Unlimited Dead Conversation

[SRP76]

Since just about every thread spirals way, way off-topic, I decided to create one of these. Since there is no topic, it is impossible to go off-topic here.

This is a catchall zombie thread. Any and all random babblings/insights/arguments about the zombie genre is welcome here. It's just a free conversation.

I'll start the ball rolling by posting a few of my own random beliefs:

1. Zombies should never run/speak/leap/act like living human beings.

2. Dawn '04 wasn't bad, and the things people complain most about are explained in the movie; you only have to pay attention.

3. Dawn '78 was the pinnacle for Romero, and it's been downhill from there.

4. Shaun of the Dead was not funny. At all.

5. The "Zombie Survival Guide" has several examples of pure crap that are totally unfeasible, and would get you killed in a real zombie outbreak.

6. There is no way to survive the hypothetical zombie uprising; it's an unwinnable scenario. We'd all be ghoulmeat before the onslaught of the living dead.

7. There is no Nirvana in the wake of a zombie apocalype, where everyone just decides to get along "for the common good". It's a fairytale.

Any argument is welcome.:)

[Mike70]

i have always been a huge fan of day and think that it is the pinnacle of romero's dead movies (and career in general). i love it because it is dark, claustrophobic and has some of the more interesting characters to appear in any of his dead movies.

i know this is all a matter of personal taste but i'll shoot anyone who doesn't agree with me and take their stuff.:lol:

sorry, i was channeling another thread there for a second.:p

[SRP76]

i have always been a huge fan of day and think that it is the pinnacle of romero's dead movies (and career in general). i love it because it is dark, claustrophobic and has some of the more interesting characters to appear in any of his dead movies.

Day has always been "meh" for me. Better than all the other non-Romero zombie crap that infested the '80s? Hell, yes. But pale compared to Dawn. It just seemed like "here's another story about a bunch of people holed up from zombies, and they don't get along". Just like Dawn, only without the coolness of a mall to run around in. It did have Rhodes, though, and that's always a plus.


i know this is all a matter of personal taste but i'll shoot anyone who doesn't agree with me and take their stuff.:lol: p

Hey, don't be a dick-skinner!:D

[Bub666]

Since just about every thread spirals way, way off-topic, I decided to create one of these. Since there is no topic, it is impossible to go off-topic here.

This is a catchall zombie thread. Any and all random babblings/insights/arguments about the zombie genre is welcome here. It's just a free conversation.

I'll start the ball rolling by posting a few of my own random beliefs:

1. Zombies should never run/speak/leap/act like living human beings.

2. Dawn '04 wasn't bad, and the things people complain most about are explained in the movie; you only have to pay attention.

3. Dawn '78 was the pinnacle for Romero, and it's been downhill from there.

4. Shaun of the Dead was not funny. At all.

5. The "Zombie Survival Guide" has several examples of pure crap that are totally unfeasible, and would get you killed in a real zombie outbreak.

6. There is no way to survive the hypothetical zombie uprising; it's an unwinnable scenario. We'd all be ghoulmeat before the onslaught of the living dead.

7. There is no Nirvana in the wake of a zombie apocalype, where everyone just decides to get along "for the common good". It's a fairytale.

Any argument is welcome.:)

I agree with you 100%.

[Yojimbo]

5. The "Zombie Survival Guide" has several examples of pure crap that are totally unfeasible, and would get you killed in a real zombie outbreak.


I am completely with SRP on this point. Though I enjoyed his handbook, quite a lot of the book is filled with silliness. What kind of moron, for example, thinks that destroying a staircase with an axe while standing on it is a viable option? He also suggests machetes over firearms (hence the mantra: Blades don't need reloading) and suggests a wholly insufficient supply of ammunition if you happen to choose a firearm.

[SRP76]

What kind of moron, for example, thinks that destroying a staircase with an axe while standing on it is a viable option?

