discussion Anti-Social & Lurker - Hideout spot

[Slumdum]

He's big and imposing, he can act, and looks the part. Meanwhile Joel in the TV series

Spoiler: Spoilers

nearly dies in the first season during -the truck ambush- by some little skinny chickenshit that's technically by himself.

I gave up on the TV Series, I still watched it, but disagree with people saying it's amazing. They fucked up Bill's Town, for some slow burn romance, rather than the Banter between him and Ellie, that I liked. You can tell they just scaled things down like they did with The Walking Dead, like every big event in the Comics was huge, meanwhile in the show it was small in scale.

I don't mind when they take liberties to keep you guessing, but I wish they would remain a little more faithful in things. To be fair, the best thing about TWD is Daryl since he's a Show Original. Like Harley Quinn being introduced in Batman TAS, gained a huge fanbase and became Canon in the Comics.

Also, hey Slum!

Never did get around to reading The Walking Dead comics.
So didn't know, Daryl was a show character.
I knew about the thing with Harley though.

 

[mikeross]

It is worth watching for no other reason than that they use "fast" zombies rather than "shamblers" of the Walking Dead. This requires an entirely different battle plan. You can't just mosey on up to them and stab them in the brain.

You must be registered to see attachments

You must be registered to see attachments

But are those even zombies anymore? "Shamblers" are at least more convincing as slowly decaying, animated corpses. Where do fast zombies even get the calories necessary for those ridiculous displays of speed?

 

[truetrue]

It's mostly because it was a beloved Book, that fans were expecting something different out of. No Zombie CQC and fight arena, no downed pilot with the .22 pistol, amongst other things. Hell, most people don't even know that the writer that did WWZ and Zombie Survival Guide is Max Brooks whom is Mel Brooks' son.

I never even knew it was a book, I guess this is one of those cases where it's good so long as you don't know the source.

But are those even zombies anymore? "Shamblers" are at least more convincing as slowly decaying, animated corpses. Where do fast zombies even get the calories necessary for those ridiculous displays of speed?

I mean, most calories are burned just to maintain body heat so getting rid of that alone would allow the body to last a lot longer and allow fast zombies to function for a while at least.

 

[DubbleU]

I never even knew it was a book, I guess this is one of those cases where it's good so long as you don't know the source.

I'm an Avid Reader I try to read 2-3 books per month, so a lot of movies are ruined for me, with very few exceptions. I have seen a few movies before I read the books though, with the recent surge of YA novels these days, because they aren't typically my demographic, I'll watch the movie and if the movie is decent, I'll check out the book. Stuff like The Maze Runner, which I liked.

 

[mikeross]

I mean, most calories are burned just to maintain body heat so getting rid of that alone would allow the body to last a lot longer and allow fast zombies to function for a while at least.

Yes. but fast zombies would likely have to keep generating heat or they wouldn't be able to be fast. Low temperatures impair muscle function, so to be able to act fast I would expect they'd have to keep their bodies warm.

 

[truetrue]

I'm an Avid Reader I try to read 2-3 books per month, so a lot of movies are ruined for me, with very few exceptions. I have seen a few movies before I read the books though, with the recent surge of YA novels these days, because they aren't typically my demographic, I'll watch the movie and if the movie is decent, I'll check out the book. Stuff like The Maze Runner, which I liked.

I used to read a lot but sadly don't anymore. These days I just tend to play RPGs and count that as reading XD .

Yes. but fast zombies would likely have to keep generating heat or they wouldn't be able to be fast. Low temperatures impair muscle function, so to be able to act fast I would expect they'd have to keep their bodies warm.

True, but when it comes to inconsistencies like this I remember what a wise man once said "If you wondering how they eat and breath, or other science facts, repeat to yourself 'it's just a show' and you'll really just relax".

 

[mikeross]

True, but when it comes to inconsistencies like this I remember what a wise man once said "If you wondering how they eat and breath, or other science facts, repeat to yourself 'it's just a show' and you'll really just relax".

I don't know who that wise man is but he is a bit off the mark here. I can wonder how they eat and breathe and stay relaxed all at the same time.

 

[DubbleU]

I mean, most calories are burned just to maintain body heat so getting rid of that alone would allow the body to last a lot longer and allow fast zombies to function for a while at least.

I'm a Zombie Fan, but logically Dead Zombies wouldn't work, but since Re-Animated Corpses attacking people is also not real I have to suspend my disbelief. No Oxygen, meaning the Brain will be deprived of Cells and Synapses so no Neurotransmission, which means they would have no impulses or way to automate themself. Then the flesh decaying, which would be fast in heat, and slower in cold, since they are deceased they no longer generate heat, so when freezing they'll just stop. If they could theoretically move, they would likely be fast at first, and when they stop rigor mortis would set in, making them slower, but they could also start moving again and overcome the rigor mortis. If a Reanimated Dead person was a thing, they'd probably be weak and slow as hell, and only act on minor instinct, if anything at all. They'd most likely just be a vegetable.

That all said, I've got Survival Training, know the ins and outs how it would work, and I guarantee if a Zombie Apocalypse happened, I'd probably be a Day 1 casuality.

