# The Walking Dead "Strangers" 10/19/14 | Talking Dead 10/19/14



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Just started watching.


----------



## SoBelle0 (Jun 25, 2002)

Poor Bob! Why was he crying? 

Hope they can catch up to the hearse! (Wasn't it a hearse?)


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I think Bob was putting on a happy face to his girlfriend (I forget her name) but inside he apparently doesn't have any hope.

Curious what Gabriel did, maybe locked everyone out of the church to keep all the food while walkers got them all


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

Soooooo Bob really did get bit and he walked out to off himself?


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

My cousin's theory he posted on facebook, I'm not sold on it

Was Gabriel setting them up as bait for the Terminus guys?


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

Test said:


> Soooooo Bob really did get bit and he walked out to off himself?


That's what I was thinking. And now they're eating "bad meat".


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

Test said:


> Soooooo Bob really did get bit and he walked out to off himself?


That is what I thought.


gossamer88 said:


> That's what I was thinking. And now they're eating "bad meat".


 I wondered about that as well. Would it make them turn?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

MikeMar said:


> Was Gabriel setting them up as bait for the Terminus guys?


I doubt it...I think his "sin" was simply locking up the church and not letting people (including his wife) in.


Test said:


> Soooooo Bob really did get bit and he walked out to off himself?


Me too here, and with the bad meat too.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Like Rick, I didn't trust Gabriel from jump. Who continues to wear a collar under these circumstances?

Terminus is so much worse than Woodbury. I'd hate to viewed as a food source by other humans.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

MikeMar said:


> Was Gabriel setting them up as bait for the Terminus guys?


 I don't think Terminus had any idea about Gabriel, and vice versa. It's clear Gabriel locked his doors and wouldn't let anyone in, but I wonder if that's all it was.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> Me too here, and with the bad meat too.


 I definitely thought Bob had got bit, but now I'm not sure.

I'm also not sure about the "bad meat" thing. Remember everyone is already infected: if you get bit it just kills you because the walker bite is so dangerous (full of bacteria etc. which kills you quickly). I would imagine cooking on a fire would kill off at least some of that although maybe not all. That would be some poetic justice, for sure!!


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

Several questions for me from tonight, most happen to be about Bob.


When they were all sitting in the church being happy and eating and all, I couldn't help but think, at least with Daryl and Maggie, they don't even seem to portray that they give any thought to Beth anymore?

Then the Cadillac with the cross in the window shows up again!

After the food shelf scene, it sure seemed like Bob had gotten injured and was just hiding it - especially just before Sasha went to hold Judith. Count me among them who thought he had gone out to kill himself before he got the fever and all.

When Gareth was talking to Bob at the Bob-B-Q, he mentioned something about them being together before that made me ponder - was the Terminus group (likely pre-canabalism) one of the groups that Bob supposedly was a part of before he came upon Rick's group? I don't recall if all of his previous groups had been killed off or if he left them because of his alcohol problem or what. Or was he just referring to the events that spanned the end of season 4/beginning of season 5?

And who WOULD win a one-legged race between Bob and Herschel?  My money's on Herschel.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

I've never really been into the zombie lore or too interested in zombie shows/movies before, but I've become a big fan of _The Walking Dead_.

It kind of hit me tonight why that might be. This show does a really good job of keeping me just a bit on the edge the whole time. The story plays out but there's always that thought in the back of my head "What unexpected thing is going to happen now?" I think that realization might have really hit me as I was watching the scene with Bob in the woods waiting for him to pull the gun from his belt and off himself when BAM - he gets nailed from behind.

There's always that sense of tension or suspense pretty much the whole time I'm watching. I LOVE that!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Count me in with those who thought Bob got bit and went outside to kill himself before he became a danger to the group. 

Interesting thought from JLucPicard about Bob having been part of the Terminus group before. That wouldn't have occurred to me, but based on what Gareth was saying to him, it certainly fits.

About the theory that Gabriel locked people out of the church to keep the food for himself, I don't really see how one guy is going to prevent a group of people from getting into that building. And if people had tried, the exterior of the building would show more than just a few scratches.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Beryl said:


> Like Rick, I didn't trust Gabriel from jump. Who continues to wear a collar under these circumstances?


Agreed. That would have been the first thing I asked him, "Why are you still wearing that ridiculous outfit?"


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

Now that I've had a little time to ponder, I don't think Bob was part of that group before (even before they would have gotten to Terminus). If he had been part of that group before, I would imagine that would have come out somehow when Bob's group arrived at Terminus and those with him (from Rick's group) would have found out. After what went down there, they would have said something about it and he would have been treated differently, if not flat out ostracized from the group.

That's what I get for posting at 1:00 in the morning!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Something I didn't notice in the show but was pointed out during TD: The guy that was in the cabin with Tyreese last week, that we all assumed Tyreese had beaten to death, was among the people with Gareth at the Bob-B-Q, so it turns out Tyreese didn't kill him after all.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> I'm also not sure about the "bad meat" thing. Remember everyone is already infected: if you get bit it just kills you because the walker bite is so dangerous (full of bacteria etc. which kills you quickly). I would imagine cooking on a fire would kill off at least some of that although maybe not all. That would be some poetic justice, for sure!!


