Gar and the intelligent Zombie debate

[darth los]

So i'm getting ready for school on saturday morning and there's a fantasy football commercial on ESPN and it featured one of the most annoying characters in recent memory, The Geico Caveman. Why do they keep doing this? Why do they insist on shoving this crappy idea down our throats. I mean the guys sucks, deal with it and move on already. They're not funny and are an eyesore. Unfortunately, this is what usually happens in pop culture. They try to tell us what's cool, what's beautiful and what's acceptably mainstream. They're like "don't you get it!?!...this is really cool...you really like this".

So i start thinking about what that reminds me of. Oh wait a minute. That's what GAR is doing wth his intelligent zombie idea. He's trying to ram it down our throats and many of us are spitting it back up.

Now, before the posts pop up about it being "his vision, his money, he can do what he wants", I concede that point as i do to the Geico dudes. There's no denying that, so that won't be a very constructive debate. However, Just like them it doesn't mean it's a good idea.

There have been other threads about land and about how the intelligent zombies play in that film and in the series, so instead let's focus mainly on them minus the films. How high an intelligence is just right for a ghoul to exhibit? Is it really the best thing for the zombie genre?

We don't like to criticize him because he's the master and even though some of us might not like the idea we accept it because it's him. Imo, he's tainting his legacy with each of these succesive attempts at the idea.

Also, contrary to as some have argued, the wants of the fans ARE relavent and can't be totally discounted. What is he, Dick Cheney now?

Guy: Gar, alot of fans aren't feeling this
Gar: So?

Artists in large part owe their success to the fans who dug their work in the first place. Without us geeking out over his original vision he wouldn't be where he is today.To totally discount what the fans want is kind of a slap in the face. And artist or not if you don't have a market for your work you will soon be irrelevant and OUT of work.

So is it a good idea? Why or why not? Do you feel it's being forced on us?

[DubiousComforts]

And artist or not if you don't have a market for your work you will soon be irrelevant and OUT of work.
That's not anyone's business but the artist's, no? You don't see Romero making psuedo-documentaries like Heckler in order to whine about being misunderstood by his critics and he has had more than his share in the past 40 years. Back in 1969, NIGHT was considered the fall of decency and good taste.

If you don't like George Romero's films or message, don't watch them. They are very easy to avoid. Romero is just one guy. Comparing him to Geico's advertising or the latest American Idle-manufactured megastar is irrelevant because there is no hiding from that type of market saturation.

In my experience, whether it be music, film or most any medium, the fans have the absolutely worst ideas and it's best that no artist listen to them.

[EvilNed]

While I have to admit that I prefer my zombies brainless and working on instinct (scarier that way), I do very, very much like the way Romero has handled the intelligent zombies in his films. I don't mind Big Daddy. There are flaws with Land, but Big Daddy ain't one of em'. I like that film.

Diary I didn't like, and that's the first one to show just mindless, brainless zombies... So, well, there ya go. I don't see a connection.

But I do agree with DC. GAR should do his thing. Because the minute he starts doing what others want, he stops being interesting. At least to me.

[Bub666]

While I have to admit that I prefer my zombies brainless and working on instinct (scarier that way), I do very, very much like the way Romero has handled the intelligent zombies in his films. I don't mind Big Daddy. There are flaws with Land, but Big Daddy ain't one of em'. I like that film.


I agree,I like the intelligent zombies in Romero's films.

[capncnut]

I do very, very much like the way Romero has handled the intelligent zombies in his films. I don't mind Big Daddy. There are flaws with Land, but Big Daddy ain't one of em'. I like that film.
I really enjoyed the intelligent zombies in Land and thought it was a natural progression but I'm not a Big Daddy fan in the slightest. He said "RARRRGGGHHH!!!" way too much for my liking and was just annoying all-round.


Diary I didn't like, and that's the first one to show just mindless, brainless zombies...
That on top of a million other flaws, quite agree.

[bassman]

I really don't see how he's cramming it down our throats. You've got Bub and Big Daddy as the only two with any large signs of intelligence. While I like both, Bub seems to be welcomed by most fans. So the only one that could feel forced is BD....

So for two movies, two characters, and almost 20 years apart....I don't see the cramming.

[Bub666]

Think you got to have inteligent zombies.It's called evolution.Sooner or later the zombies will evolve,and become smarter.

[sandrock74]

Think you got to have inteligent zombies.It's called evolution.Sooner or later the zombies will evolve,and become smarter.

