PDA

View Full Version : Things you DON'T want to see in 'The Walking Dead'...



shootemindehead
01-Sep-2010, 09:25 PM
...that was in the original source material.

Right...there's been a lot of yap ( :D ) about how the series is going to stay true to the source an yadda, yadda, yadda...

...BUT. There are some things in 'The Walking Dead' that I would personally drop from the onscreen version, if I had my way.


THIS THREAD WILL HAVE SPOILERS, SO BUGGER OFF OF THAT'S A PROBLEM!!!


1. Zombies chowing down on horses. Don't like the whole "other food source" angle. I know some people don't care, but it don't sit well with me. "Can't find a human? ah fuck it...hey look, there's a cow...there's another! To hell with the humans."

"Ugh, can't move now...I'm stuffed."

2. Zombies eating deer meat. Like the above, how did he catch it in the first place? It could have been crippled earlier I s'pose...but...mmmmmmm.

3. If I recall correctly, human characters at one point disguised themselves by "stinking themselves up" like zombies. They were then able to walk among the living dead without being attacked. Until the rain came that is and washed the smell off.


Now, out of the three points above, I think the 3rd is the most ridiculous and was a REALLY bad move on behalf of Kirkman. He didn't repeat the event thank god. He probably realised himself that it was a bit hokey. Ever smell damp clothes? Smells don't "wash off" that well in rain. Clothes will still stink. More so in some cases. Also, it implies that the living dead have great olfactory senses and can distinguish a non-dead smelling human amongst loads of dead smelling humans...which is of course, silly.

In any case, it was just a very bad bit of writing, in an otherwise excellent stretch and somewhat forgivable because it was the early days of the comic. However, such scenes do set a precedent of sorts and it's not clever to do. Kirkman seems to have quietly dropped that angle in later issues.

Anyway, is there other stuff that you don't think should travel from the comic to the series?

ShadowMan
01-Sep-2010, 10:31 PM
Oh, I don't know. Although what you're saying is undoubtedly rooted in the laws of the Romero universe, this is a different show with different rules all its own. I know they are using Romero's original NOTLD as inspiration, but remember, it's NOT Romero, so to veer slightly away from what Romero did is kinda refreshing to me. They're still staying very close to the original zombie lore. Heck, even Romero is changing some things by shaking up some of his own laws in his own "universe" by having the dead eat a horse in Survival. I, for one, am glad to be surprised a little by seeing slightly different aspects of a zombie apocalypse from a new and fresh angle while sticking closely to the basic roots. It makes me wonder "what's next"? Times change, people change, to fit the times and to keep new ideas on the table to save the genre from growing too stagnant. Just my take on it.:skull:

AcesandEights
01-Sep-2010, 11:18 PM
Mmmmm, creating a self-fulfilling death spiral of prognostagitive negativity, eh?

Okay, aliens. That's the one thing I don't want to see.

Danny
01-Sep-2010, 11:28 PM
Mmmmm, creating a self-fulfilling death spiral of prognostagitive negativity, eh?

Okay, aliens. That's the one thing I don't want to see.

Not read issue 75 yet?:p

Dr Tongue
02-Sep-2010, 03:03 AM
...that was in the original source material.

Right...there's been a lot of yap ( :D ) about how the series is going to stay true to the source an yadda, yadda, yadda...

...BUT. There are some things in 'The Walking Dead' that I would personally drop from the onscreen version, if I had my way.


THIS THREAD WILL HAVE SPOILERS, SO BUGGER OFF OF THAT'S A PROBLEM!!!


1. Zombies chowing down on horses. Don't like the whole "other food source" angle. I know some people don't care, but it don't sit well with me. "Can't find a human? ah fuck it...hey look, there's a cow...there's another! To hell with the humans."

"Ugh, can't move now...I'm stuffed."

2. Zombies eating deer meat. Like the above, how did he catch it in the first place? It could have been crippled earlier I s'pose...but...mmmmmmm.

3. If I recall correctly, human characters at one point disguised themselves by "stinking themselves up" like zombies. They were then able to walk among the living dead without being attacked. Until the rain came that is and washed the smell off.


