Quote:
Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue
I really don't think the problem with the show is trying to stick too closely to the source material. As Jon has mentioned, I think they've show a strong willingess to divert from the source material in a lot of ways. They really have only loosely stuck to it.
I think there are quite a few people who feel the same you do about the characters. People just haven't connected with them. There are some fan favorites, in paritcular Glenn and Daryl and to a lesser extent Maggie.
People seem to either dislike or be bored by Rick. Most folks hate Lori because she's kind of unpleasant and shrill in many respects. A lot of people hate Andrea too. People go back and forth on Shane. And Dale is a bit of a mixed bag.
I don't think it's a problem with character development really. I think there has been plenty character development. In some cases, perhaps too much character development.
At this point we have different tiers of characters (could be some argument as to where people lie exactly):
A-Listers:
Rick, Lori, Shane and by extension Carl
B-Listers:
Glenn, Andrea, Dale, Hershel, Maggie and Darryl
C-Listers:
T-Dawg, Carol, Sophia, and everyone else on the farm - the young kid, the young girl and Mrs. Otis.
We've had plenty of character development with the A-Listers and a decent amount for the B-List group. The C-Listers really haven't had much screen time and spend a lot of time in the background and what not. The show could do a better job of giving the C-Listers more to do and more character development but cutting into some of the time spent developing the A-Listers.
I would like to see more character development out of T-Dawg and Carol, but to say that this show lacks character development is sorely mistaken. I have an excellent sense of Rick, Lori, and Shane. I have a very good sense of most, if not all, of the B-Listers as well. I think there may be a bit too much harping on the lack of development of some characters who are quite clearly minor characters, at least at this point.
I think the problem has been that a lot of the character development of the A-Listers has been a bit repetitive and hasn't made them all that sympathetic. I actually have started coming around more on Lori. I've always liked Rick. He's a very well formulated character, but he's not charasmatic and that's sort of part of who he is. In fact, it's sort of a large part. Lori has complained about his lack of emotion and distance, even before this started, and all the highschool stories about Shane and Rick clearly pain Rick as sort of the quiet, reserved guy who just sort of watched Shane's reckless bravado from a safe distance.
I have read all the comics and I feel like the characters on the show are much more "alive" and distinct. I never felt the comic did a great job developing any characters other than Rick and Carl, to some extent, and a character who has not yet appeared on the show. The others are a bit paper thin.
|
I'd agree that character development is there; it's just bad character development IMHO because we can't connect with many of them (it may be semantics, but I'd say connecting as opposed to sympathizing with them). I agree the comic didn't do much in character development and in fact I think Lori's development is far and beyond what it is the in comic.
In a way, I feel like this show is a lot like Lost. There are a bunch of people that I see sometimes and go "Who is that?"
*side note: Lori's argument of bringing a child into that world is null and void. She argued that she still remembers good times and can cling to them; a new child wouldn't know anything of the world before (other than reading books, and I'd guess that it would be like reading science fiction). If I were Rick, I would've told her that the world is what we make of it and their (Shane's) baby wouldn't miss anything because she wouldn't have experienced anything other than we Lori and Rick gave her.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA
OMG, that's Dean Malenko !
 |
Astute!