That's one that always made me gag. He makes it seem like destroying a staircase is as simple as climbing to the top, turning around, pulling a string, and the thing collapses. In reality, even if you have the right tools to take a staircase apart, it's work. It'll take half an hour just to pry up and remove 3 or 4 risers (and you're going to have to remove more than that). It's not like you'd have all day to do this, with ghouls nipping at your heels.

And if you're dealing with a concrete-and-steel staircase (like you'd find in an office building or parking garage), you can just forget it. Unless you've got a construction crew in your pocket, it's just not going to happen.

[RustyHicks]

I agree Dawn was George's best, Night was break through and although I do
like Day, I can see the decline from there on in. Wasn't much of a fan of Land
and Diary didn't thrill me much either.

[Mike70]

I am completely with SRP on this point. Though I enjoyed his handbook, quite a lot of the book is filled with silliness. What kind of moron, for example, thinks that destroying a staircase with an axe while standing on it is a viable option? He also suggests machetes over firearms (hence the mantra: Blades don't need reloading) and suggests a wholly insufficient supply of ammunition if you happen to choose a firearm.

i with the two of you here. the zombie survival guide is an entertaining, diverting book but as some sort of blueprint for making it through zombieville without being turned into human tartar, it falls a bit short in places.

excuse me while i go walk around the forum like i'm hot sh*t. sorry, not everyone can be as cool as i am.:cool::D

[Yojimbo]

1. Zombies should never run/speak/leap/act like living human beings.

2. Dawn '04 wasn't bad, and the things people complain most about are explained in the movie; you only have to pay attention.



As far as #1 is concerned, I again am in total agreement with you, though I sort of bought Bub saying "Hello Aunt Alicia" in DAY.

But with #2, while I agree that DAWN 04 was not totally unredeemable, I must say that in comparison to DAWN 78 is was totally inferior, IMHO. My complaint is the running zombies (as you pointed this out in your statement #1 "Zombies should never Run" I assume you agree) and the conceit of naming the film Dawn of the Dead, which was a major mistep. Character development, I feel, was rather weak as well. And those putos on the commentary track barely acknowledge GAR!!! But, again, there were things that I did like about DOTD 04 and it admittedly rates among the better zombie films that have come out within the past decade, though again not as well done, insightful or fun as DOTD 78. Let's face it, few zombie films could compete with GAR's DOTD 78 (even to some degree the following GAR zombie films), however, DOTD 04 invites these comparisons to a classic favorite, so if it gains the wrath of fans then that is a pox that it brought down on itself. Had it called itself, I dunno, "Crossroads Mall" or "Zombies R Us" I think that it would not be despised on such a wide scale.

[CornishCorpse]

1. Zombies should never run/speak/leap/act like living human beings.

Completely agree. Theyre dead, theyre all messed up.

2. Dawn '04 wasn't bad, and the things people complain most about are explained in the movie; you only have to pay attention.

I agree if you take dawn04 as just a zombie flick. If you take away the name and the classic that is the original then its a decent fun no brainer. Zombie smashing fun. Dawn for the mtv generation.

3. Dawn '78 was the pinnacle for Romero, and it's been downhill from there.

Whoah there. Day is a classic it was a great way to finish the trilogy but each to their own. All installments of the holy three I feel fleshed out the world and showed a new perspective on the destation that is Z-day.

4. Shaun of the Dead was not funny. At all.

Shaun was a great film but Im compromised I love simn pegg and edgar wright and add them ( romero fanboys ) to zombies. I thought it would fell on its face but I own the dvd and saw it in the cinema three times.

5. The "Zombie Survival Guide" has several examples of pure crap that are totally unfeasible, and would get you killed in a real zombie outbreak.

The round goes to scip. Im a big fan of the survival guide but there are quite a few holes in it, some parts will stand strong against the hoardes and others fall flat on their face in my own opinion.

6. There is no way to survive the hypothetical zombie uprising; it's an unwinnable scenario. We'd all be ghoulmeat before the onslaught of the living dead.

Touche sir.