Now, out of the three points above, I think the 3rd is the most ridiculous and was a REALLY bad move on behalf of Kirkman. He didn't repeat the event thank god. He probably realised himself that it was a bit hokey. Ever smell damp clothes? Smells don't "wash off" that well in rain. Clothes will still stink. More so in some cases. Also, it implies that the living dead have great olfactory senses and can distinguish a non-dead smelling human amongst loads of dead smelling humans...which is of course, silly.

In any case, it was just a very bad bit of writing, in an otherwise excellent stretch and somewhat forgivable because it was the early days of the comic. However, such scenes do set a precedent of sorts and it's not clever to do. Kirkman seems to have quietly dropped that angle in later issues.

Anyway, is there other stuff that you don't think should travel from the comic to the series?
I'm pretty sure in issue 27 they talk about stinking themselves up again. But then something worse than the Zombies showed up. :/

As long as they change some of the laughable dialogue, I will be fine with anything else. I can only hear about how much the RV smells so much, ya' know?

clanglee
02-Sep-2010, 03:18 AM
.... He didn't repeat the event thank god. He probably realised himself that it was a bit hokey. Ever smell damp clothes? Smells don't "wash off" that well in rain. Clothes will still stink. More so in some cases. Also, it implies that the living dead have great olfactory senses and can distinguish a non-dead smelling human amongst loads of dead smelling humans...which is of course, silly.?

Well. . . .Michonne had her chained up pet zombies for the same reason. To mask her scent. So it was a factor later on too. I didn't have a problem with it.

shootemindehead
02-Sep-2010, 11:09 AM
Hmmm...I do. I don't like the idea of zombies being able to sniff out their food. It might be forgivable in a comic, but as an onscreen plot device, it'll come off as stupid.

I can't see it working out well.

Skold
02-Sep-2010, 01:11 PM
There are set pictures of 1 and 3 already.

Horse being eaten: http://media.amctv.com/photo-gallery/TWD-Production-Photos/Rick-Ground-Guns-760.jpg

Rick and Glenn in zombie stink: http://www.onlocationvacations.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/walkingdeadhatchetdudeandzombies.jpg

darth los
02-Sep-2010, 01:29 PM
Hmmm...I do. I don't like the idea of zombies being able to sniff out their food. It might be forgivable in a comic, but as an onscreen plot device, it'll come off as stupid.

I can't see it working out well.

Logically zombies shouldn't even be breathing let alone smelling/sniffing things out.

:cool:

Ghost Of War
02-Sep-2010, 01:40 PM
Zombie animals. Don't want to see any Resident Evil-type dogs or some shit. I couldn't care less about zombies eating animals, they did it in NOTLD, for cryin' out loud.


EDIT: Sorry, didn't read the first post properly. I'm a dumbass.




(Still NO to Zanimals!)

Danny
02-Sep-2010, 01:50 PM
So basically you all want the same "give me a romero rules driven thing and i will reject anything different". Lovely. This is why this subgenre is stagnating and going nowhere.:rolleyes:

bassman
02-Sep-2010, 01:52 PM
You know there's trouble afoot when people are complaining before having seen a single episode.

Forget what I "dont want to see". I just want to be entertained.

darth los
02-Sep-2010, 01:58 PM
Zombie animals. Don't want to see any Resident Evil-type dogs or some shit. I couldn't care less about zombies eating animals, they did it in NOTLD, for cryin' out loud.


EDIT: Sorry, didn't read the first post properly. I'm a dumbass.




(Still NO to Zanimals!)

Just because it happened in night doesn't make it a good idea.

It was stupid then and it's stupid now.


There's also a difference between them settling for animals when there aren't humans around and using animals exclusively as an alternative food source which is where Gar was trying to go in survival.

This is not a day or land thing 3-5 years into the plauge where there are no humans left and they have to settle for another food source.

To use your term: This is 6 DAYS into the outbreak. Very bad uncle george.

:cool:

---------- Post added at 09:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:57 AM ----------


So basically you all want the same "give me a romero rules driven thing and i will reject anything different". Lovely. This is why this subgenre is stagnating and going nowhere.:rolleyes:

He's no longer the standard being that his rules now also suck, imo.

:cool:

AcesandEights
02-Sep-2010, 02:23 PM
I almost started a thread a month or so back about how many people will be disappointed because they've over-hyped the project in their own minds, but I thought it'd be too wet blanket of me to do so. Never fear, there's always a wet blanket to be had eventually on the internet.


