Zombie Movies

[JamesKurtovich]

A zombie is a creature of the living dead. Meaning that they aren't alive, sick, or infected. They're simply reanimated.

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

A zombie is a creature of the living dead. Meaning that they aren't alive, sick, or infected. They're simply reanimated.

Correction, some movie zombies are that way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie

Here in realityland we have multiple definitions of zombie.

Logan

[Q?]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Correction, some movie zombies are that way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie

Here in realityland we have multiple definitions of zombie.

Logan

28 days later depicts a virus epidemic in a much more realistic way. Which
NONE of Romero's or other obvious zombie movies are!
And I've never heard of Zombie's that are capable of hating, like the infected boy said in 28 days later "I hate you" while attacking a person.
Which means the boy has a conscious. Romero's first zombies had no consciousness whatsoever! And the newer zombie movie which you refered to was just a cheap way, to do something new to the Zombie genre, like learning and reasoning. Which in the first place was never the trademark and appeal of the genre.
And please don't use wikipedia.org, everybody can edit articles there, which
makes it a questionable source.

And don't call Danny Boyle a moron, that is just low and uncalled for.

[robertc88]

Zombies, vampires or whatever. I like 30 Days Of Night.

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by QQQQ!

28 days later depicts a virus epidemic in a much more realistic way. Which
NONE of Romero's or other obvious zombie movies are!

Bull$#!+

Romero specifically leaves out WHY the zombies are showing up in his movies, if it's radiation, plague or whatever, he simply doesn't say.

And I've never heard of Zombie's that are capable of hating, like the infected boy said in 28 days later "I hate you" while attacking a person.
Which means the boy has a conscious. Romero's first zombies had no consciousness whatsoever! And the newer zombie movie which you refered to was just a cheap way, to do something new to the Zombie genre, like learning and reasoning. Which in the first place was never the trademark and appeal of the genre.

It's the trademark of Romero that his zombies progress on a step-by-step mental evolution throughout his movies.

If you can't see that, then you either a} have never watched a Romero movie or b} just are in it to turn off your brain and watch blood and gore. Neither of these options are bad per se, but to talk as if you know Romero's movies like the back of your hand and then miss something so painfully obvious isn't really adding much to the conversation.

And please don't use wikipedia.org, everybody can edit articles there, which
makes it a questionable source.

Take a look at the movie White Zombie. You'll find someone in that movie who is a zombie, who also wasn't irradated or anything of the sort. It's Voodoo man.

And don't call Danny Boyle a moron, that is just low and uncalled for.

Why? Is he going to track me down and go "Christian Bale" on me?

Logan

[J_UNTITLED]

We're agreed to disagree -- everyone has their own truths... big deal.

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by J_UNTITLED

We're agreed to disagree -- everyone has their own truths... big deal.

We already agreed to disagree.

Logan

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Bull$#!+

Romero specifically leaves out WHY the zombies are showing up in his movies, if it's radiation, plague or whatever, he simply doesn't say.



It's the trademark of Romero that his zombies progress on a step-by-step mental evolution throughout his movies.

If you can't see that, then you either a} have never watched a Romero movie or b} just are in it to turn off your brain and watch blood and gore. Neither of these options are bad per se, but to talk as if you know Romero's movies like the back of your hand and then miss something so painfully obvious isn't really adding much to the conversation.



Take a look at the movie White Zombie. You'll find someone in that movie who is a zombie, who also wasn't irradated or anything of the sort. It's Voodoo man.



Why? Is he going to track me down and go "Christian Bale" on me? Logan

[Q?]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Bull$#!+

Romero specifically leaves out WHY the zombies are showing up in his movies, if it's radiation, plague or whatever, he simply doesn't say.

That's not what I meant, that's my own fault, I meant that 28 days later
is much more realistic, because there is a plausible explanation to how
they got infected with rabies like symptoms.
And what is realistic about "aaaaaaaaaahhhh BRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIINS"?
The realism in 28 days absolutely warrants a different label.