They've never really established the "rules" very firmly, but (pure speculation) I wonder if eating a zombie is like being bitten by a zombie, and if being bitten by a zombie begins the process of turning into a zombie enough that if somebody who's been bitten by a zombie gets eaten, it's the same effect as if the eater had been bitten by a zombie? If you know what I mean.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

I can't wait for Rick to fulfill his promise to Gareth.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

Bob got bit in the day and would have turned pretty quick. By the time they got back to the church it would have been over for him. I honestly thought Bob was going to off himself but only because he Terminus drove him over the edge. 

How did Bob not wake up while they cut his leg off?

Did Darrel tell Maggie about Beth? I just don't remember them ever having a conversation about Maggie's sister. 

Nice that Rick is on board and not trying to lead them on some crazy path.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

JLucPicard said:


> Several questions for me from tonight, most happen to be about Bob.
> 
> When they were all sitting in the church being happy and eating and all, I couldn't help but think, at least with Daryl and Maggie, they don't even seem to portray that they give any thought to Beth anymore?
> 
> ...


Slow golf clap for a fantastic post. The "Bob-B-Q" comment made me laugh out loud and I had to explain myself at work :up:

and the theories you put forth are excellent. Kudos, sir!

Here's my theory: Bob betrayed the group and was/is working with the termites (I love that name!). He is the one that put the X on the tree that the crazy black guy has been following. But those were put there by Bob for the Termites to follow.

fwiw, I also thought Bob was going to kill himself...And I found it amazing that preacher's wife managed to keep her glasses on this whole time!


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

I am a little bummed out that Gareth and friends are back. I thought the opening episode took care of him and we were on to something new.

Going from one big bad villain in the Governor to another big bad villain in Gareth...


----------



## KyleLC (Feb 6, 2002)

Anubys said:


> And I found it amazing that preacher's wife managed to keep her glasses on this whole time!


LOL


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I'm not sure that Bob was going outside to kill himself (I don't think he got bit or anything)

I think he's starting to lose it, and put on a happy face for his girlfriend (with that whole good/bad game they played). Just went outside to cry and try and gather himself (that and lose it)


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

There's definitely more going on there. Didn't Gareth say it was "ironic" that they caught Bob in particular, but it could have been any one of the group? Odd. Why ironic? And there sure are a lot of marks on the trees, but it seems unlikely to me that Bob could be carving all those marks without anyone noticing.

Regarding Beth, they had a montage after they met up last season (?) where they went over everyone's story, and Daryl told them about Beth disappearing.

Not to out JLuc, but "Bob-B-Q" is Chris Hardwick's joke from TD. After the long discussion we had about it, this week's TD was mostly boring (IMO) .


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

madscientist said:


> Not to out JLuc, but "Bob-B-Q" is Chris Hardwick's joke from TD. After the long discussion we had about it, this week's TD was mostly boring (IMO) .


 Hardwick also mentioned a "ka-Bob". Haha

Poor Bob.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

I enjoyed the episode, as well as this week's TD. 

I feel like a real dunce because I didn't catch on to Bob having probably been bit. I remember thinking about it at the time, when things were actually going down, and then it just flew right out of my pea brain. Now things make more sense. d'oh!

Some interesting theories here about relationships with the Gareth bunch. It's hard to imagine Bob being (or at least thinking he was) on their side, but stranger things happen. Certainly somebody is dropping a dime on the group, what with the tree markings.

All I really thought about the new guy was that he locked out everybody else to save himself, but I'd have to agree that there would realistically (if I can apply that kind of logic here) be more than little scratches on the building. I also wondered how the walker girl kept her glasses on this whole time. I guess it was purely for recognition.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Anubys said:


> ... I found it amazing that preacher's wife managed to keep her glasses on this whole time!





sharkster said:


> ... I also wondered how the walker girl kept her glasses on this whole time. I guess it was purely for recognition.


Yeah, the glasses were still on churchlady so we could connect the dots. I also noticed that.

All of their clothes should have fallen off (along with their skin) after spending 18 months in that water-logged basement.

Instead of their heads exploding in blood, I also noted that the SFX guys had their heads explode into milky goo.

With all the kissy time Bob was getting in I knew he would not be long for stayin' alive.

Gareth and Martin (cabin boy) seemed to have healed up pretty well from their respective shootings and beatings. How much time has passed between the destruction of Terminus and the sleepover at the church?

And how did preacherman Gabriel keep his clothes so clean and pressed for so long? I have no idea what dark secrets he is guarding. He seemed really scared of all the walkers he had seen.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

getreal said:


> How much time has passed between the destruction of Terminus and the sleepover at the church?


I thought the smoke we kept seeing in the background was terminus burning/smoldering


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

Another thing that struck me - Did anybody notice that it seemed like many of the walkers didn't keel over as soon as they were nailed in the head. It seemed like it was taking multiple head-strikes to get them down. Are they becoming more resistant to the head killing, or am I just imagining things?


