Sign in or 
Location: Zombie Media
Discussion: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Category:
Discussion Forum /
General Discussion
Share this|
Hoss2468 |
60. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Jun 14 2009, 8:07 PM EDT
"So you're basically saying no, they're not zombies because they're not dead, but they otherwise behave a lot like them. 95% of all zombie lore says they are dead/undead, though, so I think they do have to be truly dead to count as Zs.I aggree with you. The term zombie is flexible in so many ways its not even funny. I do think that there should at least be a generally aggreed upon definition for "Zombie" Do you find this valuable? |
JamesHowe |
61. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 6 2009, 7:43 PM EDT
Well, original zombies were controlled by voodoo, But weren't actually undead. As for the 28 days/Weeks later story, no, i don't think they are zombies. If they were zombies, then they wouldn't feel pain, but in the first one, the infected person strapped to the chain in the compound was obviously hurt.Another thing about it, They never actually say "Zombie" anywhere in the movie, and only once on the back, by a critic magazine. They didn't actually die, they were transformed by the R.A.G.E virus. Plus, If they were dead, would the monkeys, who were exposed to the virus, have been decayed, like a normal body would? No. Plus, In the movie, the doctor says "They've been given an inhibitor!" which means they could be calmed and normal. Zombies can't be calmed and subdued by any medication. BUT!, Wikipedia says "A zombie is a creature that appears in folklore and popular culture typically as a reanimated corpse or a mindless human being." Do you find this valuable? |
|
ZombieVirus |
62. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 12 2009, 11:51 AM EDT
"I had an interesting thought a while ago. The premise of a zombie is that it is undead -- or being biologically dead, but behaving physically as a living organism. My thought was that because the "zombies" in 28 days/weeks fulfilled many of the characteristics of life, and that it is revealed in the end of 28 weeks that zombiism may be reversable, unlike death, then they may not be zombies after all. For example, they are supposed to starve to death after 5 weeks, which implies that they require food and water for something. Food in normal humans is used for cell regeneration, so the 28 days zombies would need to heal, grow, and develop. Tell me what you think."they are there own type of zombie, there alive, and die from standered attacks like gunshot to the heart and they move fast Do you find this valuable? |
IrishHitman |
63. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 12 2009, 11:58 AM EDT
"Well, original zombies were controlled by voodoo, But weren't actually undead. As for the 28 days/Weeks later story, no, i don't think they are zombies. If they were zombies, then they wouldn't feel pain, but in the first one, the infected person strapped to the chain in the compound was obviously hurt."In my opinion, the primary indicators of a zombie is loss of conscious decisionmaking and the strong urge to attack uninfected humans. The facts that the Rage Zombies didn't feel pain or that the virus could be inhibited are irrelevent, they're still going around mindless and trying to eat people... Do you find this valuable? |
FrenchLegion |
64. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 12 2009, 12:08 PM EDT
Well to be honest, I don't classify them as zombies. The new Hollywood zombie, the Olympic athlete "ohmygodIminyourface" is just ridiculous. It ruins what zombies were supposed to be: slow, shambling corpses that will eventually catch and eat you alive, not sprint towards you, screaming, like you insulted them profusely.For personal reasons I think the shambler is the most dangerous, but to directly answer the question... no, they're not zombies. Not in the traditional sense. Do you find this valuable? |
|
JamesHowe |
65. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 12 2009, 12:23 PM EDT
"In my opinion, the primary indicators of a zombie is loss of conscious decisionmaking and the strong urge to attack uninfected humans.good point. But the infected from 28 days/weeks later never actually ate on anyone. They only infected them, which is weird, because they would eventually would have died out anyway, weather from lack of food, or other wise. They used their vomit to make someone infected. And speaking on that, what did the infected even eat? I don't recall seeing them eat on a single person, not once in either movies, i've seen them be extremely vicious, gauging eyes and bashing heads, but not eat. Do you find this valuable? |
|
Johnnyboy007 |
66. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 14 2009, 10:51 PM EDT
| Post edited: Sep 14 2009, 10:53 PM EDT
Regardless if 28 days later style infected are zombies or not... I still think the traditional organically dead zombie is the frightening kind.Sure they're not as intense as the running and screaming kind... but they're inevitably going to catch up with you. They become more of a force of nature than an individual threat.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
IrishHitman |
67. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 15 2009, 1:50 AM EDT
"good point. But the infected from 28 days/weeks later never actually ate on anyone. They only infected them, which is weird, because they would eventually would have died out anyway, weather from lack of food, or other wise.Again, that's irrelevent for all purposes of surviving the bastards. Do you find this valuable? |
|
JamesHowe |
68. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 15 2009, 5:13 PM EDT
"Again, that's irrelevent for all purposes of surviving the bastards."good point. god help us if This actually manages to happen Do you find this valuable? |
|
IrishHitman |
69. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 15 2009, 5:31 PM EDT
"good point. god help us if This actually manages to happen"I think God's of a differing opinion if he allows that sort of **** to happen. *HAIL ATHEISM* 0 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
Goblinz |
70. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Sep 19 2009, 12:18 AM EDT
well we all know that zombies is basicaly a broad based term now hence in saying that do i beleive in the fact are those zombies in 28 days the answer is yes a version of a zombie.whats so scary about our world today is the fact the advances in medicine,biological/chemical warfare,science messing with all sorts of our anatomies and dna that in fact any thing that can be a benefit to our human race can in fact cause our downfall by creating zombies etc. theres always that variable that could send all out of control remember i dont care how much a sciencentist says it is in a controlled enviroment it only takes an oops then its out in the open. also dont we also now mess with animals,insects,germs,plants,chemicals.parasites etc. the list goes on now i see a comment in the posts about how god opinion in ths sort of thing but i do want to comment on that in science god is not a variable and the only way god is a variable is in personal belief. now i am not crackin on religion and yes i have a faith and thats of the faith of old as in the old mythical ways. Do you find this valuable? |
snakethezombiehunter |
71. RE: Are there actually any zombies in 28 days/weeks later?
Oct 21 2009, 3:58 PM EDT
I dont remember a cure being mentioned....at least not in the first one, maybe the 2nd can't remember.
Do you find this valuable?
|
