I’m not trying to insult Fear The Walking Dead, I somewhat enjoy it for some entertainment value, and I wish the showrunners the best of luck with whatever they do now that the show is finishing.

But I’ve been wondering for a long time, why didn’t Scott Gimple or AMC or someone fire those 2 after the terrible trainwrecks of season 4 and 5? What would the actual reason for keeping them on be, after such bad critical reception of those seasons? And now the ratings have just gone down and most people agree the show continued to be bad if not worse with them in charge.

They had already done the same thing previously, by firing Dave Erickson after season 3, despite most people agreeing the first 3 seasons were much better than the rest of the series and season 3 is usually cited as the best (so his firing made no sense. Another thing I’m curious about.)

I understand if Erickon didn’t want to come back after they “massacred his boy”, but couldn’t they find someone else to steer the ship back on course after Goldberg and Chambliss proved they weren’t able to make a good show out of it?

  • OtherbarryEnglish
    2•1 year ago

    Yeah I don’t know either, maybe they figured that they may as well keep the same showrunner through the end of the series & finish it off that way? If they wanted to switch gears & go with a new showrunner they should have done it after the 1st or 2nd Goldberg/Chambliss seasons but it seems they missed that chance. At this point maybe they’re too far in to change things up especially since this is the last season anyway… that’s my theory.

    You sort of see the same thing happen with the main The Walking Dead series but at least it worked out better there. They switched showrunners & Angela Kang did that for the last 3 seasons. Sure some people still complained but I’d argue that she did get the series back onto the main plot & kept the story moving towards the finale.

    Thankfully the other shows are much better overall (Dead City and Daryl Dixon).