7. There is no Nirvana in the wake of a zombie apocalype, where everyone just decides to get along "for the common good". It's a fairytale.

No but you could make youreself a nirvana. When the choice is starve or work and help society most people would do whatever they needed to survive. Id rather do manual labour than dodging zeds and bandits while searching for food.

[RustyHicks]

I gotta a good name for Dawn04

"I wanna rip of a classic zombie flick"

[Yojimbo]

I gotta a good name for Dawn04

"I wanna rip of a classic zombie flick":lol::lol::lol:Would have been more accurate, for sure.

[SRP76]

I finally got to reserve a copy of Plague of the Dead: Thunder and Ashes at my local library. It's currently "being acquired by the library", so it may take some time to come in (I've had Day By Day Armageddon reserved for a month, and it still hasn't come in).

I'm looking forward to it greatly; The Morningstar Strain was the best zombie book I've read (and I've read a whole boatload of them), so I'm expecting a great story. I could do without the whole "jackass CIA agent causing trouble for the heroes" subplot, but, other than that, the first book was nearly perfect.

[Bub666]

I gotta a good name for Dawn04

"I wanna rip of a classic zombie flick"

:lol:

[DubiousComforts]

I agree with you 100%.
I disagree with your agreement 100%

[SymphonicX]

I Like The Phantom Menace!!

[Mike70]

1. Zombies should never run/speak/leap/act like living human beings.


i could get past fast moving zombies, if the movie is good. runners in and of themselves aren't going to ruin a movie for me. crappy writing, bad acting and shoddy direction will take care of that.

as for talking: this is something i think is relatively dumb. unless the movie is a comedy spoof of the zombie genre, i far prefer zombies to be quiet. since they are dead and don't breathe, i fail to see how they can make sounds let alone talk.

[Ov3rlord]

For the first rule does leaping count if they take a walk off a cliff or something lemming style? If it has to be a force of their leg muscles propelling them I agree. If the lemmerly way counts I have to disagree. Dawn '04 I agree with Corn is the Mtv stylized zombie movie. The reason it has such a bad rep is because of the name they gave it and again Corn has it where if it were differently titled it would be a bearable zombie slaughter. As for Dawn being the pinnacle I'm a fan of day myself it really went into the characters emotional struggles after dealing with it so long. Otherwise I think it would've been a smarter move to end it with the original trilogy. Shaun of the Dead is actually a movie I prefer to watch I think it's actually pretty funny because that is what they do (the actors) Nick Frost (Ed in the movie) actually has his own reality show called Danger 50,000 volts. It's a survival show in wierd circumstances and for one episode it was danger 50,000 zombies where Simon Pegg (Shaun) plays a zombie expert it's really meant to be a mockery of zombie movies and not actually try to be a serious one. As for the zombie survival guide the so called bible of zombie apocalypse survivors to some and the so called worthless piece of trash to the rest. Most of the information in it is either common sense or dumb, like it's easier to carry .22's than it is to carry shotgun shells (no crap really brooks?), also that blades are better? who in their right mind would go that close to a zombie? Some tips are actually practical like stay out of cities (common sense) and a bolt action rifle is better because it apparently gives off some psychological feeling of making the shot count as opposed to spray and pray method. Number six goes all to you even if you did survive the initial apocalypse are you planning on repopulating the earth or something? Number seven is really up to the certain individual in different situations so to many variables for me to be certain.

[EvilNed]

Just re-read the Zombie Survival Guide, and while I'm no gun expert or anything like that, I think the point that was supposed to come across is that ammo will be scarce, and everybody would want to get ahold of some. So it'd run out fast.

But there are other flaws in the book, but I do read it for entertainment, nothing else. For instance, for close quarters combat, the author goes on to say how good the Katana is for close combat, and in other ways displays his ignorance of swords.

How are you going to maintain that sword? I don't know about you guys, but are you guys swordsmiths? Go out, take a sword and chop it into the skull of ten guys. By the tenth, it'd need maintenance or it would get stuck in at least one of those skulls. REAL stuck.

