Does this seem like a plot hole to you guys too, or...?
So recently I saw a thread that pointed out some what of a plot hole- that the group would risk their lives by walking through a herd of ravenous walkers (effectively getting several of their people killed in the process) likely totally eradicate a community of innocent people, go through a complicated yet poorly constructed plan and what not just to avoid... Doing menial chores? I mean, Carver even said that they would be let back into the group, and everything else pointed to that being a likely possibility, Carver didnt hurt them and tried not to kill them until they started trying to escape and he beat Luke and Kenny up because of the plan they were constructing. I mean, sure, Carver's a remorseless and vicious tyrant and killed Reggie because of this trait, but Reggie fucked up a lot of times by the sound of it and Carver got pissed (I'm not trying to be understanding of his action, I'm trying to be understanding of a psychopaths actions, and Reggie had proven himself weak) really and honestly, the group would of been much better off just being obedient until they were let back in the community.
This is not the plot hole I'm most concerned about however. The plot hole I'm most concerned about is the fact that the group would even leave in the first place. Now I can understand Rebecca's incentive- she had sex with Carver and wanted Alvin and her to raise the child and didn't want to be stuck with a psychopath. As for the rest of the group?
Alvin- As far as he knew, it can be inferred by what Rebecca says that Alvin believes the child to be his. Now, if you had your child (well, what he believes to be his own) on the way, a safe community and plenty of food and water during an apocalypse, what would be your incentive to leave? Rebecca might have said something to him, but what reason could she possibly come up with to convince him to leave the walled heaven?
Carlos and Sarah- Carlos wanted to prevent Sarah from seeing the horrors of the outside world, not expose her to them. Why would he make her leave and fight the horrors and dangers and uncertainty of there being a tomorrow when he could easily just kept her safe inside a community where tomorrow is at least almost a definite? Even if Rebecca and Alvin where his friends and asked him to leave with them, why would be agree? He wants to keep Sarah safe, not expose her to the horrors.
Pete, Nick, Nick's mom- I mean, just why exactly? They've got nothing against the safety provided, though maybe based off what Nick says when they find that fuckin' river, Carver was incredibly brutal and murdered anyone who wouldn't join his group. But even if that was so, how would it affect them? Carver is shown to be at least somewhat favoured amongst his people who follow the rules (if he wasn't favoured by them, then why would be still be leader? They could easily turn all the guards except Troy maybe against Carver and elect a new leader. What could Carver do to stop them?) why would you hate a brutal killer if he only killed people that were otherwise possible threats or would have in no way their deaths affect you if in exchange for that you had a refuge and ample food provided in exchange for menial chores? It doesn't add up.
Luke- I just really don't see a reason, except maybe for the fact that Carver didn't give him a toothbrush. I can see Luke leaving though if maybe Nick & co left, as I'm sure Luke would accompany Nick if Nick had a good enough reason to high tail it out of there.
This seems to be a big plot hole to me for some reason. What do you guys think? Have any more plot holes to mention?
Comments
Not a plot hole just a shitty plot
Haha, I don't believe the plot was bad in the slightest, I just believe that the way it was executed and the shift in writers and the fact that the new writers were most likely then not given any executive instruction by lead writer is what lead to all but too many plot holes. That's my theory.
A plot hole, or plothole is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that creates a paradox in the story that cannot be reconciled with any explanation. These include such things as illogical or impossible events, and statements or events that contradict earlier events in the storyline.
personally i would have stayed, they would have only been temporary prisoners, and if things got really bad i would have tried to kill carver and troy, leaving was kinda dumb, and setting the hoard on all those people was murder
If Rebecca had any sense she would have at least stayed there to give birth to the baby.
Hell they could have all stayed there for a few months. they would have been fed at least. They had shelter from the elements, safety.....
