A
reader, Frank, writes:
“John,
I know you watch and love The Walking Dead. Since last season’s
cliffhanger it has ‘jumped the shark’ and ratings are way down. Is this also
your experience with the series? Have
you given up on it yet? And which do you like better, The Walking Dead or Game
of Thrones?”
Frank,
thank you for writing. You asked some big questions right there. I’ll do my
best to answer them.
In
terms of The Walking Dead, I’ll make the following statement.
There
are few certainties in life: death, taxes, and the fact that Walking
Dead fans complain a lot about every new season as it airs. Those
writing online seem chronically dissatisfied, and they have been since season
one.
I’ve
been watching the series since the beginning too, and feel that the show hasn’t
missed a beat, but that fans -- watching the
series unfold in real time -- constantly complain about every little
development. They second guess every
creative choice, even before they can see how it plays out.
Now,
forgive me for writing this, but this approach isn’t particularly smart or
worthwhile because series such as The Walking Dead or Game
of Thrones don’t tell standalones -- complete works of art -- each
week.
Instead,
they present chapters of a larger stories,
and therefore it is not always immediately apparent how the individual pieces
fit together, until the whole arc has aired.
Weekly
episode reviews judge stories in the middle, before writers and viewers see and
fully understand how all the pieces fit together. This is why I don’t typically
review weekly episodes of series still airing, except on rare occasions (The
X-Files limited series).
What
would I be reviewing? A novel that is half read? A movie that is half-watched?
A song that is half-listened to?
So
far as the cliffhanger last season, a lot of Walking Dead fans acted
like, frankly, entitled crybabies. The season ended without a reveal of whom
Negan killed. I read innumerable complaints about what a cheat this was to end
the season with a cliffhanger.
I
can only guess that these are younger fans, who did not have to wait a whole
summer to see the conclusion of Star Trek: The Next Generation’s “Best
of Both World” Borg cliffhanger in the early 1990s.
I
can only guess that they did not have to wait the better part of two seasons to
find out who killed Laura Palmer on Twin Peaks.
Or
wondered if Mulder had been abducted by aliens, on The X-Files.
I
can only surmise they weren’t in theaters to see Han Solo spirited away by Boba
Fett in 1980 and have to wait three years, till 1983, to witness his rescue.
Basically,
season end cliffhangers are a TV tradition, a
staple, and The Walking Dead conformed to that tradition. That’s not a
cheat in any way, shape, or form, unless all those other programs and films
also cheated.
However,
in today’s world of instantaneous gratification, and binge watching, that dramatic
convention was apparently not acceptable to fans.
I
see the same problem with the fan response to the only half-complete seventh season.
Let’s
take Glenn’s death first.
Obviously,
fans of the graphic novel series know that Negan kills Glenn. This creates a
problem, because TV series want to avoid predictability at all costs, to keep
eyes tuned in. Thus producers of the series had to bridge two desires: the
desire to be faithful to the source material, and the desire to surprise and
excite fans. In retrospect, the strategy writers used regarding Glenn is
completely apparent, and valid.
What
was it?
We experienced a spell in the sixth season wherein Glenn appeared to be
dead, to throw us off the scent of Negan’s victim in the start of season seven.
Many fans assumed that Glenn could not possibly be imperiled, and discovered alive,
only to be killed a few episodes later.
That’s
exactly what happened, and it worked brilliantly.
The
fans had real doubts about whether the series would follow the literary work,
or bridge off in a different direction (as it has done with other characters,
including Andrea). Basically, the producers were able to preserve surprise by
creating a false alarm scenario over Glenn’s death.
Viewers
were not cheated.
They were not “trolled.”
They were misdirected. They were manipulated.
And quite expertly. This was a manipulation
of expectations, and TV decorum too, in the great tradition of Alfred Hitchcock’s
“play the audience like a piano” quote. Every great horror movie works in the same way.
(And
if The
Walking Dead cheated by making this feint, just look at how Game
of Thrones handled the so-called death of Jon Snow).
Finally,
fans have complained about the new, seventh season of the series, of which only
half has aired. I read weekly reviews all the time (by writers who should know
better) about what a bad choice it is to have the main characters separated
from one another, and defeated, in the face of Negan.
