|
|
Post by rberman on Dec 21, 2019 12:13:00 GMT -5
Yeah, yeah, Kirkman is anti-cure, as he is incapable of writing anything that even borders fictional research, despite the fact the real world would never stop looking for a cure (and was addressed in the 1st season finale). Moreover, he claims other zombie stories has people with some "cure-carrying" element in their system. Where? Among true "zombie" films (as in reanimated and/or cannibalistic dead), its not in any of Romero's six zombie films, not in the 1990 Savini remake of Night, the 2004 "remake/reimagining" of Dawn, the direct-to-video remake of Day, World War Z, or any other major production. I'm not sure if he's referring to one woman carrying the disease in 28 Days Later, but that's entirely different than being a host for a cure. Kirkman doesn't elaborate, but he may be thinking of well-known recent video game The Last of Us which revolves around a man escorting his surrogate daughter to a research facility. She is an unaffected carrier of the zombie plague thought to be the key to curing the scourge.  |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Dec 21, 2019 23:39:34 GMT -5
I just wanted to say I really appreciate this thread.. it was great being able to walk through the plot! I can't imagine I'll ever read it, but your quick summaries were just the thing.
I wonder, was the ending a surprise to long time fans? What was the response? I knew the series had ended, but I didn't realize how abruptly it was done.
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Dec 21, 2019 23:49:07 GMT -5
I just wanted to say I really appreciate this thread.. it was great being able to walk through the plot! I can't imagine I'll ever read it, but your quick summaries were just the thing. I wonder, was the ending a surprise to long time fans? What was the response? I knew the series had ended, but I didn't realize how abruptly it was done. Thanks! I enjoyed the series more than Tarkintino did, and I was actually curious how intelligible my summaries were to those who haven't read the series or seen the TV show. So many names. Rick tells Andrea about what Maggie did to Gregory, etc. I don't know whether fans were upset that Kirkman spent the last four years pretending he had big plans (see lettercol) and then revealing it as a subterfuge. For that matter, maybe the claim of prolonged subterfuge was the real subterfuge, and the loss of inker Gaudolino or some other outside event caused him to retire the series early. I did wonder how LCS owners felt when they learned that he had solicited five fake issues. How much does that affect their bottom line when issues #194-198 turned out to be vaporware? |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Dec 22, 2019 0:00:37 GMT -5
There were actually fake solicits? That's actually a really crappy thing to do to the stores that helped make you a household name.
Were they plans actually fake plans, or did he just decide not to proceed? Losing an inker doesn't seem like a series ending event. I mean, he'd got plenty of money at this point, maybe he just decided he was done?
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Dec 22, 2019 0:34:03 GMT -5
There were actually fake solicits? That's actually a really crappy thing to do to the stores that helped make you a household name. Were they plans actually fake plans, or did he just decide not to proceed? Losing an inker doesn't seem like a series ending event. I mean, he'd got plenty of money at this point, maybe he just decided he was done? There were fake solicits. Here are three fake covers depicting the nonexistent story of the death of adult Carl, with Sophia and little Andrea mourning him.    Kirkman was still setting up new plot threads even in the final year, which belies his claim that he had decided four years in advance to end the story with issue #193. But who knows, maybe that was just part of the misdirection. When I went to see The Rise of Skywalker last night, I was thinking about Kirkman's idea that a story is better when you can't see how many pages are left. I purposely avoided looking at my watch to see how far through the movie I was at any given point. I don't know that it made a difference, but it was something to think about. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 22, 2019 6:53:23 GMT -5
Yeah, yeah, Kirkman is anti-cure, as he is incapable of writing anything that even borders fictional research, despite the fact the real world would never stop looking for a cure (and was addressed in the 1st season finale). Moreover, he claims other zombie stories has people with some "cure-carrying" element in their system. Where? Among true "zombie" films (as in reanimated and/or cannibalistic dead), its not in any of Romero's six zombie films, not in the 1990 Savini remake of Night, the 2004 "remake/reimagining" of Dawn, the direct-to-video remake of Day, World War Z, or any other major production. I'm not sure if he's referring to one woman carrying the disease in 28 Days Later, but that's entirely different than being a host for a cure. Kirkman doesn't elaborate, but he may be thinking of well-known recent video game The Last of Us which revolves around a man escorting his surrogate daughter to a research facility. She is an unaffected carrier of the zombie plague thought to be the key to curing the scourge. Never watched it, but I believe that in "Z-Nation" there is a character immune to the zombie virus. Nevertheless, it doesn't seem to me a so common trope in the zombie fiction (but I admit I'm not an expert). It's a stretch, but in the movie version of WWZ they found that a person with a serious illness is ignored by zombies. |
|
