That was my first reaction to Sunday's episode of The Walking Dead.
Why, you ask?
SPOILER ALERT -if you haven't seen Sunday 3/11's episode, read no further!
Okay, stay with me. In general, you don't want to kill off the most provocative character in a series unless you're close to ending the entire series, right? The guy you love to hate, the most conflicted character, the one that puts everyone else on edge...would you kill him off?
Regardless of whatever revelation will come of his death, I don't think killing him off as a way to reveal whatever it is -a way of spreading the zombie infection viewers and characters were yet unaware, will be worth the death of the most compelling actor on the show.
I hope it is...I really do...but I am of the opinion that characters trump plot 99.99% of the time in film and books alike.
Was it a good episode? Yes! Shocking? Of course. I, like the survivors, now fear for the future. I'm not worried about being eating by a walking corpse but of this marvelously written show beginning the slow circle around the drain because the producers, writers or director wanted to hit the audience with a double-shocker. Killing off Shane AND this new revelation.
I'm one of those people who likes the bad guy and Shane played a great bad guy. Edgy, intense, perhaps a bit crazy -but not totally nuts as they portrayed in the last episode. Yeah, I get it, they were trying to hint at the impending 'infection' that would turn him into a zombie...I just don't agree with it.
So, do I think they've 'jumped the shark' this early on in the show? Sadly, yes.
Prove me wrong, writers. I'd be happy to eat crow on this one.
As always, find interviews, writing samples, videos, contests and more on my re-vamped website.
In bookstores 6-5-2012