Advertisements

The Walking Dead: Here’s Not Here

TWD Locked Inside

I don’t know about you, but I get very wary any time The Walking Dead runs more than sixty minutes.  The typical episode is heavily padded to meet the usual runtime.  So any time the show runs long, you know you’re facing a lot of filler. Here’s Not Here gives the audience an hour and a half of Morgan’s backstory.  In theory, this should be interesting.  Morgan is a fan favorite character.  But in execution, the show delivered ninety minutes with absolutely no new story.  Everything that was revealed about Morgan’s transformation from crazy dude to Jedi knight, we pretty much knew already.

The episode is bookended with scenes of Morgan telling his tale to someone.  We find out at the end, that Morgan has a member of the Wolves locked in his basement.  Despite the fact that his prisoner has very calmly told Morgan that he will kill everyone in town including the children and the fact that he has a terminal zombie bite, Morgan refuses to kill him.  Let me repeat that the guy is going to die no matter what.  Even if he wasn’t a lunatic plotting to kill the town’s children, this guy has a terminal disease that will kill him in a matter of days anyway.  What’s the point of trying to rehabilitate him?  There is none.  Morgan is just terminally stupid.

Most of the episode’s runtime is devoted to flashbacks showing us exactly how Morgan got that way.  We pick up following the events of the season three episode Clear.  Morgan is a dangerous crazy person who kills zombies and humans indiscriminately.  We see him kill two humans who might be father and son.  Surprisingly given Morgan’s extraordinary precautions, he does not take steps to prevent his victims from coming back as zombies whom he will have to kill all over again.  Why on earth would he do such a thing?  Because the plot demands it.

Crazy Morgan comes across a cabin.  The sole resident of the cabin asks Morgan to drop his weapon and come in for some falafel.  When Morgan rejects the invitation to vegetarian lunch, he is easily disarmed and incapacitated by the cabin’s owner, a pacifist named Eastman.  Get it?  Eastman.  He practices Eastern philosophy and is also strong in the force.

We then spend about an hour with Morgan and Eastman.  The zen master places Morgan in a cage.  Morgan asks Eastman to kill him, but the gentle man feeds him instead.  Morgan plans his escape but apparently never once tries to push open the door.  It is later revealed that the door was never locked to begin with!  At one point, Eastman accuses Morgan of saying a bunch of horse shit, but nothing Morgan said compared to that steaming pile.

This is what passes for “deep” on The Walking Dead.  Morgan has made himself a prisoner, but he could have left at any time.  In fact, even after it is revealed that the cell isn’t locked, Morgan opts to continue living in his cage rather than bunking on Eastman’s couch.  Eventually, Morgan begins reading a book which Eastman has placed in his cell.  The Art of Peace does the trick.  Morgan emerges from his self-imposed prison so Eastman can Mr. Miyagi him.

I want to take a moment just to talk about the passage of time.  Time is always problematic on The Walking Dead.  So, no surprise that the timing of Morgan’s training is a bit of a stretch.  The show goes to great lengths to obscure how much time has passed since the beginning of the zombie apocalypse.  But generally, it seems to be about two years.  We know that at least nine months had passed by the time Judith was born in the prison.

Morgan’s story happens some time after the events of the episode Clear which was set when Rick was looking for weapons to prepare for an assault by the Governor.  So I think we can pretty safely assume that at least one year had passed.  This was pretty late in the show’s third season.  We next see Morgan on Rick’s trail in the season five premiere as Rick and the gang escape from Terminus.  How much time could have possibly passed between the Governor’s first assault on the prison and the escape from Terminus?  Maybe six months?  Surely not enough time to master akido.

As I’m watching the extra-long episode play out a series of kung fu cliches, my mind begins to wander.  I know something has to happen to Eastman because the dude isn’t around any more.  It wouldn’t make sense for Morgan to leave his peaceful sanctuary if his mentor was still among the living.  So I’m just counting down till Eastman’s passing.  Which comes along while Morgan and his teacher are burying zombies.

