Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Collider)   First look at look at footage from World War Z. Yonkers never had a chance   (collider.com) divider line 223
    More: Scary, World War Z. Yonkers, sneak previews, Max Brooks, Marc Forster, Anthony Mackie, footage, Quantum of Solace  
•       •       •

9303 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 06 Nov 2012 at 9:19 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



223 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-06 01:53:29 PM  

mooseyfate: fastfxr: mooseyfate: fastfxr: Zombies have to move slow and lethargic?
-Y'all are idiots.

Should be a mini-series?
-Idiots as well.


Looking forward to a WWZ/L4D-type movie myself.

You clearly haven't read the books, or even heard about them in passing. You're an idiot, please don't speak on subjects you are obviously ignorant on. Also, eat shiat and die.

Umm yeah, I did. It was mildly entertaining, but I don't think each chapter requires its own series.
That's just the TV-watching couch-addict in you talking, I assume.


My comment on it was that slow zombies are boring...but I guess reading comprehension fails you.

And yet rather than just shut up about something you have no idea about, you try your "politics thread" best to shift attention away from the fact that you're obviously wrong. If you actually HAD read the books, you'd know that Brooks goes out of his way in chapter 1 of the ZSHB to describe that voodoo zombies and "runners" simply do not exist in his zombie world.

As for the mini-series, I never stated that it should be, but as evidenced by all the production stills and trailer screenshots, they utterly failed to capture any part of the book in the film, so clearly it WOULD have been better off as a mini-series, and it has nothing to do with this laziness you've assumed about me. It has everything to do with how the book was written, but since you clearly haven't read it, you'd have no idea what I'm talking about. Go ahead. Run to Wikipedia and read the plot synopsis so you can hurry back and impress no one with how you "totally read it" because Scott Wanio and LMOE! And then to make your blinding ignorance worse, you put WWZ and L4D into the same "type" because, well, there's zombies in both of them, so clearly they're identical!

/what a farking mook


I'm half tempted to post up the picture of it as it sits on my bookshelf between some WW2 book and some HST, but don't feel like entertaining the mouth-breather that much.


And Jeezus you're an idiot. "WWZ/L4D" implied a WWZ storyline with L4D speed zombies. Arguing your miniseries concept is a moot point, but it does prove to me you're a couch potato. Sorry, but yes, you'll have to get off your ass and go out in public to see this. Don't worry though--they have handicapped seating for those little electric scooters these days.


/Want fast zombies and none too concerned about the storyline as there was none in WWZ.
 
2012-11-06 01:58:47 PM  
Lazy personal attacks, name-dropping of unrelated authors, implication of being an idiot because I believe the movie should at the very least be about the source material, and then to top it off, you say that the book had no plot because L4D. Yup. I'm the m
 
2012-11-06 02:02:17 PM  

mooseyfate: Lazy personal attacks, name-dropping of unrelated authors, implication of being an idiot because I believe the movie should at the very least be about the source material, and then to top it off, you say that the book had no plot because L4D. Yup. I'm the m


Mouth-breather in this equation. You are the exact reason most things zombie suck ass. Thanks for doing your part to drive the genre into the ground. And no, I won't be getting off the couch to watch this garbage because I don't just mindlessly throw my money away on things that are obviously garbage. The same couldn't be said for you. Enjoy the shiatty movie, it was made to pander to people like you, anyways. Way to be a target demographic.
 
2012-11-06 02:02:50 PM  
Never read the book but I have read a detailed synopsis of the battle of Yonkers bit. I really liked the whole aspect of the military leaders being too overconfident of their superiority against the slow moving zombies. That they funneled them into a main street under the assumption that their big guns could take care of any amount of zombies and that the slow horde just kept plodding forward until ground troops panicked and became overwhelmed.

With the fast moving zombies in the preview, I doubt we will see anything like that and I'm a bit disappointed. I thought it would have made for an awesome viewing experience. The might of the American army unleashing everything they have against an unending slow horde of zombies. I really wanted to see that done in a real gritty style with maybe even POV shots from the ground troops in the dug outs as they are slowly overrun.
 
2012-11-06 02:04:11 PM  

mooseyfate: Lazy personal attacks, name-dropping of unrelated authors, implication of being an idiot because I believe the movie should at the very least be about the source material, and then to top it off, you say that the book had no plot because L4D. Yup. I'm the m


I would say that WWZ is a different enough take on zombies that it merits following the source material. Making it a series of vignettes about the world wide phenomenon makes for an interesting story. Why have Resident Evil:The Movie part 6, Zombies take Manhattan and label it WWZ? I need to get Kramer's lawyer to file an injunction against it.
 
2012-11-06 02:07:08 PM  

Fano: mooseyfate: Lazy personal attacks, name-dropping of unrelated authors, implication of being an idiot because I believe the movie should at the very least be about the source material, and then to top it off, you say that the book had no plot because L4D. Yup. I'm the m

I would say that WWZ is a different enough take on zombies that it merits following the source material. Making it a series of vignettes about the world wide phenomenon makes for an interesting story. Why have Resident Evil:The Movie part 6, Zombies take Manhattan and label it WWZ? I need to get Kramer's lawyer to file an injunction against it.