Huh?
A lifeform that is LIVING and THRIVING will evolve. Zombies are the complete opposite. They are dead and decomposing as they shamble about. I really can't accept that something with a rotting brain will evolve. How can it?
It's brain is in a state of decomposition!

[Mike70]

i am not against zombies showing some intelligence per se. i think that like people some would be "smarter" than others. maybe they've retained a bit more of their old lives and knowledge from life.

maybe the longer a person is a zombie they gradually "remember" more and more things from when they were alive.

logan does say in day that decomposition slows upon revival, so they just might be able to recover some things.

i think it would only go so far. how far is anyone guess but i don't foresee holding a conversation about "winter light" by bergman with a zombie.

[darth los]

All very good points. I didn't start this to really go one way or another, just to get a debate going. Your opinion is your opinion. It beats talking about the same things over and over.

Now, if it's not the intelligent zombie angle then it's something else. But one thing is for sure. The quality of the dead films are declining and something has to be responsible for it. That's the general consensus here, there's no denying that. Even the biggest Land Lovers ( no pun intended ) have conceded that Land is below the first three and diary is definitely behind land. Why?

[RustyHicks]

I really enjoyed GAR's Trilogy, they were classic and the
zombies in it were just scary in the way they were mindless
and bent on one thing...Getting food.
In Day, I didn't mind Bub, he was great and it was a slow
proccess to show the zombies could develop some working
development in the smarts department. The first sign of GAR
doing this was with Dawn when Stephen knew enough to go
up to the hidding place when he was a zombie. With Bub, he
wasn't developing smarts he was using his memory of what life
had been like before he turned.
Land I don't know, it seemed to fast, too rushed that these
zombies are getting smart. If they had done a movie showing
the slow process maybe I could have warmed up to the idea
a little more.
Personally though I like my zombies slow and stupid.
More fun that way

[darth los]

I really enjoyed GAR's Trilogy, they were classic and the
zombies in it were just scary in the way they were mindless
and bent on one thing...Getting food.
In Day, I didn't mind Bub, he was great and it was a slow
proccess to show the zombies could develop some working
development in the smarts department. The first sign of GAR
doing this was with Dawn when Stephen knew enough to go
up to the hidding place when he was a zombie. With Bub, he
wasn't developing smarts he was using his memory of what life
had been like before he turned.
Land I don't know, it seemed to fast, too rushed that these
zombies are getting smart. If they had done a movie showing
the slow process maybe I could have warmed up to the idea
a little more.
Personally though I like my zombies slow and stupid.
More fun that way


That's also a side effect of the intelligence... Not being scary. Something that can be reasoned with and has reasons for doing things just aren't as frightening. No matter where you stand on this issue there's no doubt that the more recent films just aren't as scary as the previous ones.

[Staredge]

The quality of the dead films are declining and something has to be responsible for it. That's the general consensus here, there's no denying that. Even the biggest Land Lovers ( no pun intended ) have conceded that Land is below the first three and diary is definitely behind land. Why?

The first three were new. They hadn't been done before, and the horror genre in general was VERY unsophisticated. In the interim between Day and Land, the genre exploded. Special effects got huge, money went into writing decent storylines, the creativity level jumped. I'm not sure how popular post-apocalyptic stories were when the first three came out, but certainly it's been done to death now. (pun also unintended)

(please don't jump me about the classic horror movies being sophisticated. I agree. That's not what I meant)

I know I'll probably get chased with pitchforks & torches, but we might give a little too much credit to Night & Day (HA!!!) and Dawn. Are they REALLY that good, or is it just that we love them so much??? (I enjoyed Ford Fairlane :rolleyes:) I like Land and Diary.

[darth los]

Being totally objective i do think that Dawn is a great all time film that trancends it's genre. There's a lot of stuff going on in that film that you don't have to be a horror fan to appreciate. It's better than night in every way. What elevates night's status to the same level is the fact that it was the first and showed things we haven't seen before that have gone on to be copied countless times.

[Shadowofthedead]

i cant go anyway.... i love all things zombie. i am romero lover, itallian lover, zombie dog lover.... etc... i will give most movies a chance unless they rip off classics like reanimator and such. i like diary and land. i like that i got to watch diary for free. i am in like with zombies. im the crazy nut who wishes the dead would really come back to life. i dont know im in one of those oddly sleep deprived moods

[darth los]

i cant go anyway.... i love all things zombie. i am romero lover, itallian lover, zombie dog lover.... etc... i will give most movies a chance unless they rip off classics like reanimator and such. i like diary and land. i like that i got to watch diary for free. i am in like with zombies. im the crazy nut who wishes the dead would really come back to life. i dont know im in one of those oddly sleep deprived moods

:stunned: NUFF SAID !!

