# The Walking Dead - S04E14 - The Grove



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

Damn. That was a brutal episode.


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

Best episode this season. Left a lump in my throat the size of a basketball.


----------



## Einselen (Apr 25, 2006)

Dark dark dark and I loved it.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

It was another slow one until it took its turn. Rare to see a child killed by one of the good guys in a TV show.

Hopefully we can skip the posting of links to spoilers for next weeks episode this time.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Did not see that one coming.

It was pretty obvious, though, when they showed Lizzie going through her calming ritual that she had been under professional care at some point...that is, that her mental problems predated the Zombie Apocalypse and were being managed. Too bad Mika was the only one who knew, and wasn't up to the task of helping her manage.

Yet again, the worst horrors in the show aren't the zombies.


----------



## brianric (Aug 29, 2002)

JohnB1000 said:


> Hopefully we can skip the posting of links to spoilers for next weeks episode this time.


No one is forcing you to click on the link.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Did they also kill Judith? Why?

She wasn't with then when let left the property.

???


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

brianric said:


> No one is forcing you to click on the link.


Right. I didn't click and knew nothing about the episode.


----------



## 6079 Smith W (Oct 2, 2000)

Hank said:


> Did they also kill Judith? Why?
> 
> She wasn't with then when let left the property.
> 
> ???


It looked like Tyreese had Judith wrapped up in a blanket and he was carrying her on his back. You can see it when they come out of the woods and turn on to the railroad tracks, as they are walking away from the walker that is still squirming around on the tracks.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

6079 Smith W said:


> It looked like Tyreese had Judith wrapped up in a blanket and he was carrying her on his back. You can see it when they come out of the woods and turn on to the railroad tracks, as they are walking away from the walker that is still squirming around on the tracks.


I had to watch it twice but I believe this is correct because I wondered the same thing.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

I'd think they'd make her appearance a little more obvious. I watched it twice and am still not convinced she's there.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Oh and despite the "twist" I was still bored stiff during this episode.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Judith was on Tyreese's back.

Definitely a tough episode, but impressive they were willing to go there. I think Carol is one of the great characters on this show; to think about where she started and where she is now, it's pretty amazing.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Nicely done.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Did not see that one coming.
> 
> *It was pretty obvious, though, when they showed Lizzie going through her calming ritual that she had been under professional care at some point...that is, that her mental problems predated the Zombie Apocalypse and were being managed. *Too bad Mika was the only one who knew, and wasn't up to the task of helping her manage.
> 
> Yet again, the worst horrors in the show aren't the zombies.


I was thinking something like this, and I wondered at the time if that was when Carol realized it too, or did she have an idea?


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

brianric said:


> No one is forcing you to click on the link.


I didn't click the link but there was really no reason/need for it to be posted or for the vague follow up discussion.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

I thought it was disingenuous of Carol to force Tyreese to choose whether she gets the death sentence at a time when both of them were needed in order to keep Judith alive. I can understand that she felt she had to be honest with him at that moment, but I would have thought better of her if she said something like, you do not have to decide now...wait until we get somewhere that Judith will be safe before you decide what should happen to me.


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

Did the death of Lizzie remind anyone of "Of Mice and Men" When George killed Lennie? "Look at the flowers".


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Hank said:


> Oh and despite the "twist" I was still bored stiff during this episode.


That's just lazy writing ... I was totally bored reading your post. 

Wow, yet another amazing episode of great character development (and destruction)!  :up:


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Someone, I forget who, posted in spoiler-tags (because of the comic) that this was the direction they were going. It was either last week or the week before, but I have to say, you called it. So please step forwards. Congratulations. 

Greg


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

Kamakzie said:


> Did the death of Lizzie remind anyone of "Of Mice and Men" When George killed Lennie? "Look at the flowers".


Not just you.


----------



## Hcour (Dec 24, 2007)

Kamakzie said:


> Did the death of Lizzie remind anyone of "Of Mice and Men" When George killed Lennie? "Look at the flowers".


I was just about to post this, We did that play in college and I played George so I remember the scene well. There were definitely echoes of that scene.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

I was saying "just shoot the kid now" since she was feeding the rodent to the walker at the railroad tracks. It was rather obvious where the whole episode was headed. And they took long enough. Considering they had to live with the kids for quite some time behaving like they were -- I'm rather shocked they lasted that long.


----------



## malayphred (Jan 29, 2007)

Bah- they are just making up stuff to fill the time slot.

The whole story line is going nowhere. They're just killing people off.

What was the pillar of smoke all about? And the burned up walkers? Were they playing with matches?

I'm pretty close to dumping the whole series. 

Thank goodness there are only two more episodes.


----------



## malayphred (Jan 29, 2007)

john4200 said:


> I thought it was disingenuous of Carol to force Tyreese to choose whether she gets the death sentence at a time when both of them were needed in order to keep Judith alive. I can understand that she felt she had to be honest with him at that moment, but I would have thought better of her if she said something like, you do not have to decide now...wait until we get somewhere that Judith will be safe before you decide what should happen to me.


Why didn't she just shut up about the whole thing.

It's like admitting to being a cheater when no one cares.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

malayphred said:


> Why didn't she just shut up about the whole thing.
> 
> It's like admitting to being a cheater when no one cares.


Well, Tyreese obviously cared. But I agree that it would have been better if she kept it to herself until they were in a much safer place.


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

malayphred said:


> What was the pillar of smoke all about? And the burned up walkers? Were they playing with matches?


My interpretation of that was that it was their way of showing that the timelines of these episode are overlapping with each other and to show that the groups aren't that far apart from each other (just like when we saw Daryl encounter the same group who had been in the house with Rick in an earlier episode).

The smoke would have been from the moonshiners' house that Daryl and Beth burned down a couple of episodes ago. The burned up walkers had walked through that fire and even though they were burned, they weren't destroyed, showing that fire is not an effective way to dispose of walkers.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> I thought it was disingenuous of Carol to force Tyreese to choose whether she gets the death sentence at a time when both of them were needed in order to keep Judith alive. I can understand that she felt she had to be honest with him at that moment, but I would have thought better of her if she said something like, you do not have to decide now...wait until we get somewhere that Judith will be safe before you decide what should happen to me.


That would be "logical," but I think what she did made sense. She's done terrible, terrible things in the name of keeping people generally, and those two girls specifically, safe, and now it was all for nothing. I think she half wanted to die, didn't have the guts to do it herself, and was giving Tyreese the excuse to do it for her.

Let's face it...you execute a little girl you love, that's gonna mess with your head. And logical is probably gonna take a vacation.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Well, Tyreese obviously cared. But I agree that it would have been better if she kept it to herself until they were in a much safer place.


There is no safe place in the zombie apocalypse. That house is about as safe as it gets.

Really shocking episode. I'm so glad I was spoiler free.

I don't remember anything like that from the comics. If it was there can anyone point out the issue? I'd like to go back and read it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> I don't remember anything like that from the comics. If it was there can anyone point out the issue? I'd like to go back and read it.


#61.


Spoiler



Ben is the psycho kid who kills his brother so he'll come back a zombie; Carl is the trigger-man.


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

My take about Carol's confession? Feeling so guilty that it was a form of suicide.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

getreal said:


> That's just lazy writing ... I was totally bored reading your post.
> 
> Wow, yet another amazing episode of great character development (and destruction)!  :up:


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

malayphred said:


> Bah- they are just making up stuff to fill the time slot.
> 
> The whole story line is going nowhere. They're just killing people off.
> 
> ...


Agreed. I'm very close to pulling the plug myself.

This ep was 45 minutes of meh with 3 minutes of 'shock' thrown in.

They've run out of ideas. The characters in this series were always interesting but they'd never been fully developed and it's clear to me they don't know how or don't want to make the effort.


----------



## brianric (Aug 29, 2002)

JohnB1000 said:


> I didn't click the link but there was really no reason/need for it to be posted or for the vague follow up discussion.


I disagree. The link was clearly labeled a spoiler, and just because you feel otherwise, I'm glad it was posted.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

I had to go back and watch the last 15 minutes or so when they showed Carol and Tyreese walking away at the end and I didn't see any Judith. The scene where Carol is digging the graves, there was the one rather fresh grave that already was refilled and had a marker. Then when Tyreese brought Lizzie out, the other sheet-covered body looked much more infant-sized than Mika-sized.

When they showed the two finished graves side-by-side with the flowers on them, that's when I was sure it was just the two girls. That's also when it became apparent to me that Judith was bundled up on Tyreese's back.

They did make a point of pointing that out, too, on _Talking Dead_ because there was a lot of discussion on the interwebs about where was Judith at the end.

I couldn't tell, but when they were shooting the crispified walkers at the fence, were Carol and Tyreese the ones actually nailing head shots and the girls hitting torsos?

There was also a very interesting tid bit about the puzzle on the table mentioned on _Talking Dead_:


Spoiler



The puzzle was there on the table the whole time they were doing that filming and the kids would from time to time put some pieces together. I believe it was just before the filming of the scene with Carol and Tyreese that Greg Nicoterro (?) brought out the box cover with the completed picture on it - it was a picture of Sophia in the rainbow T-shirt! Added to the feel of the scene as it was filmed. Wow! or as both myself and Chris Hardwick said, "Holy Sh--!!!"


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

That was the flattest baby I ever saw on Tyreese's back as they walked away.

Props department should be reprimanded about that- it was just lazy for them not to stuff that backpack full of something to make it look like the enormous baby that Judith is.

I agree that Lizzie had been having problems well before the ZA.
When we first encountered the sisters Mika said "She's messed up" so matter-of-factly that it almost had to be something she had know about for a long time and accepted.
And the coping mechanisms were in place back when Carol had to kill the girls' father- that was the first time we heard the "look at the flowers" thing.
Tragic.


----------



## Boot (Mar 15, 2000)

malayphred said:


> Why didn't she just shut up about the whole thing.
> 
> It's like admitting to being a cheater when no one cares.


Tyrese obviously still cared. He talked about it earlier in the episode. It was still torturing him, and not knowing who/why made it worse. And it was torturing Carol to know it was her fault. Telling him was cathartic for both of them.

I think she'd have to be pretty unfeeling to just say, hey, I got away with it, so this guy who's clearly in pain, who I'm trusting with my life and relying on for survival, can just keep suffering because nobody saw me and I don't have to own up to it.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I think it was great when Tyrese said that he has to live with knowing exactly what happened and that is going to be hard, but Carol has to as well.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

I guess I wasn't paying close attention but I thought there were 3 graves, one that had bronzed baby shoes on it.


----------



## trnsfrguy (Apr 28, 2005)

VegasVic said:


> I guess I wasn't paying close attention but I thought there were 3 graves, one that had bronzed baby shoes on it.


Yes, there were 3 graves. The one with the bronzed baby shoes was already there.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Boot said:


> *Tyrese obviously still cared.* He talked about it earlier in the episode. It was still torturing him, and not knowing who/why made it worse. And it was torturing Carol to know it was her fault. Telling him was cathartic for both of them.


That's why the multiple scenes of Carol watching him sleep while mumbling his way through nightmares.