 

[locolocus]

Hello Fellows.

You must be registered to see attachments

 

[Ewasuw]

I mean, most calories are burned just to maintain body heat so getting rid of that alone would allow the body to last a lot longer and allow fast zombies to function for a while at least.

I don't think that's the case, though.
Simple physics is at the root. The movement of mass requires energy.
And this one is not produced by a dead body.

 

[truetrue]

I'm a Zombie Fan, but logically Dead Zombies wouldn't work, but since Re-Animated Corpses attacking people is also not real I have to suspend my disbelief. No Oxygen, meaning the Brain will be deprived of Cells and Synapses so no Neurotransmission, which means they would have no impulses or way to automate themself. Then the flesh decaying, which would be fast in heat, and slower in cold, since they are deceased they no longer generate heat, so when freezing they'll just stop. If they could theoretically move, they would likely be fast at first, and when they stop rigor mortis would set in, making them slower, but they could also start moving again and overcome the rigor mortis. If a Reanimated Dead person was a thing, they'd probably be weak and slow as hell, and only act on minor instinct, if anything at all. They'd most likely just be a vegetable.

That all said, I've got Survival Training, know the ins and outs how it would work, and I guarantee if a Zombie Apocalypse happened, I'd probably be a Day 1 casuality.

Lol reminds me of some comedian's joke "If I was in a horror movie the entire movie would be: I'm trying to find the cat, what's that sound, the end.

There's a guy on youtube who is a virologist does a lot of really fun movie and video game monsters and virus break downs. Something like Roinoke gaming? I'd recommend checking it out.

 

[mikeross]

I'm a Zombie Fan, but logically Dead Zombies wouldn't work, but since Re-Animated Corpses attacking people is also not real I have to suspend my disbelief. No Oxygen, meaning the Brain will be deprived of Cells and Synapses so no Neurotransmission, which means they would have no impulses or way to automate themself. Then the flesh decaying, which would be fast in heat, and slower in cold, since they are deceased they no longer generate heat, so when freezing they'll just stop. If they could theoretically move, they would likely be fast at first, and when they stop rigor mortis would set in, making them slower, but they could also start moving again and overcome the rigor mortis. If a Reanimated Dead person was a thing, they'd probably be weak and slow as hell, and only act on minor instinct, if anything at all. They'd most likely just be a vegetable.

That all said, I've got Survival Training, know the ins and outs how it would work, and I guarantee if a Zombie Apocalypse happened, I'd probably be a Day 1 casuality.

The explanation I use for that is that it's done by some parasitic microorganism that effectively subsumes the remnants of the nervous system and "wears the body". That's "the zombie virus". It resides on the remnants of the head mainly which is why massive head trauma or decapitation "kills" the zombie.

But hey slow zombies still make more sense than fast ones from an energy point of view. And that was my point. Energy matters.

 

[truetrue]

He

Hello Fellows.

You must be registered to see attachments

That picture is adorable.

 

[User_151521]

It is worth watching for no other reason than that they use "fast" zombies rather than "shamblers" of the Walking Dead. This requires an entirely different battle plan. You can't just mosey on up to them and stab them in the brain.

You must be registered to see attachments

You must be registered to see attachments

Thx, will give it a try!

 

[truetrue]

Random thought of the day: What if you found out your entire purpose in life was to appear in the end credits as "dead teen number 6" except your now in your 40's? That means not only was your entire purpose in life to die as an anonymous nobody...but you failed to do that.

 

[HarelM]

Put that right up there with nuns telling me that thinking about doing something was just as bad as actually doing it.

Secondarily, while thinking about doing something bad is not necessarily bad, seriously planning or attempting to do bad things is ethically equivalent to actually doing those things.

Hypothetical example: presume that I'm married, and I get really mad at my wife, so mad in fact that I think "I'd like to kill the bitch for [not making my sandwich, cheating, chewing too loud, poisoning my dog, fucking the dog, w/e]". That's not a thought crime per se. But if I then planned out the methods or started to perform them, then I'm starting to kill her. If I tried and failed, I'm still just as bad of a person as the dude who succeeds at killing his wife. Just because I'm lousy at murder doesn't make me a better person than a person who's good at it.

You must be registered to see attachments

 

[mikeross]

Random thought of the day: What if you found out your entire purpose in life was to appear in the end credits as "dead teen number 6" except your now in your 40's? That means not only was your entire purpose in life to die as an anonymous nobody...but you failed to do that.

Not necessarily. If you were born February 29 for example then throughout your 40s you'd be at most a tween. You'd still have time.

Or in other words, teen is relative.

 

[truetrue]

Not necessarily. If you were born February 29 for example then throughout your 40s you'd be at most a tween. You'd still have time.

Or in other words, teen is relative.

You must be registered to see attachments

 

[locolocus]

That picture is adorable.

Have a look in M+

 

[Poldek]

I heard about the last of us. Does it worth time watching? Only a zombie movie or something else?

For me it's a great show. The edition, the actors, Bella Ramsey and Pedro Pascal are both great, everything is excellent. The third episode of the first season is something out of this world, I would say the best episode of any series in a long time. Just loving it.