This Eastman fellow was really something.  Not only did he find time to bury zombies, he was also an akido master, a gardener, a cook, a philosopher and he had taken up cheese-making.  In the midst of a zombie apocalypse, Eastman is flourishing.  He gets more done before noon than I do all day.

But the episode needs him dead, so he dies stupidly as often happens on The Walking Dead.  When a zombie approaches, Eastman tells Morgan its his turn to deal with it.  But wouldn’t you know it?  Against all odds (these are seriously long odds we’re talking about) the zombie is one of the two people Morgan killed in his crazy days.  Morgan freezes and Eastman has to intervene.  We have seen Eastman dispatch quite a few zombies with about as much effort as swatting a fly.  But this one gets him because of reasons.

Over the course of the episode, Eastman confesses his sins.  He was once like Morgan.  In his pre-apocalypse days, he was evaluating an inmate who was pure evil.  When the inmate realized that Eastman recognized him for what he was, he attacked him.  Later, he escaped just to kill Eastman’s family.  Afterwards, he turned himself in.  So Eastman set about getting revenge.  He had the cell built in his cabin, scooped up the man who killed his family and then let him starve to death.  The act brought him no peace, so he prepared to turn himself in for his crimes.  But by then there was no one to turn himself in to.

The story establishes parallels between Morgan and his mentor.  But mostly, it serves to run down the clock.

The episode ends in the present with the reveal that Morgan has been telling his story to a member of the Wolves.  As he walks into town, he hear signs of commotion which seems to promise that maybe something will happen next week.  But I wouldn’t get my hopes up on that one.

Advertisements

Posted on November 2, 2015, in TV, Walking Dead and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 26 Comments.

  1. This is a better article about the ep than mine. Since the ep was mostly just an irrelevant aside, I dealt with it as one. I had questions about the timeline as well. Morgan didn’t seem to stay with Eastman very long. They were still getting to know one another when Eastman died. There’s a gap of many months between the end of season 3 and the beginning of season 4 and the story could easily fit in there but these are fall and winter months, whereas Morgan’s tale seemed to unfold in the warmer months.

    It seems incredible to me that Morgan would be reintroduced into the series just to be killed but a character suddenly getting a featured ep usually means the end is near. I’ll note that the series introduced a new black guy a few weeks ago on camera and without killing an established one, which has never happened in the entire run of TWD, and that the midseason finale is rapidly approaching.

    I was heartened to poke around some of the TWD message boards last night and see some viewers describing this as one of the worst eps of the run. Maybe there’s hope! I think the creators are going to wish they’d timed things better. Their faux-death-of-Glenn stunt was clearly meant to create a firestorm of interest; this probably wasn’t the ep they should have used as a follow-up.

    Like

    • I was shocked to read rave reviews for this episode on Vox and The AV Club. Couldn’t believe we watched the same episode.

      As I said in the comments section on your article, I love that you summed up the plot in a footnote. That’s all this episode was. A 90-minute footnote.

      I have to admit, it never crossed my mind they might kill Morgan. You’re correct that the signs are there, but I don’t think that’s where this is headed. They seem to want to set up a conflict between Rick and Morgan’s philosophy. I think that will take most of the season to play out. But like everyone who disagrees with Rick, Morgan will need to get in line or he will be killed off eventually. I completely missed that Heath’s arrival should signal the death of an existing black character per TWD protocol. Congratulations on not doing that, I guess.

      Like

      • I just went back and added an update to my piece that ended up being nearly as long as the original piece. I guess it’s still sort of a footnote. Gave you a proper shout-out there too.

        Your comment about “Morgan’s philosophy” set some gears turning in me. There really was no reason give nfor Morgan to have adopted Eastman’s “all life is precious” philosophy as his own. The writers didn’t even try to come up with a reason. That remains an arbitrary bit of characterization, TWD’s bread-and-butter. That’s the thread I followed and that led me to write the update.