So basically you all want the same "give me a romero rules driven thing and i will reject anything different". Lovely. This is why this subgenre is stagnating and going nowhere.:rolleyes:


You know there's trouble afoot when people are complaining before having seen a single episode.

Forget what I "dont want to see". I just want to be entertained.

Thank you both for further crystallizing my thoughts on the matters, gents. No need for self sabotage of what may be a thoroughly enjoyable zombie yarn. The books are great as is (most here who have read them can agree on that), if they stick somewhat to that framework and characterization then this will be a capital endeavor. Most capital, indeed. By jingo!

<implacable Teddy Roosevelt smiley goes here>
http://blog.beliefnet.com/progressiverevival/imgs/Teddy%20Roosevelt.jpg

Ghost Of War
02-Sep-2010, 08:15 PM
So basically you all want the same "give me a romero rules driven thing and i will reject anything different". Lovely. This is why this subgenre is stagnating and going nowhere.:rolleyes:

Um, no. I just don't like the idea of zombie animals. Anything else new I can take. Dawn '04 runners, nazi zombies hunting for lost gold, zombie strippers, whatever. Just think animals make lame zombies.

Anyway, fuck it, I'm cranky tonight, and I didn't even answer the OP properly, so I'm going to bed.

shootemindehead
03-Sep-2010, 01:29 AM
There are set pictures of 1 and 3 already.

Rick and Glenn in zombie stink: http://www.onlocationvacations.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/walkingdeadhatchetdudeandzombies.jpg

See....zombie stink......hey it's not a problem.

Zombie's?......schmombie's. I stink up...they don't give a shit.

DubiousComforts
03-Sep-2010, 04:57 AM
This thread has the makings of epic failure, sure to be be soon followed by a thread entitled "Why I'm Leaving Frank Darabont."

AcesandEights
03-Sep-2010, 03:05 PM
"Why I'm Leaving Frank Darabont."

I'm leaving Frank Darabont because he said he loved me, but when I told him I was pregnant he punched me in the stomach and pushed me down a flight of stairs. :(

shootemindehead
04-Sep-2010, 02:47 AM
This thread has the makings of epic failure, sure to be be soon followed by a thread entitled "Why I'm Leaving Frank Darabont."

Why is it an "epic failure" ? Surely, it's not that hard a concept to grasp. There may be some things in the comic that won't (shouldn't) travel to the screen.

Besides, if you have nothing to say on the matter, then say nothing.

sandrock74
04-Sep-2010, 03:54 PM
I'm leaving Frank Darabont because he said he loved me, but when I told him I was pregnant he punched me in the stomach and pushed me down a flight of stairs. :(

Wow, that's harsh! I didn't know that Frank Darabont was so hardcore. He's definately lost a potential fan in me!

paranoid101
04-Sep-2010, 04:39 PM
Tom Hanks once they reach the Prison

bassman
04-Sep-2010, 04:42 PM
Tom Hanks once they reach the Prison

:lol: Are you serious?

Morgan Freeman, as well.

paranoid101
04-Sep-2010, 05:22 PM
:lol: Are you serious?

Morgan Freeman, as well.

Well luckily Andy Dufresne wont be there, when they arrive

hadrian0117
05-Sep-2010, 03:22 AM
Um, no. I just don't like the idea of zombie animals. Anything else new I can take. Dawn '04 runners, nazi zombies hunting for lost gold, zombie strippers, whatever. Just think animals make lame zombies.

Anyway, fuck it, I'm cranky tonight, and I didn't even answer the OP properly, so I'm going to bed.

I don't like the idea of zombie animals* either. I'm fine with zombies eating animals. Romero wrote it into both Nights had it. I've always assumed that zombies would go after the nearest warm-blooded animal if a human wasn't around.


*I might be okay with say zombie primates in a viral/prion outbreak depending on how it's done.

