Lets get this out of the way: If you enjoyed the first season of AMCs surprise smash hit The Walking Dead, be assured that the show picks up right where it left off when it returns Sunday in all its cringe-making, nail-biting, gory glory.But many of you were also spooked by the horror show going on behind the scenes at AMC (no relation to the theater chain). That included the well-publicized slashing of Walking Deads budget and dispatching of the shows creator. Unfortunately, that backstage drama may not be working its way to a happy ending.Before we get to that, though, a review of Walking Deads first season and itll be quick, since the season was all of six episodes. Even by basic-cable standards that was a pretty timid episode order, and it suggested (as would later events) that AMC executives had no idea what they had on their hands. A nice little zombie show, yes, but not a ratings monster that would maul the competition.What makes the success of The Walking Dead all the more remarkable is that it followed a simple, even throwback television formula: Take instantly appealing characters, throw them into a parallel world of Cold War-era paranoia and then think of things to make everyone jump out of their seats. Rod Serling, were he with us today, surely would have doffed his hat to Frank Darabont, who took Robert Kirkmans popular graphic novels about the undead overrunning America and turned them into a frightfully good fable for our times. After all, theres nothing more Twilight Zone than a good, solid patriot, in this case sheriffs deputy Rick Grimes (Andrew Lincoln), waking up to a world where our worst collective nightmare has come true and being forced to do things that would, in saner times, have cost him his badge and his liberty. But Walking Dead is a modern TV serial, so it must have a love triangle, and this one crackles from the get-go. Rick is reunited with his wife, Lori (Sarah Wayne Callies), and son, Carl (Chandler Riggs), thanks to the protective actions of his partner Shane (Jon Bernthal). Unbeknownst to Rick, however, Lori hooked up with Shane after Shane convinced her (and himself, maybe) that Rick had perished in the zombie outbreak. Lori decides not only to keep the affair secret but to break it off. With Shane spurned, the world upside down and guns everywhere, the show takes sexual tension to a whole new plane.By seasons end, these four, plus a rough-and-tumble contingent of survivors, reach their destination in the Centers for Disease Control headquarters in Atlanta. Only then do they discover that the CDCs promise of a safe haven from the un-undead is but a mirage. Comparisons will, and should, be drawn between The Walking Dead and FXs American Horror Story. Though each show is highly entertaining in its own way and a bona fide hit for its network, American Horror seems to be trying harder perhaps too hard to scare its audience and to be some sort of pop-culture metaphor for our day.The best TV shows, though, usually turn into cultural mirrors by accident. Thats whats happening to AMCs other marquee dramas. Just in the past week, New America Foundation scholar Gregory Rodriguez floated the idea that Mad Men is so appealing because it takes us back to an era where theres still an authority figure to rebel against, an impulse being acted out in the tea party and Occupy Wall Street movements.And Adam Sternbergh likened chemistry teacher turned meth king Walt White, of Breaking Bad, to Bernie Madoff or one of the mortgage bundlers on Wall Street basically anyone who allows the temptation to be a kingpin to overwhelm and ultimately demolish his moral compass, he wrote on NYTimes.com.Its too soon to say if The Walking Dead will yield that much meaning to pundits and graduate students, but its timing is certainly good. The first show I thought of when I saw the Dead pilot was Jericho, a post-nuke thriller that aired for two seasons on CBS (and whose co-star Lennie James also had a part on The Walking Dead). But Jericho was a product of the post-9/11, friend-or-foe conspiracy school, not unlike Foxs Terra Nova. By contrast, the humans on The Walking Dead arent squaring off against other humans. And theres little doubt to Rick Grimes, or anyone else, who the enemy is. Its the slow-moving malcontent that wants them for dinner. Theres a dynamic in The Walking Dead of a world spinning out of control in super-slo-mo, with even the best people unable to do much more than be heroes to those around them. And that fits these times to a tee.As Season 2 begins, Rick and his ragtag remnant decide theyve had it with the traffic jams and wandering mutant hordes of Atlanta, so they strike out for the country of north Georgia. If youre thinking Deliverance, rest assured, so are the shows producers. Theyre also thinking of new ways to gross us out. The signature moment for blood-and-guts fans involves Sophia (Madison Lintz), who with her mother is in the care of the Grimes family. She goes running into the woods, and when Rick finds a zombie where Sophia used to be, he kills it (again). And when he uncovers fresh flesh on the creatures teeth well, lets just say he wants to be absolutely sure she didnt wind up inside.The Walking Dead shows every sign of continuing to be in capable hands, even though those hands no longer belong to Darabont, who created and ran the show its first season. He was fired in July and replaced by Glen Mazzara, a veteran of FXs The Shield.Darabont reportedly refused to make cuts to The Walking Deads budget, and its hard to blame him. After all, the show is bigger than Mad Men or Breaking Bad, with 6 million viewers tuning in for the finale and the largest 18- to 49-year-old audience (whom advertisers love) of any scripted cable show in history. And at $2.8 million per episode, its costs are lower than those other two.But as industry sage Joe Adalian noted this summer on New York magazines Vulture blog, the people running AMC are largely new to the world of big-money TV deals. And it seems they dont know how to handle their newfound success. After all, negotiations for future seasons of Mad Men earlier this year were also very public and also involved budget cuts. They dragged out so long that the show wont be back until March 2012. As for Breaking Bad, same story haggles over money with an unhappy ending: Another 16 episodes will be made and thats it. The network, it would seem, is killing off a multiple Emmy winner just as its hitting its stride.On the other hand, they promise to be 16 unforgettable hours of TV. How many shows can make that promise? And soon fortunes may be changing at AMC. There are persistent rumors that its parent company is being shopped to media companies with deeper pockets. So despite what youve read, cables newest prestige network isnt dead yet.

