|
Post by malice on Jul 7, 2011 9:28:30 GMT -5
That's because for some reason Zombies are incredibly popular, even though the genre sucks (I hate the zombie genre).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2011 9:35:24 GMT -5
I don't mind the Zombie Genre, and here's why. Zombies are still pretty much mindless corpses that feed off of anything. The Vampire Genre was the one that went to sh*t because they started trying to give them feelings and remorse as opposed to the ultimate predictors that they were in myth.
I'm not crazy about the Zombie Genre, and I do not own a single zombie movie in my collection. However, I do kind of like that they haven't completely ruined the genre. I did own the playstation resident evil games, and found them enjoyable. I can still go to the movies with my friends and enjoy a good zombie movie. The Marvel Zombies didn't interest me though. I think it was because I flipped through the comic and seen them talking.
Call me old school, but whenever I see something like that I loose interest instantly.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Jul 7, 2011 9:39:43 GMT -5
*shrugs* I like zombies and vampires.
However, Marvel Zombies was NOT a zombie genre story. That's my primary problem with it. They weren't mindless. They were undead, yes, but their primary goal was to spread the infection, as opposed to devouring as much flesh as possible.
Also; vampires as mindless predators is the very definition of endless suck.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2011 9:46:56 GMT -5
Vampires weren't mindless predictors. They were smart, cunning, and intelligent. When you get into old school vampires they were mythoticaly sadistic. The new age emo vamps pale in comparison. When I said ultimate predictor I don't mean mindless. I mean smart, deadly, top of the food chain, no need to eat, sleep, or really do anything but feed and reek havoc.
I would rather read one good vampire novel than even hear somebody talk about some of the new crap they put out all day. The old stories were actually good.
|
|
|
Post by Hypester on Jul 7, 2011 11:22:28 GMT -5
Y'know who gets no love? Frankenstein. Zombies, Vampires, even Werewolves get some spillover love. And the Mummy movies may have been a hodgepodge, but at least they got made. Frankenstein's Monster hasn't seen a good update since Gene Wilder was puttingo n the Ritz.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Jul 7, 2011 11:26:49 GMT -5
Vampires weren't mindless predictors. They were smart, cunning, and intelligent. When you get into old school vampires they were mythoticaly sadistic. The new age emo vamps pale in comparison. When I said ultimate predictor I don't mean mindless. I mean smart, deadly, top of the food chain, no need to eat, sleep, or really do anything but feed and reek havoc. Sorry, but you're completely wrong. The vampire genre started with Lord Ruthven, who was very very much "emo" as you put it. The thing that has always made vampires cool is the emotional depth of their stories; DraculaCarmillaand so on and so forth. Vampires as we understand them in western literature and myth are a product of Gothic Romance literature. They've always been about the emotion of the story. I'm curious. Where are these "good" vampire stories where Vampires don't have "emo" leanings?
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Jul 7, 2011 11:30:19 GMT -5
Y'know who gets no love? Frankenstein. Zombies, Vampires, even Werewolves get some spillover love. And the Mummy movies may have been a hodgepodge, but at least they got made. Frankenstein's Monster hasn't seen a good update since Gene Wilder was puttingo n the Ritz. That's because by definition, if you tell a story about another monster similar to Frankenstein, you destroy the very essence of the Frankenstein story, which is about loneliness and desperation. Since the story of Frankenstein's monster has been told and re-told a billion times over, what is there left to say, really? I actually agree that Frankenstein's Monster is perhaps the most compelling of them all, I Just think that what makes it a great story also limits its potential for expansion into an entire genre. Besides; Frankenstein isn't sexy (of course I would say the same thing about werewolves, but to each their own), and what gives those other genres the ability to continually reappear in the collective conscious is sex appeal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2011 13:51:53 GMT -5
Vampires are much older than Ruthven, or Stoker, however fangs were pretty much a Stolker invention.. Their myth's are in cultures much older, spanning several continents. They just p*ssied then Up real good, almost as bad as Disney watered down the brothers grim tales.
Frankenstein, or "the monster" was good, but it doesn't really have the background that Zombies, lycan's or vampires do. They had massive myths and legends to the point that they were some of the older in man kinds history. As far as I know the frankenstein story was based off of a real doctor who tried to reanimate dead animals using electricity. Thanks to him, we understand allot more about open heart surgery. From what I've read that the author that wrote Frankenstein based Dr. Frankenstein somewhat off of that dr. So, that story would have been very hard to have thought of before people understood electricity and reanimation. Also, Frankenstein spans all media, and is very popular.
