Sign in or 
Location: Zombies vs Rage Zombies
Discussion: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Category:
Discussion Forum /
General Discussion
Share this
Showing 9 posts
|
KojiroJames |
"Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 18 2009, 5:46 PM EDT
I would like everyone to remember the "Return of the Living Dead" series. They were all fast moving zombies in that series and the first film came out in 1985, nearly 20 years before 28 Days.Although, the very first zombie in the original Night of the Living Dead was also kinda quick on his feet too. Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
Fast
Rage
Rage Zombies
Run
Running
|
John_234 |
1. RE: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 18 2009, 5:47 PM EDT
| Post edited: Oct 18 2009, 5:48 PM EDT
You're posting a new thread pointing out how something isn't new....Nothing against the points you're making, but that's just ironic... EDIT: spelling Do you find this valuable? |
DevilNuts |
2. RE: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 18 2009, 6:06 PM EDT
"He was not as slow as some of the later romero zombies, but he was still a "shambler" by the accepted definition. The main difference between the "old" zombies and the Ragers isn't really how fast they move, because that varies per subject, but instead the physiology of the subject - Shamblers are considered dead and reanimated, while Ragers are alive and can still be killed by conventional means. All of a rager's organs still work, they can still starve to death and you do not need to remove the brain to kill them. Do you find this valuable? |
|
KojiroJames |
3. RE: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 18 2009, 6:17 PM EDT
Regardless, most people seem to make the error of identifying running zombies with 28 Days Later when in fact such zombies have appeared much earlier.
Do you find this valuable?
|
Freelancer47 |
4. RE: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 18 2009, 6:27 PM EDT
"Regardless, most people seem to make the error of identifying running zombies with 28 Days Later when in fact such zombies have appeared much earlier."It's like many things in life KJ... 'Return of The Living Dead' wasn't such a well marketed movie... not to mention it was practicaly a 'Straight to Tape' (now who's getting all '80's up in here) hit. The 28 Days Later franchies is a little fresher in terms of marketing. Sorry for the Pun, but remember that "Viral Advertising" is something that just started a few years ago. Do you find this valuable? |
SasquatchJim |
5. RE: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 18 2009, 9:24 PM EDT
| Post edited: Oct 18 2009, 9:25 PM EDT
"I would like everyone to remember the "Return of the Living Dead" series. They were all fast moving zombies in that series and the first film came out in 1985, nearly 20 years before 28 Days.I don't see the Rage and ROTLD zombies as very similar. Like Devil said, Rage zombies can starve to death or die of flesh wounds. On the other hand, Ragers were nearly invincible. Also, ROTLDs were capable of speech. In reality, the only thing they really have in common is being fast, a trait shared by a lot of zombies. In defense of the Hinzman zombie, I believe him to be the most dangerous zombie of all time. He somehow had the ability to control the sun, making it set in less than a minute. Do you find this valuable? |
|
KojiroJames |
6. RE: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 18 2009, 10:05 PM EDT
I understand that. My point was mainly about the speed.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
Freelancer47 |
7. RE: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 18 2009, 10:33 PM EDT
"In reality, the only thing they really have in common is being fast, a trait shared by a lot of zombies."That's what I was going with. Notice the OP put Rage in Quotation marks. Do you find this valuable? |
|
SasquatchJim |
8. RE: "Rage" zombies aren't new.
Oct 19 2009, 5:07 PM EDT
"I understand that. My point was mainly about the speed."Oh, okay. Then yeah. I see where you're coming from. Like you and others have said, most people view the fast zombies as new (good example: Jake on Two and a Half Men: "What's your opinion of the new, faster-walking zombies?") While they actually aren't. I thought you were trying to say they were identical or something. Do you find this valuable? |
