GAR Intelligent Zombies - Bub vs. Big Daddy

[Trin]

I don't believe any kind of micro-organism or virus or bacteria could be responsible. Anything like that would have hot spots and infection patterns. This phenomenon is everywhere equally. I have a couple potential wild-assed possibilities. What about a violent allergic reaction? Perhaps something in the unique chemical makeup of zombie saliva provokes a berserk immunity response in the victims? Allergic reactions have widely varying sypmtoms. They can be deadly. They can vary in intensity causing some people to die in a day whereas others die in an hour. Allergic reactions require only the briefest contact and can be deadly from even a tiny exposure. They require nothing infectious be present in either the victim or the exposing body. What about an electro-chemical change in the victim? If we are suggesting that the radiation is exciting the nervous system of the zombie, what happens when that zombie bites into the flesh of a person? That should create a decent conduit for electrical impulses. The zombie could be "infecting" the victim with an electro-chemical change that is incompatible with life. Kinda like how a person who is immersed in acid dies. Even if they are immediately rinsed with water, the damage is done. The acid reacting with the skin creates a chemical change in the body that disturbs the electrical impulses to the heart and they die.

[Gemini]

A few weeks back we nudged up against the topic of Bub vs. Big Daddy. Since then I have been giving a lot of thought to intelligent zombies in GAR movies. The Big Question: - Were Bub and Big Daddy very much alike or fundamentally different? Arguments for alike: - Both displayed intelligence and behavior at a higher level than their zombie peers. - Both showed a cognitive ability to manipulate their environment - i.e. problem solving abilities. - Both communicated with humans beyond just trying to eat them. - Both showed a diminished (or non-existent) need to pursue/eat humans on sight. Arguments for different: - Bub was driven/enticed by the need to feed. Big Daddy showed no inclination to feed even when presented with food. - Bub was trained & conditioned by Dr. Logan. Big Daddy's higher level behavior had no visible catalyst. - Bub paid no attention to other zombies. Big Daddy was highly empathetic to other zombies. Another question is whether Bub and/or Big Daddy were really *that* much more intelligent than their peers. There is a lot of evidence that other zombies were learning: - The captured zombies in Day began to avoid the zombie pen gates. - The wandering zombies in Land didn't come around the Green electric fences anymore. - The Uniontown zombies in Land learned quickly with a little Big Daddy prompting. - The horde of zombies in Land began to ignore food sources in their pursuit of Fiddler's Green. - The horde of zombies in Land learned to ignore the fireworks without prompting. - The Hari Krishna zombie in Dawn chose to go up the stairs rather than pursue Stephen. - The pit fighter zombies learned to fight over food rather than just lunging for the closest human. I have another hypothesis to throw into the mix. I think a lot of us work from the assumption that Bub was just any old zombie pulled from the pen and trained by Dr. Logan to behave. And that makes him fundamentally different from Big Daddy because he was merely trained while Big Daddy was independently intelligent. Well, what if Bub wasn't just any old zombie? What if Logan had tried to train dozens or even hundreds of zombies prior to Bub, and Bub was the ONLY zombie he'd ever succeeded in training? It stands to reason he would've tried to train others. And it stands to reason he failed since we only have Bub. So it may be that Bub was very much like Big Daddy and all Logan did was identify it. I had always taken the stance that Bub and Big Daddy were fundamentally different. After careful consideration I've concluded that I am torn on the topic. So... discuss. And try to be civil. I'd rather this not turn into a thread to bag on intelligent zombies or any movie in particular. This is a great post. Dr. Logan certainly did try to domesticate many zombies before finding Bub, remember his frustration as he offed one of the zombies with a cordless drill after it had broken its chains? So I feel that Bub and Big Daddy are one in in the same and are perhaps the 2 out of 200,000 zombies that exhibit this kind of higher thinking. Although the concept was good, Big Daddy was the weakest character in LOTD. THis was dissapointing especially when compared to how soulful and effective Bub was in Day. Interesting that the zombie IQ dropped dramatically after their debut in NOTLD when that tenacious first zombie actually tried using a rock to smash the car window

[Gemini]

It's not enough to make the film a failure for me though. I liked it a lot. It's the weakest of the original quad of course, but it's still light years ahead of 'Diary of the Dead' and (I'd wager) the rest of this "re-boot" idea that Romero has wedded himself too. I agree with this. LOTD was a fun ride, but not as grim or serious as the previous three which was a big part of the series charm. Diary was just plain weak. However I don't know what this "re-boot" idea is, can somebody explain?

[krakenslayer]

However I don't know what this "re-boot" idea is, can somebody explain? It's not really a re-boot, it's just shorthand for Romero no longer following the tradition of each film being set chronologically after the last - Night (first night), Dawn (two weeks to several months in), Day (many months or up to 1-2 years in), Land (several years in). Diary goes back to the first night of the outbreak (around the Night timescale), Survival is set two or three weeks in (around the Dawn timescale). People are calling it a re-boot but it's arguably just him telling stories that take place at different points in the same outbreak.

[Philly_SWAT]

It's not really a re-boot, it's just shorthand for Romero no longer following the tradition of each film being set chronologically after the last - Night (first night), Dawn (two weeks to several months in), Day (many months or up to 1-2 years in), Land (several years in). Diary goes back to the first night of the outbreak (around the Night timescale), Survival is set two or three weeks in (around the Dawn timescale). People are calling it a re-boot but it's arguably just him telling stories that take place at different points in the same outbreak. Yes, this is similar to the way he showed Day and Land out of order.