[Shadowofthedead]

id still like to see someone shoot a movie where zombies started with a degree of smarts and the ability to (not starting debate with this word just making a statement dont hit me with sticks!!!) RUN at the beginning and then slow degrade to romero type with limited intellegence yet still deadly in mass. that in my opinion would be sweet. it would combine all popular elements into one mini series or such.... hmmmm i need to go to college for media arts... not. oh well perhaps someone will cover this in the fiction section at least or maybe i could.

[Staredge]

im the crazy nut who wishes the dead would really come back to life.

Dude. :stunned::confused: Thats taking the whole fanboy thing WAAAY too far. :lol:

[Bub666]

im the crazy nut who wishes the dead would really come back to life.

:confused:
I think someone has been watching too many zombie movies.

[Mutineer]

I disagree with zombies having any intelligence beyond Bub and then even that being an exception; anomaly.

RotLD got away with it due to it being more parody and comedy but GAR taking his dead this route is part of why Land sucked so hard,

[SRP76]

im the crazy nut who wishes the dead would really come back to life.

Some would agree. I personally believe the world and the vast majority of the people on it suck, so a global enema wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing in my eyes. I'm not quite fed up enough to want to wade through armies of ghouls just yet, though.

[JasonEdw]

That's also a side effect of the intelligence... Not being scary. Something that can be reasoned with and has reasons for doing things just aren't as frightening. No matter where you stand on this issue there's no doubt that the more recent films just aren't as scary as the previous ones.

*Agrees*

[Trin]

*Agrees**Agrees* with *Agrees* - Add reasoning ability and the zombies aren't scary anymore. Then take away their desire to feed on human flesh (the REAL difference between Bub and Big Daddy) and you have nothing left to fear.

The whole artist discussion is just ridiculous. GAR makes movies. Is it an art form? Yes. But it's also a business. And like any art form that ends up with a price tag attached to it it's a blurry line between the two.

Maybe GAR is past the point in his career where he wants his movies to be popular and to earn money. But I doubt it. Universal ponied up the money for Land expecting a return on investment with broad fan appeal and that's not what they got. Afterward GAR made it clear that Land 2 was something he'd be open to doing. I have a hard time believing that GAR was interested in doing Land 2 out of artistic drive. He was attempting to cash in on Land. When Universal didn't bite we end up with Diary and all of a sudden we're talking about independent filmmaking and artistry.

Well it sounds to me like movies as art is a fancy way of saying movies that don't make money.

[DubiousComforts]

Well it sounds to me like movies as art is a fancy way of saying movies that don't make money.
Universal wanted to make a box-office killing as they had on the DAWN remake, so they bring in the guy that started the genre as a "second string" director and give him much less of a budget to work with. The outcome should have been predictable.

The original NIGHT was made as an exploitation film so that the filmmakers could get a return on their investment and break into the feature film business. It made tons of money yet the filmmakers saw almost none of the returns, and less than 5 years after being made it was indeed considered "art" by the Museum of Modern Art.

George Romero didn't necessarily start out to make horror films. People read all sorts of social commentary in NIGHT, so he continued to make the types of "message" films that he believed fans wanted to see and DAWN only solidified this idea.

[darth los]

The whole artist discussion is just ridiculous. GAR makes movies. Is it an art form? Yes. But it's also a business. And like any art form that ends up with a price tag attached to it it's a blurry line between the two.

Thus the term "starving artists". The bottom line is that artists need to make money in order to be able to continue what they do. The source of this money is most likely going to come from people who like their work and want to see it continue.

[Mutineer]

Universal wanted to make a box-office killing as they had on the DAWN remake, so they bring in the guy that started the genre as a "second string" director and give him much less of a budget to work with. The outcome should have been predictable.

The original NIGHT was made as an exploitation film so that the filmmakers could get a return on their investment and break into the feature film business. It made tons of money yet the filmmakers saw almost none of the returns, and less than 5 years after being made it was indeed considered "art" by the Museum of Modern Art.