My personal favorite piece to read is Dr. Jykle and Mr. Hyde. Which I believe is something that Stan Lee was inspired by when he came up with The Hulk. Well, at least concept wise. Character wise they were very different.
|
|
|
Post by Vargas on Jul 7, 2011 14:23:34 GMT -5
Marvel death is permanent if you're the Vision apparently. (As much as I like the younger version from Young Avengers, it's not the same).
I expect that the Wasp will be the classic "temporary" death as her character seems popular enough.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Jul 7, 2011 14:54:36 GMT -5
Vampires are much older than Ruthven, or Stoker, however fangs were pretty much a Stolker invention.. Their myth's are in cultures much older, spanning several continents. They just p*ssied then Up real good, almost as bad as Disney watered down the brothers grim tales. Indeed, but none of those myths even remotely begin to resemble what you described as vampires. I'm intrigued as to from where you're drawing your particular definition of a "good" vampire. Ancient vampire legends in the west prior to stories that placed them as seducers made them pretty much mindless predators that rose from their graves to feed, and went back to their graves to rest when they weren't. I also don't think you realize just how far back the notion that vampires are seductive goes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2011 17:08:34 GMT -5
In old myths some vampires were particularly intelligent. They weren't always mindless. The seducer role was brought on from the goths, but I don't mind that. In comparison to the first vampire myths it's not that old though. When modern writers started making vampires do things like feel remorse, and other bs like that is when it crosses over into the emo territory. There's a huge difference between the seducer role to lure the prey, and whining about your problems like a little girl.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Jul 7, 2011 17:18:07 GMT -5
In old myths some vampires were particularly intelligent. They weren't always mindless. The seducer role was brought on from the goths, but I don't mind that. In comparison to the first vampire myths it's not that old though. When modern writers started making vampires do things like feel remorse, and other bs like that is when it crosses over into the emo territory. There's a huge difference between the seducer role to lure the prey, and whining about your problems like a little girl. I'm not sure what vampiric myths (from the west) you're referring to. Prior to popularization in romantic literature, vampires were by and large just another bogey man, and certainly not attributed particular intelligence like that the fey supposedly possessed. Not in any myths I'm familiar with, at any rate. Anyway, whining about your problems may be the second oldest human behavior, right after pretending you don't have any. I don't see that as a problem for vampires. I see making vampires *not* monsters (i.e. Twilight) as the problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2011 17:46:45 GMT -5
That is because you're looking for the word "vampire." They have several different names depending on the culture. The Greek version Vrykolakas were all about the hunt. The Bulgarian (Varkolak) were intelligent. They weren't the same as the romantic style ones. They would call people my name, knock on people's doors, stalk them, and kill them. One of the big things they did was call the victim by name luring them. There's allot more to the vampire myth than mindless zombies, and the goth types. You just have to take the time to read about them.
Secondly, that is my problem with vampires whining about their problems. That is human behavior, and vampires are not the same as humans. It's not nearly as enjoyable to read about vampires with human characteristics. That's how you get pieces of sh*t like Twilight.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Jul 7, 2011 17:54:31 GMT -5
I'm still unsure what, in your mind, suggests that calling peoples names to lure them in indicates "intelligence." As I said, that's typical bogey man behavior, found in myths from all around the world.
As far as vampires having problems... I guess thats a taste thing. Personally I think that anything that thinks and feels is going to have problems. If it doesn't, it's mindless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2011 18:01:39 GMT -5
The ability to hunt and track takes intelligence, especially when you're hunting humans. Of course, it is found in myth's all over the world, because vampire myth's are found all over the world too. If vampires were stupid then they wouldn't have been able to lure, stalk, and kill humans. They would have starved to death. *pun indented.*
I see what you're thinking of as "mindless," and from what I'm reading it's a like of them not having any problems rather than hunting, killing, and surviving. Being void of human emotion doesn't make them mindless, it makes them wild, unpredictable, and untainted human weaknesses.
Like you said though. It's a taste thing. I enjoy reading about vampires that are hunters. Intelligent wild predator like vampires are much more enjoyable to me than some skinny pale kid complaining about his problems until their prey kills themselves isn't my idea of a good read.
|
|