OT: TV Shows

shaygitz wrote:

kmendo88 wrote:


The women are very weak, lackadaisical, and at times they freeze up and become nothing more than burdens. I remember a particular scene where one of the female characters basically gets 'spooked' and is bed ridden for the majority of the time. Like, really?

Well, in fairness she was a 16 year old who had just seen her mother's head get blown off with a shotgun.

Carl is even younger and had to blow his mother's head off himself. He toughed it out, and is emerging as one of the leaders of the group despite being a kid (lol)

All the problems and drama came out of the female characters who act really as nothing more than supporting props for the drama, and give way to their emotions throughout the entire show. This has changed in the latter episodes after critics spoke out about it.

I don't know about the criticism, I never saw it. But there are several female characters that are as involved with the action as the men, and others who work in support. I don't think that's too much at odds with the way things would shake out if such a thing were to actually happen. You can complain that it isn't the way you'd like to see it, but I don't think you can take too much issue with the realism; it's either a completely likely scenario, or not far off.

I'd also disagree about there not being any stereotypes. The only black character, which is a completely made-up-for-TV character, was named 'T-Dog' ffs. He also had pretty much no dialogue and, again, served as no more than a prop for other characters. We don't even see any sense of character development out of him until he dies.

And that's stereotypical to you?? One, he certainly isn't the only black character. Two, is it really so far fetched that he'd be named T-Dog? And yeah, he's a supporting character, but so what? Again, is it unrealistic that a black guy wouldn't lead the group, or is it just not what you'd prefer to see? This reminds me of the hoo-hah over Lena Dunham's not writing a black character into the main core of Girls; never mind much of it is based on things that actually happened, and that it's entirely likely that three white girls in NY would not have a close black friend (certainly as likely that three black girls wouldn't have a white fourth)-- it's racist not to shoehorn a black character into the mix.

I mean, come on :wink:

The female characters didn't have that dynamic until, and it's up to you if you feel this is the reason but, the show caught a lot of flack for depicting the females as weak and needing to be protected. In the early stages of the show, they might as well have been children.

It's not about the way I would like to see things. Like I said, a lot of these claims stem from how the characters in the show contrast with the characters in the comics. You don't think it's a bit odd that strong, charismatic characters from the comics are reduced to weak, almost supporting roles in the show? In the comic, Tyreese (one of the guys introduced in Season 3) is Rick's right hand man. In the show? He's still pretty unknown. They also introduced characters that didn't exist like Daryl and Merle and gave them leading roles.

If you want to talk about realism, this show is set rural Georgia. Statistically, the group should be predominantly black as opposed to having a switching off of single black character roles. This isn't even a problem from my perspective, just thought I'd throw that out there for for 'realism' considering you are assuming I'm making unfounded statements.

Also, yes, 'T-Dog' sounds very stereotypical to me. If he's based on any character from the comics, it's the black character that went by Theodore.

Other responses are in the quotes in bold..

Edit: Here's an article that makes a lot of the same points, but much better than I - http://buydemocracy.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/is-amcs-the-walking-dead-racist/