Mouthbreather! Couch potato! You go slurp up this pig slop they threw in the dirt infront of you or you WILL NOT be getting pig slop tomorrow, young man!
 
2012-11-06 02:20:34 PM  
Either the synopsis of the film is totally inaccurate or else the film has nothing to do with the book. The book was a retrospective telling of the events that occurred during the apocalypse from which humanity is now recovering. The synopsis of the film said it followed a U.N. employee running around the globe trying to STOP the apocalypse.

World War Z it most certainly is NOT.
 
2012-11-06 02:22:51 PM  

Coelacanth: I've been calling this thing "Starship Zombies" for awhile now. But I had no idea how close I was to the truth.

At least I get to hear the lamentations of the gun porn guys when they show the Battle of Yonkers.


Spoiler alert: The U.S. military defeats the zombie queen in the climactic finale at Yonkers. All zombies worldwide crumple to the ground as their psychic link has been broken. Brad Pitt kisses his plucky female sidekick. There is a long shot of smoking city ruins, and... roll credits.
 
2012-11-06 02:25:17 PM  

mooseyfate: frepnog: screw you guys. all i expect out of this movie is a big budget OMFG ZOMBIES movie. I expect Pitt to deliver that. It won't be the book. That is fine. Walking Dead is not the books and it is doing fine (hell the last episode finally for the most part reached the quality of the books). The zombie flow looked cool and is something we haven't quite seen before, and I for one could use a new take. I love WWZ the book, and the audio book is for the most part great (altho some shiat you can write but can't say, some of the dialog in that audiobook should have been re-written to reflect how a person would speak) but the book would for the most part be boring as hell if it was filmed as is.... and do we really need a filmed sequence of a blind japanese man killing zombies? or an interview with a child talking about how her church was over-run? All I ask from this movie is a fantastic Yonkers battle. The rest Pitt can fill in.

The movie will likely be very good, even if not the book.

And this is pretty much case-in-point why 99% of zombie themed endeavors suck bloody cock.


what? most zombie stuff sucks cock because it is either low budget crap, poorly acted, poorly written garbage, or is just lazy.

the big budget stuff is usually good. Zombieland was great. The Dawn of the Dead remake was necessary and destroys the original (even if the original is beloved and good, it is hard to watch these days). I expect this movie to be frikin AWESOME even if is isn't really the book.
 
2012-11-06 02:28:34 PM  

mooseyfate: If you actually HAD read the books, you'd know that Brooks goes out of his way in chapter 1 of the ZSHB to describe that voodoo zombies and "runners" simply do not exist in his zombie world


i never read the book so could you or someone explain what he says about fast and voodoo zombies? im interested.

thanks

i actually prefer the fast moving zombies because they bring extra terror to zombies. i can watch "slow or fast" movers but i like the fast movers. ones that can run fast for days seems a lil extreme. maybe in burst like we do? who knows.
 
2012-11-06 02:32:04 PM  

mooseyfate: Fano: mooseyfate: Lazy personal attacks, name-dropping of unrelated authors, implication of being an idiot because I believe the movie should at the very least be about the source material, and then to top it off, you say that the book had no plot because L4D. Yup. I'm the m

I would say that WWZ is a different enough take on zombies that it merits following the source material. Making it a series of vignettes about the world wide phenomenon makes for an interesting story. Why have Resident Evil:The Movie part 6, Zombies take Manhattan and label it WWZ? I need to get Kramer's lawyer to file an injunction against it.

Mouthbreather! Couch potato! You go slurp up this pig slop they threw in the dirt infront of you or you WILL NOT be getting pig slop tomorrow, young man!


Could you at least turn the garden hose on the pig slop so that I can have gravy with it?
 
2012-11-06 02:32:37 PM  

Bleyo: Coelacanth: I've been calling this thing "Starship Zombies" for awhile now. But I had no idea how close I was to the truth.

At least I get to hear the lamentations of the gun porn guys when they show the Battle of Yonkers.

Spoiler alert: The U.S. military defeats the zombie queen in the climactic finale at Yonkers. All zombies worldwide crumple to the ground as their psychic link has been broken. Brad Pitt kisses his plucky female sidekick. There is a long shot of smoking city ruins, and... roll credits.


If I had the money, I'd give Atlas Shrugged the same treatment.
 
2012-11-06 02:33:38 PM  
So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?
 
2012-11-06 02:37:10 PM  

cefm: The synopsis of the film said it followed a U.N. employee running around the globe trying to STOP the apocalypse


If he was going around the world preaching the Rhodiker (I just butchered the heck out of that) Plan it would somewhat hold true to the book, though I doubt Pitt would want play a character that ruthless/heartless.
 
2012-11-06 02:38:40 PM  

AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?


would run out of gas before running out of zombies.
 
2012-11-06 02:40:50 PM  

AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?


Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.
 
2012-11-06 02:41:19 PM  

frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.


Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.
 
2012-11-06 02:44:00 PM  

AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?


Cause those super zombies will all literally run to you, literally all pick you up at once, and literally flip you over!!!!1!1one!1!
 
2012-11-06 02:44:30 PM  

Strategeryz0r: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.