VegasVic said:


> I guess I wasn't paying close attention but I thought there were 3 graves, one that had bronzed baby shoes on it.


The first one (the one with the shoes) was there when they arrived.
That's why they found all the baby equipment inside.
Then Lizzie and Mika = three.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I think there were FIVE graves total after the 2 girls, so 3 graves already there

-I could very easily be wrong and it's just the 3 total now


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

Thanks, I didn't know the baby grave was already there. When I saw the "flat" backpack at the end I wasn't sure if Judith was in there or not.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

I am not sure what those who hated the episode and are talking about cancelling their season passes want. 

I thought it was a great episode, brutal in it's execution and closing up some lingering questions from earlier in the season.


----------



## tonestert (Nov 15, 2007)

My memory sucks but weren't Mika and Lizzie releated to Hershel ? I was thinking they were at the farmhouse. Anyway, if they were related, Heshel would have known about Lizzie's mental problems so I would have thought he would have told the group about her ? At least Rick and Carol. Not sure it would have made a difference though.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Maui said:


> I am not sure what those who hated the episode and are talking about cancelling their season passes want.
> 
> I thought it was a great episode, brutal in it's execution and closing up some lingering questions from earlier in the season.


I didn't hate the episode, but what I want is to not have a show that only has a back half of a season to work with to spend entire episodes focused on 1 out of 5 groups of people, and never bring any of them together.


----------



## stark (Dec 31, 2003)

When Lizzie told Carol "I know what I need to do now". I said to my son, Carol should ask her what exactly she means by that because they haven't been very good at guessing what is going on in Lizzie's head up to that point.


----------



## stark (Dec 31, 2003)

tonestert said:


> My memory sucks but weren't Mika and Lizzie releated to Hershel ? I was thinking they were at the farmhouse. Anyway, if they were related, Heshel would have known about Lizzie's mental problems so I would have thought he would have told the group about her ? At least Rick and Carol. Not sure it would have made a difference though.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


No. They came with their dad with the Woodbury group.


----------



## tonestert (Nov 15, 2007)

stark said:


> No. They came with their dad with the Woodbury group.


That's right I think I was confusing Lizzie with Beth. Like I said my memory sucks 

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

zordude said:


> I didn't hate the episode, but what I want is to not have a show that only has a back half of a season to work with to spend entire episodes focused on 1 out of 5 groups of people, and never bring any of them together.


See I kind of like that. They are allowing more characters to develop so that they are not just background characters for Rick, Daryl and Michone. As an example, in season one you could have gotten rid of Carol and nobody would have cared. Now, she is one of my favorite characters.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

zordude said:


> I didn't hate the episode, but what I want is to not have a show that only has a back half of a season to work with to spend entire episodes focused on 1 out of 5 groups of people, and never bring any of them together.


All about saving money.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Maui said:


> See I kind of like that. They are allowing more characters to develop so that they are not just background characters for Rick, Daryl and Michone. As an example, in season one you could have gotten rid of Carol and nobody would have cared. Now, she is one of my favorite characters.





cherry ghost said:


> All about saving money.


I don't see it as that. I agree with Maui. It has given us a wonderful chance to learn back stories of the main characters. Who knew Michonne's story and what makes her tick? Now we have an idea. And Lizzie - I found it interesting that in her distorted mind she didn't see the walkers as bad. It's another viewpoint. Okay, a crazy one, but different. The answers to other questions have been answered.

The one I have now though is why don't we see more dogs or packs of dogs or even other animals. Cats, dogs, horses. Are the walkers eating them all? I mean they couldn't catch them all could they?


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

cherry ghost said:


> All about saving money.





betts4 said:


> I don't see it as that. I agree with Maui.


Actually, I think that the money saving is a consideration also.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Maui said:


> Actually, I think that the money saving is a consideration also.


Definitely. AMC is legendary for cutting the budget on their shows, no matter how successful. That's one reason (of many, apparently) Walking Dead has gone through so many show-runners.

In this case, I think they've done a good job of making their limitations work for them, by highlighting a number of potentially interesting characters who have too often been limited to saying "Yes, Rick, you're absolutely right."


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Solution! Just save up the episodes and watch them back to back. I think your irritation comes from having to wait weeks and weeks to see the whole storyline.

The showrunner wanted to do this so he could do more in depth character development.
Some people liked it and some do not. Its only 8 episodes. Perhaps they should make a boxed set where they interleave the parallel storyline scenes as a viewer option.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Maui said:


> I am not sure what those who hated the episode and are talking about cancelling their season passes want.
> 
> I thought it was a great episode, brutal in it's execution and closing up some lingering questions from earlier in the season.


I didn't hate it, I just found it ... meh. It simply wasn't compelling on any level to me. I want better writing, and I believe they're capable of it. If they don't do that I will be gone.

Case in point. Did anyone buy the scene with Carol and Tyrese, after Lizzie had killed her sister, where they discuss who will leave? I didn't, not for a second. I knew the second we saw that Lizzie had killed her sister she would have to die. Yet what we got was empty dialogue and Carol 'foreshadowing' the inevitable 15 times with 'She can't be around other people'. Neither of them even mentioned or considered doing what Carol did.

It was 45 minutes of Carol telling the kids they needed to be strong, followed by a few minutes of 'shock' then Carol was 'strong'.

We already knew Lizzie was off... maybe not to that degree but we knew she was off. They took a storyline that they could have weaved, little by little, into several episodes and made it one episode. And they didn't have enough there to make a full episode so it was flat.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

Well, so Lizzie Borden was crazier than we even thought! Although, if I had my druthers, I prefer to see stuff with more of the characters per episode, this one was pretty interesting.

Initially I, too, thought somebody also killed Judith because, as they walked away, there were three graves and one had some booties hanging from it. Although, in retrospect, they were bronze-type booties and I doubt Judith had a pair of those. There would have been no sense to killing the baby anyway, but it seemed odd that you couldn't clearly see her with them.

I agree that the confession thing was about 'I have done everything I can possibly do and everything still sucks and always will, so if you want to kill me please feel free to do so now'. That whole thing was pretty well played and I guess it's good that it's out there. Up until the confession, I still half wondered if Lizzie Borden had actually killed those people and Carol just took the rap.


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

I thought that the fire the group in the grove saw seemed to burn for a pretty long time for just a small little cabin. Although I am sure that is what they were looking at, part of me was thinking that it was actually that terminus place burning and that when they get there everything will be burnt. 

Between watching this and the Cosmos show it really drove home the point that only the fittest or the most adaptable will survive this whole ordeal if it ever ends.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

This was the best episode of the season. Poor Mica. Poor Lizzie. Poor Carol. Poor Tyreese. Hell, I even felt bad for the walker on the tracks.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> This was the best episode of the season. Poor Mica. Poor Lizzie. Poor Carol. Poor Tyreese. *Hell, I even felt bad for the walker on the tracks*.


I think (excuse my rough Walker translation) he was saying "please kill me, I can't feel my legs!" again might not be exact


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

MikeMar said:


> I think (excuse my rough Walker translation) he was saying "please kill me, I can't feel my legs!" again might not be exact


No, I think he was actually trying to say: "I've fallen, and I can't get up!"


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

With Karol and Tyreese walking away, at least they could have had Judith's head and/or arms sticking out of the back-sack. Even if it was a doll or prop... something to show she was still with them. Because the bronzed booties also threw me a bit -- sure, they weren't Judiths, but they could have been found inside the house. It's like they didn't have enough money for a Judith doll. no, let's just stuff her inside a sack Tyreese carries on his back, without any air or arm holes. Strange.

Oh, and about the burned walkers, on TTD, they said that walkers respond to fire because it's a light source and it's moving, so they walk right into it. Silly walkers.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Hank said:


> No, I think he was actually trying to say: "I've fallen, and I can't get up!"


Which made me think of the tragedy of the Life Alert system no longer functioning after the Zombie Apocalypse, which reminded me...would they still have had gas service in that house? Because they sure did linger on it in a meaningful way!

The bronze booties were on that cross when they arrived at the house.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Maui said:


> *I am not sure what those who hated the episode and are talking about cancelling their season passes want.*
> 
> I thought it was a great episode, brutal in it's execution and closing up some lingering questions from earlier in the season.


They're messed up ... they need to look at the flowers.


----------



## ibergu (May 9, 2004)

betts4 said:


> It has given us a wonderful chance to learn back stories of the main characters. Who knew Michonne's story and what makes her tick? Now we have an idea.


While the tempo/action has definitely been slower this season, I like the character development and this approach, where they focus on one or two characters per episode, is reminiscent of Lost to me. Whether or not it has to do with saving money for the network, it still gives us an opportunity to connect/relate with each of them so that we actually care what happens to them.

Personally, I would like to see more flashbacks to the days just before the ZA, something that might help us better understand how it originated and what was the cause. They've done very little of that.


----------



## 2004raptor (Dec 31, 2005)

I thought the opening was a bit odd. Have they ever done that before? I know they do flashbacks. That was a flash forward to a scene in the same episode.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

MikeMar said:


> I think there were FIVE graves total after the 2 girls, so 3 graves already there
> 
> -I could very easily be wrong and it's just the 3 total now


You're right.
The three graves with stick crosses were already there. The graves for the two girls were dug in front of the existing ones and do not have stick crosses, they have flowers planted on top of them.


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

With all of these people walking on the tracks I keep expecting at one point for them to hear a train whistle and see a train coming down the tracks. Diesel locomotives would still work and wouldn't they be the most effective way to travel given that the train could just knock walkers out of the way with the cow catcher?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

zordude said:


> I didn't hate the episode, but what I want is to not have a show that only has a back half of a season to work with to spend entire episodes focused on 1 out of 5 groups of people, and never bring any of them together.


Agreed with this. There are now six distinct groups of main characters wandering around these woods, and with only 8 episodes in this half season, it doesn't make sense to spend whole episodes focused on only one group.

And I'm not so sure the cost savings explanation really works, either. Those actors in the opening credits are "series regulars" and their contracts likely say they make $X per episode regardless of whether they appear in the episode or not.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> Which made me think of the tragedy of the Life Alert system no longer functioning after the Zombie Apocalypse, which reminded me...*would they still have had gas service in that house?* Because they sure did linger on it in a meaningful way! The bronze booties were on that cross when they arrived at the house.


A rural house like that almost surely would have it's own propane tank somewhere on the property. As long as nobody has been shacking up in the house and used all the propane, the propane tank would still be able to be used.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Cearbhaill said:


> That was the flattest baby I ever saw on Tyreese's back as they walked away.
> 
> Props department should be reprimanded about that- it was just lazy for them not to stuff that backpack full of something to make it look like the enormous baby that Judith is.


It looked like a 3 dimensional Judith sized baby to me.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> And I'm not so sure the cost savings explanation really works, either. Those actors in the opening credits are "series regulars" and their contracts likely say they make $X per episode regardless of whether they appear in the episode or not.


That depends entirely on what the contracts say. There are plenty of instances of actors appearing in reduced numbers of episodes of a season either for scheduling reasons or for cost-cutting.


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> A rural house like that almost surely would have it's own propane tank somewhere on the property. As long as nobody has been shacking up in the house and used all the propane, the propane tank would still be able to be used.