Yes; my point stays strong. It is highly illogical that most of the group would even leave in the first place without an incentive to do so. The inconsistency is in the way the characters are written and then in their choices; why would Carlos leave with Sarah if he wanted to keep her safe? It can be quiet simply be defined as a moment of inconsistency in his character. Him saying she would cease to function contradicts earlier events in the storyline, as in order to escape and for him to feel confident enough about leaving with her, he would have had to seen that she does not go to badly around walkers. If this was the case anyway, why would he have even mentioned her "ceasing to function" around walkers when he very clearly has seen her function around them after they escaped?
Biggest plot hole for me was why didnt Craver just kill Kenny back at the ski lounge when he tried to shoot Carver? He had every reason to kill Kenny. Kenny was rebellious from the get go and a possibility for down fall. And rather then kill Kenny or make an example out of him he kills Reggie for no reason. The writer made Carver's Character flop in episode 3.
Also the rope conveniently placed where they kept the prisoners wasn't a plot hole but just made carver's camp look dumb and was a poor design choice. I know TTG is more creative than that.
Why didn't they walk this way? no one gets shot, no herd, etc.
THANKS SHORETTE
Killing that whole community (which they did; you can see the walkers sneak up behind the guards shooting on the roof in the beginning of ep.4) makes them even worse than Carver. Carver wouldn't kill a whole group of people just because he didn't like one of two people from that group. In trying to get away from the bad an they effectively made themselves worse than him in doing so.
Oh God, are you serious?!
They decide to walk straight through a herd when they could of just as easily gone around (even just around the thick of it, at least!) and made it to the forest. But no. Indeed thanks, Shorette. -_-
lmao so true
I agree; I definitely felt Carver's character get weaker in terms of set morals and logic in ep. 3. He kills Reggie for cutting some berries wrong (on top of several other minor "felonies") and lets Kenny get away with just one less eye for killing one of his men, trying to kill him (shooting him in the process, even. Come to think of it, another plot hole: after being shot in the shoulder, Carver was 100% fine and could still use his arm perfect), not doing his work when he chose to attack Mike and organising and being the main contender and conspirator in the construction of the plan to escape. Plot be like: Yo... I'm out.
The plot is pretty bad in some places but its still interesting. Everything is just too dammed rushed this season.
Now that I think about it... maybe The Cabin Group had something to do with Carver becoming a psychopath...
No. They were unsure of what to do, and with Kenny almost being beaten to death. Luke getting his ribs injured. Sarah getting hit. Reggie getting killed. Walkers almost devouring Clementine, Kenny and Mike. Clementine/Sarita able to get bitten. Alvin also getting beaten to near death. This all happening in the short time the group was imprisoned.
Plus Carver would most likely kill Rebecca after she gave birth, and killed Alvin keeping the baby for himself. There is no way the Cabin Group is risking that, and going through the herd was the best solution. Like Jane said: The plan was good, it was the execution
but they got in all the trouble you listed because they wanted to leave and were trying to escape, it was not the original reason they wanted to leave
When you are imprisoned, with a mad-man. Who had just killed another man in front of you all, and can also kill Alvin. You should probably leave instead of staying there for safety. Also the walkers attacking, Sarah getting hit, Alvin getting beat up and Reggie dying all had nothing to do with the groups escape.
If I remember correctly I can't remember which character said it, but Luke had different ideas of how the camp should be runned and they butted heads supposedly. They would be Lukes incentive to leave I guess, not sure about the others though.
They just wanted to leave with Luke. Rebecca and Alvin for obvious reasons. Reggie, Bonnie (originally but dropped out), Carlos and Sarah (Carlos felt it best to protect Sarah I suppose), Nick and Pete (Nick was close friends with Luke, Pete had to look after Nick).
Wow a lot of dead characters listed in there.