KansasCity.com

- Home
- News
- Sports
- Business
- Lifestyle
- Entertainment
- Opinion
- Star Sites
- Obits
- Place an Ad
- About Us
- Jobs
- Cars
- Homes
- Rentals
- Classifieds
- Local Shopping

Can the zombies of ‘The Walking Dead’ revive AMC?

Despite backstage upheaval, cable hit shambles back on air tonight.

By AARON BARNHART

The Kansas City Star

“The Walking Dead” airs at 8 p.m. Sundays on AMC. Season 2 will air for seven weeks, then return Feb. 12 for six more weeks.

More News

Let’s get this out of the way: If you enjoyed the first season of AMC’s surprise smash hit “The Walking Dead,” be assured that the show picks up right where it left off when it returns Sunday in all its cringe-making, nail-biting, gory glory.

But many of you were also spooked by the horror show going on behind the scenes at AMC (no relation to the theater chain). That included the well-publicized slashing of “Walking Dead’s” budget and dispatching of the show’s creator. Unfortunately, that backstage drama may not be working its way to a happy ending.

Before we get to that, though, a review of “Walking Dead’s” first season — and it’ll be quick, since the “season” was all of six episodes. Even by basic-cable standards that was a pretty timid episode order, and it suggested (as would later events) that AMC executives had no idea what they had on their hands. A nice little zombie show, yes, but not a ratings monster that would maul the competition.

What makes the success of “The Walking Dead” all the more remarkable is that it followed a simple, even throwback television formula: Take instantly appealing characters, throw them into a parallel world of Cold War-era paranoia and then think of things to make everyone jump out of their seats.

Rod Serling, were he with us today, surely would have doffed his hat to Frank Darabont, who took Robert Kirkman’s popular graphic novels about the undead overrunning America and turned them into a frightfully good fable for our times.

After all, there’s nothing more “Twilight Zone” than a good, solid patriot, in this case sheriff’s deputy Rick Grimes (Andrew Lincoln), waking up to a world where our worst collective nightmare has come true and being forced to do things that would, in saner times, have cost him his badge and his liberty.

But “Walking Dead” is a modern TV serial, so it must have a love triangle, and this one crackles from the get-go. Rick is reunited with his wife, Lori (Sarah Wayne Callies), and son, Carl (Chandler Riggs), thanks to the protective actions of his partner Shane (Jon Bernthal). Unbeknownst to Rick, however, Lori hooked up with Shane after Shane convinced her (and himself, maybe) that Rick had perished in the zombie outbreak.