George Romero didn't necessarily start out to make horror films. People read all sorts of social commentary in NIGHT, so he continued to make the types of "message" films that he believed fans wanted to see and DAWN only solidified this idea.


Great post.

I do believe GAR is a 2nd string director; always saying that his legend and hype is based off of one film in particular, Night of the Living Dead. I have always felt GAR has gotten way too much kudos for message sin his film and that it was merely commentary and film enthusiasts who have created this legend.

The budget for LAND (I think $15 Million?) was paltry, but give that too a true Auteur, even a starving talent, and I think something really great could have been done.

[Doc]

I kind of liked Romeros idea with Bub but it was taken way too far with Big Daddy. Bub was essentially a big dumb dog that would still bite you in the ass if he had the chance. Big Daddy seemed at the end like he was going to start the zombie version of the SALT talks with the humans.

[sandrock74]

At least Bub had "training", wheras Big Daddy (besides having a dumb ass name) was just intelligent from the get go for no apparant reason! Huh??

If a zombie were going to be smart, it would have been at the begining, right after its reanimation...NOT years after its been shambling around and rotting away.

[clanglee]

Universal wanted to make a box-office killing as they had on the DAWN remake, so they bring in the guy that started the genre as a "second string" director and give him much less of a budget to work with. The outcome should have been predictable.

The original NIGHT was made as an exploitation film so that the filmmakers could get a return on their investment and break into the feature film business. It made tons of money yet the filmmakers saw almost none of the returns, and less than 5 years after being made it was indeed considered "art" by the Museum of Modern Art.

George Romero didn't necessarily start out to make horror films. People read all sorts of social commentary in NIGHT, so he continued to make the types of "message" films that he believed fans wanted to see and DAWN only solidified this idea.

Ohhhhhhh. . exactly!!!!!! Only he's gotten worse at woking the message into the movie. It's been a little more heavy handed each time.

As for intelligent zombies. No. . me no likey.

[Trin]

The original NIGHT was made as an exploitation film so that the filmmakers could get a return on their investment and break into the feature film business.Earlier you said that GAR is an artist and shouldn't be expected to listen to the fans, and if we don't like it we can just not watch his movies. Valid point. Now you're saying that he started his career making whatever it would take to break into the feature film business. Equally valid point. But those points are somewhat at odds. Did he change his filmmaking motivation over the years?

Personally I think he's still trying to make something that the fans will love. I think in the face of fan criticism he pretends otherwise. I just think he's lost his way figuring out how to appeal to his fanbase.

I also think he's felt pressure to take the genre in new directions. He's the master after all. For him to crank out more of the same wouldn't live up to his trendsetting image. After the success of running zombies in Dawn '04 and the Infected in 28 Days I think he was looking for some new twist he could add to differentiate Land both from his 3 previous Dead movies and from the new contenders in the genre. I think intelligent zombies grew out of that pressure.


People read all sorts of social commentary in NIGHT, so he continued to make the types of "message" films that he believed fans wanted to see and DAWN only solidified this idea.That right there is right on target!!

[Publius]

*Agrees* with *Agrees* - Add reasoning ability and the zombies aren't scary anymore. Then take away their desire to feed on human flesh (the REAL difference between Bub and Big Daddy) and you have nothing left to fear.

I agree too. We all know that NotLD was influenced by I Am Legend. In I Am Legend, the hero ultimately comes to see that the infected see him as a freak, and you can sympathize with the infected in a way. Romero flipped this by making the undead mindless, unfeeling, and unreasoning. Then by coming up with intelligent zombies, Romero starts to seem more like he's just trying to copy the emotional impact of Matheson's earlier work. He's undoing his unique twist.

[Doc]

I also think he's felt pressure to take the genre in new directions. He's the master after all. For him to crank out more of the same wouldn't live up to his trendsetting image. After the success of running zombies in Dawn '04 and the Infected in 28 Days I think he was looking for some new twist he could add to differentiate Land both from his 3 previous Dead movies and from the new contenders in the genre. I think intelligent zombies grew out of that pressure.





I think that GAR looked at what was going on with zombies at that point, and said, "Nobody thinks the old stuff is scary anymore. I've gotta think of some way to improve on the shamblers."

But, he didn't want to follow the trend that everybody else was going with, and went with more intelligence than speed with his ghouls.

And look at what we got--Land.

[Mutineer]

Tis true

I cannot remember the last time a Zombie film made me 'scared'. 28 Days Later succeeded a few times.