There’s nothing quite like sitting in on a conference call about a show you really enjoy.
How ’bout we up the ante a bit and make it a conference call that came after a pretty nifty season finale? Spiffy? You bet.
But wait … there’s more! We can top that by appointing none other than the showrunner of the program as the featured guest of the call. There’s your value added bonus right there!
And that’s just what I did last week, hobnob with showrunner Glen Mazzara of The Walking Dead. Below you’ll find not only the questions I got the opportunity to ask him, but a bevy of information concerning the just-concluded season 2 as well as some delectable tidbits for the upcoming 16 episode season 3.
But a word of warning: There are spoilers …
Michael: Glen, thank you very much for taking time out to speak with us today. It was a terrific finale. Question: Are there any places the writers won’t go when writing against the source material? There are some pretty dark places in the books and I wonder how far you guys are willing to go?
Glen Mazzara: Well, I know what you’re referring to and, you know, we have to put our own spin. I would say this: there’s no place we won’t go. Everything is on the table. This is a cutting edge cable drama. I’m comfortable with that material and we answered a lot of these questions on The Shield when I worked there, so I’m comfortable dealing with very, very edgy material.
That being said, you want to make sure things are not gratuitous, that things are not offensive for the sake of being offensive. I don’t ever want the show to get too bleak. I think we’ve done a good job of creating characters people care about. I think there’s a heart to the show.
So we will tackle issues in our own way but right now everything is on the table and I think if you take a look at those last few episodes we’ve been making some pretty bold choices … that’s where the show lives and that’s where we will feel we get the most entertainment value out of the story we’re telling.
Michael: On Talking Dead after the finale, Robert Kirkman assured everyone the pace set in those final three episodes would be carried through to Season 3. It kind of sounded — and I’m just winging it here — a bit like that may have been a shot at Frank Darabont, that those were episodes he wasn’t involved with …
Glen: No, no, no, no, no. That is not a shot at Frank Darabont. We respect everything that Frank has done. We would not be here if it wasn’t for Frank Darabont. We owe a great debt. I think his contribution to the show has been incalculable.
But … there is a difference between the story that Frank did — and Frank also wondered if we had pacing issues in the first half of the season, if there was enough story to carry us on the farm for an entire season. That was a question that we wrestled with the writers at the beginning of that season.
That being said, you know, it’s my intention that the show picked up the pace, you know. And I would say yes. You look at those last three episodes but I’m also very proud of the episodes that came before that. I’m proud of the pacing and the mid-season finale. I’m proud of “Triggerfinger” and “Nebraska.” You know, I thought that “Nebraska” — which did not have a lot of zombie action — had a very, very compelling last scene with Michael Raymond James. So, you know, we will continue to have fast-paced episodes. We will continue to have slower-paced episodes. You know, the episode in which Dale was killed was a little more thoughtful. I think we had a terrific ending there.
So week by week we want to keep throwing curve balls at the audience and so that you sit down and you never know what kind of episode you’re going to get. We are constantly playing with people’s expectations because that’s what horror movies do.
The minute you know exactly what you’re getting at the beginning of an episode, I think it becomes less scary and less entertaining. So I’ll just say this. I think … next year we’re just throwing curve ball after curve ball. That’s the goal.
Michael: Thanks for expounding on that. I really appreciate it. One final thought: I really like the way the pacing has been going … the drama. I don’t like all the zombie action week after week. The drama, the character studies … I really enjoy them and you guys are doing a great job. Thank you very much.
Glen: Well, thanks. We’re trying. Thank you, I appreciate that.
Throughout the remainder of the call, Glen gave his thoughts and answers on a myriad of topics:
Clacked by Michael Noble 
on Mar 29, 2012 @ 14:39 EST5EDT
Thanks very much for the interview. I learned more about this season and where the show is going next season than I have from any other media source so far. I’m relieved to hear they’re not going for all-zombie action all the time. I’ve never read the comic books, but I’ve really appreciated the thoughtfulness of the first 2 seasons. It’s still hard to admit I’m watching a “zombie show”, but “Walking Dead” has proven to be much, much more than that description would imply. I hope they continue along that path.