I was thinking the same thing about the gas service which I think made me notice a big white propane tank on the side of the house during one of the scenes.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

There really hasn't been an episode in this sequence of episodes (season? half-season? whatever) since the "war" at the prison that hasn't been a complete waste of everyone's time and effort, IMO. There's been very little if anything learned that is going to make any difference at all that couldn't have been explored in total within a normal episode timeframe. Maybe, just maybe, two episodes considering we had some character growth with that episode focused on Carl and his can of pudding that rebuilt some of his relationship with his dad.

I was somewhat hopeful during the sequence when the two guys were trying talking about knowing what caused it and trying to get up north (to DC?) that maybe we'd finally get back to something interesting instead of walkers killing and being killed.

Apparently that thread went nowhere, at least so far.

I had thought maybe I should watch a couple episodes of the first season again because I've been feeling for some time now that they're making the walkers a bit too mentally aware of their surroundings rather than being driven simply by smell or sound. And I felt that was becoming unnecessarily distracting to the stories.

Maybe some future episode is going to tie some of the stuff we've endured/learned together, but I can't see most any of it in any way being necessary to anything I can think would potentially be coming up.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

DeDondeEs said:


> With all of these people walking on the tracks I keep expecting at one point for them to hear a train whistle and see a train coming down the tracks. Diesel locomotives would still work and wouldn't they be the most effective way to travel given that the train could just knock walkers out of the way with the cow catcher?


The only problem would be the switch tracks. They'd have to stop the train, get out, and make sure they aren't getting switched to some side rail or spur. That's assuming they're able to move the switches. They could be frozen, rusted, or jammed without a manual release.

But yeah, I'd like to see that too.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

scandia101 said:


> It looked like a 3 dimensional Judith sized baby to me.


Not to me.
Look again at any of the scenes with Mika or Lizzie carrying her- that child's head is enormous.
And where are her legs in those photos?
If they were tucked up her butt would stick out.

Nope- I'm sticking with my Flat Judith complaint.


DevdogAZ said:


> A rural house like that almost surely would have it's own propane tank somewhere on the property. As long as nobody has been shacking up in the house and used all the propane, the propane tank would still be able to be used.


Yep, propane with a pilot light is all you need.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Peter000 said:


> There is no safe place in the zombie apocalypse. That house is about as safe as it gets.


I said "safer", not "safe". Also, the house is quite obviously not "as safe as it gets" if there is only one adult trying to take care of an infant. How can he hunt? Just leave the infant alone in the house?


----------



## NJ_HB (Mar 21, 2007)

getbak said:


> My interpretation of that was that it was their way of showing that the timelines of these episode are overlapping with each other and to show that the groups aren't that far apart from each other (just like when we saw Daryl encounter the same group who had been in the house with Rick in an earlier episode).
> 
> The smoke would have been from the moonshiners' house that Daryl and Beth burned down a couple of episodes ago. The burned up walkers had walked through that fire and even though they were burned, they weren't destroyed, showing that fire is not an effective way to dispose of walkers.


If memory serves: Daryl did not get to kill all the walkers he lead to the basement. So the more the house burns the more the walkers are able to 'escape'.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That would be "logical," but I think what she did made sense.


Where did I say anything about logical or making sense? I said it was disingenuous of her. Her behavior makes me think less of her as a person. While I can understand her weakness, it certainly does not make me admire her.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

NJ_HB said:


> If memory serves: Daryl did not get to kill all the walkers he lead to the basement. So the more the house burns the more the walkers are able to 'escape'.


Wrong house. The fire was at the moonshiner's cabin. The walkers in the basement was the funeral home.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> Where did I say anything about logical or making sense? I said it was disingenuous of her. Her behavior makes me think less of her as a person. While I can understand her weakness, it certainly does not make me admire her.


*I* said that what you said was logical. And that, nonetheless, what she did made sense.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Maui said:


> See I kind of like that. They are allowing more characters to develop so that they are not just background characters for Rick, Daryl and Michone. As an example, in season one you could have gotten rid of Carol and nobody would have cared. Now, she is one of my favorite characters.


Maybe now I'll remember who Beth is. She has been nothing but background. She could have died in season 2 when she tried to off herself and it wouldn't have made any difference to the story. Sure they shine a light on her once in a while when she's singing or caring for Judith, but that seems to be just to remind us that she's there.


----------



## NJ_HB (Mar 21, 2007)

DevdogAZ said:


> Wrong house. The fire was at the moonshiner's cabin. The walkers in the basement was the funeral home.


Right! ... I knew that.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Which made me think of the tragedy of the Life Alert system no longer functioning after the Zombie Apocalypse, which reminded me...would they still have had gas service in that house? Because they sure did linger on it in a meaningful way!


Hit on above, yeah you could easily have propane tank on the side of the house for a stove. They seemed to be wasting it a bit on just hot water?



2004raptor said:


> I thought the opening was a bit odd. Have they ever done that before? I know they do flashbacks. That was a flash forward to a scene in the same episode.


I think they did that one because for a moment I thought it was a scene with Lizzy playing from BEFORE everything went down, so I thought it was a flashback and not a flash forward. I Think that was the point of showing it from a distance and showing the gas. Tricking you into thinking it was in the past



DeDondeEs said:


> With all of these people walking on the tracks I keep expecting at one point for them to hear a train whistle and see a train coming down the tracks. Diesel locomotives would still work and wouldn't they be the most effective way to travel given that the train could just knock walkers out of the way with the cow catcher?


The problem I see with a train, at some point you have to stop, and those things are NOT quiet, you could get quite the huge heard behind you coming at you! That would not be fun to deal with when you stop.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

I kinda wished they killed off Judith. I think raising an infant, in the ZA is a streach anyway. That thing would be crying A LOT, attracting walkers from all around, with no real way to get her to stop. No mother with breast milk around, no diapers, either. From the moment that Lori got pregnant, I was like "oh geeze, no way a newborn can survive in this world"... and it's just a drag on the rest of the (subpar) plots.


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

Hank said:


> The only problem would be the switch tracks. They'd have to stop the train, get out, and make sure they aren't getting switched to some side rail or spur. That's assuming they're able to move the switches. They could be frozen, rusted, or jammed without a manual release.
> 
> But yeah, I'd like to see that too.


Play Telltale's Walking Dead Season 1...


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

Well at least we finally know that it was Carroll who killed those people and wasn't just covering up for the kids!

It was a good storyline episode but I do really want all our groups to get together, soon!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I didn't realize that propane and natural gas were interchangeable (city boy, here!).


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I didn't realize that propane and natural gas were interchangeable (city boy, here!).


Nonetheless, it makes sense.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I didn't realize that propane and natural gas were interchangeable (city boy, here!).


We looked at a house (to buy) and it was oil, but they had a big propane tank on the side of the house for the stove (and a fireplace).


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

BlueMerle said:


> I didn't hate it, I just found it ... meh. It simply wasn't compelling on any level to me. I want better writing, and I believe they're capable of it. If they don't do that I will be gone.
> 
> Case in point. Did anyone buy the scene with Carol and Tyrese, after Lizzie had killed her sister, where they discuss who will leave? I didn't, not for a second. I knew the second we saw that Lizzie had killed her sister she would have to die. Yet what we got was empty dialogue and Carol 'foreshadowing' the inevitable 15 times with 'She can't be around other people'. Neither of them even mentioned or considered doing what Carol did.
> 
> ...


So instead of taking a few minutes to talk through all possible solutions in dealing with this crazy kid, you think they should have just not done any of that and just shot her 5 seconds later? Is that what most people would have done, not even think to try and come up with another solution, even if they were just kidding themselves?

-smak-


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

smak said:


> So instead of taking a few minutes to talk through all possible solutions in dealing with this crazy kid, you think they should have just not done any of that and just shot her 5 seconds later? Is that what most people would have done, not even think to try and come up with another solution, even if they were just kidding themselves?


Well, Carol certainly did not take any time to try to reason with Lizzie about how walkers were not really people. After Lizzie was playing with the walker in the yard, it seemed an obvious time to sit down and have a LONG talk, trying to reason with her. Maybe it would not do any good, but most people would have tried. I would have expected Carol to try. But the writers just wanted to have their shocking scene, so they did not bother.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

smak said:


> So instead of taking a few minutes to talk through all possible solutions in dealing with this crazy kid, you think they should have just not done any of that and just shot her 5 seconds later? Is that what most people would have done, not even think to try and come up with another solution, even if they were just kidding themselves?
> 
> -smak-


What, exactly, were the 'other' options available to them?

It's the middle of a ZA, and there's only 2 adults there with her. No one in their right mind would be willing to take that kid on as a project at that point. I don't believe that they'd even spend one night with her, unless she was tied up.... and they didn't do that.

So what exactly were the options they talked about?

Take her way way way out in the woods and run away? Did they talk about that? - no they didn't.

Sneak away in the middle of the night and leave her alone in the house? Did they talk about that? - no they didn't.

Keep her tied up in perpetuity? Did they talk about that? - no they didn't.

The options they did talk about...... 1. Carol leaves with Lizzie 2. Tyrese leaves with Judith.

Either one leaves Carol living alone with Lizzie Borden. - Not believable.

Did they ever once talk about killing her? - no they didn't. It never came up.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Well when they were NOT talking in that scene, it was pretty obvious to me that they agreed that was the best solution. What would you guys have done?

I probably would have zombified her and let her become her fascination!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> Well, Carol certainly did not take any time to try to reason with Lizzie about how walkers were not really people.


Er, they've been having that conversation since the prison...


----------



## retrodog (Feb 7, 2002)

zalusky said:


> Well when they were NOT talking in that scene, it was pretty obvious to me that they agreed that was the best solution. What would you guys have done?
> 
> I probably would have zombified her and let her become her fascination!


After changing over, I would cut off both her arms and lower jaw. Then drag here around with a leash. Just to let all the other little living kids know better than to get too cocky.

The thing with Judith really amazes me. All the people on here who think they could have made her appearance more apparent at the end are overlooking one key factor... They wanted you to be unsure. It's sort of a cliffhanger. Well it would be if it weren't for The Talking Dead. 

I thought he interviews with Mika and Lizzie on TD were interesting because they were all excited about making this episode. I guess when you're just 8-10 years old, you're not stressing much about unemployment.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Er, they've been having that conversation since the prison...


Er, there is a big difference between a few seconds of saying that "walkers are not people", and sitting down for an hour to discuss walkers in detail...


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

retrodog said:


> The thing with Judith really amazes me. All the people on here who think they could have made her appearance more apparent at the end are overlooking one key factor... They wanted you to be unsure. It's sort of a cliffhanger.


Certainly not. It was completely obvious that Judith was there on Tyreese's back. Judith was obviously fine when they came upon Lizzie and her dead sister. There was no reason to assume Judith was dead, and furthermore, she was obviously on Tyreese's back at the end. The showrunners would have to assume their audience were complete idiots for them to think that people would be unsure whether Judith were alive.


