I don’t think there’s an assumption that the Philly guys were bad. I think the assumption is you can no longer be sure one way or another. (And the actor from “True Blood” and “Terriers” is AWESOME at playing that pretty-charming-but-also-potentially-threatening tone.) So it’s no longer humans vs. zombies, but humans-at-Hershel’s-farm vs. everyone else. Which hopefully means some everyone-elses are going to appear soon.

I also think that humans being their own biggest problem during zombie-times is a totally compelling place to take any zombie fiction. But I look at how it played out in something like 28 Days Later, and it makes so much more sense to me. Why is the assumption that the Philly guys were no good? Because they made some crass comment about getting some tail? They’re bros, but whatever – it’s the sort of thing that only makes me think that our heroes are the real bad guys.

Sorry if I gave you a spoiler; I just assumed you had read the graphic novels as well. =-)

I’m not really convinced there’s enough character behind Rick to say what he would and would not do. Shane – on the other hand – was turning into a dynamic character that had to make a hard choice and then struggled with the repercussions. All of Shane peacockery about shooting Otis is just there to mask how awful he feels about pulling the trigger. But Rick? I can’t even tell you what’s making that character do what he does – remember when they started calling him their leader a few episodes back? Just because you say it’s true, TV, doesn’t mean I’ll believe you.

I didn’t dislike this episode, I just get the sinking feeling that we are a long ways off from escaping Hershel’s farm. And that’s wearisome.

Just my two cents.