        Like

  2. Commented over on JRiddle’s article as well. But Eastman is a rip from Kevin Eastman co-creator of the Ninja Turtle comics. And there was PLENTY of turtle references in the episode. They stopped just short of Eastman saying Cowabunga, dude.

    Like

  3. I thought it was an interesting episode, but I could live without it. It didn’t bore me as much as the previous bottle episodes about what The Governor had been doing since the last time we’d seen him (I hadn’t been wondering), but it didn’t seem essential to the narrative.
    I feel compelled to note, it seems as if you review “The Walking Dead” for no other reason except to hate on it. I don’t understand why you choose to review the show when you apparently don’t enjoy the show and review programs that you find more “worthy”.

    Like

    • I wish you didn’t feel compelled. Because you are making one of the weakest possible arguments imaginable. Rather than discus the merits of the show, you’re changing the subject to my personal preferences as a viewer. The implication is that only people who view the show as you do should be watching and writing about it. If the only people who write about a show are uncritical fans, you will wind up with nothing but effusive praise every episode. As I point out weekly, The Walking Dead is a deeply flawed show and those flaws should not be ignored. However, you are quite correct to point out that people have choices. If you want to read articles that blindly praise the show, the internet is loaded with them. My write-ups serve as a counter point to the majority fawning.

      But since you have asked the question, I will attempt an answer. I watch the show because I enjoy watching it. As a fan of both the genre and the source material, I want the show to be better than it is. There is potential there for a terrific TV show. A lot of the artists behind the show are doing great work. The Walking Dead is a beautiful TV show filled with expert craftsmanship. they are just being let down by shoddy writing.

      So that’s why I watch. I’m a fan, just not an uncritical one. As for why I do write-ups? Readers ask for them. I have stopped writing recaps for The Walking Dead before. Several times actually. Whenever I go more than a week without a write-up, someone asks me when they will start again. So I inevitably come back to TWD recaps. If readers didn’t want them, I would stop doing them. They are not among my most popular articles. So I really don’t have much incentive beyond keeping my readers happy. Also, they can be fun to write.

      In general, TV recaps aren’t big traffic drivers for the site. There are too many other places you can go to read them. So even though I would like to recap something like Supergirl (which is a fun show) my time is better spent on other types of articles. I’ll keep doing TWD recaps until the show gets canceled or readers stop asking for them. Whichever comes first. After that, who knows.

      Like

      • No, I don’t think only people who view it the same as I should comment on it. It only seems to me that your reviews are largely devoted to eviscerating it. Your comments have led me to believe that you hate it, and I wondered why you would watch it week in and week out if you think it’s dreck, I’m shocked to hear that you consider it beautiful and expertly crafted as that’s the first time I’ve actually read anything positive about it. I was not making an argument, I was only wondering, I’m sorry you found the comment o offensive. I READ the reviews because I am interested in your take, but the consistency of the negative commentary led me to wonder why you review it. I’m not a blogger, so I wasn’t aware that episode recaps were high traffic draws. I don’t read them that much usually. I can understand liking and not liking something simultaneously: I have no idea why I’m watching “American Horror Story: Hotel” when I’ve found this season’s content (anal rape with drillbit dildos, accurate re-enactments of the murders committed by Richard Ramirez and Jeffrey Dahmer) amoral and mean-spirited. It’s part of my routine, that’s all I can say, and I’m coming off of it slowly. But I’m still genuinely interested in TWD though I find these kinds of bottle episodes unnecessary distractions.
        BTW, did anyone not that John Carroll Lynch had two major television appearances in the past two weeks? Not long before this episode aired, he was John Wayne Gacy on AHS. It’s weird seeing him shift from that character to this one back to back. I still primarily associate him with Twisty the Clown.

