 5, 2012 at 9:14PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    John S.

    I think its interesting how people actual think. It seems to me that almost everyone on here didnt like Dale cause he talked too much and was trying to keep order. The whole point of the episode was keeping everything civilized. I see a similar story in the book Lord of the Flies. Without order and civil obedience will only lead to savagery. But it seems that most people on this forum would rather have the shoot all that dont comply with your views kind of approach. And in a way it really dissapoints me. If zombies were to really appear, this world would go to shit. You could say im taking this show too seriously but honestly that type of story is very real.

    March 4, 2012 at 11:50PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      anon.Z.moose @John S.: Not to be too repetitive (per my earlier comment) but I think this is the writers fault. Once Dale hid the guns they made his behavior too extreme and this colors our opinion of his arguments. When the character is moral at his own expense his arguments carry weight. But as soon as it appears he's behaving morally at everyone else's expense, that's when he becomes a moral fanatic. Fiat justidia pereat mundus is like singing in the shower: nice when it's just you but when everyone else has to deal with it they'd prefer you just shut up.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:01AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Printin' Mike I agree with @Anon.Z: the writers did a poor job with what could have been a great character (and, frankly, the actor could have spoken his lines without quite as much whining).

      March 5, 2012 at 1:32AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      A fan Agree with Anon.Z also. Dale's philosophy wasn't the problem, it was his horrible dialogue. I don't believe they need to shoot everyone that doesn't comply. But the writers missed a big chance to write much better lines for Dale (and the rest of the group.) Why not argue that the prisoner could be another protector of the group? And the group could argue back that he's a bottom feeder who tags along with rapists and murderers. I'm sure there's plenty of arguments that could have been made, but weren't.

      March 5, 2012 at 3:40AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tag8833 I think Dale's problem was a little different. It was that he wanted to make decisions for other people without asking for their opinion or consent. He represented tyranny on the show, and that was a problem.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:57AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      David Niall Had Dale or his sense of morality been given more context, he may have been a more likable character or at least there may have been more sympathy for his reasoning. When he pulled Lori aside a while back to express his concerns about Shane, a revelation along the lines that he saw too much death and too much loss of humanity among his friends in Vietnam would have been a simple addition that added mass amounts of depth and reasoning behind Dale. As it was, he was simply a blowhard self-induced morality meter without any context or reason for the audience to be any more convinced than the rest of the characters.

      Had he 'been there, done that', it would have added a lot of weight to his appeals and therefore added a lot to the conflicted reality of the show. Missed chance.

      March 5, 2012 at 1:18PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Lindy Yes, I also heard that analogy to Lord of the Flies on Talking Dead.

      The problem with Dale was he was an annoying, whiny, cranky drip who never stopped complaining. His dialogue consisted of the same four sentences over and over. Had they made him more complex and multi-dimensioal, I might have wanted him to stay. That debate scene was the worst writing. The same sentences over and over. He needed to be gone.

      March 6, 2012 at 10:40PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    rickthaprick

    i cheered louder for dale's disembowelment than i did when the giants won the superbowl...fuck u dale!!!

    March 4, 2012 at 11:59PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Rock

    As much as I understand the need for someone on this show to carry the humanity/morality torch, Dale just sucked at it. It's not Jeffrey Demunn's fault--I've always thought he was a very good character actor and was glad to see him with a regular gig. But his character was just so annoyingly preachy and self-righteous. He had to go if for no other reason than to make room for someone else, someone better to be the morality police. Of course, considering how piss-poor these writers have shown to be with characterization, I won't hold my breath on the "better" part.

    I know the writers are hell-bent on making Shane into an absolute "bad guy", but they should just let it go and realize his way is the INTERESTING way. This is television--Shane's man-of-action routine is far more entertaining than Dale's(and too often Rick's) man-of-words.

    And reason #72 why Lori is horrible and needs to go--Carl's epic stupidity and ability to ruin everything can only have come from his mother.

    March 5, 2012 at 12:03AM EST Reply to Comment
    • But the thing about Shane is his way only works when he is in charge. When the shoe is on the other foot and you need someone to save your butt or get you out of a bus, then you should think about who you feel is expendable and who isn't.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:16AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Bubba Ah, yes the good ol bus scene . Ok , let's not forget the fight scene where they tried violence as a means to end an argument then when neither died from that the zombies came next . Rick fought off one then took cover with it leaving shane to fend for himself then thinking it was clear got up only to be attacked once again , he helped the kid first then looked for shane . Upon seeing shane in danger he was unsure of how to approach this situation finally deciding screw him he tried to kill me . Upon leaving the area he saw the two security guards in uniform dead side by side brothers in arms to the bitter end and realized that could have been him and shane before the apocalypse or after, it was then and only then he saved shane not as a friend but as a comrade a brother in arms .

      March 5, 2012 at 2:05PM EST
  • Hhytbqlidgpoaqaaaa___width_240_talkback_profile

    DOCDAN

    what were tonight code on walking dead please

    March 5, 2012 at 12:10AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Jessica

    Even with the cold foreboding I spent most of the episode trying to dismiss, and knowing he'd go sooner rather than later, I wasn't at all prepared for that.
    Dale was my favourite, almost immediately; he embodied the sort of kindness, warmth and decency I'd like to believe could endure in a hopeless situation, even in the face of deep criticism and open threats.
    To have to watch him go, terrified and suffering, was absolutely devastating... 

