Five requests for season three of The Walking Dead

By: Dylan Harper

*WALKING DEAD SEASON ONE AND TWO SPOILERS*

1) Will someone please supervise Carl?

It seems like every episode features at least on person asking, "where's Carl?" Lori already isn't exactly a shining beacon of good parenting, but how hard could it possibly be to keep one eye on your son during the zombie apocalypse? And where is Rick? I get that Rick has to leave camp at least three times an episode, but maybe he could sit down with his son and explain to him that there are undead monsters trying to kill everyone and that a child has a slightly worse chance of surviving away from camp than his police officer father. Next season, maybe one of Carl's parents will do us all a favor and place some adult supervision over their young son. Or at least get him a leash or a cowbell or something. (For more fun with Carl's lack of supervision, visit this tumblr.)

2) Speaking of Carl, kill him (or Lori).

It's very difficult to tell an unpredictable zombie story. So far, The Walking Dead has done a fantastic job of keeping fans on their toes, but one aspect of the show has (at least up until this point) been set in stone: the Grimes family is invincible. Though the Walking Dead writers have boldly proclaimed that "no character is safe," I don't think any of the fans have honestly felt that Rick, Lori or Carl have come close to being killed so far. Obviously, Rick is probably going to be safe throughout the series and I concede that having someone in his family alive for him to protect gives his character more dimension, but having three whole characters that the audience can assume to be safe robs the show of some suspense. Lori and Carl aren't exactly the most popular characters (and the writers were willing to kill off Shane, a beloved character to many Walking Dead fans), so I think it's time to make the Grimes family a little smaller.

3) Vary the length of time spent in one location.

After watching the season two finale, one of my friends determined that he could predict the rest of the series: "they go to a location, stay there for a season, the location goes up in flames, they leave." Let's make sure this is not the case. I'm not asking for them to stay in the same place forever; that would certainly be less entertaining than the struggle of having to find a new home from time to time. But, make them move mid-season a few times. Or better yet, keep them in the same spot for a season and a half. Make the move to a new location a big reveal. The way the writers create the safe places (the camp, the farm, the CDC), they almost become characters themselves, so they should really "kill one off" at random like they occasionally do with characters.

4) Throw in some one-line fixes (whatever device).

A one-line fix is a term that describes a piece of dialogue that fixes some problem. For example, in an action movie, if you had your character shooting a gun underwater, you could have one say something like, "thank god we invented underwater guns," or something less god-awful, to "fix" the problem. This could solve some of the mystery of the magically charged mp3 player, or siphoning gas from cars when pretty much every car made after the 80s has a siphon-blocker.

5) Please don't screw up Michonne!

A fan favorite from the comic book (and one of the top 100 comic book characters of all time according to IGN), Michonne made an amazing entrance in the season two finale. Her character in the comic is basically a cross between Shane, Daryl and Maggie. She's tough, she's a survivor and she still has the emotional capacity to want a relationship. If done correctly, she will be a favorite of fans in both the comic and the TV show. Everyone was excited to finally see her make an appearance and all the we ask the Walking Dead writers is, please don't screw her up!

A guest article by Dylan Harper

Because this blog is designed to be a safe place for TV fans to indulge in further exploration of this often underrated medium, I have asked a few of my fellow TV junkies to write me some stuff about any television topic that struck their fancy. The first to provide me with content (even before I had any content of my own, actually) was Watchin' Stuff ally and KSFS Radio big wig, Dylan Harper. So, for you reading pleasure, here is Mr. Harper's Frasier, It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia comparison.

It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia: The new smartest show on television

by Dylan Harper

Upon first glance, It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia may seem like an odd heir to a thrown last held by Frasier; in many ways, the two shows are complete opposites of one another. There are some comparisons to be made however, the most prominent being the great writing that carries both shows.

Frasier toured a world of learned individuals who were obsessed with living a high-class lifestyle, and determined to justify that lifestyle with vain attempts at helping those around them around them cursed with normality. The master of sensational repartee, the joke delivery on Frasier is so fast and fluid that some episodes barely leave the viewer time to take a breath. Frasier is the fastball pitcher of high-class wit. In contrast, Always Sunny delivers low-class change-ups. The plot is set up even before the opening credits. While on the surface this seems to be a separation device meant to highlight the differences between Always Sunny and your average sitcom it's actually a necessity. The jokes on Always Sunny are slow developing. The viewer is given time to settle in and often starts laughing without even realizing when the punch line occurred.

But don't be fooled by the Caddyshack level of class disparity, these two shows are remarkably similar. The low-class material on Always Sunny isn't the result of lazy or slow-witted writing. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The long form jokes often work on several levels and relate back to a previous joke or plot point. There are almost no throw away jokes. Always Sunny is certainly working on the same intellectual level as Fraiser. There are more similarities in the style though; Frasier is about high-class people doing good and Always Sunny is about low-class people doing bad, but both are an exercise in escapism.

A theme of 21st century sitcoms is to provide characters to whom the viewer can relate. For example, one of ABC's newest shows, Last Man Standing (*Kait's feeling on this show: "In the words of Jon Stewart, 'stop hurting America' Last Man Standing!"), tells the story of a man "whose world is dominated by women." Here, ABC is making a shameless attempt to connect to men from the Baby Boomer generation who still want to be thought of as manly. Both Frasier and Always Sunny do the opposite.

The characters in both shows are meant to be laughed at, not with. The viewer has no interest in sympathizing with anyone, except maybe the unfortunate souls who inhabit the story world of the main cast. With Frasier, humor stemmed from the fact that he never broke discipline. From Boston to San Francisco, he remained the naive, pompous socialite, who views himself as at least a minor celebrity, allowing the audience to find amusement in his self-importance. With The Gang on Always Sunny, humor is derived from the fact that all of the characters remain only self-interested as they continue to cower at the prospect of ever leaving Philly.

The plots of both shows themselves share little in common, except essence. Undeniably, the location of each show plays an important role. Where Niles Crane embodies everything that is Seattle, Mac and Charlie are the definition of South Philly. Additionally, when the writers of either show wanted to make a point, neither did it too directly. Both shows crafted symbolism into their episodes that is easy enough to read into, but never feels forced or preachy. The careers of the characters also contribute heavily in both shows. KACL Radio is the center of many a storyline, as is Paddy's Pub, but neither abuse the job sites to the point that they would dominate the show.  Both shows are so character driven that you could move The Gang to Seattle to do a radio show (maybe someone heard Dennis and Dee's air check?) and you could bring Frasier back to a bar (for those who don't know, Frasier Crane got his start on Cheers), but this time in Philly, and the shows wouldn't lose a single laugh.

Unfortunately, Frasier gave up his radio show in 2004 but The Gang was right there to pick up the "smartest show" torch shortly after in 2005 and has been carrying it ever since. Sure, the shows have their differences, but the success of both are long standing examples that there will always be a place on TV for great writing.

Thank you for your two-cents Dylan, it's greatly appreciated. And for those who have yet to see it, Frasier is available on Netflix instant.  Unfortunately, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia is not but here are some clips from both shows.

The best of Frasier Season 1

One of my favorite It's Always Sunny clips from Season 3 Episode 9, Sweet Dee's Dating A Retarded Person.