To be fair, I can see that plan possibly failing if the zombies happen to be distributed across the whole country as it would be hard to find them all, but for large masses it shouldn't be too bad with an organized military and a bunch of armor. Then again, if we were too realistic we wouldn't get to enjoy zombies, so I'm always willing to forgive as long as its enjoyable.

/Never read WWZ
/zombie movie/tv show fan
 
2012-11-06 02:47:30 PM  

AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.


Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.
 
2012-11-06 02:49:43 PM  

AntonChigger: Strategeryz0r: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.

To be fair, I can see that plan possibly failing if the zombies happen to be distributed across the whole country as it would be hard to find them all, but for large masses it shouldn't be too bad with an organized military and a bunch of armor. Then again, if we were too realistic we wouldn't get to enjoy zombies, so I'm always willing to forgive as long as its enjoyable.

/Never read WWZ
/zombie movie/tv show fan


Oh yeah, it's not a bulletproof plan. But it's certainly an advantage the zombies can't counter, and watching as the leaders of the world fail to utilize this advantage in every single zombie film/book is always a facepalm moment to me. But whatever, I love zombie shiat. So I'll flip the logical part of my brain off and enjoy it for what it is.
 
2012-11-06 02:53:25 PM  

KellyX: AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.

Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.


Um, my argument has nothing to do with modern tech and more to do with simple fact that a multi ton tank, armored vehicle, humvee, etc will flatten a zombie into a squishy paste no matter what universe you're in. I should say that I've flipped through the wiki, and if I recall correctly, Brooks still follows the classic destroy the brain rule, so any zombies remaining would be easier to target and shoot, especially if they are maimed by the vehicles, which would make them slower.
 
2012-11-06 02:54:37 PM  

Fano: So basically, it's the battle of the Hornburg with "undead" instead of Orcs?


I was originally derived from the Zulu attack on the British. Not sure wtf this is supposed to be.
 
2012-11-06 02:58:10 PM  

Strategeryz0r: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.


It will spoiler the book for you (and possibly the movie a little bit depending on what they have taken from the book) but if you are curious why that doesn't work, read a synopsis of the battle of Yonkers from WWZ. They try and bottleneck most of the zombies located in that particular area of NY and then use gunships and tanks.

The long and short of it is *SPOILER ALERT!!*


Many zombies are not killed but simply dismembered, some even cut in half. But the brain remains intact so the zombies then just become crawlers, which are still dangerous to any ground infantry as they are then low to the ground and harder to see approaching if there is lots of debris. And with their being several million zombies in the Yonkers area alone, the gunships and tanks expend their main and secondary weapons quite quickly before they can make any significant impact. The ground infantry are then left with an approaching mass of many hundreds of thousands of remaining zombies, many of which haven't even been touched by the artillery.

It actually feels really realistic in terms of how a military superpower might underestimate how dangerous a load of slow moving zombies could be and how the situation could quickly turn.
 
2012-11-06 02:58:58 PM  

chuklz: Fano: So basically, it's the battle of the Hornburg with "undead" instead of Orcs?

I was originally derived from the Zulu attack on the British. Not sure wtf this is supposed to be.


The sound of one hand clapping: Never read the book but I have read a detailed synopsis of the battle of Yonkers bit. I really liked the whole aspect of the military leaders being too overconfident of their superiority against the slow moving zombies. That they funneled them into a main street under the assumption that their big guns could take care of any amount of zombies and that the slow horde just kept plodding forward until ground troops panicked and became overwhelmed.

With the fast moving zombies in the preview, I doubt we will see anything like that and I'm a bit disappointed. I thought it would have made for an awesome viewing experience. The might of the American army unleashing everything they have against an unending slow horde of zombies. I really wanted to see that done in a real gritty style with maybe even POV shots from the ground troops in the dug outs as they are slowly overrun.


Apparently watching a poor tactical plan unravel in slow motion is just not exciting enough. I like the idea of it being like Zulu at Isandhlwana. Watching the military slowly run out of bullets, with mass chaos as the line breaks and men resorting to side arm, bayonet and hand to hand during a broken retreat against a limitless, implacable horde... that would be tense stuff.
 
2012-11-06 02:59:35 PM  

AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.

Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.

Um, my argument has nothing to do with modern tech and more to do with simple fact that a multi ton tank, armored vehicle, humvee, etc will flatten a zombie into a squishy paste no matter what universe you're in. I should say that I've flipped through the wiki, and if I recall correctly, Brooks still follows the classic destroy the brain rule, so any zombies remaining would be easier to target and shoot, especially if they are maimed by the vehicles, which would make them slower.


I think the issue is there's chaos at the start and a lot of denial, but.. i think the biggie is that they basically swarm into huge herds of people and even if you try to drive your tank or car into a group of thousands, you're going to stop and be stuck.
 
2012-11-06 03:00:39 PM  

Strategeryz0r: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.


The thing I always figured about Zombie movies is that they are set in a world where knowledge of Zombies doesn't exists. Everything that is happening to them is unknown and everybody is learning what is going on on the run. So therefore the idea of mowing them all down with machine guns wouldn't be the first thing government would think of. They would handle it like a riot situation at first trying to contain it not realizing what is going on. They will try to set up a line and hold that line. However the injured and bitten would be transferred to medical units behind the line and when they turn to Zombies the line is instantly broken and even more chaos would ensue as soldiers start deserting, police and medical people start running, just a complete breakdown. By the time it is figured out what is going on everything would be so disjointed that mowing them all down with machine guns wouldn't really be an option.