DubiousComforts
05-Sep-2010, 04:13 AM
Why is it an "epic failure" ?
If you don't like it, then you may "BUGGER OFF OF THAT'S A PROBLEM!!!" :p

SymphonicX
05-Sep-2010, 11:01 AM
Having watched Terminator Salvation last night (and actually enjoying it slightly more) I'd be happy if the following 2 things were left out of this other installment in the apocalyptic genre:

Mute kid - or in fact, kid - some cute as a button little twat who only serves as a character to "care" about - one of those cop-out characters that's meant to signify purity and innocence in a "bad world"

and

punk gangs - every apocalypse movie seems to stick punk gangs as the main antagonists - its like film makers hate humanity so much that aside from their little visions of perfection with their main characters, everyone else has to turn into a cannibalistic leather jacket wearing mohawk twat and start rabidly chasing our protagonists around trying to eat/rape/steal their shit.

bassman
05-Sep-2010, 12:26 PM
I'm glad you enjoyed it and all....but what the fuck does it have to do with this thread?:duh:

SymphonicX
05-Sep-2010, 12:51 PM
things I don't want to see in The Walking Dead - are the things I saw in TS - just sayin'

lol

MikePizzoff
05-Sep-2010, 12:52 PM
Having watched Terminator Salvation last night (and actually enjoying it slightly more) I'd be happy if the following 2 things were left out of this other installment in the apocalyptic genre:

Mute kid - or in fact, kid - some cute as a button little twat who only serves as a character to "care" about - one of those cop-out characters that's meant to signify purity and innocence in a "bad world"

and

punk gangs - every apocalypse movie seems to stick punk gangs as the main antagonists - its like film makers hate humanity so much that aside from their little visions of perfection with their main characters, everyone else has to turn into a cannibalistic leather jacket wearing mohawk twat and start rabidly chasing our protagonists around trying to eat/rape/steal their shit.

Hmmm... do you know The Walking Dead is based off a comic book? One of the main characters is a kid. They're staying true to the story line, so read it and then you'll know whether or not they'll have things you may not enjoy.

SymphonicX
05-Sep-2010, 01:47 PM
Hmmm... do you know The Walking Dead is based off a comic book? One of the main characters is a kid. They're staying true to the story line, so read it and then you'll know whether or not they'll have things you may not enjoy.

Yeah I know but I've really no intention of reading the comic to be honest - which I'm sure is going to be much better - either way I'll give the show a go, for the lols....just not a fan of these tired cliche "john connor" characters running around squeaking all over the place.

kidgloves
05-Sep-2010, 05:07 PM
Yeah I know but I've really no intention of reading the comic to be honest - which I'm sure is going to be much better - either way I'll give the show a go, for the lols....just not a fan of these tired cliche "john connor" characters running around squeaking all over the place.

Also there are rumors of a gang turning up somewhere in the 1st season. I guess this series isn't for you then:p

SRP76
05-Sep-2010, 06:56 PM
Hmmm... do you know The Walking Dead is based off a comic book? One of the main characters is a kid. They're staying true to the story line, so read it and then you'll know whether or not they'll have things you may not enjoy.

Wait, a kid? I don't remember. Did they have a kid at the start, or are you talking about the baby that was born in prison?

Or was there a kid...? I think I might recall some little brat being with the group, but I don't remember anything he said or did. So maybe he wasn't a real "main" character? Not featured much?

It been a couple years since I read any of it.

AcesandEights
05-Sep-2010, 07:01 PM
There's numerous kids involved in different story arcs throughout the book, and while many of them take a backseat, Rick's son certainlyt doesn't.

SRP76
05-Sep-2010, 07:09 PM
There's numerous kids involved in different story arcs throughout the book, and while many of them take a backseat, Rick's son certainlyt doesn't.

I only got up to where the stereotypical "punk gang" invades the prison and kills everybody, while our heroes (what's left of them) run away.

How much more stuff has happened since then?

AcesandEights
05-Sep-2010, 07:16 PM
I only got up to where the stereotypical "punk gang" invades the prison and kills everybody, while our heroes (what's left of them) run away.

How much more stuff has happened since then?

Hmmm, a pretty good bit, actually, but not so much that someone who has read a bit more than I have (I missed the last 4 or so issues), couldn't sum it up in a few sentences.

Dr Tongue
05-Sep-2010, 08:05 PM
From Issue 48(Where they escape the Prison), until now(Issue 76), a shit load has happened. Especially with Carl.

