Will’s Unpopular Opinion – “The Show That Wouldn’t Die” – 4-6-16

Be warned. There will be spoilers.
On Sunday night, ‘The Walking Dead’ fans gathered around TV’s and computer screens alike, some on their phone, and others falsely logged into their parent’s or friend’s AMC accounts to bare witness to one of the most talked about upcoming events that have been anticipated for years. The death of Glen. For those of you who don’t know, (although I have no idea how that’d even be possible if you internet ever…) Glen was suppose to be the one beat to death by Negan (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) with his barbed bat of injustice, “Lucille”. (It’s how it went down in the comic book that the series is loosely based off of.) By teasing Glen’s demise multiple times earlier in the season, it helped perpetuate the rumor of a big payoff. The promise of a jaw dropping finale was almost an absolute, especially with the trending gossip that TWD show runner, Scott Gimple had possibly decided to change the ending by offing someone else instead. Finally the 90 minute finale was coming to a close, as Negan proceeded with his grandstanding and posturing for a full 15 minutes at the end of the show, as he prattled on and on about who his next victim would be. We then sat clench fist on the edge of our seats to see Gimple do his best David Chase impersonation as Negan seemingly bashed the brains in of a very unlucky camera-man on set. That’s right, the shot was from the victim’s POV and the audience got nothing. Just black. Some were shocked, some cried. I laughed…

The next day, Facebook and the inter-webs lit up like a another Meek/Drake battle broke out (y’know, something important…) and the world couldn’t stop talking about “that ending”. Phrases like “F**K this show!” and “We want reshoots!” littered posts all day. An online petition was formed to demand the identity of who exactly was killed, now, before the season premiere in October. This constant whining and moaning is typical of TWD fans, but this continual temperament seems to be even more pervasive now than it was before.  With the new Ghostbusters trailer receiving below average fan fare (it tanked) and ‘Batman vs Superman’ pitting fans and cinephiles against each other, almost mirroring the very movie its protecting/protesting, the current presence of fan outcries seem to be raising a very interesting question; are fans and movie goers alike entitled to get the movie/TV-show they want to see if they don’t like the one presented to them?

The key word here is “entitled”, as in “not worked for”. But maybe people are working for it? These days it feels like everyone is a “film maker” or “script writer” or “director”  or… “whatever”. People drop words like “nuance” and “narrative pacing” because they watched the behind the scenes DVD commentary on ‘The Godfather II’. They edit on their phones and post vines and are apart of a growing film culture now evermore then was ever possible before. So maybe fans and enthusiasts alike are entitled to a say whatever they want on the medium. After all, they live, breathe and support the craft everyday. However, as a budding film maker or adherent fan of a franchise (or both), people are still outsiders looking in. The public does not have a direct say. Studios only pay attention when audiences stop watching, stop buying, or stop talking about something. Filing a petition only adds fuel to their fire. It’s free press that studios can use to sell even more ads, build up more hype, and honestly continue on doing exactly what they’re doing. Maybe fans could have done it better. In an ever expanding art- form, everyone is a creator and a critic. Yet, at the end of the day, admirers and lookers-on don’t work for the studios, and it isn’t their piece of art or film. It’s someone else’s.

But does this mean that audiences alike shouldn’t have a say in what they pay money for? That’s the risk. A 5-star restaurant is only 5-stars because of reviews, but palettes vary. It may taste great to someone, and not to another. If you have the same meal at a restaurant you frequent weekly, and are then served a meal not to your liking, you have the right to criticize it. You generally don’t have the right to a new meal, and you definitely don’t have a say in how the chef should prepare said meal. It’s incumbent upon the restaurant owner to decide what you deserve (if anything), not you the patron. It’s not a law to receive restitution for your own perceived grievance. You don’t get to see how the sausage is made; you only get to eat it. Film is the same way. You are entitled to your opinion, and nothing more.

Being a fan of something creates a sense of ownership and pride for the watcher/user. It’s why we run out to buy t-shirts and hats, rally behind it, defend it, and show support for our teams or heroes or what have you. Nonetheless, this personal claim we take on creates an heir of entitlement; an almost privileged authorization to declare ourselves the decision makers of someone else’s property. Naturally, it’s a legitimate claim to take that stance on something that you feel so close to, but in the end, fans are not the decision makers. They can be if they chose to champion or ignore a franchise/series, but they don’t get to physically be on the field, or behind the camera, or over the writer’s shoulder. All they get to do is watch.

Maybe the zombies are a meta statement for the fans themselves: screaming, drooling, reaching for more, clamoring for a moment to champ at the bit; when they already know exactly what to expect. Rick and friends are the studio execs keeping the zombies/fans at bay as the crew tries to move on, but it’s the fans that keep everyone at a perpetual stand-still. The insatiable hunger for a show seen by so many as “mediocre” seems to do a marvelous job at tricking it’s viewers into biting off more than they can chew. Or maybe in almost ironic paradoxical way, the show itself is similar to the actual definition of a zombie. No matter when you think it could end, it doesn’t. It’s a perpetual predictable entity, rising from it’s grave over and over to hurt and inevitably disappoint you. The series meanders aimlessly, repeating itself in it’s attempt to move on and have some false sense of purpose. Just when you think it’s over, it lives on tormenting you; making you wish you had never gotten involved in the first place. Fans of the show seem to be glutens for torture and disenchantment, because if it’s one thing we’ve learned from this episode and so many before it, zombies don’t die, and neither does ‘The Walking Dead’.

-Will Valle

P.S.-
However, in an almost mockingly satirical fashion, I’d love to find out that this season’s finale was in fact the last episode of the series. The person killed was you, the viewer. After years of participating and taking the hits one at a time, you get to die as unceremoniously and suddenly as everyone else. You don’t get to continue on or see what’s next. Just is life, you die as everyone before you, unexpectedly and without remorse. You are the ultimate victim of your own indulgence. Everyone wants to talk about “making good, bold TV”. That would be bold, and as the days follow and you think more and more on the subject, it would hit you.. You’re dead….but maybe you’ll come back next season…. ;)