Carver would've let them into the community the way he let Reggie into the community. Reggie mentions Carver was after him ever since he helped the cabin group, and the very first day after Bill arrived to the store, he found an excuse to get rid of him. Even if they were let inside, there's no reason to believe that they're safe anyway. Even if Carver claims he'll forgive them, doesn't mean he will. Capable as he may be, he's a capricious dictator, and the fact he can do whatever the hell he wants makes him all the more dangerous. Maybe you think differently, but I'd risk the herd anytime.
stockholm syndrome
the walkers didn't attack until clementine caused them to, and the imprisonment was temporary, people like tavia and the 400 days group were free to walk around and they probably had to be temporarily imprisoned as well, obviously it isn't the safest environment to be in, but having food, shelter and protection from zombies is better than what they got from escaping
The herd was actually on the other side of the building. They mention this when they come out. The fact that the back exit was so infested with walkers means that everywhere else was even worse. There was no way around it.
Clementine "caused them to". No she didn't? She walked in on Kenny and Mike fighting and the walkers broke the window. Also the "imprisonment was temporary" does not suffice. Reggie was going to be "let out soon" but oh wait, he died.
oh you mean those zombies, well you can't expect no zombies in a zombie apocalypse, obviously they would have to take care of a few of them, they were expanding the camp, but carlos, sarah, sarita, nick and rebecca died because they escaped, and as i said it isnt the safest environment to be in, but Reggie had clearly been on carvers bad side for months before sarah's screw up was the straw the broke the camels back and made carver snap, carlos, sarah, sarita, nick and rebecca didn't last a day because they escaped.
Okay so I see the logic behind your argument. The safe-zone is safe. The group should have stayed in there. What about those zombies, almost killing three people? Nah you can't not expect some zombies in this safe-zone!
Do you not see the problem here? With zombies breaking in, a horde of them on the way (the group couldn't handle since they're all most likely dead), it was either get out now or die later.
Also Reggie was not on "Carvers bad side". Carver explains he killed Reggie because he found him weak (which was mostly due to his disability).
Yes they wouldn't have died, but whose to say they wouldn't die later.
did you not pay attention in the game? they were expanding the camp, meaning expanding the "safe zone" so obviously there would be danger but it would be the same amount of danger as not being at the camp, except you have food and shelter after you finished expanding for the day.
and yeah reggie was on his bad side, he helped the others escape and carver knew about it, it is basically the first thing we learn about reggie
That is not an excuse. If they were "expanding the camp" and they sent Kenny, Mike and Clementine that means the camp just risks their lives. Nevertheless further justifying why they should leave.
Also no Reggie was not on Carvers "bad side". Especially when Carver states he killed Reggie because he was weak not because of any biased attitude towards him, and he was ready to forgive Reggie in a matter of days.
leave to the same danger they faced expanding, except no protection, food or shelter later.
but he hadn't forgiven reggie yet, he was still locked up, and it was clear that reggie had to suck up to even start to get on his good side.
and i'm not trying to justify carvers behaviour, the plan should have been to kill carver and troy, not to escape the camp and kill everyone
Perhaps, but it's far too late for that. The best bet now is to escape. Plus we didn't know how much danger they'd be in, we had no idea. I'd escape via the herd over sticking with Carver.
I doubt Carver had any intention of ever letting them back into the community. Barring maybe Rebecca. And even she would have outlived her usefulness after giving birth.
Carver wouldn't bat an eyelash at killing anyone to get what he wants.
well, everybody, knew there were loads of zombies, nowhere safe to go and no food out of the camp, so i would have wanted to stay, but i guess we just have different opinions
If Reggie was killed for being weak, Sarah would have been screwed.
In my opinion, it seems that their choice to leave The Howe's Hardware Store Community was more on the lines of selfishness than of survival.
It totally feels like the first two episodes were setting up something different for ep 3. Like I was expecting the cabin group to have made a mistake (like drawing walkers or something) that resulted in a number of Carver's group being killed, and they fled to escape the consequences. I thought that was the main reason they hadn't developed the characters more, because we didn't know their pasts (that would've been really interesting tbh). But no, Carver was just a stereotypical TWD antagonist and the cabin group fled for pretty much no reason besides Rebecca.