A few sentences? Are you reading the same comic? :p

EDIT: And Carl stopped being "Pure" since the sixth issue. To an above poster.

kidgloves
05-Sep-2010, 08:18 PM
Careful with the spoilers guys

AcesandEights
05-Sep-2010, 08:38 PM
Careful with the spoilers guys

True, true, but Shootem's OP warned against spoilers...but it'd be really cool if a "***SPOILERS***" was added to the thread title itself

Because spoilers are like a fork to the head...:fork:

MoonSylver
05-Sep-2010, 09:38 PM
Because spoilers are like a fork to the head...:fork:

Way to work the new smilies into the conversationion there Smiliy Man....:thumbsup: :lol:

SymphonicX
08-Sep-2010, 03:42 PM
ahh even if it has got stereotypical "mute" kid and "punk" cannibal gangs I'll still give it a shot, cos its got ZOMBIES in it!

Have to say the way people talk about the comic though does make me want to read it....still want to read Watchmen first though

MoonSylver
08-Sep-2010, 10:43 PM
ahh even if it has got stereotypical "mute" kid and "punk" cannibal gangs I'll still give it a shot, cos its got ZOMBIES in it!

Have to say the way people talk about the comic though does make me want to read it....still want to read Watchmen first though

Can't go wrong w/ either one. Watchmen is much more of a "dense" read IMO - there are layers apon layers. I read read it about once a year or so & get more out of it each time. Deep stuff, man...

clanglee
09-Sep-2010, 12:09 AM
Because spoilers are like a fork to the head...:fork:

Where is the spoon in the ass smily?

darth los
09-Sep-2010, 03:27 PM
One would figure that punks like that would be plentiful in a world such as this so it should be expected actually.

:cool:

Trin
09-Sep-2010, 05:29 PM
Zombies eating animals has lots of implications. It raises lots of questions and forces certain conclusions. For example, if zombies will suffice with animals then why are they congregating around human survivors rather than flocking to ranches? Could you use animals as bait and lure zombies to their demise around an animal instead of using humans for bait? Can you use animals in a strategy to fool or distract zombies? On the flip side, you can no longer use trained animals as tools in the zombie world. No more sending a sandwich in a bag across the zombie infested parking lot. I'm fine with the whole zombie/animal thing so long as it comes out plausible. But don't show me something that proves that the writers didn't think it through.

As for the complaining before the thing is even out... I like to complain. If you try to take my enjoyment of complaining about stuff away, I'll just complain about you taking my complaining away.

darth los
09-Sep-2010, 05:45 PM
Zombies eating animals has lots of implications. It raises lots of questions and forces certain conclusions. For example, if zombies will suffice with animals then why are they congregating around human survivors rather than flocking to ranches? Could you use animals as bait and lure zombies to their demise around an animal instead of using humans for bait? Can you use animals in a strategy to fool or distract zombies? On the flip side, you can no longer use trained animals as tools in the zombie world. No more sending a sandwich in a bag across the zombie infested parking lot. I'm fine with the whole zombie/animal thing so long as it comes out plausible. But don't show me something that proves that the writers didn't think it through.

As for the complaining before the thing is even out... I like to complain. If you try to take my enjoyment of complaining about stuff away, I'll just complain about you taking my complaining away.

On a bit of a tangent but this (survival) also nullifies the idea of the ghouls being "dumb fucks". It seems as if frankenstein was right. Any zombie can really do anything if they see another doing it first.

Couple that with what they clearly remember from their past lives and the only difference between them and us is putrification.

What we have seen suggests the potential is inate just waiting to be unlocked.

All this has been covered in the first trilogy. Bub, using tools (by that I mean guns), Stephen remembering, the ghouls returning to the mall because it's what they used to do, etc.

All this was fine in very conservative doses, as anomolies, but when it becomes the norm it becomes comical instead of scary, imo.

:cool:

sandrock74
09-Sep-2010, 08:53 PM
the only difference between them and us is putrification.



Which, you have to admit, is a pretty BIG deal!

Trin
10-Sep-2010, 04:44 AM
On a bit of a tangent but this (survival) also nullifies the idea of the ghouls being "dumb fucks". It seems as if frankenstein was right. Any zombie can really do anything if they see another doing it first.

Couple that with what they clearly remember from their past lives and the only difference between them and us is putrification.

What we have seen suggests the potential is inate just waiting to be unlocked.

All this has been covered in the first trilogy. Bub, using tools (by that I mean guns), Stephen remembering, the ghouls returning to the mall because it's what they used to do, etc.