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

JLucPicard said:


> When they were all sitting in the church being happy and eating and all, I couldn't help but think, at least with Daryl and Maggie, they don't even seem to portray that they give any thought to Beth anymore?


This was beginning to bug me as well. I am glad that

1. They finally mentioned her.
2. Daryl and Carol didn't hesitate to take off after them.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

I don't think anybody, except Tyreese and Carol, has mentioned Lizzie Borden and her sister either. But then I guess they were kind of secondary 'family' members anyway.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

They have mentioned that when walkers are not stimulated they go dormant. I could imagine those walkers in the basement could have been dormant for a long time and as a result keeping the glasses on is still a reasonable possibility.


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

In the first scene of last week's episode, as the group was improvising weapons in the train car, you heard Daryl tell the group that Beth was taken (alive) by the black car with the cross on the back.

I am also confused about seeing the "cabin boy" from last week's episode at the Bob-B-Q.
Tyrese definitely said he killed him (even while he screamed "I won't" as he beat him up).
Cabin boy didn't even look beat up.
Why would Tyrese lie about killing him? Didn't someone else from the group go into the cabin and look around?

I think the carvings on the trees are from whichever Termite is tracking the group from a distance. He is scouting ahead, staying undetected and then reporting back to the Terminus hunting party. I'd have to go back and watch S5E1, but I don't think the carving was there when Rick painted "NO" Sanctuary, but they made a point of showing the carving when Morgan came across the sign. If I'm right, the carving was made between Rick and Morgan's arrival at that sign.

I thought Bob was bit also and had walked outside to "terminate his threat."

I am very curious about Gabriel. You'd think at a rural church like that, his congregation would flock there when things started going south.


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

Also, I had to chuckle when they found Gabriel at the choice of actor. Tyrese, Bob and Gabriel are all played by regulars from The Wire.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

sharkster said:


> I don't think anybody, except Tyreese and Carol, has mentioned Lizzie Borden and her sister either. But then I guess they were kind of secondary 'family' members anyway.


There was a conversation between Carol and Tyrese in this episode where they agreed they would not tell the rest of the group about the girls. It was more Tyrese asking Carol not to talk about it because he wasn't ready to talk about it yet.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

MacThor said:


> In the first scene of last week's episode, as the group was improvising weapons in the train car, you heard Daryl tell the group that Beth was taken (alive) by the black car with the skull on the back.
> 
> I am also confused about seeing the "cabin boy" from last week's episode at the Bob-B-Q.
> Tyrese definitely said he killed him (even while he screamed "I won't" as he beat him up).
> ...


You mean cross on the back of the car, not skull, right?

Tyrese made a point of not letting people in the cabin and of telling them that there was nothing to see cause the guy was dead. I guess he couldn't do it and let him go but didn't want the others to know he was weak.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

Very dissapointed in Tyrese!


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

Anubys said:


> You mean cross on the back of the car, not skull, right?
> .


Yes - that's what I meant.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

madscientist said:


> Not to out JLuc, but "Bob-B-Q" is Chris Hardwick's joke from TD.


Yes - both the Bob-B-Q and one-legged race items were from _Talking Dead_. I didn't intend to make it seem like those were my own at all, but I didn't want to fall into another WD/TD rabbit hole by even mentioning where those came from.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

JLucPicard said:


> ....but I didn't want to fall into another WD/TD debate by even mentioning where those came from.


Pssst. Look at the thread title.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

Jstkiddn said:


> Pssst. Look at the thread title.


What the one with the unilateral decision


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

madscientist said:


> There's definitely more going on there. Didn't Gareth say it was "ironic" that they caught Bob in particular, but it could have been any one of the group? Odd. Why ironic?


No, he didn't.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

I don't think Bob was injured by a walker. I think mr positive about everything was just getting away to have a little breakdown in private so that he can release the negative and continue with his appearance of being positive.


----------



## 2004raptor (Dec 31, 2005)

I thought Gareth said something to the effect of "it's your fault" or "you started this". Maybe I'm not remembering it right.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

sharkster said:


> Another thing that struck me - Did anybody notice that it seemed like many of the walkers didn't keel over as soon as they were nailed in the head. It seemed like it was taking multiple head-strikes to get them down. Are they becoming more resistant to the head killing, or am I just imagining things?


The brain has to be destroyed in order to kill the Walkers. So if they get hit in the head and it doesn't crush the skull, then that's not going to make them keel over. Thus, some of the Walkers had to be hit in the head multiple times before their skulls caved in.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

sharkster said:


> I don't think anybody, except Tyreese and Carol, has mentioned Lizzie Borden and her sister either. But then I guess they were kind of secondary 'family' members anyway.


This because only Ty and Carol know that the girls made it out if the prison at all. The assumption could be that the current group were the only survivors since so many died at the prison and in that bus.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

2004raptor said:


> I thought Gareth said something to the effect of "it's your fault" or "you started this". Maybe I'm not remembering it right.