    March 5, 2012 at 12:13AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Dales#1 Finally, someone who agrees

      March 5, 2012 at 2:50AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide I liked how Dale's RV, with its normal dishes, kitchen table and wall placque, stash of books, beach chair with umbrella, etc. = his contribution of a touchstone of hominess and pre-ZA normality, even when on the road. But that sense within the group, like the RV, is breaking down, no matter how much Dale tries to repair/maintain it and pass on those skills to T-Dogg and Glenn.

      Also interesting: Rick borrowed an essential tool needed to maintain the RV but lost it in Atlanta, when the box truck was stolen; thus, Rick was also unable to deliver the additional parts Hershel was going to salvage from that truck. Bottom line: old world symbols and values may not survive the new world.

      March 29, 2013 at 5:12AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Froide I was touched by Dale's horrible death, too.

      Since Carl equated the mired walker with the chained Randall, I think Dale's death convinced the kid Randall must go. Perhaps Shane's killing Randall preempted Carl from doing so.

      March 29, 2013 at 5:15AM EST
  • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

    armofatlas

    I hated seeing Dale go. Rick may have been the heart of the group, but Dale was the soul. At least he managed to sway Andrea away from Shane's line of thinking (or lack there of). Hopefully the remorse from his death will keep her in the middle of the road.

    Carl has gone from emulating his dad, to emulating Shane, to complete psychotic disassociation in no time flat. I don't think there's any coming back for him.

    Darryl may be distancing himself, but it's important to note that he is camping in ear/eye shot of the group. With Dale gone, I hope he takes a few steps back into the fold.

    March 5, 2012 at 12:18AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      raff Re: "I don't think there's any coming back for him."

      Of course there is! You're expecting the writers to use realism? These are the people who don't seem to care a wit about their own safety or preparedness in the apocalypse, remember.

      March 5, 2012 at 10:31AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tag8833 The road to redemption for Carl would have to be long, and extreme for it to resonate at all to me. He will have to earn his happy ending, and the only character I can recall that climbed out of a chasm so deep might be Londo Mollari on Babylon 5, and these writers are no J. Michael Straczynski.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:07PM EST
    • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

      armofatlas I'm a fan of the comic (i liked it; I'm not obsessed with it). It was easier to relate to Carl's "condition" because it happened slowly over a longer timeline, with different character influences, and more situations/plot. But even in the comic, Carl received the typical blank slate/fresh start given in most comics. He didn't earn it, so I didn't think he deserved it.

      TV Carl could have done well spending time on watch with Dale. Instead, he followed Shane like a lost puppy while Rick constantly has to ride off to fix his own mistakes. And don't get me started on Lori! My point is that I don't think the writing is strong enough to turn Carl around in a believable way (especially when the comics couldn't do it satisfactorily).

      March 5, 2012 at 2:00PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    ConorMac

    Anyone else want Norman Reedus to spit out the prayer from Boondock Saints to Dale before shooting him?

    March 5, 2012 at 12:18AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    leegero

    Great episode, but one gripe. I could not let go of the fact that Carl, after what he has been through and the danger that lurks everywhere, is wandering around, unsupervised? It's not as if there was a barbecue going on or the gang was watching college football on a Saturday. Just not believable to me. Other than that, the show needed a blunt reminder of the dangers that are constantly out there, and we got it tonight.

    March 5, 2012 at 12:20AM EST Reply to Comment
    • I was thinking that too. Like I know his father had some other things on his mind. But didn't Lori say that it was her job to keep the house handled? Failure.

      March 5, 2012 at 12:29AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Col Bat Guano Bingo

      March 5, 2012 at 4:15AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Col Bat Guano Bingo

      March 5, 2012 at 4:15AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      jcpdiesel21 This was a gaping plot hole to me, too.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:21AM EST
    • Hung_horse_talkback_profile

      armofatlas I can forgive a kid exploring a farm. He definitely needs his ass kicked on a regular basis, though. What I can't forgive is that NOT ONCE did ANYONE say "where's Carl?"

      March 5, 2012 at 9:24PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Steven

    I'm surprised that no one on the farm or on here has pointed out how this whole situation was the result of yet another bad decision by Rick. What was that plan, anyway? Take Randall back to the farm, heal him up some, and then take him out and drop him alone with a knife? No wait, let's take him back to the farm and kill him! Sorry Rock, I think Carl get's his stupidity from his Daddy.
    Also, I don't think Carl's actions are the result of the zombie apocalypse. I think he's a spoiled brat and would be in any world.
    Bye Dale. I know I won't miss you.

    March 5, 2012 at 12:24AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      csugrue I think it was interesting the way Carl's situation i.e. he tormented a zombie and that zombie later became a real threat to the group - paralleled the situation with Randall, in that Daryl was torturing Randall for information at the beginning of the episode & now that he hasn't been eliminated, is he too going to become a danger?

      March 5, 2012 at 2:09AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    fortfied

    I caught the first word of tonight's code "Struggle". Anyone got the other two words?

    March 5, 2012 at 12:33AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Godzillavseaster_talkback_profile

      Dezbot Struggle To Survive

      March 5, 2012 at 12:50AM EST
Next 323 Comments

Get Instant Alerts on What's Alan Watching

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web