Also, he furthers the myth that the Katana is all-powerful and that european swords are trash. Just the other week I had the fortunate oppertunity to speak to a medieval re-enactor who had actually trained with swords. All kinds of swords. And still, European swords are meant to stab, NOT bash. European swords would be razorblade sharp.

But most importantly, where the hell are you going to find ANY sword (katana or otherwise) that would not break after only a few uses. Swords were meant for stabbing! Stabbing! And stabbing they can do. But stabbing is USELESS against zombies. And if you chop, be prepared to have your sword stuck in that thick bone.

Also, I prefer Romero's zombie rules to Brooks. In the Zombie Survival Guide it just says that zombies retain nothing of their former selfs. Well, they do in Romero's films. They have memories, they can figure some stuff out. They're still dumber than the dumbest ape, but hey. They DO have hands, and they would be able to grab things.

[Yojimbo]

Also, he furthers the myth that the Katana is all-powerful and that european swords are trash...European swords are meant to stab, NOT bash. European swords would be razorblade sharp.

But most importantly, where the hell are you going to find ANY sword (katana or otherwise) that would not break after only a few uses. Swords were meant for stabbing! Stabbing! And stabbing they can do. But stabbing is USELESS against zombies. And if you chop, be prepared to have your sword stuck in that thick bone.



Evil Ned is very correct. In Kendo, the japanese art of fencing also known as "the way of the sword" slashing and stabbing are both implemented, however slashing must be done very carefully since, as Evil Ned pointed out, you are likely to either get your sword stuck, or snap your blade. (yes, even the legendary steel of a master crafted Japanese Katana can break)

Every tool is designed for a specific purpose- a hammer for nails, a screwdriver for driving screws - and while you can certainly use a hammer and a screwdriver to kill someone, there are more efficient tools designed specifically to kill someone. And in that realm, some of those tools are designed specifically to decapitate, some are for slashing and others for stabbbing, and yet others meant to fire a projectile at high speed through the vital organs of an opponent. The Katana was designed as a stabbing weapon first that can also be used for slashing.

It is true that the Katana can be used to slash an opponent, and that the true masters of the art can in fact slash through the body or decapitate the head of an opponent in one strike, effectively cleaving their body in two or decapitating with one quick stroke, but only masters of the art can accomplish this, and this can only be done if you are truly skilled, have an understanding of the rigidity/flexibility of your steel, and strike your opponent at a very specific angle at a specific place in the body. Simple brute strength is not enough to carry this off.

If you aim for the head, you risk breaking your sword on the skull, or having your sword glance off of the cranium. Most of those who fought on the battlefield wore helmets, which would break a sword with a skull strike. Sure, it is possible to cleave through the skull, but this is not what a Katana was designed for.

And if you think about the dynamics of a sword fight where your opponent is a human being with the weaknesses of a human being, a slash might be effective in weakening your victim through pain, or opening a vein or artery so that they bleed out, or reducing your opponent's ability to continue fighting effectively severing a tendon in the arm or the leg.
With a live opponent, a true "kill strike" is going to be a stab at the neck, or through the heart, or an abdomen thrust followed by a secondary kill strike. But this would not work against a ghoul who feels nothing. A stab through the heart will not kill a ghoul. A ghoul wouldn't be weakened by pain or through severing an artery, though a tendon strike might be effective.


There is nothing mystical or magical about a Katana, any more than it's European counterparts. And in recommending a Katana for use against the living dead (and a machete which is designed to cut vegatation, not heads off of ghouls) and by insinuating that it is superior to European edged weapons, Brooks offers up another example of his ignorance showing that he does not really know all that much about that which he writes.

[Ov3rlord]

Also on top of those swords snapping and breaking that's talking about finding one that can actually handle it self to those made for battle where as most are just show pieces and could very well break by swinging it incorrectly. I don't know about anyone else but I'll stick to a good old crowbar as my zombie basher.

