GAR Intelligent Zombies - Bub vs. Big Daddy

[Wyldwraith]

Just gonna say it, Much like the jerk in Dawn '04, if anyone ever sees me shambling around *please, for the love of God. DESTROY ME*. Shitty as my life has been, I would absolutely detest being reduced to an undead eating machine with all the sensibility of a dumb rat or smart cockroach. Know how hard its been to restrain myself from killing several people who were once part of my life? I would hate to think that in life I exercised such restraint, and didn't do in those who richly deserved it, but in undeath I preyed on the innocent. The only remotely possible "sympathy" I could see having for a zombie, no matter who they were in life, would be to promptly make them truly dead as a tribute and memorial to fulfilling what would no doubt have been the wishes of the former human being who used to inhabit that body. Still, just my .02 As always, your mileage may vary.

[Rancid Carcass]

Just gonna say it, Much like the jerk in Dawn '04, if anyone ever sees me shambling around *please, for the love of God. DESTROY ME*. Sod that, if I'm doomed to come back then I'm gonna get me a bullet proof helmet and just go for it!

[Andy]

I Can pretty much put an end to the Battle of the inteligent zombies with 5 words. THERE IS NO SUCH THING Their brains do not function, only the central complex of the brain which controls base instincts retains any kind of function, even logan says that. Bub was mimicking behaviour from his memory and behaviours taught to him by logan, he was by no means inteligent he was just mimicking behaviour as all zombies have the capability to do and we have seen many times in many different films, the only reason bub seemed more inteligent was becuase not many zombies get to spend time around a human scientist to mimick them. Big daddy on the other hand was totally degrading and insulting to the whole genre, and was some kind of result of a mental breakdown or stroke. Poor GAR. Either way, if GAR had been fully compus mentus then big daddy (and land of the dead) would never of happened, therefore it didnt happen. See my land topic for details.

[Trin]

LMAO - Nice

[Rancid Carcass]

Their brains do not function, only the central complex of the brain which controls base instincts retains any kind of function, even logan says that. Don’t forget that Logans work, as Sarah commented, was based on theories that he wasn’t even proving correctly, so it’s hard to say whether or not if this was a definitive fact or just another hypothesis.

[SRP76]

All previous zombie study agrees with Logan, from the pointdexter on tv in Night to Patches in Dawn. Since everyone shown pre-Land agrees, that's got to be the accepted rule. Romero just woke up one morning and thought, "hey, wouldn't it be cool to fuck everything up now?", and the next day Big Daddy was created.

[fulci fan]

The big difference between the two is: Bub is not annoying. Big Daddy is.

[Andy]

The big difference between the two is: Bub is not annoying. Big Daddy is. Fulci fan, it always makes me smile when i see you've been online, not only becuase im a fellow fulci fan and ZFE is one of the best zombie movies ive seen not made by GAR, but your also the voice of truth and wisdom.

[Trin]

Bub was mimicking behaviour from his memory and behaviours taught to him by logan, he was by no means inteligent he was just mimicking behaviour as all zombies have the capability to do and we have seen many times in many different films, the only reason bub seemed more inteligent was becuase not many zombies get to spend time around a human scientist to mimick them. Bub did thrash the chain around in frustration and anger when he finds Logan's body. He wasn't mimicking anything then.

[Wyldwraith]

About behavior, Whether or not you're in the pro or anti-zombie intelligence camps, one thing that needs to be acknowledged is that all perpetuated behaviors are impulse/agenda driven. In other words, it's a moot point whether a zombie can reason as we do, even on a simplistic level. The vast majority of animals don't reason out their actions, yet they perform suitable behaviors in the appropriate contextual scenarios every time. When a pride of lions uses an oddity in the terrain (such as sort of shallow boxed in swell in a river or stream with unusually high banks to either side) to corner and bring down a prey animal using teamwork, none of the lions are engaged in tactical reasoning. Perception of the potential for an easier kill + hunger as motivator to act + evolved behavior patterns related to operating as a unit = 1 dead prey animal. Did the lions spring a trap on their target? Absolutely. Do they reason it out or "think" of what they just did as such? Of course not. I've never disputed that zombies were/could be potentially capable of some rather complicated behaviors when spurred to act by the basic drives motivating them. My contention is and remains that zombies are not as a rule capable of abstract thought. Even the complex multi-phase assault on Fiddler's Green lead by BD could be construed less as a quest for revenge against human tormentors, and more as a link in a chain of basic causality. Step 1: Human scavengers descend on BD's locale, loot the area and trash some zombies. Step 2: Big Daddy sees the warm humans rolling back towards the lights in the distance. Lights that are a unique sensory phenomena so far as the zombies in the area were concerned. Step 3: Big Daddy, compelled by his base drives begins heading for this unique sensory phenomena because it was the direction warm flesh was last seen heading. Due to the daisy-chain effect, other zombies massed and began following Big Daddy. Step 4: The events leading up to the massacre inside the Green. None of this requires reasoning ability or capacity for rational thought. While rather complex, it doesn't fall outside the boundaries of the expression of the basic drives GAR zombies have been depicted as being motivated by. What if Big Daddy isn't actually an "intelligent" zombie? What if he's simply the zombie exposed to a more complex series of sensory stimuli? Isn't it possible we're projecting our human bias onto a situation easily mistaken for thought-driven action, that was instead simply the tumbling of more dominoes than usual into each other? Human beings have a well-documented tendency to anthropomorphize non-sentient entities responsible for triggering intense emotional states in the observer. An exaggerated example of which would be when the survivor of an attack by an animal predator ascribe traits like evil to the predator, or feel it "enjoyed" their pain and fear. In objective reality it was a simple act of opportunistic predation, but subjectively for the victim, belief that the predator planned its actions and derived emotional satisfaction from carrying them out gives them a target for their feelings of helpless anger/rage. They create a false image or persona for their attacker, because its easier to emotionally digest than so much physical and emotional trauma having been caused by simply coming in contact with a creature following a pattern of instincts. It's a hazy, indistinct line..the boundary between complex instinct and simple thought. Maybe just a philosophical one, but I thought it was an interesting take on "Intelligent Zombies". Thoughts?