        Like

        • I won’t say that I was offended by your comment. But comments of this nature are a pet peeve of mine. It’s the equivalent of the old “America: Love it or leave it”. When you make these kinds of comments, you’re rejecting all forms of criticism whether valid or not.

          I frequently hear this sort of thing from Disney World fans. I love Disney World, but I am highly critical of the choices that have been made for the last decade or so. The management has cut costs while raising prices to the point where the parks are both more crowded and expensive than ever before. But if you criticize Disney, certain fans will respond with “If you don’t like it, don’t go.” Which is just a way to silence an opinion they don’t agree with.

          In my experience, people who truly love something (be it a show, a theme park or whatever) tend to be the harshest critics. Casual fans can just love something without acknowledging its flaws. But real fans look at the object of their fandom so closely that the faults are inescapable. True fans want their favorite show (or whatever) to be as great as they know it can be. And when it falls short, they are vocal about the ways in which it could improve. If I didn’t care about The Walking Dead or Disney World or whatever other thing I may be complaining about that day, I just wouldn’t bother writing about it. You don’t hear me complaining about the latest Transformers or Ninja Turtles movie, because I have no interest in those things. But I do care about TWD. I probably care about more than a lot of self-professed fans who praise the show week after week regardless of the quality of the latest episode.

          Admittedly, write-ups are going to focus more on the short-comings. This is the sixth season and 61st Walking Dead article I have written. I’m not going to write “the make-up team continues doing stellar work” 61 times. Also the things the show excels out tend to be things that when done well fade into the background. There’s some very talented people working in props, costuming and location scouting. I bet their craft services is also quite good. But that stuff isn’t going to make the weekly recap.

          And let’s face facts, picking apart the more ridiculous aspects of each episode is at least half the fun of watching. How anyone could sit through this latest 90-minute footnote without their mind wandering is beyond me. When you’re bored, you tend to look for stuff like this.

          I do agree with you on AHS. It hasn’t been good in a long time, but this season is simply wretched. I’m watching, but it’s purely out of habit. I should drop it, but morbid curiosity keeps bringing me back. If it makes you feel better, TWD is a better show than AHS: Hotel. Or Scream Queens for that matter. It’s even better than Fear the Walking Dead. But I’ll take Supergirl over the whole bunch.

          Like

        • I have managed to rip myself away from American Horror Story this year. I gave the Freak Show last year a chance to win me back after the utterly terrible Coven season, and if you’d asked me after about four episodes I would have said they’d done the job. But the second half of that season very quickly ran out of good ideas and I finished the season off simply because I knew it would come to some sort of end. I’m done thinking the series is worth my time, though.

          Sometimes when I am criticizing something I love I have to remind myself to make a quick mention of one or two of the reasons I like or care about it. I find it personally helpful to achieve enough of a balance to make the reasons I care enough to criticize clear to myself. But that’s really just something I do for me, not for anybody else.

          Like

        • You are really not missing anything on AHS. As bad as Freak Show was, Hotel is worse.

          Balance is definitely a good thing to keep in mind. If this were my first article about TWD, I’d probably feel more of a need to point out the show’s high production values. I do mention it from time to time although I’m not sure when the last time was. After 61 articles, I feel like I should be able to take that as a given and focus on what differentiates one episode from another which. I run into the same issue on Disney World forums. I have been on WDWMagic for over a decade. By this point, I would assume it’s safe to say I am a fan. And yet, I get accused of being overly critical by people who have joined within the last year.

          Like

        • That sort of knee-jerk defensiveness about a favorite thing usually makes me pretty certain that the person in question has pretty limited experience with creating anything themselves…experience which typically includes a little bit of constructive criticism.

