User Avatar Image

TWD TV - That Season 3 ending...

posted by Phil_TWD on - last edited - Viewed by 1.6K users

I honestly was expecting the governor (Philip) to be killed but nope, Andrea, that kid, the crew who was with him pretty much were all dead because of him or his actions.

It was unsatisfying and this is Andrea's fault mainly, because if she had slit his throat while he was asleep only he would have died.

Oh yeah, since they were awaiting them at the prison they could've locked them down and shot them all like a bunch of walkers, and/or throw grenades to blow them up if they had any left.

100 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • How is it Andreas fault exactly? So she's responsible for not being a murderer? So basically you're saying that you should keep people just because of the possibility they might be raving sociopaths?

  • Season three was complete crap. 1 and 2 were okay.

  • @Noname215 said: I really don’t give a shit about anybody who died in this episode except for Milton. I didn’t care about what happens to Andrea after the end of Season 2.

    I felt a lot worse when Merle was killed. Not only that, even though Allan had a bigger (and less pointless) role in the comics, I didn’t give a shit about him, either.

    I will say this, though: Carl is probably going to turn into a Shane by half-way through Season 4.

    Ditto. Andrea was an irredeemable ditz, in my view. From shooting Daryl to her failure to Kill Phil.

    Hell, Merle the racist redneck was more likeable.

    @Noname215 said: How is it Andreas fault exactly? So she's responsible for not being a murderer? So basically you're saying that you should keep people just because of the possibility they might be raving sociopaths?

    It's not like the signs weren't there; how many people of good character and sound mental health do you know who keep human heads in fish tanks? Or force two brothers to fight to the death? She also had her former group tell them he killed one of them for grins and giggles, beat the piss out of another, along with her only friend for the past eight months tell her "yeah, he also sent a guy to kill me the day I left and he would've done the same to you".

    She doesn't even deny the guy's evil. She wanted to "save everyone" (the governor included) and it basically results in the death of every able-bodied fighting-age person in Woodbury. Sun Tzu warned us about that kind of mindset "He who tries to defend everything defends nothing".

  • @k1ngMe said: Season three was complete crap. 1 and 2 were okay.

    Wow really?
    I thought season 1 was awesome, but season 2 was really getting boring to me. A lot of my friends stopped watching The Walking Dead because of season 2. I stayed in there, and absolutely loved season 3.
    I think David Morrisey is an amazing actor, but I didn't like the governor. He annoyed the hell out of me. I know he's supposed to, but I kinda hoped he would die at the end of the season.

  • Am I the only one who doesn't like Carl?(as a character, not actor lol) He blames Rick for his mothers death, yet I still have no idea how it's Ricks fault. He acts all important and that he can do a lot, yet he caused a few deaths. He shot a kid that was handing his gun (wheat in the world was that kid even doing in the woods??) And he thinks he can make decisions on his own.

    A lot of people saying that he is just a kid and he saw a lot of bad things and his mother died and all, but srsly he's not the only one who lost his family/friends etc.. and why in the world would they give him the gun in the first place? Teach him how to use it is one thing, but allowing him to use it just like that is wrong.

    I'd be more happy if Carl would have died instead of Andrea. The only thing why I don't want him to die, is because I think Rick would really lose it..

    As for season ending.. I think it was a bit weak, bit shocking but weak. But that's just me.

  • There are some moments during season 2 where I was really fed up with Carl, but in season 3 I started to really like the character. Especially after the last episode... I was totally behind his decision.
    I do understand people disliking him though.

    As for the ending... yeah, it didn't have a cliffhanger like the other seasons, but I still thought it was a great episode. It felt more like a mid-season finale. They could have done better, I totally agree, but being a huge Walking Dead fan, I can't complain that much.

  • @k1ngMe said: Season three was complete crap. 1 and 2 were okay.


    I agree,it was really bad and hard to watch and spend 40 minutes watching.I invested in watching this series because of how well written it was,the finale episode summed up how bad season 3 was,and by the looks of things season 4 will be more of the same...

  • @JordyLicht said: There are some moments during season 2 where I was really fed up with Carl, but in season 3 I started to really like the character. Especially after the last episode... I was totally behind his decision.
    I do understand people disliking him though.

    As for the ending... yeah, it didn't have a cliffhanger like the other seasons, but I still thought it was a great episode. It felt more like a mid-season finale. They could have done better, I totally agree, but being a huge Walking Dead fan, I can't complain that much.

    Likewise. I tended to place blame for the way he was in Season 2 on his mother though; Lori just couldn't keep an eye on the kid.

    Carl definitely made the right call in shooting the kid. As I said in the other thread, the kid was told to drop his weapon and he didn't. It's one of the first things I was taught in basic, as long as somebody's armed, they're still a combatant. If somebody (particularly somebody that was just shooting at me or my buddies) has a weapon pointed anywhere even remotely in my general direction, I'm not taking chances.

    Hell, we even see how that scene with the kid could've gone like five minutes later, when the governor looks like he's about to surrender to Allen.

  • @Rommel49 said: Likewise. I tended to place blame for the way he was in Season 2 on his mother though; Lori just couldn't keep an eye on the kid.

    Carl definitely made the right call in shooting the kid. As I said in the other thread, the kid was told to drop his weapon and he didn't. It's one of the first things I was taught in basic, as long as somebody's armed, they're still a combatant. If somebody (particularly somebody that was just shooting at me or my buddies) has a weapon pointed anywhere even remotely in my general direction, I'm not taking chances.

    Hell, we even see how that scene with the kid could've gone like five minutes later, when the governor looks like he's about to surrender to Allen.

    I think you are wrong here. Yes, the kid was told to drop his weapon, but he didn't even had a chance to do so. If someone points a weapon at you, you don't just drop it. You do everything slowly, because as we know in situations like this you can't do any sudden moves. He was handing a shoutgun with one arm and there's no way a kid could shoot his weapon in any fast way.

    What is more, Hershel was the one who told the kid to drop his weapon and he was armed, therefore it was his call to shoot or not, not Carls.

    Yeah, I agree that Lori did a terrible job as a mother in season 2. Yet I feel that Rick has no control over Carl anymore, and that's bad.

  • I agree with Rommel here about shotgun kid. So long as someone is still holding on to their gun, they are a combatant. Carl's action would, in fact, be justified under international law in the real world which clearly states you can't harm someone only after they dropped their weapons. I'm not trying to get into a legal debate in a ZA scenario. The point I am trying to make is that such laws are in place because it's to prevent feign surrenders. There's a good practical reason to it.

    Shotgun kid was told to drop his weapon. And he had plenty of time of do so. Re-watch the scene again. He was given the chance to comply. He was even thinking straight enough to tell Hershel and Carl to take his shotty. He continued walking up "to hand over" his shotgun. That's just stupid and asking to be killed if he truly intended to surrender. Someone who actually wants to surrender--when you have a bunch of people aiming their weapons at you--would lay down their weapons on the ground as instructed.

    All that said, I'm not 100% sure that Carl was even thinking about all that. I think he simply wanted to kill someone. He was super pissed off before the battle started. Even Glenn said he's never seen Carl so pissed off before. At the same time, Carl could've just capped shotgun kid the moment he showed up. Any thoughts? Regardless, Carl killing shotgun kid may or may not be inspired by the right motivations, though it probably prevented shotgun kid from pulling off some stunt.

Add Comment