Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Fear the Walking Dead - Season 1

Hotsauce

By Hotsauce,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

Hotsauce Explorer

Hotsauce

Posted
Posted

A new spin off of the WD is set to premier this Summer!

Summary:

What did the world look like as it was transforming into the horrifying apocalypse depicted in The Walking Dead? This summer, AMC will answer that question with Fear The Walking Dead, an all-new original series set in Los Angeles, following new characters as they face the beginning of the end of the world.

Starring Kim Dickens (Gone Girl, Sons of Anarchy), Cliff Curtis (Missing, Gang Related), Frank Dillane (Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince) and Alycia Debnam Carey (Into the Storm) and Executive Produced by Dave Erickson (Marco Polo, Sons of Anarchy), Robert Kirkman, Gale Anne Hurd, Greg Nicotero and David Alpert...

Website:

http://www.amctv.com/shows/fear-the-walking-dead

Trailers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Proudiddy Grand Master

Proudiddy

Posted
Posted

Didn't see your thread when I posted in the other one, but glad you posted it, as I think it deserves its own discussion...

Here's what I posted in the other thread about it:

Also, I'm creaming my pants over "Fear the Walking Dead." At the very least, it will give us a TWD holdover until next season... But the promo has me stoked! I really hoped they would eventually address how it all started, and I read that Kirkman himself said that he had an idea of what started it but that he didn't really have the desire to ever reveal it in the comics. So I was surprised that AMC stepped out and decided to do it. But as I said in my previous post, AMC/the TV writers have shown a clear desire to occasionally, and sometimes, drastically, depart from the comics... And I love it.

When one of my friends had initially resisted getting into TWD, he said he wasn't big into the zombie thing like me... I told him, first off, I'm not into the "zombie thing" per se, but more so, the human element of it... I often see parallels between their world and ours, but theirs is obviously much more extreme and dire... I like seeing what people do and the decisions they make, and the consequences that arise from it... And the big question, "if that was you, what would you do?" Would you run? Would you fight? Would you be brave or be a coward? My friend ended up marathon watching the first 4 season like I did, and was fully caught up going into this season, and now has his wife heavy into it too lol.

That human element and the actions/reactions of the characters are what I'm really looking forward to with FTWD. Also, I wonder if it is successful enough, will they eventually bring the characters together, as based on the promo, I'm assuming FTWD is set in L.A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Proudiddy Grand Master

Proudiddy

Posted
Posted

I've always said if it really happened, the first thing I would do is drive to the coast and get on a boat... Problem is, my wife and kids don't know how to swim, would still need weapons, as there would likely still be a huge problem with other survivors (pirates in that case), and I would quickly have to refresh myself on fishing and eating what you catch, as I haven't really done that whole process, EVER... LOL.

Okay, and with that, I have officially gone too far in "Nerdvana."

But, yeah, Montsta, Alcatraz would be ideal, but I imagine it would bring a lot of other people as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goondal Newbie

Goondal

Posted
Posted

I've always said if it really happened, the first thing I would do is drive to the coast and get on a boat... Problem is, my wife and kids don't know how to swim, would still need weapons, as there would likely still be a huge problem with other survivors (pirates in that case), and I would quickly have to refresh myself on fishing and eating what you catch, as I haven't really done that whole process, EVER... LOL.

Okay, and with that, I have officially gone too far in "Nerdvana."

But, yeah, Montsta, Alcatraz would be ideal, but I imagine it would bring a lot of other people as well.

I would be heading for the mountains, I figure the terrain would make it tougher on them and while I am not sure that cold would help, I am pretty sure it would not hurt
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jasonluckydog
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...