          Like

        • I don’t think I am defensive or having knee jerk reactions about criticisms of the show, and I wasn’t actually saying you shouldn’t watch it or review it. I was just genuinely perplexed. Your criticism is so brutal, I genuinely thought you hated it, so I didn’t understand why you would watch it or subject yourself to reviewing it if it’s genuinely unenjoyable, and that is all. I don’t think it’s an unreasonable inquiry. In some ways it comes off as though you hold TWD to a higher standard than other forms of entertainment- for instance, you seem to have a higher tolerance for films that I find ludicrously silly, like Scream. I would rather read recaps that give an actual opinion on the program than just neutrally report what happened, generally. I do like to hear what other people think.
          I do watch things just to rip on them for entertainment, but only things that I think are laughably bad or ostentatiously ludicrous, like “Blue Velvet” or “Suspiria”. Things I enjoy, I notice their flaws, but I don’t go out of my way to look for them, and if I enjoy it overall, I let the little things go. And flaws I don’t notice are flaws I don’t care about.
          AHS is a show that is so inconsistent that it really tests one’s ability to stick with the “let it go, it’s tv, what do you expect?” mantra. Characters behaviors and motivations are just so completely inconsistent and contradictory and the same character swings back and forth from evil to good to sympathetic to heinous and constantly act in ways that don’t make complete sense. It even frequently betrays it’s own logic. but i have been drawn into it anyway because it’s so unique and individual scenes and the majority of performances are so good, and it is in the least unpredictable. I loved ‘Coven’ even though so parts of it were admittedly stupid, but was deeply disappointed in the finale. ‘Asylum’ was a mess but so entertaining that I didn’t mind. ‘Freakshow’ had parts that were really good, and others that were pretty bad, but it also had an unsatisfying ending and was too lazy to bother resolving about a third of it’s story lines. And I had absolutely no tolerance for the anachronistic song numbers. I was wavering about watching ‘Hotel’ because I was concerned they were going to continue laying on the heavy camp thicker and thicker, but this season, that’s not really the problem. In fact, this seasons is downright unpleasant and joyless, in my opinion, and downright cruel in a way that previous seasons haven’t been. There’s no clear protagonist to root for here, and that’s part of the problem. The default protagonist would have to be the humorless John Lowe, but he’s not a character who’s any damn fun to spend time with. It’s also doesn’t have any love-to-hate-them villains who you can’t wait to see get theirs. Everyone is simply ambiguously evil without a decent explanation for what drives them. And while Lady Gaga is not outright awful for a completely unexperienced pop star actress- she’s probably doing better than Madonna in any given movie at least a little- she sure can’t fill Jessica Lange’s shoes as a charismatic protagonist. I like a couple of performances- I feel like Dennis O’Hare and Jessica Paulson are killing it. I’ll probably watch the next episode, but I don’t know what I’m still hanging around for. I hope this will be their last season- murphy needs to quit while he’s ahead.

          Like

        • That’s a great big block of text you have written, BC! I do think you are mischaracterizing the tone of my write-ups. I don’t consider them brutal at all. They aren’t necessarily 100% fair because I am cracking jokes. Yes, I am poking fun. But for me, that’s a sign of affection. Nothing brutal about a gentle ribbing.

          Here’s the thing. I don’t go out of my way to notice the flaws in TWD. They are painfully obvious to me. I don’t understand how other people don’t see them except for willfully ignoring the logical inconsistencies. Trust me, these articles are written with the minimum effort possible. I don’t even get to watch the show until my kids are asleep which usually means I am staying up late to finish it. Ideally, I’d like to write the article before bed, but lately I have been too tired to do so. 90 minute episodes don’t help on that front.

          I keep telling myself I should grab a notebook and take notes during the episode. But I never do. These articles are usually written the next morning in about 20 minutes with no notes or preparation other than having watched the episode one time. I’m not picking the show apart. The flaws I mention in the articles are the ones I still remember the next day. There’s usually more I could have included if I had actually made an effort to pick the episode apart.

