Inside Television with Alan Sepinwall

New 'Walking Dead' showrunner confirmed, season 4 production begins in May

Scott M. Gimple replaces Glen Mazzara, who replaced Frank Darabont

<p>&quot;The Walking Dead.&quot;</p>

"The Walking Dead."

Credit: AMC

Are you a fan of The Walking Dead?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

"The Walking Dead" is the biggest hit in the history of AMC, and one of the biggest in the history of cable television — at the moment, it's the highest-rated entertainment show of this season in all of television —  but success has not brought with it stability. Original showrunner Frank Darabont departed under murky circumstances midway through season 2, to be replaced by his lieutenant Glen Mazzara. And when the season 4 renewal came in, it was with the announcement that Mazzara would be departing the series over the ever-popular creative differences.

Though it's been rumored for months that Scott M. Gimple (who's been on the writing staff since season 2) would be promoted to replace Mazzara, AMC wouldn't confirm that until today, when the channel also announced more details about the fourth season.

Production will begin in Atlanta on May 6, with another 16 episodes being produced to premiere in October. In addition to Gimple's promotion, the show's Emmy-winning makeup supervisor (and sometime director) Greg Nicotero has been promoted one notch to executive producer, alongside returnees Robert Kirkman, Gale Anne Hurd and David Alpert.

We're never going to know exactly why Mazzara left (other than that he didn't agree with the direction that season 4 will go in), but unsurprisingly, the press release features all interested parties sounding pleased as punch with the new arrangement.

"Scott has been an essential part of this show since he came aboard at the very beginning of season two. He's contributed to guiding this show in a substantial way that has resulted in a lot of the key scenes and storylines fans have dubbed signature moments of 'The Walking Dead,'" Kirkman (who created "The Walking Dead" comic) said. "I am thrilled to begin work on a brand new season of ‘The Walking Dead’ with Scott at the helm, and I truly believe we could be embarking on what will be the best season of this show yet."

Gimple, meanwhile, said, "I'm thrilled to continue the tradition of the spectacular, cinematic, horrifying, exciting and emotional storytelling of 'The Walking Dead.' I'm a huge fan of the comics, and started with the show on the other side of the set, as an avid viewer. Over the past two years, it's been an incredible privilege making such great television with the best cast and crew I've ever worked with – I can't wait to make some more."

I wish Gimple more luck than his predecessors, or else the history of "The Walking Dead" will read like those Biblical passages about how so-and-so begat so-and-so, who in turn begat...

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

Alan Sepinwall Recaps & Reviews

View By Show »

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    Jay

    Who will be the guy to replace Gimple early in Season 5?

    February 27, 2013 at 3:54PM EST Reply to Comment
    • The-critic-thumb_talkback_profile

      BrettPoker T-Dog

      February 27, 2013 at 3:59PM EST
    • Chewie-baseball-card_talkback_profile

      Bgklein Too soon....not because of his character's death but because we clearly aren't ready to acknowledge that he was actually ever a character.

      February 27, 2013 at 4:19PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      joel I've been wondering if the back half of season 3 would go off some sort of creative cliff, thus being the reason Mazzara was voted out of Woodbury. But so far it's been about as good as the first half, warts and all. So we have to assume that AMC's trend of driving it's shows into the ground via executive mismanagement and general stupidity is continuing.

      Luckily for Walking Dead (and AMC), the vast majority of the audience doesn't really care that much about the writing. And with ratings this strong, the show could probably lose a couple more wheels but continue to limp into the top ten for at least two more seasons. It's not like there's much on network/basic cable TV to stop it.

      February 27, 2013 at 6:06PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    the flower tao

    [SPOILER] So far season 3 has been a blast. Up until Lori's death I enjoyed it as a hilarious guilty pleasure powertrip, after that I thought the showrunners really managed to amp up the drama. Sure, many of you guys have pinpointed the weakness in writing just right over the course of the last weeks. But I have to admit that I do enjoy going along with all this bullshit / awesomeness. If you wanna talk some really atrocious writing, go pick on post season 1 HEROES or something like that; 4 seasons of 'can Claire reunite with her dad?'. Not saying that WALKING DEAD is in any way a great show (it's not even remotely close to the likes of BREAKING BAD, BATTLESTAR, LOST, THRONES or BOARDWALK). But hell yeah, I'm curious to see what Gimple will bring to S4.

    February 27, 2013 at 4:41PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Col Bat Guano "post season 1 HEROES"

      You heartless bastard. I almost forgot about those terrible seasons of Heroes and you had go and dredge up the memories. How could a show go so horrible wrong?

      February 27, 2013 at 8:48PM EST
  • Images_talkback_profile

    MagicHipple

    The common thread is that AMC is the devil.
    They score a huge hit show, and even after receiving tax credits, promptly slash the budget for the next season.
    They've lifted their leg on Mad Men too, and made life miserable for all involved.

    February 27, 2013 at 8:18PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Gizmo_bigger_talkback_profile

      dan MagicHipple - Nobody slashed the budget on anything. Ever. Other than that, rant away!

      -Daniel

      February 27, 2013 at 8:23PM EST
    • Images_talkback_profile

      MagicHipple no, you

      February 27, 2013 at 8:27PM EST
    • Images_talkback_profile

      MagicHipple Just one snippet from an ocean of media on the subject.