[AcesandEights]

Yeah, the myth of the invulnerable katana and unbreakable melee weapons is one of my pet peaves.


I don't know about anyone else but I'll stick to a good old crowbar as my zombie basher.

See? Now we're talkin'! I'm a big adherent to the lead pipe philosophy of zombie bashing, so I see where you're coming from :skull:

[SRP76]

See? Now we're talkin'! I'm a big adherent to the lead pipe philosophy of zombie bashing, so I see where you're coming from :skull:

Certainly. It's a lot easier to just splatter a skull apart than it is to slice heads off and whatnot. The whole idea of using swords to "decapitate the ghoul, or thrust through the eye" is stupid; contrary to what some may say, not everyone is a ninja. 99.999% of people would wind up slicing themselves up while trying to take on a pack of ghouls with a sword.

[Yojimbo]

excuse me while i go walk around the forum like i'm hot sh*t. sorry, not everyone can be as cool as i am.:cool::D

He who laughs last... :)


Also on top of those swords snapping and breaking that's talking about finding one that can actually handle it self to those made for battle where as most are just show pieces and could very well break by swinging it incorrectly. I don't know about anyone else but I'll stick to a good old crowbar as my zombie basher.

Yes, what you will find at surplus stores or in your local mall sword shop are reproductions, usually shoddily made, and usually made in China. It might look like a Japanese Katana, but even those few that are made in Japan today are generally not of the same quality of those made by the masters of the past, with maybe a few rare exceptions. The original katanas are just not going to be available.

If you are going to get close enough to use a Katana, seriously, you'd be better off with an aluminum baseball bat, or a lead pipe wrapped with grip tape, or hell, even a claw hammer.


Certainly. It's a lot easier to just splatter a skull apart than it is to slice heads off and whatnot. The whole idea of using swords to "decapitate the ghoul, or thrust through the eye" is stupid; contrary to what some may say, not everyone is a ninja. 99.999% of people would wind up slicing themselves up while trying to take on a pack of ghouls with a sword.

Agree with SRP. And would say the same for firearms too. While I know that SRP could hit his target, most would not be skilled enough to hit a ghoul in the head.

[Wyldwraith]

One point to make,
While *in principle* I agree humanity is toast in the event a Romero-style zombie uprising occurs, not everyone is going to die...at least of anything besides natural causes.

Here's my theory. I call it the Everything Turns to Gold For Him theory. Know those people who are ALWAYS in the perfect place, at the perfect time, doing the perfect thing? Out of 8 billion of us there are bound to be a few by sheer stupid chance that find themselves in the perfect position to tough out the apocalypse. Then again, I think that goes without saying for any sort of apocalypse that doesn't instantly wipe out all life on earth.

::shrugs::

Oh, and zombies should never run, and Old Dawn was the high-water mark for Romero.

[EvilNed]

If you are going to get close enough to use a Katana, seriously, you'd be better off with an aluminum baseball bat, or a lead pipe wrapped with grip tape, or hell, even a claw hammer.

Agreed. It wouldn't be impossible to use a sword, but let's face it. A sword, any sword, is first and foremost quite expensive (talking about the real ones) and second, designed to fight humans, who feel pain. Against humans swords can be tremendously effective! But against an opponent that feels no pain, stabbing would be useless. Stab a human in the stomach in a sword duel, or even just leave a fleshwound near across his ribs and his effectiveness will have dropped. Do the same to a ghoul, and you've just lost precious time.

In the end, learning to use the sword in a proper way would be one big waste of time when preparing for the zombie apocalypse. Learn to swing a bat instead. Cheaper, easier to get ahold off, better suited for destroying the brain and it'll probably last just as long as a sword anyway. But it won't get stuck in their flesh or bone.

[SRP76]

I thought of another big thing that none of the zombie films ever address: toilet use.