Gareth said: "...and it's almost kind of a cosmic justice that it had to be you. We would have done this to anybody."

And he knew Bob's name; for everyone else he avoided using names, like a farmer not naming the steers he's going to butcher.

Clearly Bob had some prior relationship with the Termites. Loving this season!


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

I think Bob's only prior relationship with the Termites is that he introduced himself, just like every other "guest" at Terminus.

Gareth is detail-oriented enough that he probably remembers everyone's name.


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

Weird scene - wife and I re-watched even - Daryl asks Carol if she wants him to carry one of those water jugs, and the jug he was carrying flies out of his hand. What was that about? Daryl just being clumsy?


----------



## KyleLC (Feb 6, 2002)

MacThor said:


> Weird scene - wife and I re-watched even - Daryl asks Carol if she wants him to carry one of those water jugs, and the jug he was carrying flies out of his hand. What was that about? Daryl just being clumsy?


I rewatched that, too. Maybe it was a blooper they decided to use.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

MacThor said:


> Weird scene - wife and I re-watched even - Daryl asks Carol if she wants him to carry one of those water jugs, and the jug he was carrying flies out of his hand. What was that about? Daryl just being clumsy?


Yeah....I do that move when I want my wife to bendover so I can smack dat @ss


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

ej42137 said:


> Gareth said: "...and it's almost kind of a cosmic justice that it had to be you. We would have done this to anybody."
> 
> And he knew Bob's name; for everyone else he avoided using names, like a farmer not naming the steers he's going to butcher.
> 
> Clearly Bob had some prior relationship with the Termites. Loving this season!


While you could be right I actually interpreted that as "you" meaning the group that Rick leads that escaped and caused all the trouble, not specifically Bob.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

ej42137 said:


> Gareth said: "...and it's almost kind of a cosmic justice that it had to be you. We would have done this to anybody."
> 
> And he knew Bob's name; for everyone else he avoided using names, like a farmer not naming the steers he's going to butcher.
> 
> Clearly Bob had some prior relationship with the Termites. Loving this season!


I don't think there's anything in Gareth's entire speech that makes it clear. If Bob knew them, he would have said something to the group. I think the only reason he emphasized "you" was to mean someone from the group that destroyed Terminus. It's cosmic justice that they found and captured someone from the group, not that they got Bob specifically. Bob didn't put them in this situation, the group did.



> I want to explain myself a little. You see we didn't want to hurt you... before. We didn't want to pull you away from your group or scare ya. These aren't things we want to do. They're things we gotta do. You and your people took away our home. That's fair play. Now we're out here like everybody else, trying to survive. And in order to do that we have to hunt. It didn't start that way... eating people. It evolved into that. We evolved. We had to. And now we've devolved into hunters.
> 
> I told you. I said it. Can't go back, Bob. I just hope you understand that nothing happening to you now is personal. Yeah, you put us in this situation and it is almost kind of a cosmic justice for it to be you, but we would have done this to anybody. We will, but at the end of the day no matter how much we hate all this ugly business, a man's gotta eat.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Remember in the previous episode when Rick wanted to kill the remaining Terminus people? The first person to respond was Bob, who said in an incredulous voice, "What?". I wonder if he is remembering that moment now as he ponders his missing leg...

Why oh why didn't I tell Rick, "Hell yes!"


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

MacThor said:


> I thought Bob was bit also and had walked outside to "terminate his threat."


Honestly, I thought he was out taking a leak.


----------



## jradosh (Jul 31, 2001)

I'm in the camp that Bob was going to off himself and got packed away for lunch instead.

Guy I know called him "Bobbq". Made me chuckle.

Irony is that he actually tastes better having been bitten.


----------



## billboard_NE (May 18, 2005)

I loved that Rick asked the good reverend the three questions. It was profound when he asked the third question "why". I thought it was irrelevant when the first two answers were "none". At first I did not think Rick was going to ask why, then when he did, I thought "brilliant".


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

scandia101 said:


> I don't think Bob was injured by a walker. I think mr positive about everything was just getting away to have a little breakdown in private so that he can release the negative and continue with his appearance of being positive.


I thought he was frustrated that his erectile dysfunction was about to be discovered. 



john4200 said:


> ... I wonder if he is remembering that moment now as he ponders his missing leg...


To be fair, his leg isn't actually "missing" in the sense that we know where it is.  But poor old Bob can't argue with Gareth as he doesn't have a leg to stand on.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

getreal said:


> But poor old Bob can't argue with Gareth as he doesn't have a leg to stand on.


Technically, he DOES have a leg to stand on. Or at least hop on.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Technically, he DOES have a leg to stand on. Or at least hop on.


Zoom! I was expecting someone to say that. Touché!


----------



## stinkbomb1020 (Jul 18, 2004)

Well I told my wife they were going to have a real Bob's burger but that's not as funny as Bob-B-Q!


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Cainebj said:


> I am a little bummed out that Gareth and friends are back. I thought the opening episode took care of him and we were on to something new.
> 
> Going from one big bad villain in the Governor to another big bad villain in Gareth...


