Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

So I watched AMC's 'Walking Dead' TV show the other night. I am a huge Romero fan and do rather enjoy the WD comic series.

But I am struck by exactly how close Kirkman's fare matches (or copies?) Romero's universe. Right down to:

1. Apocalyptic future overrun by re-animated corpses...check!

2. Death and resurrection of people bitten by zombies...check!

3. Destruction of the brain 'kills' the zombie...check!

4. Ambigious origin of zombie plague...check!

Hell, WD's opening montage even copies 28 Days Later in that both protagonists come out of a coma in a hospital to discover the world has gone to sh!t

I understand Romero lost the rights to alot of his work (hence the reason why Kirkman hasn't been sued to the hilt?) but are Kirkman's stories original enough to stand on their own?

Is the 'Apocalyptic Zombie World' a generic enough concept (compare to Vampire stuff)? Or is aping Romero's concepts akin to me writing a sci-fi story with soldiers who use laser swords while fighting a galactic empire?

Most of what you named is typical zombie movie/book fare, though...

Originally posted by -Pr-
Most of what you named is typical zombie movie/book fare, though...

But...

Wasn't all these concepts developed by Romero? To the best of my knowledge before George zombies were created by magic, did not spread by biting others etc.

I wouldn't consider 28 Days Later a Romero ripoff, as there weren't zombies in it...just homicidal humans exposed to a virus (plus they ran around a lot ).

If Romero's name was on the Walking Dead, I would totally believe he was responsible for it. There is no way I would pick up an Anne Rice book and confuse her with Stephanie Meyer.

Originally posted by theICONiac
But...

Wasn't all these concepts developed by Romero? To the best of my knowledge before George zombies were created by magic, did not spread by biting others etc.

.
My impression of the Romero verse is that being bitten by a zombie simply kills you, and that anyone who dies returns as a zombie provided there's enough left to reanimate.

Isn't that a major point about Day of the Dead? That all dead rise in that world because of some vague shift in the way of the Universe?

I love the WD comic series, and I thought the first episode of the TV show was pretty good as well.

Stop nitpicking. sly

Originally posted by Omega Vision
My impression of the Romero verse is that being bitten by a zombie simply kills you, and that anyone who dies returns as a zombie provided there's enough left to reanimate.

Isn't that a major point about Day of the Dead? That all dead rise in that world because of some vague shift in the way of the Universe?

You are correct. For years I was under the mistaken belief it was the bite that actually zombified the person.

The remake of 'Dawn of the Dead' DID have it where the bite was directly responsible, and non-bitten dead people did not rise.

Another strike against Kirkman is that he seems to have copied this from Romero as well (from Wikipedia):

The zombies
To date in the comic book series, every deceased human being has risen as a zombie, as long as they still have a working nervous system. It is unclear how long a person must have been deceased before they are reanimated: Tyreese's daughter "comes back" within a few minutes after death, but Shane's body does not reawaken until well after having been buried. Zombie body fluids getting on a human will not infect them. It is not the bite itself that zombifies a person, all the bite does is cause a serious infection, which kills within days. Promptly removing the limb of a person bitten will ensure survival.

Originally posted by Galan007
I love the WD comic series, and I thought the first episode of the TV show was pretty good as well.

Stop nitpicking. sly

Heh...gather around Galan I will regale you with a tale...

The Scorpion and the Frog
One day, a scorpion looked around at the mountain where he lived and decided that he wanted a change. So he set out on a journey through the forests and hills. He climbed over rocks and under vines and kept going until he reached a river.
The river was wide and swift, and the scorpion stopped to reconsider the situation. He couldn't see any way across. So he ran upriver and then checked downriver, all the while thinking that he might have to turn back.

Suddenly, he saw a frog sitting in the rushes by the bank of the stream on the other side of the river. He decided to ask the frog for help getting across the stream.

"Hellooo Mr. Frog!" called the scorpion across the water, "Would you be so kind as to give me a ride on your back across the river?"

"Well now, Mr. Scorpion! How do I know that if I try to help you, you wont try to kill me?" asked the frog hesitantly.

"Because," the scorpion replied, "If I try to kill you, then I would die too, for you see I cannot swim!"

Now this seemed to make sense to the frog. But he asked. "What about when I get close to the bank? You could still try to kill me and get back to the shore!"

"This is true," agreed the scorpion, "But then I wouldn't be able to get to the other side of the river!"

"Alright then...how do I know you wont just wait till we get to the other side and THEN kill me?" said the frog.

"Ahh...," crooned the scorpion, "Because you see, once you've taken me to the other side of this river, I will be so grateful for your help, that it would hardly be fair to reward you with death, now would it?!"