          Obviously, we have very different tastes. When I hear “Blue Velvet” I think “masterpiece” not “laughably bad”. I’m not a big D’Argento fan, but I can see why people like Suspiria. I certainly wouldn’t hold those movies up for ridicule.

          Ironically, a lot of the criticisms you are making about American Horror Story also apply to TWD. This one in particular:

          Characters behaviors and motivations are just so completely inconsistent and contradictory and the same character swings back and forth from evil to good to sympathetic to heinous and constantly act in ways that don’t make complete sense. It even frequently betrays it’s own logic.

          Granted, it is probably more true of AHS. But TWD is extremely guilty of exactly this kind of writing.

          Like

        • I’m sorry brokencandy, I had moved on to a specific conversation about some Disney fans we’ve encountered and did not mean for my comments to apply to you.

          Like

        • We have Disney PTSD. It’s a thing.

          Like

    • No worries Daffy Stardust. And lebeau, sorry, I don’t think that TWD’s characters behave in wildly inconsistent ways that can’t be logically justified in some manner. You’ve explained why you think it’s so, particularly with Rick, but I just don’t agree. Lori and Andrea, I’ll concede, were poorly written, but not enough to drag the show down, in my opinion.
      Now, ‘Blue Velvet’ though…c’mon. I mean, I can see how some people would like it FOR it’s camp, but you can’t possibly be unaware of the over-the-top silliness of it. “He put his disease in me!” “Baby wants to fuck!” “Heineken? Fuck that shit! PABST BLUE RIBBON!” The whole thing’s completely bananas. And you can probably see why someone would hate Suspiria, too. Like, a like of a cohesive plot, the fact that none of it makes sense, characters that are written and then completely forgotten, details that serve no purpose, bad acting, terrible dialogue. It’s main strength is the surreal, dream like atmosphere, the great visuals, and the Goblins soundtrack, but it’s not an objectively good movie in terms of plot, scripting, direction, or performances. There’s an entire scene filmed over one of those extraneous character’s shoulder, and the back of his head covers two thirds of the screen. The lead actress does nothing but nod while he’s talking. Why on earth would any director wish to waste time with such a scene and shoot it in such a way? Those are legit complaints. Neither one of those films is in “The Room” or “Brown Bunny” territory, but I’d think you can imagine how someone would find them ridiculous.
      That’s kinda what I mean about your TWD reviews: you give a little leeway for ludicrous ridiculousness and irrational story lines in some things, but less forgiveness in much smaller problems in TWD.
      ‘Supergirl’ doesn’t interest me, but I’m sure it’s a fine show if you’re into superhero/comic book-y type things. I’m not. But I’m glad it exists, because tv needs more positive female protagonists who aren’t hypersexualized and whose stories aren’t about finding romance.

      Like

      • Of course Blue Velvet is completely bananas. That’s the point!

        As for Suspiria, not all movies are plot driven.

        Blue Velvet and Suspiria don’t violate their own internal logic. They take place in ridiculous worlds, so different rules apply. The Walking Dead, other than the existence of zombies, takes place in a world like our own. You’ll never hear me complain about the mechanics of the undead on this show unless they violate a previously established rule. Which they do from time to time. But time and space should still operate the same way on TWD as they do in the real world. So different standards are expected.

        Like

        • Suspiria couldn’t possibly violate it’s internal logic because it doesn’t have any logic, internal or external. Everything about it is illogical. Which isn’t the worst thing; it’s worst thing is that it’s boring, and it’s second worst thing is that none of the performances are worth a shit. I don’t think it should have even been a movie; it should have been an avant garde opera-ballet. Visuals, music, dancing- no dialogue, sketchy plot, minimal acting. Just a really violent Nutcracker Suite type thing.
          I don’t always mind illogical cinema. Have you seen “High Tension”? When you find out the “twist”, half of the actions you’ve witnessed throughout the movie don’t make sense. But I didn’t care much when all was said and done.
          The main thing that I harp on with TWD is when they find one method that successfully diverts zombies or protects them from them, they don’t ever do it again. Like covering yourself with zombie blood so you can pass through them undetected. Or why not just build a big ass trench around the perimeters of the settlement so they’ll fall in or lead them into a confined space and set fire to them? Because it’s important to always keep your characters in harm’s way, otherwise you’d kind of have a doomsday preppers type show about post-apocolyptic homesteading. So okay, you have put aside the logic that people would have adapted to their dangers and found long-term solutions to outsmarting mindless meat puppets.