----------



## retrodog (Feb 7, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Certainly not. It was completely obvious that Judith was there on Tyreese's back. Judith was obviously fine when they came upon Lizzie and her dead sister. There was no reason to assume Judith was dead, and furthermore, she was obviously on Tyreese's back at the end. The showrunners would have to assume their audience were complete idiots for them to think that people would be unsure whether Judith were alive.


Well either they covered up her head to make it look questionable, or Tyrese was trying to give her some street cred by dressing her up with a hoodie.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

I guess I'm a complete idiot then. 

Seemed really strange to have a baby stuffed into a sack without any holes for breathing or legs/arms. 

It was *not* entirely obvious. Why they had to obfuscate the baby in the back-pack is puzzling to me.

eta: Or what I think -- they ran out of money/time to properly film a real baby there, or create a fake one. So they just winged it with a sack.


----------



## Hcour (Dec 24, 2007)

I thought it was great ep. The sharp contrast between the earlier hopeful discussions of making a home there with a family-like atmosphere vs how it all turned out in the end was very effective.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Hank said:


> eta: Or what I think -- they ran out of money/time to properly film a real baby there, or create a fake one. So they just winged it with a sack.


How hard is it to have a lifesize doll on hand?
You'd think they'd have one already.

I think it was just somebody being lazy.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

john4200 said:


> Er, there is a big difference between a few seconds of saying that "walkers are not people", and sitting down for an hour to discuss walkers in detail...


Could you imagine the outrage if they actually did that. Tonights episode is one full hour of Tyrese and Carol lecturing Lizzie.

I think we have to assume the between Carol's "Reading" sessions at the prison and in the time since they were reunited that those conversations have indeed taken place.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

Cearbhaill said:


> I think it was just somebody being lazy.


Was it the writers ? :up:


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Maui said:


> Could you imagine the outrage if they actually did that. Tonights episode is one full hour of Tyrese and Carol lecturing Lizzie.
> 
> I think we have to assume the between Carol's "Reading" sessions at the prison and in the time since they were reunited that those conversations have indeed taken place.


Exactly.
Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it wasn't done.
Or do you want real time coverage of every diaper change and sponge bath?

A one hour conversation on how 'serious' zombies are would be ridiculous.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Cearbhaill said:


> A one hour conversation on how 'serious' zombies are would be ridiculous.


Of course it would. I did not say they should film one hour of Carol discussing walkers with Lizzie. It should have been completely obvious that I meant they should show us something to let us know that such a discussion took place.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

john4200 said:


> Er, there is a big difference between a few seconds of saying that "walkers are not people", and sitting down for an hour to discuss walkers in detail...


I didn't see it as a few seconds. I felt like it was an issue they talked with her about several times and she just wasn't getting it. She showed in her actions that she wasn't accepting that idea, and they showed her by theirs that what they meant. The only thing I could say is that I think Carol should have killed the walker on the train tracks.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

john4200 said:


> Of course it would. I did not say they should film one hour of Carol discussing walkers with Lizzie. It should have been completely obvious that I meant they should show us something to let us know that such a discussion took place.


Well, _I_ heard it discussed at _least_ 100 times 



betts4 said:


> I didn't see it as a few seconds. I felt like it was an issue they talked with her about several times and she just wasn't getting it. She showed in her actions that she wasn't accepting that idea, and they showed her by theirs that what they meant.


Exactly :up:


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Cearbhaill said:


> Well, _I_ heard it discussed at _least_ 100 times


No, you did not. Unless you watched the same episodes over and over.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

BlueMerle said:


> What, exactly, were the 'other' options available to them?
> 
> It's the middle of a ZA, and there's only 2 adults there with her. No one in their right mind would be willing to take that kid on as a project at that point. I don't believe that they'd even spend one night with her, unless she was tied up.... and they didn't do that.
> 
> ...


Obviously they did talk about killing her since that's what happened and Tyreese was watching from the window and wasn't surprised by it. So they clearly had a discussion off camera about killing her. So what's to say that off-camera discussion didn't include all of the other potential options you wanted it to include?

If your issue is with why they didn't show that discussion, I think that's pretty obvious. They wanted the scene of Carol killing LIzzie to be shocking and have the emotional impact that it had. If they had shown the discussion between Carol and Tyreese going through options and settling on the one they did, then it would have taken away the impact of the scene.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

betts4 said:


> I didn't see it as a few seconds. I felt like it was an issue they talked with her about several times and she just wasn't getting it. She showed in her actions that she wasn't accepting that idea, and they showed her by theirs that what they meant. The only thing I could say is that I think Carol should have killed the walker on the train tracks.


Again, there is a difference between just spending a few seconds telling the girl "walkers are not people" over and over, and actually sitting down and having a detailed discussion with her, asking her questions, exploring why she thinks what she thinks. The writers provided no clear indication that such a detailed discussion took place. You might assume it did, but that would be you, not the writers.

And Carol was not around the walker on the tracks, so how would she kill it?


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

DevdogAZ said:


> Obviously they did talk about killing her since that's what happened and Tyreese was watching from the window and wasn't surprised by it. So they clearly had a discussion off camera about killing her. So what's to say that off-camera discussion didn't include all of the other potential options you wanted it to include?
> 
> If your issue is with why they didn't show that discussion, I think that's pretty obvious. They wanted the scene of Carol killing LIzzie to be shocking and have the emotional impact that it had. If they had shown the discussion between Carol and Tyreese going through options and settling on the one they did, then it would have taken away the impact of the scene.


My post you've quoted was just pointing out to smak that their were no other options and that they didn't discuss any, other than someone leaving, including killing her.

I agree fully with everything you've said there. In a 'normal' show you'd be spot on. But as I said earlier, I knew the minute I saw her standing over her dead sister's body that she had to die. I suspect everyone did. So in that respect Carol's actions weren't a shock... they were expected. It's the way the writers dealt with that fact that I take issue with.

The writers seem to be under the impression they're writing for an episode of some show that's not in a ZA. The tropes they used here didn't work in this situation. They're writing to the very lowest common denominator, much like the "marching band" in the bathroom scene with Rick.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

pmyers said:


> Well at least we finally know that it was Carroll who killed those people and wasn't just covering up for the kids!


We knew that last oct/nov when they showed Carol doing it.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

retrodog said:


> Well either they covered up her head to make it look questionable, or Tyrese was trying to give her some street cred by dressing her up with a hoodie.





Hank said:


> I guess I'm a complete idiot then.
> 
> Seemed really strange to have a baby stuffed into a sack without any holes for breathing or legs/arms.
> 
> ...





Cearbhaill said:


> How hard is it to have a lifesize doll on hand?
> You'd think they'd have one already.
> 
> I think it was just somebody being lazy.


I think it's obvious that the head was covered so that they could use a life size doll and not a real child bit it also makes perfect sense that they would cover the baby's head - less light stimulus makes it easier for a baby to sleep and how much sunscreen do you think they have?

It's a show about zombies and people have their panties in a wad over 8 seconds of screen time that shows a less than ideally realistic doll under a blanket rather than a live baby.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

scandia101 said:


> We knew that last oct/nov when they showed Carol doing it.


They never showed Carol doing it before. She told Rick previously that it was her that did it. And there's been speculation ever since that she didn't actually do it and instead lied to Rick to protect Lizzie. You and I had a long argument about that a few threads back. Now it seems pretty clear that Carol wasn't covering for Lizzie, as this would be the perfect time for her to tell Tyreese that Lizzie killed Karen if in fact that were the truth.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

john4200 said:


> Well, Tyreese obviously cared. But I agree that it would have been better if she kept it to herself until they were in a much safer place.


But if that safer place included Rick, then it wouldn't be a good time to get into it.



Cearbhaill said:


> That was the flattest baby I ever saw on Tyreese's back as they walked away.
> 
> .


I realized earlier when they were all walking down the tracks that I couldn't see Judith anywhere, and then decided that the very flat thing on Tyrese's back was her. So I knew she was there at the end.



dswallow said:


> I had thought maybe I should watch a couple episodes of the first season again because I've been feeling for some time now that they're making the walkers a bit too mentally aware of their surroundings rather than being driven simply by smell or sound. And I felt that was becoming unnecessarily distracting to the stories.
> 
> .


Actually I remember in season 1 when the awesome black guy whose name I can't remember was freaked out by his zombie wife coming to their front door all the time. She was definitely aware of her surroundings, though probably not consciously.

And in Lizzie's defense  there have been others who kept walkers around in hopes that they could reach them in some way. The governor had his daughter, and Hershel had a bunch of them in his barn and was feeding them. I'm not sure any of them actually made zombies to study--maybe the Governor did.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> I didn't realize that propane and natural gas were interchangeable (city boy, here!).


Out here in the sticks, there isn't a gas line down every little road, so some of us have to use propane in a tank.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

scandia101 said:


> It's a show about zombies and people have their panties in a wad over 8 seconds of screen time that shows a less than ideally realistic doll under a blanket rather than a live baby.


It's not that... it's that the ending was just ambiguous enough to make some of us wonder if while they were killin' off the young'ns, maybe they offed Judith for some strange reason we might not get just yet. Maybe she was too much of a risk to their own survival. Maybe because Carol couldn't kill that deer, they saw a nice tasty morsel in Judith instead, now that they finally had a working oven.

That was a joke for the sarcasm impaired.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

As for any discussion between Carol and Tyreese of killing Lizzie, as I watched the scene with Carol sitting at the table and Tyreese standing and holding Judith, in my mind it became clear the "discussion" about killing Lizzie took place right there.

Carol said she could leave with her, and Tyreese said they wouldn't make it on their own. Likewise when Tyreese said he could leave with Judith. Then Carol said "she can't be around people". They talked about trying to talk her back and a couple of things like that. Carol said "this is the way she is" and got misty-eyed. Then she looked at Tyreese and repeated, more pointedly, "she can't be around people". The unspoken discussion between them at that point gave me the distinct impression that she was meaning she'd have to kill her, and she teared up a little. Tyreese looked like the realization sunk in and he saw no other option either.

For me that was all the discussion there was and it was apparent to THEM at that point.

That was the way I saw it as I watched anyway. It made sense to me then when it played out as it did.

.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

Hank said:


> Maybe because Carol couldn't kill that deer, they saw a nice tasty morsel in Judith instead, now that they finally had a working oven.
> 
> That was a joke for the sarcasm impaired.


What has this show done to me??? I just laughed at that line. 

And I knew it was a joke or I would REALLY be worried about me!


----------



## retrodog (Feb 7, 2002)

scandia101 said:


> I think it's obvious that the head was covered so that they could use a life size doll and not a real child bit it also makes perfect sense that they would cover the baby's head - less light stimulus makes it easier for a baby to sleep and how much sunscreen do you think they have?


YES!!! Babies are birds. You just hang something over their cage to get them to shut up. OUTSTANDING!


scandia101 said:


> It's a show about zombies and people have their panties in a wad over 8 seconds of screen time that shows a less than ideally realistic doll under a blanket rather than a live baby.


Well, to be realistic, it's a zombie movie and people are getting their panties in a wad because they are trying to determine how many youngsters died. So please give us a little panty wadding latitude. (yes, you can quote me on that).