Not having read any of the books, I like not having a connection. It’s a clean slate. So, whatever the writers decide to do means I don’t have an established thought of what will happen or should happen next. I wonder how folks who have been devotees feel about the deviations from the books.
You gave fair warning that spoilers were contained in this post. However, it sounds like the writers could really go in various directions. Nothing spoiled about season 3. The only bummer is waiting SEVEN long months. GAR!!
I’m really very curious what the writers will do with the Michonne-Gouvernor thingy….I hope they’ll use it, yes it’s disgusting but i believe people in a messed up world get messed up themselves. Further more: I miss Shane!
Trust me, coming from someone who has read the comic book series all the way through… several times… you’re probably better not knowing what is going to happen! Don’t get me wrong, I LOVE the comic books and would give them my highest possible recommendation to anyone who felt the urge to read them. But anyone watching the tv series who wants to remain surprised should probably avoid them. Knowing the comic storyline colored the entire first two seasons for me… knowing that Shane was going to die, eventually; I was just kind of waiting for it to happen, because it seemed inevitable, especially in the direction they were going with the character in the tv series. But, on the other hand, it was also a supreme surprise to me when characters like Dale and Sophia — who lived MUCH longer in the comics — died “early” in the tv series. So I guess it goes both ways! :-) One last thing… I have no problem with the fact that the tv series has often diverged from the comic book storyline. In fact, I applaud them for doing so. If the story of the tv show followed the comic beat for beat, it would be boring for readers of the comics. I’m glad that they’re keeping the comic fans guessing what’s coming next!
*POST AUTHOR*
. . . . .
ScottA:
That’s a big huge deal for me, too, about aping the series and going off on their own with the show. There are a lot of fans of the comics who are griping and complaining this, that or the other should be done. But, as a fan of the comic series myself, I have enjoyed the fact the writers have been mixing it up. When Dale died, it was a shocker. My reaction after that episode was “Well … NOW what … ?!?” It was a good “now what” however. For them to have the cojones to pull that off and continue on down the road is bold, but I have faith with Kirkman in the mix of things.
I’ve had my qualms with what’s come before; read my previous posts and you’ll see them for what they’re worth. One of the things I think we’ve gotten out of The Walking Dead, though, is some terrific surprises and characters not in the books. Case in point: Daryl.
But regardless of what’s been thrown at us, I’m enjoying the heck out of the show. This interview with Glen Mazzara has been rather enlightening as well …
Thanks for commenting.
Michael Noble:
I think Daryl is an awesome character and a great addition to the cast of characters. TDog, based solely on the fact that they have used him so little thus far, not so much.
To add some clarification about my comment that people wanting to be surprised probably shouldn’t read the comics: I have all the trade paperbacks, and my wife has never shown even the slightest interest in reading them. She was, how shall I put this… reluctant… to watch the tv show. And she still turns her head or closes her eyes at the goriest stuff. But she has been completely and totally sucked into the television series because of the quality of the writing, acting and the stories. And she finally couldn’t stand it anymore after the mid-season “Sophia in the barn” cliffhanger… and she started reading the trades because she just HAD to know what was going to happen. I warned her that she might not be too happy (since I knew that Shane was one of her favorite characters). When she read to the point where (in the comic) Shane was killed, she put down the trades and stopped reading. She was depressed for days. And any time an episode aired after that, once it was over, she would turn to me and say, “I wish I didn’t know Shane was going to die.” :-(
Scott, very smart summary. You have the most level headed viewpoint I’ve read from a comic fan who watches the show.
Thanks! I think most people whose comments I’ve read online take the idea of “adaptation” way too literally. If it were a one-time only movie, I think I’d be mad if they didn’t follow the comic story beat for beat. But a longterm television series should be open for interpretation. And it’s not like Robert Kirkman isn’t involved in the writing and production of the series! His stamp of approval is important to me, otherwise I and others might see the series as being a bunch of other guys who think they can “improve” on his original stories.