So the frog agreed to take the scorpion across the river. He swam over to the bank and settled himself near the mud to pick up his passenger. The scorpion crawled onto the frog's back, his sharp claws prickling into the frog's soft hide, and the frog slid into the river. The muddy water swirled around them, but the frog stayed near the surface so the scorpion would not drown. He kicked strongly through the first half of the stream, his flippers paddling wildly against the current.

Halfway across the river, the frog suddenly felt a sharp sting in his back and, out of the corner of his eye, saw the scorpion remove his stinger from the frog's back. A deadening numbness began to creep into his limbs.

"You fool!" croaked the frog, "Now we shall both die! Why on earth did you do that?"

The scorpion shrugged, and did a little jig on the drownings frog's back.

"I could not help myself. It is my nature."

Then they both sank into the muddy waters of the swiftly flowing river.

Originally posted by theICONiac
But...

Wasn't all these concepts developed by Romero? To the best of my knowledge before George zombies were created by magic, did not spread by biting others etc.

I wouldn't consider 28 Days Later a Romero ripoff, as there weren't zombies in it...just homicidal humans exposed to a virus (plus they ran around a lot ).

If Romero's name was on the Walking Dead, I would totally believe he was responsible for it. There is no way I would pick up an Anne Rice book and confuse her with Stephanie Meyer.

they were zombies in 28 days later. technicality ain't gonna change that.

Romero is the godfather of zombie movies. He's done so much in that genre, that it is literally impossible to watch a zombie flick he wasn't involved in, without noticing similarities to his work. Lets face it, zombies are a great concept (imo), but they aren't dynamic at all -- you can only do so much with them.

But frankly, I'm glad to see zombies once again being portrayed in the WD franchise as they were in the 'golden age'. ie. they aren't very intelligent, they move slowly, bites can be managed without infection, etc. -- I hate some of these newer zombie films that depict zombies as intellectual equals to humans, having the speed of a cheetah, and being experts in parkour.
none

Originally posted by Galan007
Romero is the godfather of zombie movies. He's done so much in that genre, that it is literally impossible to watch a zombie flick he wasn't involved in, without noticing similarities to his work. Lets face it, zombies are a great concept (imo), but they aren't dynamic at all -- you can only do so much with them.

But frankly, I'm glad to see zombies once again being portrayed in the WD franchise as they were in the 'golden age'. ie. they aren't very intelligent, they move slowly, bites can be managed without infection, etc. -- I hate some of these newer zombie films that depict zombies as intellectual equals to humans, having the speed of a cheetah, and being experts in parkour.
none

I am really digging WD as well.

And what is 'parkour'?

Originally posted by -Pr-
they were zombies in 28 days later. technicality ain't gonna change that.

C'mon Pr! There is no difference between the 28 Days Later 'zombie' and your average drunken Irish soccer fan with eczema.


I kid!

Originally posted by theICONiac
I am really digging WD as well.

And what is 'parkour'? Parkour = free running. Google it.

When someone changes the lore of established monsters we end up with Twilight. Is that what you want? Huh? You want Zombie Twilight? HUUUUUUUUUUH?


Seriously though, most of your criteria in the OP are things Romero borrowed from the book I am Legend anyway...

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
When someone changes the lore of established monsters we end up with Twilight. Is that what you want? Huh? You want Zombie Twilight? HUUUUUUUUUUH?


Seriously though, most of your criteria in the OP are things Romero borrowed from the book I am Legend anyway...

Heh...girls emoting copius amounts of teenage angst towards sparkly zombies...you might be onto something here

IMO 28 Days Later is a lot closer to I Am Legend then Romero's stuff.

Is 'Zombie Apocalypse' a genre? Or something unique that many seem to be borrowing liberally from?

I guess I am trying to determine the line between innovation and plagarism. Max Brooks is another one (I read World War Z and give it a big MEH...maybe it didn't float my boat because there were no pictures??? ) who seems to have created his stories almost exclusively through the mythos Romero created.

Originally posted by Galan007
Parkour = free running. Google it.

Oh, Le Parkour! You threw me with the anglicised pronounciation

I liked the running zombies. In reality they would be a lot more effective than Romero's. No way Romero's snail zombies would be able to completely devastate civilization as effectively as they did...

...running zombies? Hell yeah. They'd have me running away, screaming like a little school girl on helium.

On a sidenote, does anyone know if any other comic besides WD #1 has cracked the $100 ceiling in the secondary market in this decade?

My latest issue of Wizard says WD #1 is going for $180!

Originally posted by theICONiac
1. Apocalyptic future overrun by re-animated corpses...check!

Wait, AMC's WD took place in a apocalyptic future? Seemed like an apocalyptic present, or at the most few years ahead from now. Did I miss something?