I'm not thrilled about a longtime engagement of Gareth and Fine Young The Cannibals. There's something about cannibalism that's such a turn off to me that I won't be happy at all if Gareth and friends are the season long big bads.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> I'm not thrilled about a longtime engagement of Gareth and Fine Young The Cannibals. There's something about cannibalism that's such a turn off to me that I won't be happy at all if Gareth and friends are the season long big bads.


SO said that too.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

That was impressive butcher+medical skills. They frenched the bone and somehow prevented him from bleeding to death.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I know I've said it before.....but I just hate any cannabilism storyline. Mainly because we have been shown time and time again that there is abundant food STILL laying around.....making the leap to eating HUMANS is just too big for me to believe or grasp.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

pmyers said:


> I know I've said it before.....but I just hate any cannabilism storyline. Mainly because we have been shown time and time again that there is abundant food STILL laying around.....making the leap to eating HUMANS is just too big for me to believe or grasp.


But of all the animals, Humans are the easiest to trick and hunt. Hell, all you have to do is put up signs and they come to you!


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

pmyers said:


> I know I've said it before.....but I just hate any cannabilism storyline. Mainly because we have been shown time and time again that there is abundant food STILL laying around.....making the leap to eating HUMANS is just too big for me to believe or grasp.


It's not that abundant. People were starving and desperate last season.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Anubys said:


> But of all the animals, Humans are the easiest to trick and hunt. Hell, all you have to do is put up signs and they come to you!


Everyone is hunting animals, you gotta ZIG when others are ZAGGING


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> It's not that abundant. People were starving and desperate last season.


Yes, and when you have a substantial population (as at Terminus), you can bet that everything within scavenging range has long since been picked over.

Rick & Co. keep finding food because they keep moving. A permanent settlement, obviously, doesn't have that option.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

Anubys said:


> But of all the animals, Humans are the easiest to trick and hunt. Hell, all you have to do is put up signs and they come to you!


I laughed, but you do have a really good point.

All that being said, one would think since these people are wandering through rural georgia they could find some livestock, but I'm guessing we can assume that all the remaining farm animals were quickly killed off. Any animals that were in a commercial farming situation probably died early on due to lack of care from their human caregivers. (For instance, if the drapes don't come up and/or the fans don't come on at certain temperatures, an entire flock chickens in a commercial chicken house can die with hours.)

But none of that negates the fact that they could have lived vegetarian until they came up with a plan to go out and find some livestock.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yes, and when you have a substantial population (as at Terminus), you can bet that everything within scavenging range has long since been picked over.
> 
> Rick & Co. keep finding food because they keep moving. A permanent settlement, obviously, doesn't have that option.


I guess that's a fair statement. Their are some advantages to keeping on the move.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

pmyers said:


> I know I've said it before.....but I just hate any cannabilism storyline. Mainly because we have been shown time and time again that there is abundant food STILL laying around.....making the leap to eating HUMANS is just too big for me to believe or grasp.


I'm happy to accept it but I do agree with you. There was very little explanation offered as to why the Termites made the jump.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

JohnB1000 said:


> There was very little explanation offered as to why the Termites made the jump.


They teased us with some info in the season premiere, so I'm guessing at some point we'll get the rest of the story.

Plus, I think Gareth is simply just bat **** crazy.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

JohnB1000 said:


> While you could be right I actually interpreted that as "you" meaning the group that Rick leads that escaped and caused all the trouble, not specifically Bob.


While I agree this is likely the right interpretation, I can't help but feel like ti was directed at Bob specifically also. Enough that I rewatched the scene and I am still not entirely sure which is right. I think a case could be made for either.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

Jstkiddn said:


> They teased us with some info in the season premiere, so I'm guessing at some point we'll get the rest of the story.
> 
> Plus, I think Gareth is simply just bat **** crazy.


Well that info didn't really explain the switch to human leg BBQ did it (unless I missed something). It just showed them being treated badly. In some ways, for me, that made the leap to cannibalism even less clear.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Jstkiddn said:


> But none of that negates the fact that they could have lived vegetarian until they came up with a plan to go out and find some livestock.


Exactly my thinking throughout this series. There is no shortage of eatable plant life in Georgia. Along with medical books, I'd be looking for vegetarian information.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

So let's assume that Eugene is telling the truth and there is a massive underground science/survival area that is perfectly fine and can live for years and years and years in there.

I'm assuming there area TON of Walkers there, how the hell are you going to get in, and why would they let you in, wouldn't everyone be going there? Is it that secret?


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

If there is a huge underground area, and they got in there pretty early on, are they infected? Will they turn when they die? And did they know that before the first of them died of whatever and turned and started biting the rest? It would be a shame if the President and all his buddies are just walking around down there with no one to bite. But then if that happened early on, there would still be a lot of supplies uneaten down there.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I would guess that the hope is that Washington was able to keep/regain some control. That they "hunkered down" and then were able to control the city. Plus they might even have a "weapon" against the Walkers.