That's still not a plot hole in the traditional sense. What you're describing isn't contradicting events or creating paradoxes that happened in the main story line like Duck_was his son said. Inconsistencies of characters, in which you're describing, isn't enough to be labeled as a plot hole unless specific events revolving around that character, like death, happened in the past that would otherwise make future appearances or events for that character impossible no matter how skilled or talented the writer was.
An example of a plot hole would be Lee getting bitten, not cutting his arm off, and then leaving him to die/turn only to have him come back completely fine and healthy in future seasons. It contradicts everything that's established in The Walking Dead story regarding how people die and come back as walkers.
What you're describing at the very least can be described as poor story execution. The plot tried to set up Carver's community as being a horrible place to live to the point where some of the people in the community would rather take their chances of survival outside.Carver being a Social Darwinist and leader of a community wouldn't really be that much of a safe place to live since he could ultimately decide who's strong or weak and look for "reasons" to dispose of people he thought weren't worthy to live. So who's to say he wouldn't have done that to Sarah. Looking at it that way, it made sense to some extent for the cabin survivors to want to escape.
I think you guys are going too far in the opposite direction and forgetting that Carver was a megalomaniac and a slave owner.
He captures strangers, sometimes murdering them, and forces them to live like prisoners and work under armed guard almost indefinitely. He has no qualms with harming or even killing children to fulfill his goals. It's strongly implied that he raped Rebecca, judging by her and her husband's disgust towards him. Carlos likely disagreed with Bill regarding his child-rearing methods, particularly towards Sarah. Luke hates leaders who push their people too hard, and Nick and his family went along with them because of their personal loyalty to Luke.
The problem with Carver is that he expects personal loyalty and undying love for HIM, and disregards any pre-existing familial connections among his people. He was an unstable mess when the survivors first left, went more crazy in the process of finding them, and needed to be killed for the sake of everybody.
Okay, you make a fair point. Carver is indeed a vicious psychopath and a tyrant, but I don't think that Rebecca was raped- based off dialogue and the fact that Rebecca didn't tell Alvin. She was probably feeling ashamed, remorseful and guilty to have ever thought Carver was alright and to have had an affair with him, not to have gotten raped, which she couldn't have avoided if it did happen and it wouldn't have been her fault. For all the stress and pain of the unknown as to whether the baby is hers or not, I'm sure she would have told Alvin if Carver had raped her and that Alvin would have been incredibly pissed and still loved her like any good husband would. Besides, she's remorseful and guilty. Rebecca had her hand in herself getting pregnant. As for Carlos, Carver wouldn't have mistreated or emotionally and physically abused Sarah while she was in the group. The group Carver rules over seem relatively content based off of the fact that there were only two people in the probation yard- if you thought you could escape Howe's without dying and the only punishment for trying to escape a raging psychopath was to be put in the yard, I'm sure heaps more people than just Mike, Jane and Reggie would have taken the risk. So if the people in the community were alright with being there, he can't be treating any of them too badly, and I supposed he wouldn't of pressed his "child raising" methods on Sarah until they got to the yard; Carlos wouldn't of had incentive to risk Sarah's life and leave. As for Luke, perhaps that is true. He might not like leaders who press themselves and their ways onto others too hard, and as for what I've seen, Carver seems to be that kind of leader. Same goes for Nick & Co high-tailing it out of there with Luke- they would follow Luke if there seemed to be enough of an incentive.
I fully agree with this. Along with having no reason to leave, there was a lot of speculation going around the forums that they were the ones that did something to Carver first and that Carver was a reasonable person. This would of added so many layers of moral ambiguity that the walking dead so admirers- that the living have become more of a threat than the dead and that you really can't trust anyone you come across, especially some random group of people that you've only known for about a week. But, agreed, Carver turned out to be just another stereotypical Negan and the Governor antagonist prototype. I thought they were going to do something original this time -_-