I still think it was all intentional, just to stir up threads like this.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

JLucPicard said:


> As for any discussion between Carol and Tyreese of killing Lizzie, as I watched the scene with Carol sitting at the table and Tyreese standing and holding Judith, in my mind it became clear the "discussion" about killing Lizzie took place right there.
> 
> Carol said she could leave with her, and Tyreese said they wouldn't make it on their own. Likewise when Tyreese said he could leave with Judith. Then Carol said "she can't be around people". They talked about trying to talk her back and a couple of things like that. Carol said "this is the way she is" and got misty-eyed. Then she looked at Tyreese and repeated, more pointedly, "she can't be around people". The unspoken discussion between them at that point gave me the distinct impression that she was meaning she'd have to kill her, and she teared up a little. Tyreese looked like the realization sunk in and he saw no other option either.
> 
> ...


If the ultimate thing you know you have to do is kill a little kid, you're probably going to try to think up as many alternatives as possible, even if they are stupid, and you ultimately know they won't be good enough.

-smak-


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Seriously. I don't know how you can blithely decide to kill a 10 year old girl, no matter how horribly effed up she is. I would do whatever I could to think up whatever other options there might be.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

I liked the episode and all I know is when they came up on Lizzie after she had killed her sister I would have shot Lizzie then myself. No way I want to live in a world with all that Carol has been through.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

They showed Judith on Tyreese's back very clearly as they were leaving the house.
How hard do people need to be hit over the head with the facts before they accept them?


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

smak said:


> If the ultimate thing you know you have to do is kill a little kid, you're probably going to try to think up as many alternatives as possible, even if they are stupid, and you ultimately know they won't be good enough.
> 
> -smak-


Ok, so why didn't they?



DreadPirateRob said:


> Seriously. I don't know how you can blithely decide to kill a 10 year old girl, no matter how horribly effed up she is. I would do whatever I could to think up whatever other options there might be.


There's nothing 'blithe' about it. After she killed her sister they were left with 2 adults, one infant, and a f'ing bat siht crazy girl. One who had talked about zombifying Judith and had pulled a gun on them. They had no other resources to call upon. It was Carol & Tyrese... full stop.

It's a serious decision, one that must be taken to ensure the survival of the greatest number of people.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

scandia101 said:


> They showed Judith on Tyreese's back very clearly as they were leaving the house.
> How hard do people need to be hit over the head with the facts before they accept them?


There was no baby shown. Not even an arm or a leg. Nothing. Just a closed up sack. It's just not that "clear".


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Seriously. I don't know how you can blithely decide to kill a 10 year old girl, no matter how horribly effed up she is. I would do whatever I could to think up whatever other options there might be.


Name one.


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

scandia101 said:


> They showed Judith on Tyreese's back very clearly as they were leaving the house.
> How hard do people need to be hit over the head with the facts before they accept them?





Hank said:


> There was no baby shown. Not even an arm or a leg. Nothing. Just a closed up sack. It's just not that "clear".


lol, exactly... calling this "clearly shown" is a bit of a stretch. I'm sure the baby is in there (or in one of the bags they're carrying) but only because she HAS to be...there's absolutely nothing clear about this shot... It barely even look like there's a spot for air to come in. and the kid is like four months old, there's no harness or anything. I can't imagine they would just throw her in a closed sack with only a tiny slit for air to get in it but that's apparently what they did, lol



I'm glad the "carol killing karen" thing is over with... I thought that was gonna derail the whole season. Rick kicking her out of the group because of how Tyrese would react was ridiculous - she's been with him since almost the beginning and Tyrese just showed up... the sooner that came to end the better IMO. I think it made sense for her to tell him given how he spent the whole episode saying how much he trusted her. Plus I'm pretty sure she felt like she deserved to die after wasting a 10 year old girl who she vowed to care for, so she figured he'd do it and get it over with... buuuuut nope. Oh well, at they can move on with sack baby and see what's up at Terminus, which I'm sure is gonna be good for everyone.


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Seriously. I don't know how you can blithely decide to kill a 10 year old girl, no matter how horribly effed up she is. I would do whatever I could to think up whatever other options there might be.


I would have told her that she was right about the walkers and that she should go back out and play with them again, or just high-tail it out of that house in the middle of the night while she was sleeping.


----------



## retrodog (Feb 7, 2002)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Seriously. I don't know how you can blithely decide to kill a 10 year old girl, no matter how horribly effed up she is. I would do whatever I could to think up whatever other options there might be.


Well take some time and get back to us with all those great options.

I'll bet people would be a bit more understanding if they had shown the scene where she slashed her little sister. That had to be precious.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

BlueMerle said:


> There's nothing 'blithe' about it. After she killed her sister they were left with 2 adults, one infant, and a f'ing bat siht crazy girl. One who had talked about zombifying Judith and had pulled a gun on them. They had no other resources to call upon. It was Carol & Tyrese... full stop.
> 
> It's a serious decision, one that must be taken to ensure the survival of the greatest number of people.





Cearbhaill said:


> Name one.





DeDondeEs said:


> I would have told her that she was right about the walkers and that she should go back out and play with them again, or just high-tail it out of that house in the middle of the night while she was sleeping.





retrodog said:


> Well take some time and get back to us with all those great options.
> 
> I'll bet people would be a bit more understanding if they had shown the scene where she slashed her little sister. That had to be precious.


Clearly, there aren't any other options. But I sure as hell would want to at least talk it out before I offed her, so I don't quite get the complaint that Carol and Tyrese talked about it for too long/didn't talk about it enough. It's not interesting to show, at least not if you want to preserve the drama of it all, but it's also quite reasonable to assume happened, and probably took awhile.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

DeDondeEs said:


> I would have told her that she was right about the walkers and that she should go back out and play with them again, or just high-tail it out of that house in the middle of the night while she was sleeping.


Yeah, I probably wouldn't have had the guts to kill her, so if you could somehow just lose her in the woods with the walkers that would take care of it. And then we could meet her again later.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Clearly, there aren't any. But I sure as hell would want to at least talk it out before I offed her, so I don't quite get the complaint that Carol and Tyrese talked about it for too long.


I don't think anyone was complaining that they talked about it for too long. I think the complaints were that they didn't talk about it enough, or consider all the possible options.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't think anyone was complaining that they talked about it for too long. I think the complaints were that they didn't talk about it enough, or consider all the possible options.


You caught me mid-ninja edit.  I've since clarified a bit.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Maui said:


> I am not sure what those who hated the episode and are talking about cancelling their season passes want.
> 
> I thought it was a great episode, brutal in it's execution and closing up some lingering questions from earlier in the season.


Agreed....fast WD hour in a long time....it was superbly done. And I've been one critical in the past for some slow-moving eps.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Bierboy said:


> And I've been one critical in the past for some slow-moving eps.


Prove it.


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

What I always like about this show is that while some episodes of any given season are considered "slow" , so far they have always paid off in last couple of episodes of the season. I think of how many episodes crawled while they were at the farm but then the last two episodes went nuts. I think this will be a good example of that, except maybe more so... spending all this time on individual characters has made just about everyone more three-dimensional and important, to me anyway. IE, Beth. Never cared about Beth because she never had more than two lines in an episode. Fleshing her out individually, as well as showing how much she's come to mean to Daryl, makes me WAY more invested in her than before. And Daryl's reaction to her being taken. And watching Glen and Maggie trying to get back to each other, or seeing Michonne and Carl's breakdowns/acceptance of their circumstances... 

All this stuff might be playing out slow, but come the last couple of episodes as everyone converges on what I'm assuming is some kind of living nightmare (if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is), I think it will all payoff. All the characters have had time in the spotlight so not only do they have more depth individually, but the little pairings that have develpoped after they fled give the group a new dynamic once they're reunited. The stakes are higher for everyone. 

Patience will be rewarded.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

BlueMerle said:


> Prove it.


12 or 13 examples should do the trick.

-smak-


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

smak said:


> 12 or 13 examples should do the trick.
> 
> -smak-


lol.... one would think.

-BlueMerle-


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

I'm just going to throw this out there... a collection of the relevant comics that covered the same material. You can follow the link if you want. Or not.

I thought they did an amazing job with this episode. These threads are becoming a chore to read.



http://imgur.com/a


Greg


----------



## mchasal (Jun 6, 2001)

mrdazzo7 said:


> lol, exactly... calling this "clearly shown" is a bit of a stretch. I'm sure the baby is in there (or in one of the bags they're carrying) but only because she HAS to be...there's absolutely nothing clear about this shot... It barely even look like there's a spot for air to come in. and the kid is like four months old, there's no harness or anything. I can't imagine they would just throw her in a closed sack with only a tiny slit for air to get in it but that's apparently what they did, lol


I think what we're seeing there is that the baby is in a backpack carrier. You can see the 2nd set of straps over his shoulders outside of the normal LBE straps he has. Typically this type of carrier has the baby facing forward towards the parent's back. Something like:









Over that appears to be a hooded sweatshirt. You can see what looks like the outline of the front pocket. The hood's over the baby's head, but the front is open so there's plenty of air access, it's just that you can't see it from the back. 
From the attire the adults are wearing, it's a little chilly, and they're taking some improvised steps to keep the baby warm. It is likely a fake baby of some sort, so they probably went a little overboard to make sure everything was hidden, but I think it's pretty plausible.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

gchance said:


> I'm just going to throw this out there... a collection of the relevant comics that covered the same material. You can follow the link if you want. Or not.
> 
> I thought they did an amazing job with this episode. These threads are becoming a chore to read.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link. That's an interesting comparison.


----------



## warrenn (Jun 24, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I didn't realize that propane and natural gas were interchangeable (city boy, here!).


Propane and natural gas are NOT interchangeable. You can't just hook up one or the other to the same appliance. Most appliances have adapters which allow them to work on one or the other, but not both at the same time. The adapter controls how the air mixes with the gas. You can't just switch the type of gas without also switching out the adapters.

Not to threadjack, but I wouldn't want anyone simply hooking up their BBQ to the LP line of their house when the propane tank goes empty. Although, maybe that's where the crispy walkers came from.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

I'm pleased with all of the episodes this season. The shows aren't laden with excessive dialog like it was Season 2. We have activities in a variety of locations. We are getting the back-stories which help us to understand the characters. None of the episodes have been "perfect" but I've been thoroughly entertained each week.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

gchance said:


> These threads are becoming a chore to read.


Put a couple people on ignore. You'll be amazed at the difference.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

gchance said:


> These threads are becoming a chore to read.


Things usually deteriorate into arguing and name calling once an episode thread gets past the third page.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

mrdazzo7 said:


> Patience will be rewarded.


There are only 2 episodes left, so hopefully the payoff starts soon.


----------



## Dmtalon (Dec 28, 2003)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Seriously. I don't know how you can blithely decide to kill a 10 year old girl, no matter how horribly effed up she is. I would do whatever I could to think up whatever other options there might be.


Perhaps after roaming around for as long as they have trying to survive in ZA land under those conditions, killing Zombies and fighting for life EVERY SINGLE DAY, their perspective on how to continue surviving might have change?