In just about every Zombie movie, even though it is never shown, it is always implied that this is what happened to the military, and now there is no central military as they all took off.
 
2012-11-06 03:00:58 PM  

KellyX: AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.

Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.

Um, my argument has nothing to do with modern tech and more to do with simple fact that a multi ton tank, armored vehicle, humvee, etc will flatten a zombie into a squishy paste no matter what universe you're in. I should say that I've flipped through the wiki, and if I recall correctly, Brooks still follows the classic destroy the brain rule, so any zombies remaining would be easier to target and shoot, especially if they are maimed by the vehicles, which would make them slower.

I think the issue is there's chaos at the start and a lot of denial, but.. i think the biggie is that they basically swarm into huge herds of people and even if you try to drive your tank or car into a group of thousands, you're going to stop and be stuck.


Recent filmed example: The van in Argo trying to get through the mobs. A tank would have trouble pushing through a mob that didn't care about living.
 
2012-11-06 03:01:27 PM  
I did enjoy the book and I even got the audibook so I could listen to it on a road trip. I was upset about some of the things they cut out like North Korea. But it was cool that they had so many people narrate it. The Henry Rollins merc to the celebritys was great. That probably wont be in the movie.
 
2012-11-06 03:02:59 PM  

KellyX: AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.

Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.

Um, my argument has nothing to do with modern tech and more to do with simple fact that a multi ton tank, armored vehicle, humvee, etc will flatten a zombie into a squishy paste no matter what universe you're in. I should say that I've flipped through the wiki, and if I recall correctly, Brooks still follows the classic destroy the brain rule, so any zombies remaining would be easier to target and shoot, especially if they are maimed by the vehicles, which would make them slower.

I think the issue is there's chaos at the start and a lot of denial, but.. i think the biggie is that they basically swarm into huge herds of people and even if you try to drive your tank or car into a group of thousands, you're going to stop and be stuck.


Sounds like its mythbusters time. Lets round up several hundred or even thousand people we don't like, and see if they can stop an M1 Abrams at top speed (35 mph) from moving with their bare hands!
 
2012-11-06 03:05:09 PM  

Freakin Rican: mooseyfate: If you actually HAD read the books, you'd know that Brooks goes out of his way in chapter 1 of the ZSHB to describe that voodoo zombies and "runners" simply do not exist in his zombie world

i never read the book so could you or someone explain what he says about fast and voodoo zombies? im interested.

thanks

i actually prefer the fast moving zombies because they bring extra terror to zombies. i can watch "slow or fast" movers but i like the fast movers. ones that can run fast for days seems a lil extreme. maybe in burst like we do? who knows.


The first chapter is basically just Max saying in so many words: "I know that Hollywood has portrayed zombies as runners, voodoo, and supernaturally powered; but here's how zombies work in the universe my books take place in.". He then spends the next few pages describing how real zombies (read: Brooks Zombies) are reanimated through a virus called Solonum, and how they CAN'T act like sprinter's and voodoo zombies because the virus just doesn't allow the reanimated to move in such a fashion. They also aren't capable of any form of intelligence or reasoning. So no hand tools, door knobs are beyond their abilities to operate, hell, even ladders and stairs are nearly impossible for them to navigate. Anyways, if you haven't read it yet, go snag a copy. It's an insanely fun read.
 
2012-11-06 03:05:42 PM  

The sound of one hand clapping: The long and short of it is *SPOILER ALERT!!*


Many zombies are not killed but simply dismembered, some even cut in half. But the brain remains intact so the zombies then just become crawlers, which are still dangerous to any ground infantry as they are then low to the ground and harder to see approaching if there is lots of debris. And with their being several million zombies in the Yonkers area alone, the gunships and tanks expend their main and secondary weapons quite quickly before they can make any significant impact. The ground infantry are then left with an approaching mass of many hundreds of thousands of remaining zombies, many of which haven't even been touched by the artillery.

It actually feels really realistic in terms of how a military superpower might underestimate how dangerous a load of slow moving zombies could be and how the situation could quickly turn.


The biggest factor was what the zombies could survive which was terrifying, and with land warrior everyone saw the same thing, instantaneously experienced inaccurate data, panicked the same way, and once they were afraid Zs were behind them too.
 
2012-11-06 03:05:59 PM  

AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.

Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.

Um, my argument has nothing to do with modern tech and more to do with simple fact that a multi ton tank, armored vehicle, humvee, etc will flatten a zombie into a squishy paste no matter what universe you're in. I should say that I've flipped through the wiki, and if I recall correctly, Brooks still follows the classic destroy the brain rule, so any zombies remaining would be easier to target and shoot, especially if they are maimed by the vehicles, which would make them slower.

I think the issue is there's chaos at the start and a lot of denial, but.. i think the biggie is that they basically swarm into huge herds of people and even if you try to drive your tank or car into a group of thousands, you're going to stop and be stuck.

Sounds like its mythbusters time. Lets round up several hundred or even thousand people we don't like, and see if they can stop an M1 Abrams at top speed (35 mph) from moving with their bare hands!