[Andy]

About behavior, Whether or not you're in the pro or anti-zombie intelligence camps, one thing that needs to be acknowledged is that all perpetuated behaviors are impulse/agenda driven. In other words, it's a moot point whether a zombie can reason as we do, even on a simplistic level. The vast majority of animals don't reason out their actions, yet they perform suitable behaviors in the appropriate contextual scenarios every time. When a pride of lions uses an oddity in the terrain (such as sort of shallow boxed in swell in a river or stream with unusually high banks to either side) to corner and bring down a prey animal using teamwork, none of the lions are engaged in tactical reasoning. Perception of the potential for an easier kill + hunger as motivator to act + evolved behavior patterns related to operating as a unit = 1 dead prey animal. Did the lions spring a trap on their target? Absolutely. Do they reason it out or "think" of what they just did as such? Of course not. I've never disputed that zombies were/could be potentially capable of some rather complicated behaviors when spurred to act by the basic drives motivating them. My contention is and remains that zombies are not as a rule capable of abstract thought. Ignoring the big daddy stuff becuase i refuse to acknowlege it as a character or land as a movie, i dont think its fair to compare zombies to a lion or indeed any animal, as any animal is alive and has a functioning brain, no matter what level its working on, its functioning. A Zombie does not, its brain dosnt function in any way aside from the central core, the behaviours were we see them are not in context with the situation around them, for example trying to drive a car or truck, taking a gun off roger, fiddling with a cash register in the mall.. None of these "behaviours" have any reason for advancement of neither the individual or "pack", they are just husks acting out vague memories and following their instincts and that is all. The absolute most potential i would give a zombie is the ability to mimick behaviour.

[krakenslayer]

Ignoring the big daddy stuff becuase i refuse to acknowlege it as a character or land as a movie. "Big who?" ?

[BillyRay]

While the gist of this arguement is about the relative intelligence of the Living Dead themselves, wouldn't the evolution of zombie intelligence actually be the mutation of the virus that caused the Dead to rise in the first place? Any virus is a living entity, and Virus Z (or Solarium, or Morningstar) works by attaching itself to the brain of it's host/victim. It primarily clusters around the motor function portions of the Human brain (including the aggressive Reptle, or "R-factor", portion of the brain). What we call a "zombie" is merely the vehicle for the virus to travel and spread (through a bite) and survive. By the time of Land, the virus may have mutated to other portions of the dormant brain. We've seen basic tool use and other learned/remembered behaviors since Night, why couldn't the virus develop some resemblance of 'higher brain function' as a means of improving it's chances of survival? The virus already seems to slow the decomposition process in the body, would it do the same with the head meat? If it does, that would keep the more advanced portions of the brain preserved. I'm no Brain Scientist (not much of a Rocket Surgeon, either), but it seems the argument of "Zombie Intelligence" must go to the root of the problem - the Virus Itself. It is a living organism fighting to survive. It will mutate, adapt & evolve in order to do so.

[Andy]

In which of GAR's dead movies is it disclosed that the cause is a virus? I dont recall..

[fulci fan]

Fulci fan, it always makes me smile when i see you've been online, not only becuase im a fellow fulci fan and ZFE is one of the best zombie movies ive seen not made by GAR, but your also the voice of truth and wisdom. Thanks, brother. You are probably the only guy on here that doesn't think I am an annoying dick.