Think. Do your bowels care that there's an army of corpses after you? No. The urge to take a dump can strike at any time. This can be a horrible situation; nobody's going to be "holed up" in a restroom someplace. If you happen to be outside in their mist, you've got a huge problem. Finding a safe spot to squat and pinch off a loaf would be nearly impossible. If a ghoul happens to wander your way, you'll be in a pretty helpless position.

[Bub666]

I thought of another big thing that none of the zombie films ever address: toilet use.

Think. Do your bowels care that there's an army of corpses after you? No. The urge to take a dump can strike at any time. This can be a horrible situation; nobody's going to be "holed up" in a restroom someplace. If you happen to be outside in their mist, you've got a huge problem. Finding a safe spot to squat and pinch off a loaf would be nearly impossible. If a ghoul happens to wander your way, you'll be in a pretty helpless position.

Thats a good point.If you had to use the toilet and you were surrounded by zombies,you'd be in big trouble.

[Wyldwraith]

Well,
That wouldn't be a problem for most people in the first day or so of encountering the living dead, since it's surprisingly common for people who are mortally afraid to **** themselves. Seriously, ask any orderly who gets tasked with ER clean-up. I have, the two I spoke with say they HATE it when people who are badly hurt are still very conscious/aware of what's happened to them, because those are the ones who **** and piss themselves out of fear that they're dying.

Telling me that having a DEAD GUY MISSING HALF HIS FACE grab you, you scuffle with him for 20 seconds as his blood/gore-stained teeth snap over and over inches from your face before you manage to throw him off of you won't accomplish mortal terror in your average person?

Exactly. Will be a lot of survivors running around with a load in their shorts and a large yellow stain down the front of their clothing.

No, not meant to be a stupid childish commentary, I'm serious.

[Bub666]

Well,
That wouldn't be a problem for most people in the first day or so of encountering the living dead, since it's surprisingly common for people who are mortally afraid to **** themselves. Seriously, ask any orderly who gets tasked with ER clean-up. I have, the two I spoke with say they HATE it when people who are badly hurt are still very conscious/aware of what's happened to them, because those are the ones who **** and piss themselves out of fear that they're dying.

Telling me that having a DEAD GUY MISSING HALF HIS FACE grab you, you scuffle with him for 20 seconds as his blood/gore-stained teeth snap over and over inches from your face before you manage to throw him off of you won't accomplish mortal terror in your average person?

Exactly. Will be a lot of survivors running around with a load in their shorts and a large yellow stain down the front of their clothing.

No, not meant to be a stupid childish commentary, I'm serious.


I agree.

[Skippy911sc]

1. Zombies should never run/speak/leap/act like living human beings.

I agree to some degree, I like some of the sounds (moans) they make, however Big Daddy was horrible. His grunts made me cringe like the first time I saw the young Anakin in TPM. I actually find the running a little more frightening.

2. Dawn '04 wasn't bad, and the things people complain most about are explained in the movie; you only have to pay attention.

I was one of the few who actually enjoyed this movie, however it should have been called something else.

3. Dawn '78 was the pinnacle for Romero, and it's been downhill from there.

I loved Dawn 78, but it is a toss up over Day. I enjoyed day and find it a little more easy to repeat watch.

4. Shaun of the Dead was not funny. At all.

I loved Shaun of the Dead and laughed out loud during this flick. Some of the inside jokes, especially if you watched spaced are brilliant.

5. The "Zombie Survival Guide" has several examples of pure crap that are totally unfeasible, and would get you killed in a real zombie outbreak.

I cannot comment on this since I have not read it.

6. There is no way to survive the hypothetical zombie uprising; it's an unwinnable scenario. We'd all be ghoulmeat before the onslaught of the living dead.

I reluctantly agree, although the prospect of survival is fresh in my mind the truth is I think it would be only a matter of time.

7. There is no Nirvana in the wake of a zombie apocalype, where everyone just decides to get along "for the common good". It's a fairytale.

We can't seen to get along in the best of time let alone when trouble erupts.

Any argument is welcome.:)

And thats all I gotta say about that...for now. ;)