I don't think it's about bare hands, it's more about mass... eventually it would just become more than the tank (in this example) could push against...

Also at what point does all the goo, bones, etc. gum up the tank's wheels?
 
2012-11-06 03:06:22 PM  

thecpt: ConConHead: So I don't get my weiner dog zombie hunter squads then? :(

Make it Corgis, then we'll talk.


WAVE OF ZOMBIES!?

i1003.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-06 03:08:27 PM  

KellyX: AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.

Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.

Um, my argument has nothing to do with modern tech and more to do with simple fact that a multi ton tank, armored vehicle, humvee, etc will flatten a zombie into a squishy paste no matter what universe you're in. I should say that I've flipped through the wiki, and if I recall correctly, Brooks still follows the classic destroy the brain rule, so any zombies remaining would be easier to target and shoot, especially if they are maimed by the vehicles, which would make them slower.

I think the issue is there's chaos at the start and a lot of denial, but.. i think the biggie is that they basically swarm into huge herds of people and even if you try to drive your tank or car into a group of thousands, you're going to stop and be stuck.

Sounds like its mythbusters time. Lets round up several hundred or even thousand people we don't like, and see if they can stop an M1 Abrams at top speed (35 mph) from moving with their bare hands!

I don't think it's about bare hands, it's more about mass... eventually it would just become more than the tank (in this example) could push against...

Also at what point does all the goo, bones, etc. gum up the tank's ...


Im not sure human remains would do much to gum up a tanks treads, since they can probably grind through them until they reach asphalt again, but what do I know. In any case, get a few tanks behind them to push :)
 
2012-11-06 03:09:05 PM  

The sound of one hand clapping: Strategeryz0r: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.

It will spoiler the book for you (and possibly the movie a little bit depending on what they have taken from the book) but if you are curious why that doesn't work, read a synopsis of the battle of Yonkers from WWZ. They try and bottleneck most of the zombies located in that particular area of NY and then use gunships and tanks.

The long and short of it is *SPOILER ALERT!!*


Many zombies are not killed but simply dismembered, some even cut in half. But the brain remains intact so the zombies then just become crawlers, which are still dangerous to any ground infantry as they are then low to the ground and harder to see approaching if there is lots of debris. And with their being several million zombies in the Yonkers area alone, the gunships and tanks expend their main and secondary weapons quite quickly before they can make any significant impact. The ground infantry are then left with an approaching mass of many hundreds of thousands of remaining zombies, many of which haven't even been touched by the artillery.

It actually feels really realistic in terms of how a military superpower might underestimate how dangerous a load of slow moving zombies could be and how the situation could quickly turn.


When you're shooting from above them, using weapons that spray bullets in the thousands upon thousands of rounds per minute. The odds of you hitting them in the head are increased so exponentially that it's practically assured you will land a kill shot. Even if you don't, the sheer damage inflicted will make the grunts job significantly easier, as the zombies will have significantly decreased mobility.

No matter what perspective you look at, the helicopter is the ultimate zombie death machine. Not to mention the collateral damage from something like that would be lessened compared to say, tanks firing shots all over the place, jets firebombing the streets, etc.

Running out of ammo is obviously the main issue(mini guns be hungry). However, supported properly with the helicopters moving in first to initially cut a swath in the horde, snipers hanging back landing easy head shots as they can, and main infantry/ground armor moving forward behind the helicopters(to support the assault). It's like a hot knife through butter at that point. Your main assault force(helos) is untouchable by the zombies, the ground pounders have a significantly easier job courtesy of the damage being done from above and afar, and your infantry can focus on landing direct kill shots without worrying about wasting ammunition the helos would be using(miniguns expend 7.62 rounds vs standard M16/M4's 5.56).

Granted this is all conjecture at this point. As zombies aren't real(yet), and this is assuming that you catch on to the outbreak early enough for your ground forces to not be facing hundreds of millions of zombies at a time.

Regardless of that, the military response to a zombie outbreak in films and movies seems to rely on heavily outdated strategy.

1) setup defensive line
2) funnel zombies into a main avenue
3) try and cut them down while they're in a massive group, from a large firing line

That's a very.. err.. revolutionary war style strategy that seems to make ill-use of all the equipment in the military's arsenal. It also seems to be standard zombie film/book protocol.

I mean give me a street full of zombies, a wing of A-10s, and a bunch of avenger strafing runs. Tell me that wont wipe out a shiatload of zombies.
 
2012-11-06 03:11:01 PM  

Strategeryz0r: Regardless of that, the military response to a zombie outbreak in films and moviesbooks seems to rely on heavily outdated strateg


ftfm
 
2012-11-06 03:13:08 PM  

mooseyfate: Freakin Rican: mooseyfate: If you actually HAD read the books, you'd know that Brooks goes out of his way in chapter 1 of the ZSHB to describe that voodoo zombies and "runners" simply do not exist in his zombie world

i never read the book so could you or someone explain what he says about fast and voodoo zombies? im interested.

thanks

i actually prefer the fast moving zombies because they bring extra terror to zombies. i can watch "slow or fast" movers but i like the fast movers. ones that can run fast for days seems a lil extreme. maybe in burst like we do? who knows.