Sure, it's seems insane sitting at your computer desk sipping on coffee/soda warm/comfortable/clean, not fighting for your life. They are literally in a kill or be killed situation most of the time.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Dmtalon said:


> Perhaps after roaming around for as long as they have trying to survive in ZA land under those conditions, killing Zombies and fighting for life EVERY SINGLE DAY, their perspective on how to continue surviving might have change?
> 
> Sure, it's seems insane sitting at your computer desk sipping on coffee/soda warm/comfortable/clean, not fighting for your life. They are literally in a kill or be killed situation most of the time.


Well, if humankind is worth saving as a whole, I'd hope that it'd be hard to kill anyone without out at least some consideration under most circumstances. Particularly a child. If not, they've pretty much lost all humanity and are just smart animals roaming around killing each other. I'm really not interested in watching a show like that. I want them to fight for what makes humankind worthwhile.

And just another thing to consider; most of the world's population is dead/undead. Human life should be considered sacrosanct if they're to survive as a race.


----------



## generaltso (Nov 4, 2003)

warrenn said:


> Not to threadjack, but I wouldn't want anyone simply hooking up their BBQ to the LP line of their house when the propane tank goes empty.


Not to split hairs on your threadjack, but since your post was meant to clarify, I just want to point out that LP is propane. So if you have an LP line at your house, it's probably connected to a propane tank somewhere, and you could certainly hook up your propane BBQ grill to it. If you have a natural gas line at your house, you would need a conversion kit to connect a propane appliance to it. That being said, you can get BBQ grills in natural gas versions. That's what I have and it's hooked directly into my house's natural gas line. The only real difference between a propane appliance and a natural gas appliance is the size of the orifice that lets gas into the burner.


----------



## Dmtalon (Dec 28, 2003)

Peter000 said:


> Well, if humankind is worth saving as a whole, I'd hope that it'd be hard to kill anyone without out at least some consideration under most circumstances. Particularly a child. If not, they've pretty much lost all humanity and are just smart animals roaming around killing each other. I'm really not interested in watching a show like that. I want them to fight for what makes humankind worthwhile.
> 
> And just another thing to consider; most of the world's population is dead/undead. Human life should be considered sacrosanct if they're to survive as a race.


Still sounds like you don't comprehend how dire their situation would be.

Maybe they should have taken her to therapy 3-4 times a week to work out her zombie issues. OR tied her up all the time so they could, I don't know, not be worried about being gutted at any given moment.

This place (tc) complains when they don't spell out every single detail of their thought process, AND complains about too much character development/non action. Its a catch 22.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

Peter000 said:


> And just another thing to consider; most of the world's population is dead/undead. Human life should be considered sacrosanct if they're to survive as a race.


Yup, but at the same time murderers could not be tolerated.


----------



## GameGuru (Dec 12, 2003)

She wasn't put down because she was a murderer, it was because she is insane and could kill anyone at anytime to make a friend. The girl would rather have a zombie sister than just a sister. I wouldn't want her to be with my group. Would I kill her? Not in my real life state but if I had been hardened by a year of a ZA I might think about it. Probably though I would just banish her and let her know if she tries to follow then she will be put down.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Peter000 said:


> Well, if humankind is worth saving as a whole, I'd hope that it'd be hard to kill anyone without out at least some consideration under most circumstances. Particularly a child. If not, they've pretty much lost all humanity and are just smart animals roaming around killing each other. I'm really not interested in watching a show like that. I want them to fight for what makes humankind worthwhile.
> 
> And just another thing to consider; most of the world's population is dead/undead. Human life should be considered sacrosanct if they're to survive as a race.


I don't understand why you think there was no consideration. I can't imagine them NOT talking about it. We just didn't see all of that, only some. Which is per usual for TV. You can think they just went decided, off her, and then went to bed and dreamt of lollipops and unicorns, but I in my mind, I am betting they stayed up pretty late wondering what to do with her and how to handle the situation.

They didn't have the resources to control her and she was a liablity to them in terms of not trusting her anymore.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

GameGuru said:


> The girl would rather have a zombie sister than just a sister.


That's not quite true, it is actually worse because she doesn't think there is a difference between the two.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

betts4 said:


> I don't understand why you think there was no consideration. I can't imagine them NOT talking about it. We just didn't see all of that, only some. Which is per usual for TV. You can think they just went decided, off her, and then went to bed and dreamt of lollipops and unicorns, but I in my mind, I am betting they stayed up pretty late wondering what to do with her and how to handle the situation.
> 
> They didn't have the resources to control her and she was a liablity to them in terms of not trusting her anymore.


I don't see where you think I thought there was no consideration given. I wasn't even commenting on the show, I was commenting on reaction TO the show, where people were complaining that there WAS consideration on it.

I thought the episode was pretty much perfect in that respect.

In a world where humans are on the verge of extinction there has to be some thought and consideration in a situation like that. I can see killing someone on the spur of the moment who is trying to kill me, but if someone can be salvaged or cured, and there are the resources to do it, it has to be an option at least.

Obviously this wasn't the case here.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

heySkippy said:


> Put a couple people on ignore. You'll be amazed at the difference.


I learned that along time ago! Makes this place a lot more enjoyable.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> In a world where humans are on the verge of extinction there has to be some thought and consideration in a situation like that. I can see killing someone on the spur of the moment who is trying to kill me, but if someone can be salvaged or cured, and there are the resources to do it, it has to be an option at least.
> 
> Obviously this wasn't the case here.


Except they've been dealing with her zombiephile issues for a long time now, and her response has been to murder people to turn them into zombies. They managed to talk her out of murdering Judith (at least until she can walk), but who knows how long that would have lasted. It was only a matter of time until she struck again, and as they said, they couldn't risk letting her be around other people. I'm not sure what alternatives they are left with.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Yeah, even if you leave her by herself and she somehow survives long enough to hook up with any group of survivors, who's to say she doesn't kill a bunch of them for the same reason!


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Except they've been dealing with her zombiephile issues for a long time now, and her response has been to murder people to turn them into zombies. They managed to talk her out of murdering Judith (at least until she can walk), but who knows how long that would have lasted. It was only a matter of time until she struck again, and as they said, they couldn't risk letting her be around other people. I'm not sure what alternatives they are left with.





Peter000 said:


> In a world where humans are on the verge of extinction there has to be some thought and consideration in a situation like that. I can see killing someone on the spur of the moment who is trying to kill me, but if someone can be salvaged or cured, and there are the resources to do it, it has to be an option at least.
> 
> *Obviously this wasn't the case here.*


In case I'm not clear, I have no problem with how they handled the situation in this episode.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> In case I'm not clear, I have no problem with how they handled the situation in this episode.


Oops, I missed that last line somehow. Sorry!


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Dmtalon said:


> This place (tc) complains when they don't spell out every single detail of their thought process, AND complains about too much character development/non action. Its a catch 22.


I guess that depends on what the definition of 'character development' is. And perhaps that's where some of the differences we have here regarding this episode comes into play.

I remember a scene from last season when they were still living at the prison where one of the older boys tell Carl he should attend Carol's 'reading time' class. Cut to Carol reading to several kids sitting cross-legged around her. Someone (Carl perhaps?) is looking in on them. As soon as that person walks away Carol puts the book down and begins to instruct the kids on how to properly kill a zombie. -- Now that's a powerful moment of character development to me. We always knew Carol was the 'mother' type that wanted to protect all the kids, but now we see that she's taken it to giving them zombie killing lessons. Something I don't believe she'd been capable of if not for the death of her daughter. And ... it only took ~ 30 seconds to deliver that message.

To me, this episode didn't involve any character development... what so ever.

We were beat over the head with:

"Carol likes kids and wants to keep them safe" -- already knew that.

"Lizzie is bat siht crazy" -- already knew or suspected that.

"Mica is a sweetheart and knows her sister is messed up" -- already knew that.

"Tyrese is strong but kind and values personal relationships" -- already knew that.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Peter000 said:


> In case I'm not clear, I have no problem with how they handled the situation in this episode.


I think you weren't clear in the post that I quoted, but I may have been skimming. In fact I know I was. My bad.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

BlueMerle said:


> I guess that depends on what the definition of 'character development' is. And perhaps that's where some of the differences we have here regarding this episode comes into play.
> 
> I remember a scene from last season when they were still living at the prison where one of the older boys tell Carl he should attend Carol's 'reading time' class. Cut to Carol reading to several kids sitting cross-legged around her. Someone (Carl perhaps?) is looking in on them. As soon as that person walks away Carol puts the book down and begins to instruct the kids on how to properly kill a zombie. -- Now that's a powerful moment of character development to me. We always knew Carol was the 'mother' type that wanted to protect all the kids, but now we see that she's taken it to giving them zombie killing lessons. Something I don't believe she'd been capable of if not for the death of her daughter. And ... it only took ~ 30 seconds to deliver that message.
> 
> ...


Maybe it wasn't character development per se, but I think it was an issue that was necessary to tie up the flapping loose end of Lizzie. The whole episode worked to bring out some of the "I can do what needs to be done" Carol and to get rid of a couple of kids. I am sorry they lost Mica - I think she could have grown up and maybe even eventually emulated Carol.

And HAPPY BIRTHDAY Blue!!!


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Peter000 said:


> In case I'm not clear, I have no problem with how they handled the situation in this episode.


Me either. It was the only choice, as terrible as it is. But I have no problem with Carol and Tyrese talking it out (apparently) either - in fact, I would have hoped that they agonized over it.


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

I wish the writers had made the choice to have Lizzie kill Judith instead of Micah (Mika?). Micah finally became a character in this episode, recognizing her own faults, but able to be tough when she needed to, trying to help her sister while seeing her sister's mental illness. I'd have liked to keep her character.

Having Lizzie kill Judith would have solved a lot of logistical baby problems. But then we'd have had to miss out on what will be the oh-so-touching reunion of Rick, Carl and Judith.


----------



## ozzman73 (Nov 27, 2006)

Great episode, brutal and yes, with character development. As someone said, Carol has come a long way since the beginning. 

In addition to the things that have been mentioned before, I think a significant issue is that Carol has become Judge/Jury/Executioner for the humans that threaten the survival of others. I'm not saying she wasn't justified in doing so. I'm not even saying she feels no remorse, because it was killing Lizzie that finally broke her secret and made her confess to Tyreese. But now with his forgiveness, I wouldn't be surprised if she continues down the slippery slope


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Zevida said:


> Having Lizzie kill Judith would have solved a lot of logistical baby problems. But then we'd have had to miss out on what will be the oh-so-touching reunion of Rick, Carl and Judith.


And why on Earth would they save Judith at the prison, only to kill her off-screen (from Rick's PoV) now?


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

betts4 said:


> Maybe it wasn't character development per se, but I think it was an issue that was necessary to tie up the *flapping loose end of Lizzie.* The whole episode worked to bring out some of the "I can do what needs to be done" Carol and to get rid of a couple of kids. I am sorry they lost Mica - I think she could have grown up and maybe even eventually emulated Carol.
> 
> And HAPPY BIRTHDAY Blue!!!


lol... that made me giggle.

Thanks Betts.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

I thought it was a good episode. I like the fact that they've split up the group and have delved into more in-depth character development. With everyone grouped together, most of the characters had taken a back seat to Rick and his problems. I expect they'll all get reunited at some point.