To
which I say: that’s likely the fucking point.
The
first part of the seventh season is all about establishing Negan’s villainy,
and our heroes’ facing their greatest and most traumatic crisis.
It’s
a turning point for Rick, and his evolution as a leader.
This
part of the story is Han Solo in carbonite, going to Jabba, as a trophy.
It
is Spock dead on Genesis, with his katra in McCoy’s head, and Kirk having to
choose between friendship and career.
It
is THE existential crisis for our
protagonists on The Walking Dead.
If
Negan is defeated in one hour-long episode, or two episodes, or the heroes find
their footing in the face of his particularly sociopathic form of menace
instantly, all drama bleeds out of the series. We might as well be back in the
era of standalone TV writing.
The
final episode of The Walking Dead before the mid-season break of the seventh
season sees the majority of the protagonists -- Rick, Carl, Maggie, Sasha,
Daryl, Michonne etc. -- rejoined for the first time since the death of Glenn at
the start of the season. It is an emotional high point as they reunite at
Hilltop, and make the choice to fight. It is, again, clearly, the turning point
of the seventh season arc.
It
would have meant nothing if all the characters were united for the first
handful of episodes. If Daryl and Rick could have teamed up. Or if Maggie, Rick
and Daryl could have huddled and formulated a meaningful, united front against
Negan.
We
would not experience strong emotions at seeing our heroes together again,
rallying to fight, had they not been separated for the whole season.
Quite
simply, we would never get an emotional or dramatic pay off at all, without a
half-season establishing the danger of Negan, and the sight of our heroes
brought low before him.
I
can understand why some fans don’t get it. Perhaps they’ll get it on retrospect,
when the season is over, and this arc comes to an end. When they see the whole
story, the arc will be apparent, and validated, I believe. At the very least, I’m willing to reserve
judgment, instead of judging failure. To judge failure at this point, the story
half-told, is reviewer malpractice.
You
asked me another question, about which series I prefer, Game of Thrones, or The
Walking Dead.
I’ve
probably angered enough readers in this post, but I’ll go for it anyway.
The
first thing to understand is personal preference. Personally, speaking, I
prefer The Walking Dead, because I enjoy horror more, as a genre, than
I do fantasy. That’s not a comment on
the quality of these programs, so much as it is my taste.
Professionally
speaking, as a critic, I believe both series are extraordinary.
I
do think the fact that fans are continually comparing The Walking Dead and Game
of Thrones is a fascinating insight into our culture, and how critics and
fans view horror and fantasy genres. The Walking Dead is constantly
second guessed by fans and critics, and judged wobbly. Game of Thrones is
generally treated like quality television, and there is far less of the
bellyaching about it.
Yet
I prefer the Glenn/dumpster/Negan feint, for instance, to the Jon Snow
one.
But
I do wonder why The Walking Dead solution is treated as a “cheat,” and the Snow
feint is not complained about to the same (obnoxious) degree.
Has
The
Walking Dead jumped the shark? Not yet. Let's see how the last half of this arc plays out.
But maybe some fans have and the critics have jumped the shark. Why not demonstrate a little patience?
Are
rating down? Yes. But there’s a logical fallacy to discuss there. Just because
something is popular does not mean it is good. And just because something is
not popular does not mean it is bad. Ratings are down, but do we understand why
at this juncture?
Is
that because of the storytelling? Or are there other factors to consider
(changing cultural context, the age of the series, overall)?
We
probably can’t tell for sure on that front, either. At least not yet.
Don’t
forget to ask me your questions at Muirbusiness@yahoo.com.
John, I have been a Walking Dead viewer since it's fall 2010 debut and have never been disappointed by the journey they have taken us on. I have not read the comic book to cloud my thoughts about what's coming. Like Breaking Bad did during it's AMC run the long and winding road of the story is needed to build the narrative. The Governor lasted over two seasons and I think Negan will last as long, if not longer.
ReplyDeleteJohn, brilliant review.
SGB
Thank you, SGB. Glad to see that you are sticking with "The Walking Dead," and showing patience, as the creators take us on an amazing journey...
DeleteFascinating comments/examination. I think fandom is a fickle creature and there is a massively similar Venn diagram crossover for "New Dr Who".
Delete