Re: The Undying Zombie Thread

[Seamaster]

Sharks don't get cancer, so I wonder if they'd be immune to the zombie bite? Regardless of Fulci's take on zombie versus shark, I'd put my money on the shark, especially the great white. Jaws wins in this case.

[Iago]

Well, Fulci actually did NOT have the vision (or madness) to carry that one to its conclusion; the zombie does indeed beat the shark and bites down on it, but we never have the followup with a zombie shark. It would not seem too likely that Fulci had any knowledge of the susceptiblity of sharks to disease; he probably either never thought of what would happen afterward, or simply did not have the means to film it. But thinking about it, I cannot remember any post 1968 Romeroesque zombie movies having zombie animals at least until the Eighties; off the top of my head, the zombie half-dogs in The Return of the Living Dead in 1986 may have been among the first. But there were a LOT of Romero ripoffs, especially Italian ones, so I may have missed some or forgotten them.

[East]

Speaking of zombies


https://s383.photobucket.com/user/ss87622/media/2013-03-30_14-26-53_128_zps8bc2417e.mp4.html

I am quite happy with how the rebuild turned out.

[Seamaster]

Help me out. An old radio deck?

If I remember correctly, the zombie bites the shark in its chest area, but then another shark comes along and takes that same zombie's arm (which appears to grow back and fall off at will -- where was the editor when that scene was pieced together?).

Many animals are immune to our viral and bacterial diseases and infections, so it probably wouldn't make much sense for a zombie shark, dog, cat or whatever. A nasty sore, I'd expect, though.

It is hard to be too serious about a zombie flick, but the the thing with Fulci's Zombie and the shark is that it is hard to believe the zombie had the agility to get the better of a shark. We're not talking quick-moving zombies in Zombie! But that is all I will say. It is cooler to just accept that we got to see a shark and a zombie duke it out. Zombie flicks are fun, with exceptions like 28 Days Later and [REC], which definitely take a more serious tone, although some might argue that neither of those are really zombie flicks.

[East]

You must be slipping if it got by you. Either that or you didn't realize its a video.

Well we have 2 things going on here. I was contrasting the car to a zombie. It probably shouldn't but it somehow keeps running and reliably too I might add. Although that was a more valid comparison before I got the floors in it. Also the lyrics to the background music are "Go forth my putrid army of undead
Bring forth upon this night a veil of dread"

[Iago]

Well, as long as your car is not subsisting on human flesh you should be fine.


Interesting, of course, that you are making the argument that since most viruses that affect humans do not affect animals, while accepting the mythos of a virus than can animate dead human tissue! It just goes to show that all fantasy needs its own internal logic, however illogical that logic may be!

Fulci's zombie vs. shark scene works for two reasons: one is simply its sheer audacity. The other, which helps overcome your objection about the relative speeds of the combatants, is that they really put a stuntman in zombie makeup underwater and had him interact with a live shark. It is one of those situations where filming something in a realistic fashion helps overcome the inherent unreality of the sequence -- if they had him at the bottom of a pool wrestling with a rubber shark, the whole thing would have not just been absurd, it would have LOOKED absurd.

[Seamaster]

Oh, I'm highly illogical. And I'm just fine with the zombie and shark scene. I just think the shark should have won.

[Iago]

Yes, but you are biased.


Keep in mind, though, that if you want to be a purist and go back to Romero, there is never any mention of a virus or other organism like that in his zombie movies. There is a quick TV report about a downed satellite in Night of the Living Dead, but Romero deliberately never drew an explicit connection between it and his zombies. He wanted the viewer to decide for themselves what the cause may have been. The scientists in Day of the Dead do talk about transmission, but I do not recall that the word virus is ever used. (By the way, Scream Factory posted a screen shot of them working on the transfer for a new edition of the latter film . . . )

Fulci's spinoff movies never really discuss cause, either. It is only more " modern" zombie movies like 28 Days Later and {REC}/Quarantine that go that particular route -- and in the case of the former, while it is indeed a bioweapon virus, the affected are not actually considered "zombies," even though for all practical purposes they are identical.

[Iago]

Oh, and I meant to mention this earlier:

https://www.sharksavers.org/en/education/biology/myth-sharks-don-t-get-cancer/

[Seamaster]

I feel like I read that somewhere before. It's funny how some myths stick with us even when we should know better. Truth be told, there is so little that we know about sharks, especially the big predators like the great white that don't do well in captivity, that it is difficult to make any sort of generalizations. We simply haven't studied them enough. Incidentally, did you ever watch Rob Stewart's Shark Water? It's a conservation documentary and is certainly biased, but it delves into how important and interrelated species are in an ecosystem. Some of the imagery is pretty awesome too. Worth a look.

I actually prefer zombie films that don't try to explain what is happening. That is another area where The Dead succeeds. It tells a classic, well-done zombie tale. Only the opening really brings it down.

There are a few films where the explanation doesn't bother me. Planet Terror, for example, was okay, but we could easily argue that that is a film about mutants, not zombies. But clearly everyone involved was having fun and so the film is fun.

One of the reasons I find Walking Dead successful (so far) is that they haven't explained the fall of mankind. The story is much about the people surviving in a post-apocalyptic world. It just so happens that the world the survivors inhabit now has reanimated corpses walking around who like to chomp on the living. I was actually a little worried at the end of Season 1 with the survivors finding the CDC. But they quickly moved past that, using that interaction to simply explain how the bodies are reanimating, but not why.

[Iago]

I have not seen that documentary, but I will have to look it up.

The emphasis on the CDC makes sense regardless of what is really causing the zombie outbreak in The Walking Dead, because no matter what they would definitely be brought into a situation like that. Plus, it gave the first of many "false hopes" for the characters, thus giving the writers yet another excuse to emotionally shatter the characters. Even if the show was going to claim a viral cause, they STILL would have written the CDC out of it to put the characters on the run again.

On the other hand, the temptation nowadays is always to try to explain the mysteries -- witness Prometheus. Though in that case I have put it into the "prequel trilogy" category and consider it non-canon to the Alien series.

[Seamaster]

I don't recall the CDC coming up in the graphic novels, which is why I was a little concerned. I am quite pleased with how it was handled and I think it was a great device for shattering the will of the characters. I just think it would have been a pity to have succumbed to the temptation to explain the outbreak. Thankfully, that didn't happen.

[Iago]

I still have not read any of the books. But Robert Kirkmann seams to feel pretty clearly that the books are the books and the series is the series, and he really does not care how much the latter diverges from the former. Speaking of varied takes, have you looked at Telltale's episodic game yet? It has gotten pretty solid reviews, arguably even better than the series. I keep waiting for it to show up on GOG so that I can get it DRM free. Though speaking of zombies, one of the greatest zombie-esque games of all time finally hit GOG: System Shock II. I bought it and followed the mod recommendations from the community and it looks pretty impressive for a fourteen year old game. Still have not played it, though -- I am working my way through its descenant, Bioshock Infinite.

[Seamaster]

Yes, and the diversion is a good thing. It gives each (the books and the TV series) a voice and direction of their own.

I picked up Telltale's game for the PS3 and I'm currently in Episode 4. I got it for $20, so I was willing to give it a shot. It's a good game and I've been meaning to mention it, but kept forgetting. It is episodic and plays similar to Heavy Rain, but it's not as refined. And while the game is touted as being a game that reacts and changes based on your actions, I'm not so sure. From what I've seen, the game has a definite story arc and there is no changing that direction. At best, I think the player's choices affect the relationships in the game. Nevertheless, so long as you are aware of that, don't expect another Heavy Rain (it is possible to die or get a Game Over screen in Walking Dead), and realize that it's only $20, it's a worthwhile purchase. The game has atmosphere and is more than just zombies, although it does rely on cliched horror elements and stories (if you play it, you will know what I mean). I'd recommend picking it up. Another point to note is that the game has hung on me a few times between loading episodes, requiring me to replay a few scenarios. It's a small irritation. Lastly, each episode takes about three to four hours to complete, so there's a bit of game play to be had

[Iago]

I still have my PS3, but I would wait for the PC version. And that is available, of course, from sites like Steam, but I am willing to wait for a DRM-free site like GOG to pick it up. Much easier to play when you have no easy or direct internet connection at home. Bioshock Infinite is a Steam game, of course, even when you buy the boxed version, but so far I have not had issues with offline mode. Steam must have done an update that fixed some of the problems that I was having. Previously, about one in ten times that I tried starting up a Steam game, it would not go into offline mode and instead put it into an infinite "please retry your connection" loop that could only be stopped by actually connecting -- even after a reboot. However (knock wood) I have played about two-thirds of the game without having that happen.

Amazon has the third season of the show up for pre-order, but no date yet.

[Seamaster]

Given the pace of the game (it is similar to Heavy Rain in that regard), I've been quite pleased with the experience on the PS3. Not that there is anything wrong with playing on a PC (I'm sure the graphics will be rendered at a higher resolution), but I don't know that I'd actually enjoy the game any more or less on a PC. At any rate, think about checking it out in whatever format you can get your hands on.

[Iago]

If given a choice between a controller and mouse & keyboard, I will take the latter every time, so that largely settles it.

I am almost done with Bioshock Infinite, so I think that I will return to the bio-zombies of System Shock II. Did you ever play that back in the day? It does have some of the creepiest zombie-esque creatures ever. Sort of a puppetmasters deal, in that these are humans that are animated by a parasitic creature, but the nasty element is that the humans retain their own conciousness, without control. As they attack you, they scream at you to run. The sound design was amazing; I can still here that "rrruuuunnnn!!!!" in my mind's ear after all these years.

[Seamaster]

I agree regarding a mouse and controller. I was just trying to impress on you that the pacing and control scheme are similar to Heavy Rain, so playing with a controller is acceptable. I wouldn't let the absence of mouse and keyboard support keep you away from what is a pretty good game.

I played System Shock II back in the day. It is a great game. The atmosphere and sound design are good and I loved that you actually had to watch your ammo. The game always left you feeling like you were going to run out of ammo, which made it feel like you really had to survive. The only thing I didn't like about the game was the levelling model and heavy emphasis on psi powers, as I prefer to develop my character in other ways.

[Iago]

I think that I originally opted for a tech character, knowing how much hacking played a part in the original System Shock, but I may try the psi route this time. The shooting route (marine? I cannot remember) sounds like the least interesting for me, but then again I long ago tired of straight shooters. That is my biggest criticism of Bioshock Infinite: its over-reliance on shooting. Mind you, the actual shooting gameplay is extremely well done and offers a lot of variety for play styles, but the world itself is so interesting, and exploration & discovery are so much fun, that when you have to start combat it is actually disappointing. It is an excellent shooter that could have been a transcendent adventure/RPG.

[East]

What do you guys think the likely hood of this being our friend Glen is?

[Iago]

Given all the spelling and grammar errors in the description, it may well be!

[Seamaster]

Perhaps, but that means Glen has moved to Kansas or that this machine is shipping from Salina, Kansas. The last I heard, Glen lived in Edmonton, Alberta. Of course, anything is possible.

[Iago]

No, I do not really think that it was him. I was joshin' about the spelling. Actually, there were a few specific phrasings in that listing that makes me suspect that the seller may not be a native English speaker.

[Iago]

[Seamaster]

[Sponsored content]