I have to admit that the scene where Carol confessed to Tyrese that she killed his girlfriend and he forgave her got me a little choked up. It also seemed pretty clear that Carol was having mixed feelings about her training of the kids. On one hand she taught them survival skills and on the other she taught them how to be brutal killers with no remorse.

My initial reaction at the end was the same as most of you, as in what happened to Judith? I surmised that she was on Tyreese's back in a papoose wrap. There were no indications that she was harmed at any time during the episode. I did find it strange that I don' recall hearing her cry during any previous episode. Carrying a baby around is surefire walker bait as they tend not to remain quiet for very long.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

mr.unnatural said:


> My initial reaction at the end was the same as most of you, as in what happened to Judith? I surmised that she was on Tyreese's back in a papoose wrap. There were no indications that she was harmed at any time during the episode. I did find it strange that I don' recall hearing her cry during any previous episode. Carrying a baby around is surefire walker bait as they tend not to remain quiet for very long.


I don't get all the "what happened to Judith?" questions. I never had a doubt she was alive and going with them - I didn't even think to say "gee that backpack thing is flat" or gosh where is she stored, I just knew it had to be somewhere.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

BlueMerle said:


> lol... that made me giggle.


That's what I get for posting while at work.


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

mr.unnatural said:


> I did find it strange that I don' recall hearing her cry during any previous episode. Carrying a baby around is surefire walker bait as they tend not to remain quiet for very long.


Lizzie almost suffocated Judith when she was crying the episode when Carol showed up.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

mr.unnatural said:


> ...It also seemed pretty clear that Carol was having mixed feelings about her training of the kids. On one hand she taught them survival skills and on the other _*she taught them how to be brutal killers with no remorse*_....


Which leads me to believe that Carol is as much to blame for Mica's death as Lizzie is...


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

The human population is decimated and we've been barely surviving in the world that's left. I've already gone well out of my way to try to help two kids and a baby. One of the kids just killed the other, an apparent escalation of her mental derangement that I've already seen evidence of and talked to her about. So what if she "comes back." She wasn't "already dying." She was alive. The girl killed her just for fun, just to prove herself right. She even threatens me, pointing a loaded gun at me.

If we had the facilities and people to monitor her and help her and treat her, there's possibly be an argument for devoting the effort to do so. But society isn't back to that level. And our little group is certainly incapable of doing anything like that, even short-term. She's toast. I'm not going to place myself in extra danger keeping her around, nor am I going to expose the baby to danger from her for the same reasons. I'm not gonna shed a tear, either. And I'm not going to waste any effort burying her. There's plenty of physical labor I need to be doing for the living before wasting it on the dead -- especially on someone who killed someone else for fun, "kid" or adult.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

Bierboy said:


> Which leads me to believe that Carol is as much to blame for Mica's death as Lizzie is...


Not even close. Teaching someone how to defend themselves --including how to kill, if necessary-- is one thing. Not having the capacity to distinguish between who, when, or why to kill is another thing altogether.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

I guess the thing that made me wonder for a second about 'where's Judith?' is that I am not at all used to seeing a baby just slung on someone's back like a backpack full of books or something. I figured one of them would be carrying her in their arms or something. Once I realized she was on his back I was fine. Just confused me for a second.



Zevida said:


> Having Lizzie kill Judith would have solved a lot of logistical baby problems. But then we'd have had to miss out on what will be the oh-so-touching reunion of Rick, Carl and Judith.


Oh my God, I can't even imagine Rick's reaction once there is a reunion if Carol shows up and he finds out that Judith was killed while 'under her care'!?!?!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

And let's face it...this is a show that showed us Judith's bloody baby car seat when it turned out she was still alive. If they wanted us to think there was even a possibility of her being dead this time, they would have shown us...something.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Bierboy said:


> Which leads me to believe that Carol is as much to blame for Mica's death as Lizzie is...


That's absurd enough to be almost trollish.
Lizzie was broken long before she even _met_ Carol.

ETA: I know you're not trolling 
Just find it an odd statement.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

I mentioned to my daughter that I thought they killed Lizzie and Mica partly so they did not have to deal with the obvious age changes in the actresses between seasons.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Dawghows said:


> Not even close. Teaching someone how to defend themselves --including how to kill, if necessary-- is one thing. Not having the capacity to distinguish between who, when, or why to kill is another thing altogether.


Road apples....she taught them how to brutally stab or shoot....and that's exactly what Lizzie did to Mica....

There's absolutely NO evidence Lizzie had killed or even attacked anyone prior to the ZA despite her bat-craziness. I'm saying Carol SHARES the blame...not that she IS to blame.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

MikeMar said:


> Yeah, even if you leave her by herself and she somehow survives long enough to hook up with any group of survivors, who's to say she doesn't kill a bunch of them for the same reason!


This is something I hadn't thought of. So much for my let her go into the woods plan. Sweet little girl walks up to a group--they take her in with no idea of needing to watch her. A new hoard of zombie friends is created.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Bierboy said:


> Road apples....she taught them how to brutally stab or shoot....and that's exactly what Lizzie did to Mica....
> 
> There's absolutely NO evidence Lizzie had killed or even attacked anyone prior to the ZA despite her bat-craziness. I'm saying Carol SHARES the blame...not that she IS to blame.


Her coping mechanisms (counting to three, look at the flowers) were already in place when her father died. 
Mica said she was "messed up" right after we first met them.

If she didn't have a knife she'd have found another way.

IMO in no way can this be blamed on Carol- not 50%, not 10%, not even 0.0001%.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Bierboy said:


> Road apples....she taught them how to brutally stab or shoot....and that's exactly what Lizzie did to Mica....
> 
> There's absolutely NO evidence Lizzie had killed or even attacked anyone prior to the ZA despite her bat-craziness. I'm saying Carol SHARES the blame...not that she IS to blame.


Why not blame her parents for teaching her how to cut her meat with a knife and putting the idea in her head that sharp things cut.

-smak


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Cearbhaill said:


> Her coping mechanisms (counting to three, look at the flowers) were already in place when her father died.
> Mica said she was "messed up" right after we first met them.
> 
> If she didn't have a knife she'd have found another way.
> ...


How many times would she be dead if Carol hadn't taught her these things?

-smak-


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

smak said:


> Why not blame her parents for teaching her how to cut her meat with a knife and putting the idea in her head that sharp things cut.
> 
> -smak


That has nothing to do with how Carol TAUGHT the kids (not just Lizzie and Mica) how to use weapons to kill. You're REALLY stretching...absolutely NO comparison to teaching a child how to SAFELY use a knife to cut food....


----------



## ozzman73 (Nov 27, 2006)

The only thing that Carol is to "blame" for is not recognizing that there was something mentally wrong with Lizzie. Particularly when Mica helped her sister to calm down. All the children were taught to use weapons for survival, not unlike any part of the world or time in US History when survival was a way of life. 

Take away the knife and gun from Lizzie and you still have a girl with noticeable psychosis (she said in this episode that she understands whay the walkers say) that fed rats and mice to the walkers. A girl that delighted in killing small animals, a girl that almost suffocated the baby and enjoyed. Without weapons she could strangle both her sister and the baby.

Carol had nothing to do with that.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Bierboy said:


> That has nothing to do with how Carol TAUGHT the kids (not just Lizzie and Mica) how to use weapons to kill. You're REALLY stretching...absolutely NO comparison to teaching a child how to SAFELY use a knife to cut food....


And I say knowing how to kill zombies, in whatever way is necessary, is as important in this world as knowing how to cut meat with a knife.

MORE important because just shooting a zombie, or just stabbing a zombie might not do the trick, when your normal world thinking thinks it would

-smak-


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

smak said:


> And I say knowing how to kill zombies, in whatever way is necessary, is as important in this world as knowing how to cut meat with a knife.
> 
> MORE important because just shooting a zombie, or just stabbing a zombie might not do the trick, when your normal world thinking thinks it would
> 
> -smak-


I don't disagree with anything you're saying here...I just don't get your statement about blaming Lizzie's parents for the death of Mica....


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Bierboy said:


> I don't disagree with anything you're saying here...I just don't get your statement about blaming Lizzie's parents for the death of Mica....


And we don't get your statement blaming Carol... or saying she shares in the blame.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

fwiw, I thought Carol was carrying the baby in her basket/bag


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

BlueMerle said:


> And we don't get your statement blaming Carol... or saying she shares in the blame.


Carol blames Carol...how much more do you need to understand?


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Bierboy said:


> Carol blames Carol...how much more do you need to understand?


But that's not what you said..... note the use of the first person pronoun 'me' in your statement. (emphasis mine)



Bierboy said:


> *Which leads me to believe that Carol is as much to blame for Mica's death as Lizzie is...*


And I'd challenge you to show me that Carol blames Carol.... she doesn't like it but she understood that it had to be done... as does everyone else.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Forget Carol! Lizzie would have and probably did get the idea just watching everybody else kill Zombies in and out of the prison. It's pretty clear she new that people turn into Zombies once they die well before Carol taught her about knives. It's also clear there were Zombie attacks on the town as well at the prison and she watched people deal with it. Lizzie would have done it sooner or later without Carol in the picture. It's pretty obvious everything Lizzie demonstrated was somewhat similar to young serial killers. 

They could not take her with them. Are they gonna stay up all night on watch or tie her up before they go to bed! It was pretty clear it was a more humane decision to off her right there rather then let her be eaten Sofia style which Carol would not let happen again.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Bierboy said:


> I don't disagree with anything you're saying here...I just don't get your statement about blaming Lizzie's parents for the death of Mica....


I didn't. I was saying in this world, teaching somebody how to kill a zombie, is as important as eating and breathing.

It's no different than teaching children any of the other things they will find necessary to know in life.

It can't possibly be anybody's fault for teaching them.

-smak-


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

smak said:


> I didn't. I was saying in this world, teaching somebody how to kill a zombie, is as important as eating and breathing.
> 
> It's no different than teaching children any of the other things they will find necessary to know in life.
> 
> ...


Clearly you won't let go of this....so I'm done.


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

cheesesteak said:


> Things usually deteriorate into arguing and name calling once an episode thread gets past the third page.


Look at that, it took until page 7 this time


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> Clearly you won't let go of this....so I'm done.


It's clearly your fault for inadequately communicating your position well enough for him to realize you're position is the Truth.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Okay, my question from all of this is - didn't Lizzie come from Woodberry and the Guv's place?

What was happening there or was it not until her dad died that things went really zonkers for her?


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

betts4 said:


> Okay, my question from all of this is - didn't Lizzie come from Woodberry and the Guv's place?
> 
> What was happening there or was it not until her dad died that things went really zonkers for her?


Yes they came from Woodbury but I don't recall any backstory from that time.
Someone really should have talked to Mika the first time she used the phrase "messed up" after they got to the prison.

More fodder- it has been pointed out that one of the paintings Michonne found in the house back an ep or two could be Lizzie?