[bassman]

Crazy, crazy philly. He definitely sticks to his guns. Gotta love him.

[Trin]

Yes, who didn't cringe at Kraken's obvious invitation to this debate?

[Gemini]

What is the evidence for Land coming before Day? Day was the most bleak portrayal of the zombie war of any of GAR's movies, with people forced underground and the only foray into a civilized area resulting in absolutely nothing but walking death; no looters, etc. Also I don't believe even radio contact with the living was achieved through the whole movie. Even if you buy into Land coming after Day you must admit the humans in Day were much more doomed and at the end of their rope.

[krakenslayer]

Even if you buy into Land coming after Day you must admit the humans in Day were much more doomed and at the end of their rope. This. They were stuck down there on the Florida peninsula, the tip of the dick of America, with broken radio equipment and one chopper with a ~300 mile range (one way) which meant they could only explore in a 150 mile radius. They could have been the last people on Earth, or they could just have been the last large group in Florida who are actively seeking contact. Sure, they were at the end of their rope and more desperate than anything in Land, but Land is conceptually set later into the outbreak. Even Romero said that he decided to go back to the beginning with Diary because he didn't want to keep going further and further into the post apocalyptic future like he'd been doing with the last three movies or he'd get to the point where it became The Road Warrior. In the end, the Pre-Day Landers are entitled to their strange little belief system, so I'm not gonna get drawn in: it's fiction and can be interpreted in any number of ways.

[Philly_SWAT]

What is the evidence for Land coming before Day? Day was the most bleak portrayal of the zombie war of any of GAR's movies, with people forced underground and the only foray into a civilized area resulting in absolutely nothing but walking death; no looters, etc. Also I don't believe even radio contact with the living was achieved through the whole movie. Even if you buy into Land coming after Day you must admit the humans in Day were much more doomed and at the end of their rope. Excellent post, especially for a new guy. Welcome to HPOTD Gemini! Sure, they were at the end of their rope and more desperate than anything in Land, but Land is conceptually set later into the outbreak. Even Romero said that he decided to go back to the beginning with Diary because he didn't want to keep going further and further into the post apocalyptic future like he'd been doing with the last three movies or he'd get to the point where it became The Road Warrior. Romero is prone to mis-speaking, and especially when he is talking to someone who is not an extreme dead fan, he tends to keep things simple and easy soundbites rather than giving complex answers. So what GAR says or doesnt say isnt compelling one way or the other, especially regarding who he was talking to and why. Do you have a citation/context of when and where he said that? Also, I disagree that conceptually that Land is set later into the outbreak.

[Trin]

Even if you buy into Land coming after Day you must admit the humans in Day were much more doomed and at the end of their rope. The level of "doomed" is not indicative of timeline. When Ben kills Cooper in Night and retreats to the basement he is as doomed and at the end of his rope as any character in any Dead movie. Same for Peter contemplating suicide after the mall is invaded. Did they come after Day too? At the same time the sheriff and posse are not doomed at all. Nor is the biker gang. So even within the same movies experiencing the same events there are those who are in desperate situations and those who aren't. The ending of Day had the survivors sitting on the beach. The ending of Land had the survivors driving off shooting fireworks. Both of the movies ended on relative happy notes.

[SRP76]

How are the people in Day any more "doomed" or "at the end of their rope" than the folks in Land, anyway?

[Gemini]

How are the people in Day any more "doomed" or "at the end of their rope" than the folks in Land, anyway? In Land, Fiddler's Green was one of many high-end living spaces quaranteed from the living dead. Refer to the Fiddlers Green commercial in the movie which states "unlike those other places" ....the victims in Day had not even one such place to go..that they knew about anyway. As far as they were concerned they were the last people on earth. Land had managed to carve out an actual society (a microcosm of our own maybe) the same could not be said for the desperate people driven underground in Day.

[Wyldwraith]

I'd argue against that, Except for the unforeseeable event of Miguel going all pro-zombie and opening the base up to be invaded, even WITH Rhodes nutjob behavior, I can make a helluva argument that minus Miguel's lone act that SOME of the military grunts could've survived indefinitely. Compare to Land, where the suburbs of the Green ended up ravaged by BDs Navy Seal-zombies, and the Green itself was overrun/brought down. One could even make the argument that the base in Day was far more recoverable than the area around Fiddler's Green. Hole up in a lab, wait for the majority of the zombies to scatter, begin thinning the herd, then secure the elevator. Tough, but no tougher than excising BD and his learning-commando zombies from the area where "they were just looking for a home" Personally, I subscribe to the view Land IS after Day in the timeline, but that's just a feeling. I have no substantive evidence that I'm right, it simply "feels" later.

[SRP76]

In Land, Fiddler's Green was one of many high-end living spaces quaranteed from the living dead. Refer to the Fiddlers Green commercial in the movie which states "unlike those other places" ....the victims in Day had not even one such place to go..that they knew about anyway. As far as they were concerned they were the last people on earth. Land had managed to carve out an actual society (a microcosm of our own maybe) the same could not be said for the desperate people driven underground in Day. The only difference is that Kaufman's leadership/deception skills were greater than Rhodes' and Cooper's. The two groups were in the same exact situation.