All this was fine in very conservative doses, as anomolies, but when it becomes the norm it becomes comical instead of scary, imo.

:cool:I got into this in my Survival review post, but Survival just pisses all over the zombie behaviors we've argued about for years. From aggressiveness, to physical skills, to learning ability, to eating habits... nothing is sacred. The rules get so horribly confused as to be irrelevant.

You almost have to define how you view Survival alongside the rest of the series before you discuss how you feel about it as a movie. Survival gets really complicated taken in the context of the series. As much as I hate to say it, it's easier to view Survival outside the universe/timeline/storytelling universe... whatever you wanna call it... just to save reconciling the zombie rules. It's almost required to insulate the other movies from the pollution of Survival's zombie rules.

BotOZombie
10-Sep-2010, 11:09 AM
ahh even if it has got stereotypical "mute" kid and "punk" cannibal gangs I'll still give it a shot, cos its got ZOMBIES in it!

Have to say the way people talk about the comic though does make me want to read it....still want to read Watchmen first though

Up until three weeks ago I had never read any of The Walking Dead comics, or any comics at all (apart from Beano and Dandy when I was a child). After being told by people on here that I MUST give them a try, I have now read all of the twelve volumes released do far and apart from the odd page or two the whole thing has blown me away. I cant wait to see the series and see how it plays out but the whole thing has great potential. As I assume you have more comic reading history than me I can see you getting a real kick out of these and they would probably clear up any fears you have for the TV series.

As far as what I don’t want to see I could do without the animal kills being too graphic as that is something I have never liked in films (living dead or otherwise). I’m think specifically about the cat kill by Ben, I can see how a film maker could take that too far in order to play out the shock factor. Other than that I’m happy to just see how it goes.

MoonSylver
10-Sep-2010, 11:24 AM
Where is the spoon in the ass smily?

http://www.crawlersmileys.com/img/smileys/lol.gif

darth los
10-Sep-2010, 04:53 PM
I got into this in my Survival review post, but Survival just pisses all over the zombie behaviors we've argued about for years. From aggressiveness, to physical skills, to learning ability, to eating habits... nothing is sacred. The rules get so horribly confused as to be irrelevant.

You almost have to define how you view Survival alongside the rest of the series before you discuss how you feel about it as a movie. Survival gets really complicated taken in the context of the series. As much as I hate to say it, it's easier to view Survival outside the universe/timeline/storytelling universe... whatever you wanna call it... just to save reconciling the zombie rules. It's almost required to insulate the other movies from the pollution of Survival's zombie rules.

And as i said before it's not like this is years into it as was the case with bub and BD.

This is 6 DAYS into it for pete's sake.

No evolution, no learning curve, nothing. He's saying this is what they are from the start.

Do i really have to post a facepalm pic?

:cool:

Sammich
11-Sep-2010, 06:58 PM
I definitely do not want to see a stereotypical "gangsta" character constantly screaming "yo" and "bust a cap" lines.

Trencher
30-Oct-2010, 09:41 AM
I don't want to see any rape. That was the weakest period of the series when it became ninja chicks and shlock.

Mike70
30-Oct-2010, 01:06 PM
i do not want to see fat people naked.

but i do want to see flying, fire breathing, sparkly, levitating zombies who can do the moonwalk.

MoonSylver
30-Oct-2010, 01:23 PM
i do not want to see fat people naked.

but i do want to see flying, fire breathing, sparkly, levitating zombies who can do the moonwalk.

Laser beams! LAZER BEAMS!!!! :lol:

Mitchified
30-Oct-2010, 03:43 PM
I'll try to keep this vague just in case there's still someone out there that hasn't read Walking Dead but is reading this thread.

I really don't want to see the scene that occurs when they are escaping from the prison. If you read the comics you know what I'm talking about, because it was probably the most shocking event to happen in The Walking Dead to this day. Since becoming a father, I seem to have become more, I dunno, sensitive about that sort of thing. Seeing the panel in a comic is one thing, but actually watching it on a television show would be a bit much for me.

Obviously the show would have to do a number of seasons to get to that point so it's looking down the road a bit, but if it (hopefully) does make it to that point, I'd be more than satisfied with nothing more than a reference to the, erm, "event" happening or maybe a long-range shot as opposed to the up-close-and-personal panel in the comics.