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

Jstkiddn said:


> I laughed, but you do have a really good point.
> 
> All that being said, one would think since these people are wandering through rural georgia they could find some livestock, but I'm guessing we can assume that all the remaining farm animals were quickly killed off. Any animals that were in a commercial farming situation probably died early on due to lack of care from their human caregivers. (For instance, if the drapes don't come up and/or the fans don't come on at certain temperatures, an entire flock chickens in a commercial chicken house can die with hours.)
> 
> But none of that negates the fact that they could have lived vegetarian until they came up with a plan to go out and find some livestock.


I don't think walkers care whether or not the food source is human or not - I remember them coming across walkers in the woods eating rabbits and deer. Plus, didn't the walkers eat Rick's ride when he checked into Atlanta?


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

pmyers said:


> Yeah....I do that move when I want my wife to bendover so I can smack dat @ss


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

Necromancer2006 said:


> I don't think walkers care whether or not the food source is human or not - I remember them coming across walkers in the woods eating rabbits and deer. Plus, didn't the walkers eat Rick's ride when he checked into Atlanta?


That's right. I forgot about that.

Nevermind.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

Jstkiddn said:


> But none of that negates the fact that they could have lived vegetarian until they came up with a plan to go out and find some livestock.


Without refrigeration and shipping that is much much harder to do. You don't get that many harvests per year, even in Georgia, and you have to eat in the meantime.

I've got a Satsuma tree in my yard. I get one harvest per year, usually between Thanksgiving and Christmas (depending upon weather). My good one died. I was getting 100+ fruit out of it. My replacement tree is 3 years old now, and I might get 10 this year, if I'm lucky. It'll take a while before that gets to where the old tree was, and even the old tree couldn't support me for a year.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

I don't know, maybe I'm not like everyone else. But if it's the zombie apocalypse, and viable food sources are very, very scarce.. and there are dead-but-not-turned humans around, I don't think I'd have any problem using them for a food source (along with some fava beans and a nice Chianti). 

Now I'm not saying I'd go around killing people for food, but if they just happened to be there, and already dead (or just died), why not if we're starving and there are no other readily available food sources? 

Who's with me?


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Hank said:


> Who's with me?


*crickets*
Vegans will survive the apocalypse. 
http://eatingmymoccasinsnow.blogspot.com/2009/04/autrey-mill-nature-preserve.html


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Beryl said:


> *crickets*
> Vegans will survive the apocalypse.
> http://eatingmymoccasinsnow.blogspot.com/2009/04/autrey-mill-nature-preserve.html


I wonder how those vegans feel that once they die they will turn into carnivores!

Now play nice!


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

Nathan Fillion is wondering what was up with Bob, too! 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/524674691278307330


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

I thought it was pretty clear Bob was saying goodbye before he got up. I thought at first it was kind of sloppy writing, that maybe the writers were having him say goodbye before they killed him, but then it became clear that he was saying goodbye because he was leaving.

I have to say they zoomed in on the tree after he was taken but I saw absolutely nothing on that tree. Why did they zoom in on the tree?


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

Because there was a blaze cut on the tree, similar to the one Morgan was looking at. There was another scene in this episode that focused on this same blaze. (I'm pretty sure you were never a Boy Scout.)


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

ej42137 said:


> Because there was a blaze cut on the tree. There was another scene that focused on that blaze, too.


Huh. I saw the X in the circle last week, but no blazes this week. I must be unobservant. When was the other scene?


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

It was just a line this week, but it was pretty clearly carved out of the tree (I saw it, so it couldn't have been too well hidden  )


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> They've never really established the "rules" very firmly, but (pure speculation) I wonder if eating a zombie is like being bitten by a zombie, and if being bitten by a zombie begins the process of turning into a zombie enough that if somebody who's been bitten by a zombie gets eaten, it's the same effect as if the eater had been bitten by a zombie? If you know what I mean.


It depends on whether or not the meat has been cooked to 160 degrees.


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

madscientist said:


> It was just a line this week, but it was pretty clearly carved out of the tree (I saw it, so it couldn't have been too well hidden  )


It wasn't just a line (the one on the tree Bob was leaning against). It looked like ¬.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

Ereth said:


> Huh. I saw the X in the circle last week, but no blazes this week. I must be unobservant. When was the other scene?


In the previews, Bob's girl stands next to a tree with a blaze; it was the same blaze on a different tree. (I see the tail on the ¬ as a natural split in the bark, not part of the carved line. I don't believe the termites are PL/I coders!)


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Line of the night -- "You taste better than we thought you would...."


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

So what's a blaze?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

cheesesteak said:


> So what's a blaze?


You didn't hear it right...that's not what he said! He distinctly said "to blave." And, as we all know, "to blave" means "to bluff," huh? ...


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

PennyD said:


> Bobs Burgers Crossover!


And the best line of the thread!


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

PennyD said:


> Bobs Burgers Crossover!





MikeMar said:


> And the best line of the thread!


Shouldn't Bobs Burgers have its own separate thread?


