“The Walking Dead” is TV’s First Unisex Soap Opera

By | February 28, 2018

Cables two biggest soap operas are back this week with premieres for “The Walking Dead” and “UnReal.” Now before you scoff at the definition of TWD as a soap opera remember that zombie Godfather George A. Romero dissed “Dead” as a “soap opera with zombies.” And I might have to agree after watching the mid-season premiere—largely centered around Carl’s death and Morgan’s ever evolving “arc” which seems to exist around “kill people Morgan!” “No, don’t kill people Morgan!”

What are the hallmarks of a soap opera: simplistic characterizations, florid acting, melodramatic moral quandaries, repetitive plot-lines, slow pacing, and staying on the air too long. Oh joy, “The Walking Dead” has all those elements! Just check out Carl’s drawn-out death bed scene not-so-skillfully intercut with a separate plot-line, and the same conversation the characters have been having for years: “You don’t need to kill!” And then, of course, that decision almost always bites them in the ass. The plot-lines are moving so slowly this entire season has literally taken place over the course of one day. An epic battle worthy of it or a way to fill time and draw out the plot?

Oh well, like any hopeless soap opera watcher, I’ll keep grousing (and watching) for years to come, but I sure hope we’re closer to the end than the beginning. Grade for Premiere: Three Hankies…unless, like me, you don’t like Carl, and then probably just one. Also, this moment was handled staggeringly bad, with Carl pretty much using his last moments to unrealistically champion peace/chastize his father rather than make meaningful goodbyes.

2 thoughts on ““The Walking Dead” is TV’s First Unisex Soap Opera

  1. Matthias

    I don”t know about New Orleans, but here in the Sunshine State we too are inundated with those ads. (And remember, we have the very popular firm of Morgan and Morgan here.) I have always wondered if those ads that claim that the person “got me a gazillion dollars is somewhat false advertising. By that I mean that here, by the time the person says what they “got the small, tiny, barely visible print of actual costs associated with the lawsuit are off the screen. You simply cannot read the fine print. So while a jurr may have awarded a gazillion dollars, the person injured may have only gotten have a gazillion by the time the costs and fees and copying and per diem for coffee, etc are billed as well. Interestingly, (at least to me) Morgan and Morgan has fought against the disclosure of fees when advertising as well as in front of a jury but at the same time has ads that talk about how juries should know who would be paying the judgement. The practical result is that Morgan and Morgan want the jury to know the deep pockets of the payee of the judgement, but not the deep pockets where the money goes (theirs.) Finally, it would be interesting to see a study on whether mandated insurance has helped or hurt costs of driving for the average law abiding citizen as they are paying for the costs of uninsured motorists as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.