On Halloween of 2010, AMC premiered The Walking Dead, a post-apocalyptic (and therefore, dystopian) drama about a small group of survivors in a world of zombies originally based on a graphic novel. Now on its fourth season, The Walking Dead is the #1 most-watched drama TV series ever in basic cable history with 16.1 million viewers for the season four premier.
What makes this show better than the others? Zombies. Well-done, not-cheesy zombies. Err, walkers.
Besides the walkers, the show is just a drama - a close-knit group of people that experiences ups and downs together, focusing strongly on the characters' emotions, not just their actions. Plus walkers.
In an attempt to rise above the rest of the zombie subgenre, The Walking Dead never, ever uses the word 'zombie.' Instead, they call the undead 'walkers' or 'biters.' This new labeling allows the show to create their own spin because the audience's preconceived notions of 'zombies' are not applicable to 'walkers' or 'biters.' And the re-labeling helps. Now, people can become walkers without being bit - a new feature for walking dead.
While the first season deals primarily with the fall of humanity and the second season builds the characters' relationships with one another, the third season seriously increases the moral discussion so often accompanying dystopic stories - what defines humanity?
The ragtag main group, led by Rick Grimes, encounters a second seriously organized group of survivors in the third season. The resulting conflict between these groups forces the audience to ponder - if you were part of the group, what would you do? Is it ethical to kill another living human if their group and your group are fighting for the same resources? Should you align yourself with the other group merely because you have a common enemy? In the absence of government, what is the determining factor in your behavior? Do ethics even apply?
The fourth season, although only about halfway through, not only continues but advances season three's discussion: How far should a person go to protect those they love? Is murder ever ethical? The most common question this season (even asked by the characters themselves!) is, "Can you come back from this? How?"
Thus far, the fourth season's contemplation of right versus wrong in a world no longer organized by rules has only increased the show's literary merit. While the show does indeed have its faults (Rick floats between crazy and totally sane way too easily and way too much), its portrayal of human response to horrific de-humanizing experiences and a complete collapse of society is brilliant. My only fear (besides that my favorite will die) is that the show may over-villainize the Governor to the point that he will end up closer to a super-villain instead of a real human person who wasn't able to adjust to a dystopic society.
No comments:
Post a Comment