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

Necromancer2006 said:


> Shouldn't Bobs Burgers have its own separate thread?


Just be sure to keep it separate from the Talking Bobs Burgers thread.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

ej42137 said:


> In the previews, Bob's girl stands next to a tree with a blaze; it was the same blaze on a different tree. (I see the tail on the ¬ as a natural split in the bark, not part of the carved line. I don't believe the termites are PL/I coders!)


Ah, I don't watch previews, so I didn't see that. Thanks.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Ereth said:


> Ah, I don't watch previews, so I didn't see that. Thanks.


How come? They often remind me of important plot points that I totally forgot (and are relevant to what's going to happen). Is it because they are a spoiler for what is sure to come?


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Anubys said:


> How come? They often remind me of important plot points that I totally forgot (and are relevant to what's going to happen). Is it because they are a spoiler for what is sure to come?


I never watch preview, but I do sometimes like the previously on

The previously on reminds you of what you forgot and what's important. The previews are just mini-cliff hangers to get you to watch next week, I am already going to do that.

I like to go in FRESH


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

MikeMar said:


> I never watch preview, but I do sometimes like the previously on
> 
> The previously on reminds you of what you forgot and what's important. The previews are just mini-cliff hangers to get you to watch next week, I am already going to do that.
> 
> I like to go in FRESH


Oh...my question was about the previously on...not the preview of what's coming next week...sorry...carry on!


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

ej42137 said:


> In the previews, Bob's girl stands next to a tree with a blaze; it was the same blaze on a different tree. (I see the tail on the ¬ as a natural split in the bark, not part of the carved line. I don't believe the termites are PL/I coders!)


It didn't look natural to me. It was the same color and width as the horizontal line.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Anubys said:


> Oh...my question was about the previously on...not the preview of what's coming next week...sorry...carry on!


Now I'm confused, it was on the previously on right?

So we are all on the same page with some incorrect labels


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

I'm going to speculate on something said in the preview, so this is your fair warning to those who avoid previews, based solely on knowledge garnered from the current episode ...


Spoiler



We heard a woman say "We're being watched, and now three of us are gone."

This would lead us to think that the cannibals took three of them, but we know they have Bob and the group don't know where Darryl and Carol went, so that accounts for the three missing people.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

Interesting take on Talking Dead. Theory is that the slot should be used for original programming given the ratings for WD.

http://m.host.madison.com/daily-car...cle_ac80e3a0-599b-11e4-b6d0-432357125727.html


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

JohnB1000 said:


> Interesting take on Talking Dead. Theory is that the slot should be used for original programming given the ratings for WD.
> 
> http://m.host.madison.com/daily-car...cle_ac80e3a0-599b-11e4-b6d0-432357125727.html


Is 11 PM really a good time to try and put another show on?
I don't think so

(Thanks for posting that though)


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

JohnB1000 said:


> Interesting take on Talking Dead. Theory is that the slot should be used for original programming given the ratings for WD.
> 
> http://m.host.madison.com/daily-car...cle_ac80e3a0-599b-11e4-b6d0-432357125727.html


Obviously this writer had never followed original airings of "Breaking Bad", as evidenced by this quote:


> Can you imagine if "Breaking Bad" or "Mad Men" had something akin to "Talking Dead?" No one would like it, want it or watch it.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

MacThor said:


> Also, I had to chuckle when they found Gabriel at the choice of actor. Tyrese, Bob and Gabriel are all played by regulars from The Wire.


While I recognized Tyrese and Gabriel, I hadn't noticed until you mentioned it that Bob was also on the Wire. I'm guessing its a combination of aging and having hair that kept me from recognizing Deangelo Barksdale.


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

JohnB1000 said:


> Interesting take on Talking Dead. Theory is that the slot should be used for original programming given the ratings for WD.
> 
> http://m.host.madison.com/daily-car...cle_ac80e3a0-599b-11e4-b6d0-432357125727.html





> Again, this is a product of our time, and it only works for shows like The Walking Dead that have openly encouraged their fans on social media and through promotions. If HBO had started airing something like Talking Dead after The Sopranos or Six Feet Under, it would have been ludicrous. These shows were made for people to take their own meanings from and to appreciate on their own. Even among other AMC shows, The Walking Dead stands alone. Can you imagine if Breaking Bad or Mad Men had something akin to Talking Dead? No one would like it, want it or watch it. Yet for The Walking Deadwhich wants to be considered as seriously as its network counterpartsTalking Dead airs after it twice on Sunday nights.


I don't think the article's author has a solid grip on reality if they really believe that. Heck - LOST had multiple websites that would discuss every tiny detail about that evening's episode right after it aired - not to mention message boards like these that have threads dedicated to shows discussing what happened and what it meant or could mean.

The author is flat out completely wrong that people wouldn't have watched the hell out of a Breaking Bad live post-show breakdown. It can't or wouldn't work for all shows. Obviously, I don't believe it would work for a procedural kind of show, nor would it work for a reality show very well, but episodic television lends itself to this kind of show (Talking Dead) because fans can work details out right then and there.