      The Hollywood Reporter broke a story revealing that Darabont had in fact been fired due to issues of the show's reduced budget and a strained relationship with AMC executives

      February 27, 2013 at 8:36PM EST
    • Images_talkback_profile

      MagicHipple Tap dancing:

      Deadline: Did you cut the budget on The Walking Dead in Season 2?

      Collier: If you look at pilot budgets vs. pattern budgets usually the pilot budget is much higher than what ends up being the pattern budget. With The Walking Dead, instead of doing a pilot, we went straight to 6 episodes because we believed in the team and the talent in front and behind the camera. Then we came back with a 13-episode second season, and amortization over 13 episodes is very different than over 6. But we settled into one of the highest pattern budgets for a basic cable series.

      Deadline: So the overall budget for Season 2 is lower than the Season 1 because of the amortization factor?

      Collier: We went straight to series, with the first season serving in many ways as a pilot, and then we have settled into a 13-episode pattern budget.

      February 27, 2013 at 8:41PM EST
    • Images_talkback_profile

      MagicHipple (rant ends)

      February 27, 2013 at 8:42PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      RU Serious Wow. Served. As no one used to say. I think the budget for S3 even shows on screen. That prison set, particularly the "Green Room" area, looks really cheap.

      February 28, 2013 at 10:35AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    keith

    Won't be a good show until they fire Kirkman and write a proper zombie apocalypse drama.

    February 27, 2013 at 9:51PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Mr_burns_89_01_talkback_profile

    Jonas.Left

    Its funny Alan thought of The Bible. I'm reminded more of Spinal Tap's drummers.

    February 27, 2013 at 10:24PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    FranklynStreet

    My guess is that the one who's really calling the shots is Kirkman, but they he doesn't have enough hands-on technical film experience to officially be the showrunner. And it's hard to have two cooks in the kitchen, when the showrunner is the one supposed to be calling the shots. And the showrunner has to call the shots within the production process. I'd bet that both Darabont and Mazzara were making smaller day-to-day decisions, and wanted to make larger narrative choices, that was in opposition to the way Kirkman wants it to go. Through all of this, he's remained the central mouthpiece, and Hurd seems to support him as the creative center. Which, of course, since it's based on his comic creation, he is. But it's a little surprising to see the writer being given this much clout when the opposite is usually true of a project being adapted from another medium. Usually the creator of the original material, if he doesn't have a film background, is pretty much locked out of the process.

    February 27, 2013 at 11:14PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      GRubi Are you just speculating or do you have evidence to back this claim up? If that question sounds sarcastic, I don't mean for it to. I'm legitimately asking.

      February 28, 2013 at 1:42AM EST
    • No, just speculating. That's why I said "My guess...."

      February 28, 2013 at 2:44AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Bryan L I would agree with this, based on the comics. Kirkman is very averse to looking too deeply into his fictional world (for example, he's stated several times that he will never address the origin of the zombie plague). Unfortunately, that means you get very little backstory on the characters or explanation of their motivation. They never talk about their lives before zombies or any long-range plans or hopes or fears. Everything happens on a very superficial level. They're basically cardboard cutouts that are moved from situation to situation. Exhibit one is Michonne, who is little more than a caricature. This carries over into other Kirkman comics like Invincible, as well. That's why I attribute it to him.

      A show like Lost is almost the exact opposite, focusing more heavily on the characters' lives before they ended up on the island. That's also got its own perils (I don't think anybody thought much of the final 'explanation' for the island). But you get much better drawn characters.

      Ideally, I'd like to see something in the middle, where you have more rounded characters who are choosing their path, not being shoved around helplessly by external forces. It would be fantastic to see some flashbacks of the original zombie "uprising" or even of the characters before then. But I doubt we ever will.

      If I had to guess, I'd say the improved ratings are people tuning in to see zombie gore (in fairness, it is different in that respect than anything else on, and I'm not immune to some buttkicking zombie slaughter myself).

      February 28, 2013 at 11:07AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Paul C I think at times Kirkman would be a real pain in the writer's room. He would probably start a fight if somebody decided to take *his* characters in a different direction than what was put down on page. Ideally he would either be locked out and just collect his cash or AMC put him as show-runner.

      FWIW, I read elsewhere that apparently Kirkman and Mazzara had a disagreement over the direction of season 4. AMC backed Kirkman, therefore Mazzara left as his position as show-runner had obviously become untenable.

      February 28, 2013 at 7:02PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      theJerk When Kirkman was on Talking Dead with Steven Yeun, Steven made a mild criticism of the way one of the characters was being developed and Kirkman just about bit his head off. And when a listener asked if Shane would have handled a situation better than Rick, Kirkman said basically, I killed Shane off instead of Rick, therefore Rick has to be a better leader than Shane ever would have been. I love the show, but I have the feeling that any creative genius Robert Kirkman once had is now gone forever.

      March 10, 2013 at 2:53PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Quinn

    Will season 4 be broken in half again?

    February 28, 2013 at 2:07AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Paul C Yes, given that it will be starting in October.

      February 28, 2013 at 7:03PM EST

Get Instant Alerts on What's Alan Watching

Around the Web