Originally Posted by jadedeath

It's the trademark of Romero that his zombies progress on a step-by-step mental evolution throughout his movies.

If you can't see that, then you either a} have never watched a Romero movie or b} just are in it to turn off your brain and watch blood and gore. Neither of these options are bad per se, but to talk as if you know Romero's movies like the back of your hand and then miss something so painfully obvious isn't really adding much to the conversation.

If you had read it thouroughly you would have understood that I said
the first zombies had no consciousness whatsoever. Romero obviously loves doing zombie flicks, I guess he would have had a hard time continuing his series without "evolution" of the zombies. Which was probably more of a necessity than intend. If you ask the general public of what a zombie
is, 99% would say they are reanimated dead bodies with no will of their own or something in the lines of that. And they sure as hell wouldn't say "they are the walking dead who progress on a step-by-step mental evolution"
Therefore their "trademark" or what they are known for, is that they are the
walking dead with no capability of speech and mental abstraction.
Which is not what the infected are in 28 days/weeks later.

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Take a look at the movie White Zombie. You'll find someone in that movie who is a zombie, who also wasn't irradated or anything of the sort. It's Voodoo man.

You're right, and that is not realistic and has nothing to do with the infected in 28 day/weeks later, because there is no Voodoo or other mumbo jumbo, only science. Look at dictionaries on the net
and books you'll see their definitons DO NOT MATCH the infected from 28 day/weeks later.

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Why? Is he going to track me down and go "Christian Bale" on me?

Logan

Hahaha that was actually quite funny, you and Michael Cera should team up!

and by the way, how can you defend calling somebody a moron you don't know?

Lastly I wanna say that we have to agree to disagree and it's totally understandable
that this can be regarded as a zombie movie, and I'll never change your mind no matter how many links and arguments I provide.
And I just read on an IMDB board somebody quoting the writer of 28 days later Alex Garland http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0289043/.../128672601?p=2 written by combatreview. "This is a Zombie movie with no zombie's in it." They're the Infected!!!! Not Zombies.
p.s. Opterasis thumbs up!

[JamesKurtovich]

Having a strong opinion on what defines a true Zombie movie makes you a hit with the ladies.

Zombies eat people. Virus-infected people starve to death.

[opterasis]

I like what one of the sfx guys said about 28 Days. He basically said "This is a zombie film without actual zombies".

*edit* QQQQ! just posted it.

[Anthony P]

Correction, some movie zombies are that way.

what is your point, that any idiot can write any stupidity on Wiki?
if you look at the definition at the beginning

A zombie is a reanimated human corpse

anything else is not a zombie. in 28 days/week the people have a disease that is a mutated form of rabies and like all rabies it makes the infected much more violent, or would you call a dog with rabies a zombie just because it attacks people?

[Anthony P]

There's plenty of neck-biting scenes. Flesh is consumed.

I don't remember if there was flesh that was consumed or not, but would you consider a movie about canibals to be a zombie movie?

[Ruin]

The best zombie movie is titled zombie/zombi. That is a classic

[opterasis]

A zombie is a reanimated human corpse. The things in 28 Days/Weeks are not reanimated, but enraged. They are not zombies. End of debate as far as I'm concerned.

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I don't remember if there was flesh that was consumed or not, but would you consider a movie about canibals to be a zombie movie?

Not about cannibals no.

But, we're talking about Zombies, the ZOMBIES from 28 days/weeks later fit every definition of zombie except for the fact that they're technically still alive.

Then again, that's the definition of Romero zombies, I prefer the Voodoo type myself, and seeing as how the Voodoo zombies can still be alive, then the 28 days/weeks zombies could fall under that definition as well.

Then again, I seem to be supporting my findings with logical discussion, people who are against me are seemingly engaged in a 'no it isn't!" type mentality without providing anything to back up what they're saying.

Logan