Companion Series to The Walking Dead. Set in Los Angeles, the series follows a male divorced teacher, a female guidance counselor, and her two children–a son and a daughter–in the zombie apocalypse. Summer 2015 link <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/unWdvWPmiPk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Robert Kirkman promises 'zero woods' on Fear the Walking Dead Walking Dead comic creator Robert Kirkman already told us about the main characters on Fear the Walking Dead and how they’ll differ from the ones on the original series. He also told us how the new program is set much earlier, in order to show us the outbreak as it happens. But there’s one other major difference between the two incarnations: where each one takes place. While the original Walking Dead began in Georgia and is now in Virginia, Fear will be set across the country in Los Angeles. “Los Angeles is such an interesting city in and of itself, just because of the vast melting pot of diversity that California has become,” says Kirkman. “The urban sprawl—it covers a tremendous amount of land, and it’s got an extremely dense population, so there are a lot of things about that that lend itself well to good storytelling in the zombie apocalypse. But also, this is a city where a vast number of people come to the city to reinvent themselves, or they’re new to the city for various different reasons. It’s almost a city of immigrants inside a country of immigrants. So there’s definitely some aspects of that we’ll also be playing with as well.” Does that more urban environment mean that Fear will eschew the filming in the woods that’s become so prominent on the original series? According to Kirkman, the answer is yes. “Yeah, we’ll definitely be spending a lot less time in the woods,” he says. “I can say I think we’re not in the woods at all. Yeah, I am pretty sure we are in zero woods this season.” You heard the man: zero woods! That big difference should help Fear forge its own separate identity when it launches in August, which will be necessary if AMC wants both zombie dramas to succeed and not infect viewers with walker overload. Now we’ll just have to wait and see how “street smart” these new zombies actually are.
The regular series is doing just enough to keep me watching, but I'm definitely not clamoring for more of this world. I really have no interest in this new series at all.
AMC is trying to milk The Walking Dead for all it's worth. Hence the show The Talking Dead. I for one am not on board for this new show. To much of something good can get bad fast.
I could probably search and figure it out, but since this is here... Is this the origin of the "zombieness" story I've heard about, or just more of the same with different characters in a different location? I'm interested in the telling of how it started, though it's not hard to guess how that would go, but more of the same from just another angle they could already be doing. In fact, I'm surprised the original series hasn't been more in the vein of a "slacker" plot already... they are too clingy with some of these folks. George R R R R Martin could teach them a thing or two.
It's both. You get the origin story.. but how long will that last, like one season max? After that, yeah, it's just different characters and different location.
I think it's a solid enough universe to sustain multiple stories. Life in the deep south during that kind of apocalypse would be drastically different from life in and around LA. If done right, it could be every bit as good.
So, some of you are saying you won't watch it at all then because it's just another story in the same world? Good for you. But, please don't clog up the discussion thread when it comes around with "I don't watch it because it's more of the same so I'm just here to complain about it even though I don't watch it never having even given it a chance" nonsense and leave us who do watch it to discuss. Thanks.
i'll watch. there are also a couple of shows on the link that look interesting. turn? and the making of the mob? any of them good?
I'll watch. Since there is no source material to draw from, I expect this iteration to be better than The Walking Dead. No b****ing about what change from the comics. The writers won't feel the need to change stuff for change sake either.
I've give it a watch, hoping for something closer to season 1 of WD, which I liked, than what WD has become....
Seriously? They kill off TONS of characters in TWD. In fact, I would say that no one is safe in TWD. In GoT, there is a handful of characters that are safe (I won't spoil it).
I almost always enjoy the origin story focus in apocalyptic settings. The buildup...the fear..the confusion....the "what the hell would I do?" When done right, that uncertainty makes for a compelling story. I'm hopeful this will be like that.
I guess maybe they do, if you count a bunch of less than red shirts.... maybe just not some that I think they should.... for a long time now.
Not sure what show you're watching. These guys got more screen time than most of the GOT actors: Spoiler Herschel, Lori, Beth, Andrea, Tyreese, Shane Then there are tons of characters that are in a dozen episodes only to get whacked.
You not liking a character and wanting them dead is not the same thing as the show not killing people off. Sophia Shane Lori Andrea Merle Tdogg Those were original cast members that were all killed and all were major characters except Sophia in terms of screen time. Milton The Governor Hershel Lilly Lizzie Beth Dawn Tyreese Noah Walking Dead has killed off more characters of note than GOT I would bet. GOT has the reputation because of the deaths of Ned and Robb Stark. Were all characters who became major characters in terms of screen time that have been given the axe. This doesn't count any of the ancillary or red shirts as you call.
Agreed, that's why I couldn't stand the movie adaptation, they should have just called it something else and let HBO or Showtime do a faithful adapation as a mini-series....