The first chapter is basically just Max saying in so many words: "I know that Hollywood has portrayed zombies as runners, voodoo, and supernaturally powered; but here's how zombies work in the universe my books take place in.". He then spends the next few pages describing how real zombies (read: Brooks Zombies) are reanimated through a virus called Solonum, and how they CAN'T act like sprinter's and voodoo zombies because the virus just doesn't allow the reanimated to move in such a fashion. They also aren't capable of any form of intelligence or reasoning. So no hand tools, door knobs are beyond their abilities to operate, hell, even ladders and stairs are nearly impossible for them to navigate. Anyways, if you haven't read it yet, go snag a copy. It's an insanely fun read.


thanks!!! will do
im gonna get a couple copies for my sons. i brought them all up as zombie, vampire, werewolf fans. ask them about how to survive a zombie attack and they would give you a full 50 page report, ask them for one page of homework and they draw a blank. lol

i actually started reading the wiki stuff on it. cant get through it all here at work. looks good so far.
 
2012-11-06 03:14:17 PM  

Strategeryz0r: The sound of one hand clapping: Strategeryz0r: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.

It will spoiler the book for you (and possibly the movie a little bit depending on what they have taken from the book) but if you are curious why that doesn't work, read a synopsis of the battle of Yonkers from WWZ. They try and bottleneck most of the zombies located in that particular area of NY and then use gunships and tanks.

The long and short of it is *SPOILER ALERT!!*


Many zombies are not killed but simply dismembered, some even cut in half. But the brain remains intact so the zombies then just become crawlers, which are still dangerous to any ground infantry as they are then low to the ground and harder to see approaching if there is lots of debris. And with their being several million zombies in the Yonkers area alone, the gunships and tanks expend their main and secondary weapons quite quickly before they can make any significant impact. The ground infantry are then left with an approaching mass of many hundreds of thousands of remaining zombies, many of which haven't even been touched by the artillery.

It actually feels really realistic in terms of how a military superpower might underestimate how dangerous a load of slow moving zombies could be and how the situation could quickly turn.

When you're shooting from above them, using weapons that spray bullets in the thousands upon thousands of rounds per mi ...


i would think even fire bombing them would work. naplam or something like that. just burn em to a crisp
 
2012-11-06 03:16:21 PM  

cefm: Either the synopsis of the film is totally inaccurate or else the film has nothing to do with the book. The book was a retrospective telling of the events that occurred during the apocalypse from which humanity is now recovering. The synopsis of the film said it followed a U.N. employee running around the globe trying to STOP the apocalypse.

World War Z it most certainly is NOT.


A great big THIS.

If Brad Pitt, Hollywood or anyone else wanted to make an "EXPLOSIONS! BOOM! VROOM WOOOOO!" zombie movie, go right ahead. Don't put the name "WWZ" on it. Call it "Zombie 'Pocolypse" or something. Call it something else.

Don't take a beautifully written book that holds certain truths about the material it is covering, and then set it all on fire so you can call it by an instantly recognizable name to put butts in the seats.

Basically - this would be like having decided that Harry Potter needed to be female, Harrietta was raised by a wizarding family and trained to fight the evil bad guy from day one and the final scene of the first (and only) movie is Voldermort being destroyed forever.
 
2012-11-06 03:16:33 PM  

Freakin Rican: Strategeryz0r: The sound of one hand clapping: Strategeryz0r: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.

It will spoiler the book for you (and possibly the movie a little bit depending on what they have taken from the book) but if you are curious why that doesn't work, read a synopsis of the battle of Yonkers from WWZ. They try and bottleneck most of the zombies located in that particular area of NY and then use gunships and tanks.

The long and short of it is *SPOILER ALERT!!*


Many zombies are not killed but simply dismembered, some even cut in half. But the brain remains intact so the zombies then just become crawlers, which are still dangerous to any ground infantry as they are then low to the ground and harder to see approaching if there is lots of debris. And with their being several million zombies in the Yonkers area alone, the gunships and tanks expend their main and secondary weapons quite quickly before they can make any significant impact. The ground infantry are then left with an approaching mass of many hundreds of thousands of remaining zombies, many of which haven't even been touched by the artillery.

It actually feels really realistic in terms of how a military superpower might underestimate how dangerous a load of slow moving zombies could be and how the situation could quickly turn.

When you're shooting from above them, using weapons that spray bullets in the thousands upon thousands o ...


Sure it would, the burning would eventually destroy the brain.

The inherent problem is that you're fire bombing your city centers. So if your end goal is to pacify the outbreak in hopes of rebuilding, you just caused a massive amount of needless collateral damage.

It's much easier to fix bullet holes than it is to rebuild entire city blocks because you burned them to the ground. Though if things became hopeless, that's obviously the first option. Just MOAB the shiat and be done with it.
 
2012-11-06 03:17:57 PM  

Fano: KellyX: AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.

Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.

Um, my argument has nothing to do with modern tech and more to do with simple fact that a multi ton tank, armored vehicle, humvee, etc will flatten a zombie into a squishy paste no matter what universe you're in. I should say that I've flipped through the wiki, and if I recall correctly, Brooks still follows the classic destroy the brain rule, so any zombies remaining would be easier to target and shoot, especially if they are maimed by the vehicles, which would make them slower.