Lori decides not only to keep the affair secret but to break it off. With Shane spurned, the world upside down and guns everywhere, the show takes sexual tension to a whole new plane.

By season’s end, these four, plus a rough-and-tumble contingent of survivors, reach their destination in the Centers for Disease Control headquarters in Atlanta. Only then do they discover that the CDC’s promise of a safe haven from the un-undead is but a mirage.

Comparisons will, and should, be drawn between “The Walking Dead” and FX’s “American Horror Story.” Though each show is highly entertaining in its own way and a bona fide hit for its network, “American Horror” seems to be trying harder — perhaps too hard — to scare its audience and to be some sort of pop-culture metaphor for our day.

The best TV shows, though, usually turn into cultural mirrors by accident. That’s what’s happening to AMC’s other marquee dramas. Just in the past week, New America Foundation scholar Gregory Rodriguez floated the idea that “Mad Men” is so appealing because it takes us back to an era where “there’s still an authority figure to rebel against,” an impulse being acted out in the tea party and Occupy Wall Street movements.

And Adam Sternbergh likened chemistry teacher turned meth king Walt White, of “Breaking Bad,” to Bernie Madoff or one of the mortgage bundlers on Wall Street — “basically anyone who allows the temptation to be a kingpin to overwhelm and ultimately demolish his moral compass,” he wrote on NYTimes.com.

It’s too soon to say if “The Walking Dead” will yield that much meaning to pundits and graduate students, but its timing is certainly good. The first show I thought of when I saw the “Dead” pilot was “Jericho,” a post-nuke thriller that aired for two seasons on CBS (and whose co-star Lennie James also had a part on “The Walking Dead”). But “Jericho” was a product of the post-9/11, friend-or-foe conspiracy school, not unlike Fox’s “Terra Nova.”

By contrast, the humans on “The Walking Dead” aren’t squaring off against other humans. And there’s little doubt to Rick Grimes, or anyone else, who the enemy is. It’s the slow-moving malcontent that wants them for dinner.

There’s a dynamic in “The Walking Dead” of a world spinning out of control in super-slo-mo, with even the best people unable to do much more than be heroes to those around them. And that fits these times to a tee.

As Season 2 begins, Rick and his ragtag remnant decide they’ve had it with the traffic jams and wandering mutant hordes of Atlanta, so they strike out for the country of north Georgia. If you’re thinking “Deliverance,” rest assured, so are the show’s producers. They’re also thinking of new ways to gross us out.

The signature moment for blood-and-guts fans involves Sophia (Madison Lintz), who with her mother is in the care of the Grimes family. She goes running into the woods, and when Rick finds a zombie where Sophia used to be, he kills it (again). And when he uncovers fresh flesh on the creature’s teeth … well, let’s just say he wants to be absolutely sure she didn’t wind up inside.

“The Walking Dead” shows every sign of continuing to be in capable hands, even though those hands no longer belong to Darabont, who created and ran the show its first season. He was fired in July and replaced by Glen Mazzara, a veteran of FX’s “The Shield.”

Darabont reportedly refused to make cuts to “The Walking Dead’s” budget, and it’s hard to blame him. After all, the show is bigger than “Mad Men” or “Breaking Bad,” with 6 million viewers tuning in for the finale and the largest 18- to 49-year-old audience (whom advertisers love) of any scripted cable show in history. And at $2.8 million per episode, its costs are lower than those other two.

But as industry sage Joe Adalian noted this summer on New York magazine’s Vulture blog, the people running AMC are “largely new to the world of big-money TV deals.” And it seems they don’t know how to handle their newfound success.

After all, negotiations for future seasons of “Mad Men” earlier this year were also very public and also involved budget cuts. They dragged out so long that the show won’t be back until March 2012.

As for “Breaking Bad,” same story — haggles over money — with an unhappy ending: Another 16 episodes will be made and that’s it. The network, it would seem, is killing off a multiple Emmy winner just as it’s hitting its stride.

On the other hand, they promise to be 16 unforgettable hours of TV. How many shows can make that promise?

And soon fortunes may be changing at AMC. There are persistent rumors that its parent company is being shopped to media companies with deeper pockets. So despite what you’ve read, cable’s newest prestige network isn’t dead yet.