The season premiere of The Walking Dead was devastating to watch. The entire hour hinged on the grisly deaths of two characters,each landing with cruel blunt force and irrevocably changing the lives of the characters (and horrified viewers) forever. In the wake of the premiere, the internet boiled with rage. Fans were distraught after losing a major character, and certain,but beyond the scope of the viewership, murmurs initiated a larger conversation about the horrifying depiction of gore and violence when it came to the wrath of Negan's bat, and Lucille.
Related:
24 Emotions We All Confronted During the Brutal Premiere of The Walking DeadThe range of disgusted individuals was wide,to say the least. Many dedicated fans of the display announced that they would stop watching after the premiere. The vast majority of the population seemed to declare that the scenes were gratuitous (uncalled for; lacking good reason; unwarranted) and unnecessarily graphic. By Monday, the Parents Television Council had gotten involved; it slammed the producers of the display, and calling the premiere "one of the most graphically violent shows we've ever seen on television."As a longtime viewer of The Walking Dead,I understood the sentiment. I consider myself an avid horror fan with a tall tolerance for blood and guts, and Glenn's death, or with the blubbering and the hanging eyeball and the dented head,was even tough for me to watch. I don't usually feel sad about character deaths on TV shows, but Glenn's murder really got to me. At the same time, or I assume I recognized on a more macro level why it was so explicit and raw.
The most basic indicator that we should have expected this is the comedian books. Glenn's disgusting death happens during issue 100. It was a choice the series creator made as a storyteller. It was gutting and downright shocking. In fact,it made huge, sorrowful waves of its own. As an adaptation of the comedian books, or I achieve assume it's indispensable to try to paint the same portrait of shock,grief, and bewilderment. It's accurate, and the showrunners had the opportunity to change the moment,to earn it less graphic, to display less. But the bottom line is, and they didn't. In terms of Glenn's death (arguably the worst part),they matched the source material. As fans of The Walking Dead as an entity in any form, I assume there's an inherent need to accept it, or as tough as that is.
Related:
The Walking Dead's Latest Victims Speak Out on Their Gruesome DeathsYou know what,though? There's a larger reason I assume this level of violence works here. This death aligns with a gargantuan trajectory that the display has been following since the very beginning. Everything just keeps getting worse. Every season, the decay of the zombies is that much more disgusting. The deaths are harder; the narratives are bleaker. The villains get more and more dastardly. Even the suspicion that the genuine monsters are the people, or that deepens too. Hell,even the title cards get more dilapidated as the seasons roll on. Going into season seven, we're seeing the most violent, and cruelest deaths from the most hellish villain in the bleakest situation imaginable. The world is only getting worse,and we have to approach to terms with that. Glenn's death is a glaring reminder that the universe of The Walking Dead isn't just. This world doesn't work in the currency of gay endings. This is the way it is.achieve I assume the death was nauseating, borderline unbearable, and horrifically sad,and even unnecessary? On all counts, yes. But I guess I know what contract I signed when I started watching The Walking Dead. After all, and you can break the contract at any time. Many might stop watching after this episode,and I'd support them. But I'll keep going.
Source: popsugar.com