I think the issue is there's chaos at the start and a lot of denial, but.. i think the biggie is that they basically swarm into huge herds of people and even if you try to drive your tank or car into a group of thousands, you're going to stop and be stuck.

Recent filmed example: The van in Argo trying to get through the mobs. A tank would have trouble pushing through a mob that didn't care about living.


A tank would plow over or through any number of zombies. Anything short of hardened fortifications isn't going to slow them down. Hell, one of the best things we could do is bring back some of the "funnies" models of Shermans from WW2. Imagine what a mine-flayer would do to a mass of zombies.
 
2012-11-06 03:19:19 PM  

Strategeryz0r: When you're shooting from above them, using weapons that spray bullets in the thousands upon thousands of rounds per minute. The odds of you hitting them in the head are increased so exponentially that it's practically assured you will land a kill shot. Even if you don't, the sheer damage inflicted will make the grunts job significantly easier, as the zombies will have significantly decreased mobility.

No matter what perspective you look at, the helicopter is the ultimate zombie death machine. Not to mention the collateral damage from something like that would be lessened compared to say, tanks firing shots all over the place, jets firebombing the streets, etc.

Running out of ammo is obviously the main issue(mini guns be hungry). However, supported properly with the helicopters moving in first to initially cut a swath in the horde, snipers hanging back landing easy head shots as they can, and main infantry/ground armor moving forward behind the helicopters(to support the assault). It's like a hot knife through butter at that point. Your main assault force(helos) is untouchable by the zombies, the ground pounders have a significantly easier job courtesy of the damage being done from above and afar, and your infantry can focus on landing direct kill shots without worrying about wasting ammunition the helos would be using(miniguns expend 7.62 rounds vs standard M16/M4's 5.56).

Granted this is all conjecture at this point. As zombies aren't real(yet), and this is assuming that you catch on to the outbreak early enough for your ground forces to not be facing hundreds of millions of zombies at a time.

Regardless of that, the military response to a zombie outbreak in films and movies seems to rely on heavily outdated strategy.

1) setup defensive line
2) funnel zombies into a main avenue
3) try and cut them down while they're in a massive group, from a large firing line

That's a very.. err.. revolutionary war style strategy that seems to make ill-use of all the equipment in the military's arsenal. It also seems to be standard zombie film/book protocol.

I mean give me a street full of zombies, a wing of A-10s, and a bunch of avenger strafing runs. Tell me that wont wipe out a shiatload of zombies..


That will work all fine and well if you know that you are dealing with a Zombie invasion. But like I said before, in most stories about Zombies, Zombies and Zombie stories don't exists in the world the story takes place in. So by time they figure out what is going on, the military has all deserted, bases have been overrun and there isn't much of a centralized military left. Your plan wouldn't even be able to get off the ground in a situation like that.
 
2012-11-06 03:20:43 PM  

frepnog: screw you guys. all i expect out of this movie is a big budget OMFG ZOMBIES movie. ... but the book would for the most part be boring as hell if it was filmed as is.... and do we really need a filmed sequence of a blind japanese man killing zombies? or an interview with a child talking about how her church was over-run? All I ask from this movie is a fantastic Yonkers battle.


I wouldn't mind seeing an elderly blind Japanese man going to town on zombies with a sword or spade. But I guess that's just me.

And seriously, your compliant about the book being boring would be like complaining about 28 Days Later being boring. Jim wakes up. Jim wanders round. Jim has some brushes and has to witness/do some harsh things. Jim finds help. Jim gets left for dead. Jim goes ape shiat. Swedes fly over. ONLY ONE BIG BATTLE WTFBBQCHIPS!!!

It's like comparing Bram Stoker's Dracula to Blade. "Waaahhhh, Blade doesn't have character development. Blade doesn't have vampire wife things played by Monica Belluci. Blade doesn't have an insane asylum. All I want is one sweet ass carriage race through Transylvania and some fightin' at a Castle."

And I leave you with this: Link
 
2012-11-06 03:23:07 PM  

SuperChuck: Fano: KellyX: AntonChigger: KellyX: AntonChigger: frepnog: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

would run out of gas before running out of zombies.

Do you KNOW how much America spends on the military? I doubt they would run out of gas. All they need to do is reduce the number of zombies down to a manageable level anyway for the ground troops to come in and clean up the mess. Fast zombies would be hard to pin down I suppose, but slow zombies would be easy pickins.

Max Brooks covered why modern technology wouldn't affect things that radically against the undead, short of nuking everything and even then that wouldn't solve it and then you'd have radioactive ones that didn't get evaporated instantly roaming around.

Um, my argument has nothing to do with modern tech and more to do with simple fact that a multi ton tank, armored vehicle, humvee, etc will flatten a zombie into a squishy paste no matter what universe you're in. I should say that I've flipped through the wiki, and if I recall correctly, Brooks still follows the classic destroy the brain rule, so any zombies remaining would be easier to target and shoot, especially if they are maimed by the vehicles, which would make them slower.

I think the issue is there's chaos at the start and a lot of denial, but.. i think the biggie is that they basically swarm into huge herds of people and even if you try to drive your tank or car into a group of thousands, you're going to stop and be stuck.

