[fravel]

Originally Posted by schoy

This is what I don't get. In a city of close to 4 million people, why choose a measly 12 safezones? And it seemed that there were only like 30 people in this particular safezone. What's the point of creating these safezones if the other 3+ million people become zombies, surround the safezone and easily overrun the safezone? And then to have a protocol for the termination of the safezone residents if and when the safezone was going to be vacated by the government (which was going to happen eventually)? Am I missing something?

#1. Resources aren't infinite.

#2. Would you have preferred that the military just did nothing?

#3. Always have an exit strategy.

[schoy]

Originally Posted by fravel

#1. Resources aren't infinite.

#2. Would you have preferred that the military just did nothing?

#3. Always have an exit strategy.

I get all of that. However, it's a terribly inefficient use of resources on a plan that was designed to fail and ultimately end in the deaths of those you were protecting in the first place, i.e. 100% expected failure rate. Why create pockets of safezones in a dangerous location when it would be better for the populace to just be relocated? Since this safezone had, what, 30 people, it would have taken a couple of helicopters to move them to safety in a matter of hours, thereby safeguarding the lives of both the residents and the soldiers assigned to protect them.

I can understand irrational human behavior, particularly in a high-stress environment (see my posts above), so I'm less bothered by the stupidity exhibited by some of the characters (as compared to TXSTYLE, for instance). However, I have less patience for obvious plot holes or highly improbable plot situations.

[UncleWede]

So in that final scene with Travis and Maddie: anyone else seen "From here to eternity"?

[Templar]

Originally Posted by schoy

I get all of that. However, it's a terribly inefficient use of resources on a plan that was designed to fail and ultimately end in the deaths of those you were protecting in the first place, i.e. 100% expected failure rate. Why create pockets of safezones in a dangerous location when it would be better for the populace to just be relocated? Since this safezone had, what, 30 people, it would have taken a couple of helicopters to move them to safety in a matter of hours, thereby safeguarding the lives of both the residents and the soldiers assigned to protect them.

I can understand irrational human behavior, particularly in a high-stress environment (see my posts above), so I'm less bothered by the stupidity exhibited by some of the characters (as compared to TXSTYLE, for instance). However, I have less patience for obvious plot holes or highly improbable plot situations.

Highly improbable plot situations? Like maybe, I don't know, a zombie apocalypse? Come on... You're trying way too hard to nitpick the show. Just don't watch it if you don't like it. Pretty simple.

[larryn]

Surprised that Nick has been accidentally popped for looking far too much like a Walker. Clothes, hair, stumbly walk, always has blood on him....

The opening scene of the series with him, I thought they were making a Jim Morrison rock star scene - only to find out junkie unlikeable loser character.

[Nkc]

Enough with this POS show. The OG Walking Dead is back in action.

[Fundguy1]

Original is better.