[Lucky]

Number 2 seed Pet Sematary made simple work of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Up next, Dawn of the Dead! The remake had a comedy in the last round so what happens when it locks up against one of the heavyweight horrors? Can the zombies stand a chance? Sure, the zombie baby was fucking freaky but... GAGE!


(2) Pet Sematary




vs


(15) Dawn of the Dead (2004)




Poll Closes Fri 8 PM EST. Roundabout.

[Lori]

Well isn't Gage kind of a zombie too? Reanimated corpse and all that. Sure, he doesn't want brains, but there seemed to be a pretty broad net for what a zombie is.

[Lucky]

Yep. Hence the little note up there above the poll. Pet Sematary = totally zombie film. Just not Romero Zombies. And not the apocalyptic, hordes, plague idea so common in films like Night and 28 Days. Its a tale of specific zombies.

They didn't want brains in Night of the Living Dead either. They wanted flesh. The "BRAINS!" thing was in Return of the Living Dead which were extremely different zombies than Romero's.

[DevSop]

I never ever ever thought this board would have such an in-depth and wide ranging discussion of zombies and what they are and if certain characteristics result in a "Zombie Movie." I was always of the simple mindset where, if it was a reanimated corpse...and wasn't a vampire or anything else obvious...they were all zombies.

I guess the distinction came into play where the "Zombies" weren't dying persay, but just acting like the classic zombie.

I think I'd just go with the old saying, "if it walks like a zombie and if it acts like a zombie-it must be a..."

[Lucky]

I think everyone has their own idea of what a "zombie" is. Lots of people think "slow moving, gurgled voice if any, eats flesh/brains, MOBS of them." Romero Zombies. 28 Days and Dawn brought in the new fast Romero zombies (often called "Rage Zombies" or "Infected").

If you wanna split hairs? A zombie is arguably a mindless, animated corpse (don't wanna open this door again). A ghoul is a flesh eating undead monster with the ability to think, speak, and move. A vampire is another undead thing. Vampires, ghouls, and zombies are often linked in many ways. Romero combined a lot of ghoul and zombie traits to make his Romero Zombies. But meanwhile zombies exist in lots of other cultures as stuff like those in the Serpent and the Rainbow. Its confusing because its folklore and there are no rules. Everyone makes up their own mythos.

Every ghoul I've ever seen was a cannibal. Every story I've ever read. Pet Sematary guys were not cannibals but were re-animated corpses. Zombies as far as I'm concerned.

Its an extremely constant topic of conversation in the horror world. Noone can ever agree on it. Lots swear by the Romero definition.

"The Infected" are almost always the big problem starter. Because lots of Romero fans and lots of 28 Days fans want to insist they're not zombies. And that "not dead" thing hangs over it clouding the issue. My argument's always been that its undeniable those ARE zombies in almost every way, he just kept them alive. Is that such a change that it should negate the clear archeatype he used? No way I'm creating a new category for "Infected" when its clearly the same basic creature I've been watching for my entire life.

[Chris Eco]

Except you're wrong, because they're not dead.



;-)