(no subject)

[proximoception]

I remember Robert Downey Jr. attacking the Nolan Batman movies, the rival franchise to his at the time, for requiring that you have a college degree to watch them. The Walking Dead's present ambition seems to be to only please doctoral students.

They're being careful, though - one assumes that to many this played like it was about how the good guy goes to heaven. But death only needs to not be this life to be heavenly, as presented. He's never concerned with God, just with the thought that his friends are well out of this.

Identifying the zombies with war violence is a bold choice, and won't stand thorough scrutiny, but it gave the writers the dignity they needed. Fantastic trojan horsing, frankly. The unwatchable murder of the Jewish soldier in Saving Private Ryan is pretty much the template here, but unlike Ryan it steps beyond war - war's just the fast-forwarded, undeniable example of what can happen on Earth, like it is in The Thin Red Line film. He didn't consider suicide because it isn't about him; life is suffering, but since it includes others' suffering you mustn't leave early, and you mustn't decide that it is a bill that can be paid (to you) by the suffering of its inflicters. You don't know whether helping really helps, seeing that reductions in suffering now may just permit worse later (e.g. the old age of an infant you save). But you don't get to look away, just in case. And by "get to" I don't mean you physically can't - just that you can't forget that you shouldn't have. Since we might see suffering at any time this means that to even blink is to fail.

The episode evades what it is we might owe ourselves, a bit the way Pan's Labyrinth did, but both get away with it by invoking war. Probably that's a context where guilt at nonperformance would be so extreme (e.g. the guy in Ryan whose bout of cowardice lets the Jewish soldier die) that, while we'd never phrase it this way, altruism and hedonism are one.

"When Does It Get Good" is a question heard a lot more these days. There were few contexts where it mattered before. It's approaching surreal that this particular series was one of those that did (cue "When Did It Start to Suck," though). I suspect the rise of fan edits will inspire official recuts at some point - there's got to be some money in it, if they're offered at the right time. And show writers would be enthusiastic, if unions could be gotten around. Just think how much David Lynch would love to hack down Twin Peaks season 2, especially if the revival's any good. Losing 90 percent of season 2, 60 of season 3 would give Walking Dead at least watchability through to where there's something to be proud of.

Maybe movies still do this stuff better, and it's no contest that books can, but it's great to see good anywhere it wasn't before, especially amid all this suffering.

Comments

[grashupfer.livejournal.com]

I'm not a viewer of this show but damn this is good. Is it worth it?

[proximoception.livejournal.com]

Probably not. It's record-setting gore horror and for years it's dumb as hell, plus for long stretches amazingly boring. The recent run of good episodes probably just impress me the way a talking dog would. Depending what makes you anxious (it's a pulse-pounder, has been its selling point) or physically or ethically disgusted it might be a very bad idea to try even if curious. My heart is a stone so I'm not a good measure.