This had the words "No, no, no" scrawled across the bottom (what Lizzie yells at Carol when Carol goes to kill the walker lady that Lizzie is playing with) and the girl in the painting has the same braid as Lizzie.
Plus, on the wall behind Michonne at that moment is a painting of flowers. 
So as Michonne is holding up the painting, Lizzie is "looking at the flowers."

Discuss


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Very cool! and I vote yes.


----------



## ozzman73 (Nov 27, 2006)

Another vote for yes. Carol must have painted that picture.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

ozzman73 said:


> Another vote for yes. Carol must have painted that picture.


Wrong. It's Carol's fault the picture got painted.


----------



## Fahtrim (Apr 12, 2004)

Bierboy said:


> Which leads me to believe that Carol is as much to blame for Mica's death as Lizzie is...


that's nonsense, Lizzie was nuts, end of story


----------



## Timbeau (May 31, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And let's face it...this is a show that showed us Judith's bloody baby car seat when it turned out she was still alive. If they wanted us to think there was even a possibility of her being dead this time, they would have shown us...something.


I agree they would have shown us something. It's too much of an emotional gold mine to just let it pass.

I was thinking the writers hid Judith to make us wonder if she was dead. I wouldn't be surprised to see the next episode start with a flashback of Lizzie or Carol or Tyreese or maybe a walker looming menacingly over Judith only to find it is a dream sequence.

I think too many people had the thought "Where's Judith?" for it not to be intentional.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Timbeau said:


> I think too many people had the thought "Where's Judith?" for it not to be intentional.


Nah, I just think it never occurred to them that anybody would think that. The show has a pretty extensive history of weird gaps between the writing and the production. This just seems to be another example, where the writers knew that Judith was safe and didn't bother to emphasize it, and the production team didn't do anything to make it explicit because it wasn't in the script.


----------



## Timbeau (May 31, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> Which leads me to believe that Carol is as much to blame for Mica's death as Lizzie is...


I agree that Carol may have inadvertently contributed to Lizzie killing Mika, but I wouldn't term it blame by any means. In Walking Dead World, knowing how to kill zombies is every bit as important as learning how to cut meat with a knife and assigning blame for teaching that is not realistic. Not every bad incident needs blame attached, sometimes innocuous events conspire to create bad incidents -- especially on TV.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

Anubys said:


> Wrong. It's Carol's fault the picture got painted.


:up:


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Zevida said:


> Lizzie almost suffocated Judith when she was crying the episode when Carol showed up.


And was about to kill her when Carol and Ty showed up in thus episode. That poor baby has been on the brink of death many times. If she grows up, she will be fierce.



Cearbhaill said:


> More fodder- it has been pointed out that one of the paintings Michonne found in the house back an ep or two could be Lizzie?
> 
> ...
> This had the words "No, no, no" scrawled across the bottom (what Lizzie yells at Carol when Carol goes to kill the walker lady that Lizzie is playing with) and the girl in the painting has the same braid as Lizzie.
> ...


This so makes sense. That entire segment was too freaky to not be tied into this.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> Nah, I just think it never occurred to them that anybody would think that. The show has a pretty extensive history of weird gaps between the writing and the production. This just seems to be another example, where the writers knew that Judith was safe and didn't bother to emphasize it, and the production team didn't do anything to make it explicit because it wasn't in the script.


This. I figured Judith was in that back pack and that Ty and Carol discussed killing Lizzie more than was shown.

They cover a lot of ground in each episode so a lot of details are omitted. Folks complained about all of the dialog at the Farm. It must be a challenge for them to hit the sweet spot with details and will never please everyone.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Nah, I just think it never occurred to them that anybody would think that. The show has a pretty extensive history of weird gaps between the writing and the production. This just seems to be another example, where the writers knew that Judith was safe and didn't bother to emphasize it, and the production team didn't do anything to make it explicit because it wasn't in the script.


In retrospect, I agree. It was only due to my own lack of attention that I did not notice the additional grave with the booties, early on, and only did so at the end. At that point I was like 'whaaaa? Did somebody kill the baby too?'. Of course, it didn't make sense. But it was brought to my attention that the bootie grave was there in the beginning and I had missed it.

So, long story long - Outside of a viewer just not catching the appropriate detail, there was probably no reason for them to think that anybody would wonder where the kid was.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Cearbhaill said:


> ... More fodder- it has been pointed out that one of the paintings Michonne found in the house back an ep or two could be Lizzie?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nice catch! Thanks for sharing that early Easter egg!


----------



## Mike Lang (Nov 17, 1999)




----------



## Timbeau (May 31, 2002)

Too funny!!


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

:up::up:


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

OMG! Lizzie Borden - best babysitter EVER ... assuming you don't like your kids much.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

So has anyone tried calling the number?


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

I think Tyreese and Carol knew Lizzie had to die as soon as they saw her with the bloody knife and wanting to kill Judith. The conversation between them later on was them trying to find SOME way of not having to go through with it. When the best they could come up with was one of them leaving, they realized there was no other choice. She had to be put down. Unlike some people here, Carol and Tyreese had some reservations about murdering a child, especially one that was so close to them.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

WhiskeyTango said:


> I think Tyreese and Carol knew Lizzie had to die as soon as they saw her with the bloody knife and wanting to kill Judith. The conversation between them later on was them trying to find SOME way of not having to go through with it. When the best they could come up with was one of them leaving, they realized there was no other choice. She had to be put down. Unlike some people here, Carol and Tyreese had some reservations about murdering a child, especially one that was so close to them.


Exactly.


----------



## brianric (Aug 29, 2002)

When Lizzie was told to keep looking at the flowers, did she comprehend that she was going to be killed?


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

brianric said:


> When Lizzie was told to keep looking at the flowers, did she comprehend that she was going to be killed?


I really don't think so - I think she was zeroed in on 'don't hate me because I pointed the gun at you'. I never did get the feeling that she thought she did anything wrong killing Mika, so the idea of Carol killing her never even crossed her mind. My take on it, anyway.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JLucPicard said:


> I really don't think so - I think she was zeroed in on 'don't hate me because I pointed the gun at you'. I never did get the feeling that she thought she did anything wrong killing Mika, so the idea of Carol killing her never even crossed her mind. My take on it, anyway.


Yeah, to her mind "Look at the flowers" just means "Calm down."


----------



## KyleLC (Feb 6, 2002)

I agree with both posts above.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

As do I.

Wow- a consensus on something


----------



## toddvj (Apr 22, 2004)

I would've shot her the moment I saw her playing around with that zombie. Or just watched to see what the zombie would do. It would be great to say I told you so right before she turns.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

toddvj said:


> I would've shot her the moment I saw her playing around with that zombie.


you're not the first one to suggest this and I find it to be a very odd comment. Up until that point - and as far as any adult knew - she was just a kid who still thought zombies were "people". How you can justify killing her because of that is an astounding claim.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Anubys said:


> you're not the first one to suggest this and I find it to be a very odd comment. Up until that point - and as far as any adult knew - she was just a kid who still thought zombies were "people". How you can justify killing her because of that is an astounding claim.


I don't recall anyone suggesting that she should be killed after playing with the zombie. (other than toddvj)

I know I wouldn't have until I saw her standing over her sisters body all bloody with a knife in her hand.


----------



## brianric (Aug 29, 2002)

BlueMerle said:


> I know I wouldn't have until I saw her standing over her sisters body all bloody with a knife in her hand.


That was the turning point for me.


----------



## toddvj (Apr 22, 2004)

But see, I would've prevented her sister's death. Now who has blood on their hands?


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

She would've died some other way. Everyone does.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

toddvj said:


> But see, I would've prevented her sister's death. Now who has blood on their hands?


Um, you do? For killing someone?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

dswallow said:


> I was saying "just shoot the kid now" since she was feeding the rodent to the walker at the railroad tracks. It was rather obvious where the whole episode was headed. And they took long enough. Considering they had to live with the kids for quite some time behaving like they were -- I'm rather shocked they lasted that long.





BlueMerle said:


> I don't recall anyone suggesting that she should be killed after playing with the zombie. (other than toddvj)
> 
> I know I wouldn't have until I saw her standing over her sisters body all bloody with a knife in her hand.


It was first mentioned in post #23 

Granted, it wasn't the one in the playground, but I think the one in the tracks might have been even earlier!


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Anubys said:


> It was first mentioned in post #23
> 
> Granted, it wasn't the one in the playground, but I think the one in the tracks might have been even earlier!


Oh.. that doesn't count. Everyone knows how Doug feels about children.


----------



## canonelan2 (May 11, 2001)

As I watched it last night I thought for sure that Carol was going to die. When she started walking with Lizzie right before she shot her, I expected Rick (or someone) to show up on the scene and all they would see is Carol shooting Lizzie. Then Rick would shoot Carol not understanding what was going on.

I liked the episode and was happy to watch the last three episodes which were 100% Rick free! Yahoo!


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

canonelan2 said:


> I liked the episode and was happy to watch the last three episodes which were 100% Rick free! Yahoo!


I don't mind Rick, it's Carl and Michonne I can't stand.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

If ever someone tells me to look at the flowers and then I hear a revolver cocking sound behind me, I'm not gonna keep looking at the flowers.

Just say'n...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

heySkippy said:


> If ever someone tells me to look at the flowers and then I hear a revolver cocking sound behind me, I'm not gonna keep looking at the flowers.


If she thinks zombies are friendly, there's no telling HOW she feels about guns...


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Spoilers are up for next episode.

Link contains spoilers.

Spoilers if you click.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

WHY !! LOL

Can we at least not discuss them, even vaguely.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Fine by me- just spreading the word


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

Watched it late this week. I'm assuming the theory that Lizzie killed Karen and David and Carol lied to cover for her is finally irrevocably dead and buried for all time? or are people still inexplicably clinging to it?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

smbaker said:


> I'm assuming the theory that Lizzie killed Karen and David and Carol lied to cover for her is finally irrevocably dead and buried for all time? or are people still inexplicably clinging to it?


Was Sun really sleeping with her language tutor on Lost?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

smbaker said:


> Watched it late this week. I'm assuming the theory that Lizzie killed Karen and David and Carol lied to cover for her is finally irrevocably dead and buried for all time? or are people still inexplicably clinging to it?


Does Bear Grylls sh!% in the woods?


----------



## Timbeau (May 31, 2002)

smbaker said:


> Watched it late this week. I'm assuming the theory that Lizzie killed Karen and David and Carol lied to cover for her is finally irrevocably dead and buried for all time? or are people still inexplicably clinging to it?


Carol obviously lied about it to keep at least a shred of Lizzie's reputation alive. You could tell by the way she didn't look quite sincere when she was "confessing". Mark my words, within the next couple of episodes there'll be a flashback showing what really happened.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

toddvj said:


> I would've shot her the moment I saw her playing around with that zombie. Or just watched to see what the zombie would do. It would be great to say I told you so right before she turns.


Might want to re-think the chronology; "just before she turns" she is dead, not really able to hear the "I told you so."


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Was Sun really sleeping with her language tutor on Lost?


You mean the gaunt one?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

wprager said:


> You mean the gaunt one?


No, the other one...the Goth.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I'm pretty sure they were both the same person.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

danterner said:


> I'm pretty sure they were both the same person.


Well, now you're just being silly.


----------

