AMC zombie series from Frank 'Majestic' Darabont - The Walking Dead

http://knowyourmeme.com/i/000/052/812/original/Deal_with_it_dog_gif.gif?1275684729

here's a zombie question i got for ya. this applies to pretty much every movie or whatever i've seen about them.

if when zombies sense people their impulse is to head over and eat them and tear them apart until there's nothing left, where do new zombies come from?

community sort of addressed that last week when the zombies bit troy and he was all like "okay, you bit me, i get it, that's what zombies do" and shrugged them off

and how does mere "infection" allow the continued mobility of something as annihilated as bike girl?

this criticism is bullshit though. THATS WHAT HAPPENS IN ZOMBIE MOVIES.

Nothing but a head shot kills a zombie. Who doesn't already know this?

a lot of people in atlanta iirc

isn't it a case of

Secluded cases ppl think is illness > biting fam but overpowerable (that's not a word surely) so not a case of absolute death > people in the street able to escape the slow/stupid zombies with just a bite/scratch > fuck loads of zombies then can wile out on anyone > end times

never thought there would be a case of new gen of zombies in any zombie story i've ever seen, always ends with end times. also while that was obviously a lot of people in atlanta at the end, it wasn't exactly a whole fucking city of people, most people are dead.

ya i guess a lot of them are bite-and-runs

Both of these links are U+K.

http://www.cracked.com/article_15643_5-scientific-reasons-zombie-apocalypse-could-actually-happen.html
http://www.cracked.com/article_18683_7-scientific-reasons-zombie-outbreak-would-fail-quickly.html

thought the show was fantastic. loved it.

get out

felt it failed to highlight the current crisis facing burma

What about elephants
Have we lost their trust

the reality today is that 33 per cent more horses die year on year due to showjumping/flatracing injuries than being rended limb from limb by a gigantic crowd of zombies. now call me cynical, but i doubt this show will ever mention that stat.

I for one am disgusted by the show's blatant anti-horse agenda.

show is speciesist

a horse uses an immeasurable amount less gas than a military tank, and can later be recycled as food for zombies. and yet this show sends out the message, bold as brass, jump in your gas guzzling tank, you'll be safe there!

It was incredibly speciesist to portray horses as being so easily spooked by zombies. I'll bet none of the writers are even horses, let alone horse riders.

Are we on for a zombie horse next ep d'y think?

no doubt it won't be a stallion

and how does mere "infection" allow the continued mobility of something as annihilated as bike girl?

this criticism is bullshit though. THATS WHAT HAPPENS IN ZOMBIE MOVIES.

― candid gamera (s1ocki), Tuesday, November 2, 2010 8:40 AM (58 minutes ago) Bookmark

think you're missing contenderizer's point here, he's not criticizing the show for lack of scientific veracity when it comes to zombie infection, he's criticizing it for being so slow and disengaging that he started questioning stupid stuff. which I understand, because I had the exact same reaction. I was like, why aren't there a fuckton of zombie dogs, pigs, and horses running around?

Same reason we don't get feline leukemia.

actually, has there been a zombie animal movie?

(Resident Evil doesn't count; that had zombie humans as well)

Does the crazy deer head in "Evil Dead 2" count?

Oh I dunno, never saw that

Oh Dan

Pet Semetary, sort of.

There are reanimated animal, er, parts in "Return of the Living Dead." Zombie dogs in "Resident Evil?" The game, at least.

x-post The Romero rules more or less state the virus (or whatever) affects the dead or newly dead, so that means thousands of people who die every day - 250,000? - plus recently buried. So figure the initial outbreak contends with some 500,000 zombies, which is a big enough vector to spread around the world pretty quickly via zombie bite. Now, if the question is, how do the zombie multiply if they eat their victims, then that's a sort of good question. But in all these movies and shows and books and stuff, we're never given a zombie count. It's just always "a lot," and certainly more than there are people. But then you do the math and think, jeez, how many zombies does it take to take out 6 billion people (give or take a few)? So the total zombie count has to be massive.

x-xpost Just because "Shaun of the Dead" is funny does not make it a deconstruction. Gags and in-jokes aside, It's more of a loving homage, since regardless it hones pretty close to "the rules." It's not like vampires showing up in broad daylight and saying "oh, those are silly myths" The zombies eat people, get killed via the brain, shamble, bite, transfer the virus, etc. Nothing wrong with that, but like the mentioned earlier, the characters are not aware of Romero's world in their particular world. It's fun, funny stuff, but it still shows the zombie survivor learning curve in effect.

"Hot Fuzz," FWIW, it's possibly more of a deconstruction, since it ironically sets OTT Michael Bay antics (the characters even watch "Bad Boys 2") in a mundane small town.

OK, back on topic: zombies. They eat people.

thought dans post read "zombie anal movie".

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

But in all these movies and shows and books and stuff, we're never given a zombie count.

The only thing I've seen that's close is in Day Of The Dead, when the doctor estimates the then-current zombie-to-human ratio at 400:1.

thought dans post read "zombie anal movie".

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/59/Ottoor.jpg

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I knew there had to be at least one.

it paints homosexuals in a bad light.

as zombies.

well if you want hetero

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y176/edwardiii/deadgirl-dvd.jpg

i think that was my first wife amirite!!111

New DTV flick Horno has venereal zombieism, spread through sodomy, plaguing a (het) porn shoot. It's absolutely terrible.

http://mmomfg.com/wp-content/gallery/rdrundead_09292010/undeadnightmare4.jpg

^^^want to play, haven't gotten yet

Nothing wrong with that, but like the mentioned earlier, the characters are not aware of Romero's world in their particular world. It's fun, funny stuff, but it still shows the zombie survivor learning curve in effect.

dont see why the characters need to have seen romero movies for the movie to be a genre deconstruction?

like why is that a dealbreaker?

to deconstruct a genre, you have to get in under the hood and, you know, deconstruct it. take it apart. show how it works in ways that aren't immediately self evident. i'd say that history of violence deconstructs stories of violent heroism because it questions them, examines them, plays games with the means by which they generate their emotional effects. shawn really is just a straight-up zombie movie with jokes. it doesn't have anything to say about zombie movies, doesn't show or tell us anything about them we didn't know going in. the basic formula isn't deconstructed, it's merely referenced (constantly).

except for the scene where they sneak through town and get into the pub by pretending they are also zombies

i dunno man, i would say the central conceit - that the humans are more zombie-like than the zombies - is a pretty shrewd "take-apart"

wasn't that already done in whichever Romero movie was set in the mall?

mall of the dead

lol

I looked it up, it was Dawn

i mean, it's not as explicit as like, scream, but they are playing with pretty much every zombie movie convention, they're just not actually saying "this is the part where in the movie they'd do this"

romero's movies frequently make the point that humans are much like zombies to begin with, but i wouldn't call night of the living dead and dawn of the dead deconstructions because of this. it's a form of social criticism that seems appropriate to the setting.