          Like

      • “sorry, I don’t think that TWD’s characters behave in wildly inconsistent ways that can’t be logically justified in some manner.”

        That’s not an open question–they demonstrably behave in that manner. It feels like about a third of what I’ve ever written about TWD is devoted to documenting that very thing.

        “Now, ‘Blue Velvet’ though…c’mon. I mean, I can see how some people would like it FOR it’s camp, but you can’t possibly be unaware of the over-the-top silliness of it.”

        What shocks me is that you–or anyone, really–could possibly miss the fact that’s intentional. BLUE VELVET, like TWIN PEAKS and a lot of Lynch, is an intentional exaggeration of the very kind of rubbish show TWD plays entirely straight. It’s hilarious and grotesque and engrossing and brilliant.

        “And you can probably see why someone would hate Suspiria, too. Like, a like of a cohesive plot, the fact that none of it makes sense, characters that are written and then completely forgotten, details that serve no purpose, bad acting, terrible dialogue. It’s main strength is the surreal, dream like atmosphere, the great visuals, and the Goblins soundtrack, but it’s not an objectively good movie in terms of plot, scripting, direction, or performances… Those are legit complaints.”

        Euro-fantacists prefer “pure” cinematic narratives that become unmoored from reality and drift along like dreams–in the case of horror movies, nightmares. If that isn’t your cup of tea, that’s no skin off anyone’s nose–in holding such tastes, you join a huge majority of the Anglo-American audience. But a preference for the Anglo-American approach, which tends to prefer strong, clear narrative lines, is merely one of cultural chauvinism. There’s nothing “objective” about it.

        Like

  4. I don’t know what it says about me, but I actually quite enjoyed this episode. In particular I thoroughly enjoyed John Carrol Lynch’s performance as Eastman, he’s one of those character actors that I’ve seen in a million different things (Fargo, Zodiac, Face/Off, Volcano, etc.) and I thought he was superb here. His performance actually elevated the episode, for me, not something I often say by one actor’s performance, but since this was essentially a two-character dialogue-heavy piece Lynch’s work really made an impact here. It’s kind of funny because in 2007’s Zodiac (SPOILER ALERT) he actually plays a serial killer, and yet here his character is the victim of a serial killer.

    Like

    • I know him as Twisty the (killer) Clown and John Wayne Gacy on AHS, so seeing him play a good person is a bit of shock for me too.

      Like

    • What this episode had going for it was two talented actors. They were given next to nothing to work with, but lots of room in which to work. On Talking Dead, Lynch talked about how he was encouraged to deliver his lines slowly and savor the silences. He said that is very rare for television. I laughed to myself and said, “Yeah, John. They will do anything to stretch the running time. You could probably do a song and dance routine and they would leave it in.”

      The episode may have been ridiculous and essentially a footnote in Morgan’s story, but at least it wasn’t 90 minutes about Father Gabriel. Oh shit! I hope I didn’t just give TWD an idea!

      Like

      • If TWD does an hour episode on Gabriel, I will assume it happened because of you and serve you a very harshly-worded letter. I like you Lebeau. I like you a lot. But our friendship has limits. 😉

        Like

        • Lol.

          If they do a Father Gabriel episode, it probably means they are killing him off. Under those circumstances, I’ll take it. If they just do a flashback to him hiding in his church and it doesn’t end with him making a heroic sacrifice, you all have my apologies.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: