| There are days when I am very, very jealous of your 'effortless' programming ability!
That flocking is amazing. joh - Sun 17 Aug, 23:36:18 |
| Should there be a state between human and zombie where the body remains dead and inert as the virus (or whatever) infects their body:)
There's normally some time interval before the humans body reanimates. Or if they aren't fully killed by the zombies there's normally some time spent running around as a human before they shock their comrades by suddenly go for the jugular and sporting a new, grotesque , face. :) But very nice nonetheless. The only emotion left to cover is that of being barracaded in a house while thousands of the undead attempt to rip away the wooden planks hastily nailed to windows.:) Ed. Edward George - Mon 18 Aug, 13:42:40 |
| This is really depressing. As much as I'd like to say the brilliance of the thingy is captivating, II think its being depressing explains its topping Blogdex. haha!! ;) Chloe - Mon 18 Aug, 18:29:40 |
| Amusing simulation... as far as the comment from Edward George, "There's normally some time interval before the humans body reanimates", really how do you know the time intervals when zombies don't exist? Besides in the movie 28 days later, it was nearly instantaneous... Anakin - Tue 19 Aug, 01:45:24 |
| In the movie "28 Days Later" - they were NOT zombies! They were people infected with some kind of disease. That is NOT the same as "Night of the Living Dead". Chloe - Tue 19 Aug, 04:30:44 |
| Your algorithm is a hoot... I've been having a grand time reworking code, and thinking up other elements, like a torch-bearing human that can drive off zombies, or maybe "infect" them with being torches themselves.
Scotto - Tue 19 Aug, 05:53:16 |
| excellent site. huge fan of zombies. love the simulation. ps. to the comment up there about Night of the Living Dead. sure the filmmakers came up with a different reason for the monsters to avoid the "zombie" tag, but they followed the unofficial rules of a zombie film like they were born to one. in my opinion, 28 Days Later is more of a zombie movie than most zombie movies. spiderbites - Tue 19 Aug, 19:26:01 |
| Spiderbites: Zombies are NOT people infected with a virus - zombies are reanimated corpses of dead people. That's my point. It's not a zombie film if it doesn't involve the dead coming back to life. And 28 Days Later did not involve that... it didn't involve anything particularly paranormal that I could remember, other than a disease that doesn't actually exist. I thought it was easier to believe that could happen with a disease - rather than to believe zombies exist (the reanimated dead). Chloe - Tue 19 Aug, 20:44:46 |
| Chloe,
i realize they were reanimated corpses. my point is that the movie used many rules from movies about animated corpses. and Boyle's own tagline was that he "reinvented zombie horror" also, in the Romero movies, there does seem to be some kind of virus or infection if it's transmitted through a bite. it's not all supernatural. especially in Dawn, when the little cop at the end who got bit, seemed okay, then slooowly turned. the rules are flexible though. the first Night of the Living Dead seemed to suggest that every corpse will rise, no matter how you died. Dawn and Day of the Dead started narrowing it down and saying the bite carried an infection AND atill kept the all-the-dead-will rise thing. and Return of the Living Deads went with just the bite. some movies use just the bite, some seem to do both. and who's to say that, in 28 Days, the "zombies" hearts stopped beating when they turned? it's a stretch but there's a fine line between supernatural and sci-fi with these movies. that's why they should have had the essential zombie autopsy in 28 Days Later, a staple in the best zombie movies and my one disappointment. and sure, it comes from a monkey but so did the zombies in Dead Alive (aka Brain Dead) and that didn't disquilify that movie from the zombie family by being too scientific. so i'm saying, as far as 28 day goes, if it smells like it, mumbles like it, eats like it, walks like it (okay they ran and didn't walk, but so did the Zs in Return) and imitates every zombie movie ever made (the shopping spree, the zombie chained up in the back etc. the scenes borrowed to honor the classics are too numerable to list here), then i call it a zombie movie. and it's easier to use that word when you're telling your friends to go see it, instead of calling them RISNUJ's (Rage Infected Screaming Nutjobs). see, you get to save a syllable! it's still the best flick i saw this year. spiderbites - Tue 19 Aug, 21:55:57 |
| I liked the movie, don't get me wrong. The thing is though - I thought it was BETTER because it was NOT zombies. You just say zombies to me, and I'm thinking - a movie with no purpose or point. haha. I think my old co-worker said it best when he watched Night of the Living Dead and said something like "I don't know why every one says this sis such a great movie! It was about NOTHING! There was no reason for that to be going on..." and went on to make fun of the "zombie" aspects of the 'typical zombie movie". And 28 Days Later was NOT like that. There WAS a reason. There was that virus. These people unwittingly let it loose, which caused the problem. And in the end... SPOILER SPOILER...
....it did NOT end like a typical zombie movie 'should'... as the zombie simulation does... 28 Days Later wasn't a depressing ending at all... So though it may superficially resemble zombie movies... I think the differences are more important as to MY attitude about the film. Night of the Living Dead and Dead Alive are two movies that I watched long ago, and have no interest in ever seeing again. I might watch 28 Days Later again. And I still maintain, it's either paranormal with dead bodies being reanimated (ie: zombies) OR it's a virus. If you have both, the movie is just RIDICULOUS. (And I think that's probably what seperates the Dawn & Day from the original script.) Chloe - Wed 20 Aug, 04:15:56 |
| i agree that 28 Days was a suprisingly good film, but i think you should revisit the Romero stuff and give it another day in court. your co-worker said it "was about nothing" but that was it's charm. it offered almost zero explaination for what was happening (except some mutterings about a a comet? on the news) and became the birth of survival horror. a beautiful story about people stuck in a house with an unstoppable force banging on the door. by focusing on what those people would do or think in the situation and NOT the situation, i think it was a masterpeice. to dwell on the reasons (the line "when there's no room in hell, the dead will walk the earth, and the reports of the outer space thing AND the increasing interest in experimentation in the 3rd) steers the movies away from what made them great. it's about what people would do when faced with an unthinkable situation. to say it's about nothing, then say 28 days is about something seems odd, seeing how, once you remove the goofy clockwork orange-type monkey experiment, you simply have another survival horror film. what humans do against an unstoppable force (and the usual zombie movie stand-by, a gang of corrupt military). and it seems that the happy ending wasn't the original ending after all. (you see the new version?)
so show some love to the classics! here comes a big zombie hug, lumbering towards you! p.s. you see Cemetary Man? check it out, it's got some good humor and a freaky twilight zone ending that comes out of nowhere. i'm still scratching my head over that one. spiderbites - Wed 20 Aug, 16:22:44 |
| What I learned:
Zombies clump together, and panicked humans can run several laps around them. Never go into an alley with a zombie. The best way to protect yourself from zombies is to have solid wall all around you. :) Zarba - Thu 21 Aug, 04:55:03 |
| Yes, but the most important lesson is that in the end, everyone is fucked. Shaun - Sat 23 Aug, 01:08:53 |
New comments have been disabled for years, now, as this blog is no longer updated. Sorry.