Recent filmed example: The van in Argo trying to get through the mobs. A tank would have trouble pushing through a mob that didn't care about living.

A tank would plow over or through any number of zombies. Anything short of hardened fortifications isn't going to slow them down. Hell, one of the best things we could do is bring back some of the "funnies" models of Shermans from WW2. Imagine what a mine-flayer would do to a mas ...


If you've ever played Company of Heroes, you know EXACTLY what a mine-flayer does to people, in exquisite detail...

/damn Jerries

Also, an M1 Abrams is 67ish short tons according to wikipedia, compared to a van which is 2 or 3. Gonna be really, really hard to slow it down, especially when its design would allow it to simply drive over the top of the zombies like a ramp after knocking down the first wave, maybe.
 
2012-11-06 03:23:47 PM  

Freakin Rican: i would think even fire bombing them would work. naplam or something like that. just burn em to a crisp


That was the initial strategy, and that's why they lose the battle.

SPOILERS.
What came out of the firebombing was the most horrifying part. Thermo-baric explosions made the Zs lungs come out of their mouths, and they were burnt crisps but they weren't dead. The smoky left overs allowed them to collect ranks, and distracted the army. Soon they crawled and walked out to now terrified soldiers.

Thats the kind of book this is. They really build up the reason to be scared of them, more than something that can kill humanity but something for which humans have to rewrite the book of war.
 
2012-11-06 03:27:20 PM  

Strategeryz0r: AntonChigger: So does anyone want to explain why the military didn't just drive around the city with tanks running over all the zombies?

Or just send in a bunch of gunships to mow them down from the air?

That's one of the main reasons zombie movies make me laugh. All it would take is some apaches, blackhawks with miniguns, and a ton of ammo to put an end to the zombie apocalypse. Sweep with the air assets, then send in the ground troops supported by armor to clean up the streets and sweep the buildings.

Quick, simple, easy, effective. Yet it's always the last thing any zombie film/book ever tries.


The only thing that takes out a zombie for sure is a headshot. If you can't achieve that, it's masturbation. Sending in ground troops is insane. In the original Night of the Living Dead, a gun might get you out of town. In Dawn of the Dead (2004 remake), a gun might get you next door. This? In the movie, a zombie bite can turn you in eight seconds.
 
2012-11-06 03:29:18 PM  

thecpt: Freakin Rican: i would think even fire bombing them would work. naplam or something like that. just burn em to a crisp

That was the initial strategy, and that's why they lose the battle.

SPOILERS.
What came out of the firebombing was the most horrifying part. Thermo-baric explosions made the Zs lungs come out of their mouths, and they were burnt crisps but they weren't dead. The smoky left overs allowed them to collect ranks, and distracted the army. Soon they crawled and walked out to now terrified soldiers.

Thats the kind of book this is. They really build up the reason to be scared of them, more than something that can kill humanity but something for which humans have to rewrite the book of war.


Thermo-baric explosives aren't effective for firebombing because they aren't primarily intended to be incendiary devices, if I recall correctly. We are simply talking napalm, which sticks to everything and burns hot. The zombies can't movie if all their flesh and tendons, etc has burnt and sloughed off.
 
2012-11-06 03:34:06 PM  
Battle of Yonkers audio if you don't have the book. Makes a good attempt to explain why all the modern weapons and strategy failed. Doesn't cover everything of course.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGBN7IPkgGg
 
2012-11-06 03:35:12 PM  

AntonChigger: thecpt: Freakin Rican: i would think even fire bombing them would work. naplam or something like that. just burn em to a crisp

That was the initial strategy, and that's why they lose the battle.

SPOILERS.
What came out of the firebombing was the most horrifying part. Thermo-baric explosions made the Zs lungs come out of their mouths, and they were burnt crisps but they weren't dead. The smoky left overs allowed them to collect ranks, and distracted the army. Soon they crawled and walked out to now terrified soldiers.

Thats the kind of book this is. They really build up the reason to be scared of them, more than something that can kill humanity but something for which humans have to rewrite the book of war.

Thermo-baric explosives aren't effective for firebombing because they aren't primarily intended to be incendiary devices, if I recall correctly. We are simply talking napalm, which sticks to everything and burns hot. The zombies can't movie if all their flesh and tendons, etc has burnt and sloughed off.


thats what i would think. burning them up there would be nothing left to move.


thecpt: Freakin Rican: i would think even fire bombing them would work. naplam or something like that. just burn em to a crisp

That was the initial strategy, and that's why they lose the battle.

SPOILERS.
What came out of the firebombing was the most horrifying part. Thermo-baric explosions made the Zs lungs come out of their mouths, and they were burnt crisps but they weren't dead. The smoky left overs allowed them to collect ranks, and distracted the army. Soon they crawled and walked out to now terrified soldiers.

Thats the kind of book this is. They really build up the reason to be scared of them, more than something that can kill humanity but something for which humans have to rewrite the book of war.


wow thats crazy!! that would scare the crap outta me.

i understand about the destroying of cities with fire bombing. maybe lead them out into an open area away from the cities?

would fire bombing possibly burn up carl? do we know where he is?
 
Displayed 50 of 223 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report