canucklehead

March 6, 2012 7:41 pm @Conor Kilpatrick They could be puting more thought into the show is all I'm saying. Maybe they could consult Matt Mogk, or Max Brooks to bring more realism to the show. The Walking Dead is my favorite comic, and I agree that it is a drama piece (or soap opera with zombies), but I crave more realism. Pregnancy in this "zombie world" has alot more implactions than the obvious (women die during child birth). If the baby dies inside the womb, then there goes the mother, and just imagine the drama that would ensue then. The characters in the show aren't aware that when anyone dies they become a zombie, so if Beth had succeeded in killy-herself, there would have been a zombie chewing on people in the farmhouse. I've been waiting for this to pop-up in the series, and I thought that Dale dying would have been the perfect time (but they had to go and shoot him in the head). It's been awful convenient that every living person that has been shot to death so far, has been shot in the head. Obviously, the writers are saving the "big reveal" till later.

March 6, 2012 7:21 pm Almost like they are forcing you to visit piratesbay. ;)

March 6, 2012 5:06 pm @UncleBob Yeah, I agree. The writers of most shows don't put enough thought into their stories, because the average joe-viewer isn't all that discerning.

March 6, 2012 5:03 pm @itsbecca Dawn of the Dead (remake) showed how an infected mother would pass the infection to the unborn child. I was questioning what would happen if a "healthy" pregnant woman had a miscarriage, in the "walking dead" world (anyone who dies becomes a zombie). I personally think that the unborn baby would become a zombie and infect the mother.

March 5, 2012 1:02 pm Zombies tearing open a victims stomach is believable (sharp, bony finger tips and uncut nails (that grow for a short period, even after death). I wonder if this series will demonstrate what would happen to a pregnant mother that has a miscarriage? Kirkman has already established that all living human beings that die become zombies. A late trimester miscarriage could theoretically claw it's way out of the womb, and a baby at any stage that dies (infection would likely spread to mother long before the mothers body would eliminate the remains of the failed pregnancy), would cause infection in the mother, thus killing her (and she would return as a zombie). I've watched my fare share of zombie movies and never seen a writer tackle this issue. I think my disussion point might touch some nerves with the pro, or anti-abortion debaters. But, being as the suggested title of the episode is “Shit Stops Being Polite and Starts Getting Real”, I think it's an appropriate point. Anyone have any "educated" thoughts on the science of this topic?

March 3, 2012 7:50 am Please keep up the Summer BBQ episodes, those are the best IMO.

December 21, 2011 7:09 pm @KenOchalek: Cool, no problem. Peace on Earth, and all that jazz. :)

December 21, 2011 7:08 pm @flapjaxx: We can thank the "feminoids"(or feminists, if you prefer) for the anti-male sentiment in todays western culture (IMO).

December 19, 2011 12:32 pm @KenOchalek: For the record I'm not "pro-creepy", I'm just a "realist". "I stand by my first comment. A comics fan is a comics fan, regardless of gender/appearance." I agree. "Whether you’re socially awkward or not, just try to treat everyone with respect. Even if you think they don’t deserve it. Hell, ESPECIALLY if you think they don’t deserve it." ... and agree. @Nerd_Raaage "You know, labeling someone, or their post, as “pro-creepy” isn’t really being respectful." I agree. That's my fastest post ever. :)

December 18, 2011 8:14 pm @KenOchalek: Really, being stared at "is pretty damned creepy", that's kinda funny, because in order to detect a stare, one would have to focus in on the person staring (doesn't that constitute a stare). If someone wasn't expecting to be stared at, would they be actively scanning a crowd looking to make eye contact with a "starer". You assume an awful lot in your monologue "...the starer refuses to interact in a socially acceptable manner." Are you talking about an individual that you are familiar with (are you familiar with the intentions of "starers", lol)?. "I’m kind of surprised I have to explain that point.", I am too, it wasn't necessary. "And you’re right — when you put yourself out there, you can’t control how others react." I acknoweldege your agreement. ;) "And maybe it IS naive on the part of the provocateur, but naïveté does not grant anyone a license to behave badly." Let's assume that someone who is not fully developed socially, emotionaly or sexually might be unable to accuratley gauge his or her(I know that women and men are both just as guilty when it comes to staring) own behaviour. It's obvious that some people are better at controling thier natural instincts than others are. Should we vilify those people, or be tolerant of them? "And I’m sorry, but I’m not answering your question." I respect that. One alternative for a woman that doens't like the attention she's recieving due to her wardrobe choice...try a burqa and niqab combo. LOL. ;)