Originally posted by theICONiac

I understand Romero lost the rights to alot of his work (hence the reason why Kirkman hasn't been sued to the hilt?) but are Kirkman's stories original enough to stand on their own?

Yes, absolutely. The setup is similar, what the characters do is not. It's clearly it's own story.




It's pretty genetic nowadays. I mean, major props to Romero, he is to zombies as movie-Dracula is to vampires, but it's all in what you do with it.

---
Related, there's an RPG called All Flesh Must Be Eaten. It's about zombies, and all kinds of variations on the them of 'zombies'. It has literally dozens of 'deadworlds' you can play in with different variations of the theme.


And most other zombie movies are in similar setups. Shaun of the Dead, Biozombie, many more.

Kirkman's got a fairly standard zombie world, but that's well into the category of 'genre default' rather than plagiarism.


-

The 'wake up in a hospital' thing's been done in quite a few places too. You mentioned 28 Days Later, but the Resident Evil movie's another, and I'm sure there's more.

Originally posted by Q99
And most other zombie movies are in similar setups. Shaun of the Dead, Biozombie, many more.

Kirkman's got a fairly standard zombie world, but that's well into the category of 'genre default' rather than plagiarism.

Yeah, I think it is pretty much accepted that a lot of these zombie movies, books etc are directly derivative of Romero's work and not new concepts. It's been commented on frequently over the last few decades.

I don't know if it's true or not, but I recall reading somewhere that the only reason why Romero can't sue or do anything about it is because Night of the Living Dead became public domain for some reason, allowing everyone to make derivative works from it.

Originally posted by Q99
The 'wake up in a hospital' thing's been done in quite a few places too. You mentioned 28 Days Later, but the Resident Evil movie's another, and I'm sure there's more.

The first time I know of this sort of plot device was Day of the Triffids from 1951, where he recovers/wakes in hospital to find everyone is blind and society has collapsed (though obviously the monsters involved are flesh eating plants not zombies). It might have been used even earlier than that. so...

- Day of the Triffids - book, movie, tv series, 2nd tv series
- Resident Evil
- 28 Days Later
- Walking Dead
...and probably others

Originally posted by basilisk
Yeah, I think it is pretty much accepted that a lot of these zombie movies, books etc are directly derivative of Romero's work and not new concepts. It's been commented on frequently over the last few decades.

I don't know if it's true or not, but I recall reading somewhere that the only reason why Romero can't sue or do anything about it is because Night of the Living Dead became public domain for some reason, allowing everyone to make derivative works from it.

Copyright data was left off or not filed or something, so people can not only make derivative works, but just sell the movie themselves.


Even not counting that, people could still rearrange elements and do their own movie. There's no copywriting a style of setting after all. So there'd still be other zombie movies even without that, and I don't think Romero minds anyway.

Kirkman is JESUS! He is the SAVIOUR of comics.

Originally posted by ThAnus_ofTITass
Kirkman is JESUS! He is the SAVIOUR of comics.
You are MY saviour!

Good to see you again

romaro doesn't actually own night of the living dead, he never got it copywritten so it's public domain.

Originally posted by psycho gundam
romaro doesn't actually own night of the living dead, he never got it copywritten so it's public domain.

This may be, but consider this; what if I wrote a novel about:

1. A future where robots have taken over and send one of their own back into the past to eliminate a future leader

2. Where scientists have extrapolated enough dna from fossils to create their own dinosaurs, and do so...creating their own theme park

3. how 4 middle-age women in New York city muse over their sexual exploits (ewwwwwwwwwwww).

Would you call me original, someone who borrows, or a blatant rip-off artist?

Originally posted by theICONiac
This may be, but consider this; what if I wrote a novel about:

1. A future where robots have taken over and send one of their own back into the past to eliminate a future leader
Interestingly, the makers of Terminator did get taken to court over by Harlan Ellison over perceived similarities to two of Ellisons 'Outer Limits' episodes. Cameron denied it, and the studio was going to fight it. However the story goes that supposedly someone admitted that Cameron had mentioned the episodes while making the film, and they settled out of court. Harlan Ellison's name now appears in the credits.


2. Where scientists have extrapolated enough dna from fossils to create their own dinosaurs, and do so...creating their own theme park
Some of the concepts for this movie were taken from the ideas flying around at the time from scientists and in the media about the possibility of bringing back animals from DNA in fossils, amber and so on. Of course Spielberg etc wrote a whole story around it, but the basic ideas weren't entirely theirs to begin with.


3. how 4 middle-age women in New York city muse over their sexual exploits (ewwwwwwwwwwww).One version was bad enough. They did sort of try it again with Lipstick Jungle and Cashmere Mafia, which viewers thankfully stayed the hell away from.