I totally disagree with it hurting their prime time original programming at all.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

JETarpon said:


> It didn't look natural to me. It was the same color and width as the horizontal line.


Look closer. The horizontal line is a deep channel, clearly carved into the wood. The vertical line appears to be the same width and depth as the obviously natural groves immediately above and below it. And the color is different from the horizontal groove; it's more silvery without the brown of the horizontal. If it's meant to be part of the blaze, the vertical part is painted while the horizontal part is cut; I consider it more likely that the vertical line is just a trick of the light. But a different interpretation is certainly possible, and I doubt whether WD is ever going to clarify whether this particular blaze has a tail or not, unless we get to see this tree next episode in better light.

Boy, that was fun! I'm imagining everyone's eye's glazing over if they didn't just skip this post.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I am confused. Breaking Bad did have something akin to Talking Dead. At least during the last half of the last season. It was called Talking Bad.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> I am confused. Breaking Bad did have something akin to Talking Dead. At least during the last half of the last season. It was called Talking Bad.


And it was hosted by Chris Hardwick and taped on the same stage!


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

ej42137 said:


> Look closer. The horizontal line is a deep channel, clearly carved into the wood. The vertical line appears to be the same width and depth as the obviously natural groves immediately above and below it. And the color is different from the horizontal groove; it's more silvery without the brown of the horizontal. If it's meant to be part of the blaze, the vertical part is painted while the horizontal part is cut; I consider it more likely that the vertical line is just a trick of the light. But a different interpretation is certainly possible, and I doubt whether WD is ever going to clarify whether this particular blaze has a tail or not, unless we get to see this tree next episode in better light.
> 
> Boy, that was fun! I'm imagining everyone's eye's glazing over if they didn't just skip this post.


I did look closer. The verical line clearly looks man-made. It is clearly deeper and wider than the grooves above and below it, like the horizontal line. Also the color is clearly the same as the horizontal line.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> So what's a blaze?


2: a trail marker; especially : a mark made on a tree by chipping off a piece of the bark


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

JETarpon said:


> I did look closer. The verical line clearly looks man-made. It is clearly deeper and wider than the grooves above and below it, like the horizontal line. Also the color is clearly the same as the horizontal line.


Clearly we see different things when we look at this image. The picture I see on my TV screen has much more detail and color than the included screen capture; going by your image and not my own screen I would have agreed the lines are the same color. But wider and deeper than the continuations above and below? I just don't see that in either view. Maybe we'll get a better look next week.

So if it were to be a ¬ sign, do you have any theories as to what it might mean, contrasted with the orthodox cross we saw before and the simple line we see in the previews?


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> I am confused. Breaking Bad did have something akin to Talking Dead. At least during the last half of the last season. It was called Talking Bad.


And it was just as good if not better than TTD!! And I think a Talking (Six Feet) Under show would have worked really well too. Maybe not so much for Sopranos... But it's a new type of show that resonates with fans. I'd suspect we'll start to see more versions of this medium popping up elsewhere, but a lot of the magic is C Hardwick himself .


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

Chris Hardwick is the sole reason I don't watch TD.


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

ej42137 said:


> Clearly we see different things when we look at this image. The picture I see on my TV screen has much more detail and color than the included screen capture; going by your image and not my own screen I would have agreed the lines are the same color. But wider and deeper than the continuations above and below? I just don't see that in either view. Maybe we'll get a better look next week.
> 
> So if it were to be a ¬ sign, do you have any theories as to what it might mean, contrasted with the orthodox cross we saw before and the simple line we see in the previews?


That symbol means "not" or logical negation, in mathematical proofs.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

I was thinking "right turn ahead", which is one of the usual blazes you need to lay out a trail. If Gareth were a mathematician they might be using it to mean "stop here" or "turn back", or even "go the other way".

(Although I'm still taking the position that the tail a flat rut in the bark, you understand.)


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

Hank said:


> And it was just as good if not better than TTD!! And I think a Talking (Six Feet) Under show would have worked really well too. Maybe not so much for Sopranos... But it's a new type of show that resonates with fans. I'd suspect we'll start to see more versions of this medium popping up elsewhere, but a lot of the magic is C Hardwick himself .


They had some kind of similar show for _Naked and Afraid_ and it was abysmal! There certainly are shows that do not lend themselves to this kind of aftershow. And the host was most definitely NO Chris Hardwick!


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

getreal said:


> I'm going to speculate on something said in the preview, so this is your fair warning to those who avoid previews, based solely on knowledge garnered from the current episode ...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...





Spoiler



Darryl and Carol are numbers 2 and 3. They left without telling anyone. I saw it too and I wondered what they meant. I think that's the answer.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

JLucPicard said:


> They had some kind of similar show for _Naked and Afraid_ and it was abysmal! There certainly are shows that do not lend themselves to this kind of aftershow. And the host was most definitely NO Chris Hardwick!


I like Josh Wolf...though naked after dark (the tv show) is silly idea.

Y'all are overthinking the tree.


----------