Would you call me original, someone who borrows, or a blatant rip-off artist?
But has Kirkman ever really claimed any sort of credit for the setting? I don't think anyone out there would believe the concepts were in any way his ideas. The way I look at it is that the zombie apocalypse world exists as a shared world without any copyright (by accident or whatever), so anyone can tell their stories in it - and plenty do (on top of movies, comics, and tv about a million+ short stories and trash novels out there if you look around). He just chose to write a different sort of story, long running and open ended. I think it's a good change from all the one-off movies, and comics.

It's good that Kirkman uses the rules of Romero's zombieverse. Virus thing is lame.

Hell at least the zombie mythos has remained relatively intact. You should try being a werewolf fan. Most modern depictions of werewolves- i.e. twilight, Trueblood etc.- have them running around on all fours like overgrown german sheperds. Long gone are the days of the monsterous humanoid creatures with superhuman strength that can only be killed by silver.

At least we still have stuff like the Wolfman...

Originally posted by -Pr-
At least we still have stuff like the Wolfman... Forgot about that one. It was ok. Forgot about the Underworld trilogy as well.

Originally posted by theICONiac
This may be, but consider this; what if I wrote a novel about:

1. A future where robots have taken over and send one of their own back into the past to eliminate a future leader

2. Where scientists have extrapolated enough dna from fossils to create their own dinosaurs, and do so...creating their own theme park

3. how 4 middle-age women in New York city muse over their sexual exploits (ewwwwwwwwwwww).

Would you call me original, someone who borrows, or a blatant rip-off artist? those instances are different

plus, as stiltman said romaro is hailed as a god cause he made the "rules", he didn't create zombies. if anything kirkman is making a homage to the film, but at the same time making the vision romaro couldn't due to resources and such.

"3. how 4 middle-age women in New York city muse over their sexual exploits (ewwwwwwwwwwww)."

^ that was pretty disgusting

Originally posted by psycho gundam
^ that was pretty disgusting

Disgusting in that it was a sexist remark in regards to middle-aged women?

Or did you get a visual in your head of Sarah Jessica Parker riding the baloney-pony?

Episode 5

It seem different per se from the comic.

The part where band headed to a government facility

Maybe its for the best? Storyline wise

Originally posted by dmills
Hell at least the zombie mythos has remained relatively intact. You should try being a werewolf fan. Most modern depictions of werewolves- i.e. twilight, Trueblood etc.- have them running around on all fours like overgrown german sheperds. Long gone are the days of the monsterous humanoid creatures with superhuman strength that can only be killed by silver.
Although werewolf folklore has varied throughout history anyway. A lot if not all of the earliest werewolf depictions were just men who turned into actual wolves (and not overgrown ones). I think the humanoid werewolves came a bit later, nowdays we seem to have the giant mutant wolf type stuff.

Originally posted by theICONiac
Would you call me original, someone who borrows, or a blatant rip-off artist? \

Well everyone is ripping off each others work in one way or another...

Originally posted by vansonbee
Episode 5

It seem different per se from the comic.

The part where band headed to a government facility

Maybe its for the best? Storyline wise

I don't think that's a step in a good direction, tbh.

Apparently none of 'The Walking Dead's' season 1 writing staff will be part of the second season, because Darabont fired all of them and gave the job to a bunch of freelance writers... And to top it off, season 2 won't even air until October of next year.

Does the guy not know how successful the show has been, or does he just not give a shit? Savor season 1, people... It will likely be the best. srsly

What?! Damn... been enjoying the show thus far

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
What?! Damn... been enjoying the show thus far

Don't worry, that's not what happened. Darabont was supposed to step down as show runner for season two but he decided to stay on, so the writer who was going to take over as show runner left. That is only one guy. Not that it would have been a big deal if he fired his entire writing staff. I mean Darabont wrote two episodes himself, and had outsiders writers (Kirkman and someone else) write two episodes. So his team of writers only wrote two episodes... and Darabont then rewrote them...

The rumor is that Charles H. Eglee (the writer who left) left to be show runner on an tv adaption of Bendis' powers over at FX.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Don't worry, that's not what happened. Darabont was supposed to step down as show runner for season two but he decided to stay on, so the writer who was going to take over as show runner left. That is only one guy. Not that it would have been a big deal if he fired his entire writing staff. I mean Darabont wrote two episodes himself, and had outsiders writers (Kirkman and someone else) write two episodes. So his team of writers only wrote two episodes... and Darabont then rewrote them... Damn, the weekly 'what's new' video clips on comicvine were WAY off.

Season 2 still isn't going to air until next October, right?

Originally posted by Galan007
Damn, the weekly 'what's new' video clips on comicvine were WAY off.

Season 2 still isn't going to air until next October, right?

Yeah but it is going to be a full 12 episode order at least.