Zombies: Walkers VS Runners

Walker Zombies VS Runner Zombies – which are more likely to take over the World!?

Ah… the quintessential question for all modern and old school zombie enthusiasts is asked – which type of zombie is more likely to take over the world, the Walker ghoul or the Runner? To answer this question we have to look at the worldwide mass of zombie lore and judge by what was presented to us as the years gone by.

First off, the Walker zombie variety is the original as far as technically adept zombies are concerned. Before them, the simple spell-induced zombies of Haiti and Africa roamed about as catatonic, soul-less beings. These types were not even cannibals or undead in any real sense.

However they quickly changed to the staple Undead ghouls that we know of today after films by Richard Matheson and George Romero pulverized theater goers with their visions of flesh-hungry fiends. In more modern venues, the image of the zombie was changing, just as old school versions of vampires and werewolves underwent a major make-over to give a more realistic and frightening take on the new generation, zombies, too, were about to change.

Danny Bolye’s film 28 Days Later and Zach Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead Remake came out roughly in the same year and both brought about the “Runner” zombie into the mainstream. Although people can bicker about whether or not the “Infected” or Snyder’s “Runners” were true zombies, it could hardly be contested that they were the new Up-dated versions to the old silver-screen zombies of yore.

Yet this is where the debate started - Walkers VS Runners. Let’s take into consideration the advantages of each “Species” as we try to discover which Undead fiends would be more likely to exist and which are more likely to be successful in a worldwide takeover.

The Walkers:

Walkers set the fundamental rules for the zombie pandemic – infection through a bite, resurrection after death, and of course, the fanatical blood-lust for human flesh. Romero’s original trilogy, Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, and Day of the Dead had set forth a series of these traits that are easily recognized by the masses. His later trilogy of Land of the Dead, Diary of the Dead, and Survival of the Dead, take zombie lore further, as he explores the evolution of the zombie mind and their enigmatic nature. More so, the zombies presented here are slow-movers...indeed Walkers.

This medium proved to still send shivers up viewers’ spines, as video games such as the ultra-popular Dead Rising and Dead Rising 2 games decided to use the Walker variety as the main antagonists. …And why not? It’s clear that the frightening aspect of the Walker ghouls is simply their sheer numbers. It’s also noted that Walkers are true zombies – distinctly in the sense that they have died and been resurrected as necrotic, dead cannibals.

The Runners:

Sure, there are a lot of zombie fans who hate running zombies, but you have to admit that this new incarnation of ghouls has set a strong precedence for up-dating the suspense factor in films. Taking root from the 28 Days/Weeks Later franchise and Snyder’s Dawn Remake, other zombie films added Runners in their movies, too. Flight of the Living Dead, the Day of the Dead Remake, and more eloquently the French zombie thriller Horde have all decided to make Runners their ghoul of choice - but why?

Mainly because having the fast moving zombies darting about the apocalypse is scarier to some. The contention here is that it’s easier to kill a slow-moving zombie, while it’s much harder to kill a fast moving one. Simple logic no doubt, but there are some factors that defy the aged zombie rule book. One of the most annoying things about some of the Runner ghouls, such as those presented in ZombieLand and 28 Days Later is that they are not true zombies, because they are not “Undead.” Runner ghouls in these films are infected, but not dead. They are reminiscent of the ghoulish denizens to the Rec and Quarantine films, where a hyped-up version of rabies makes the case for zomboid dissidence.

Even more popularized are the Runner types conjured up for the famed Left 4 Dead video game series. Here, the infamous shooter-game not only enlists truly Undead Runners, but also introduces “Mega-zombies” such as the explosive Spitters, Hulks, and Tongue-Lashing ghouls. Resident Evil, both the games and the films, also made a big evolution if their zombie genera. In the early games and films, the zombies are mainly Walkers, but they adopt Runner types in the new additions of their franchise.

Yet even so, the dilemma here is trying to figure out what type of zombies can occur in real life, and what type is more deadly to mankind? This question is explored in depth in National Geographic’s “The Truth Behind Zombies.”

Zombies in real life:

There are a few ways to create a zombie epidemic. The mostly likely source is in weaponizing a bizarre fungus called Cordyceps, which is a parasitic fungus that infects the brain of insects and more recently discovered, small reptiles and possibly mammals. This doesn’t turn them into flesh eating cannibals, but it does take over the brain and forces them to seek out light of all things, until the poor host dies.

The other and far more likely version is weaponizing the Rabies virus, which is actually the plot to the Rec and Quarantine films. Yet here again, stands a set of problems – first, the ghouls spawned from this would simply be sick and die off rather fast, and of course they would be killing each other just as much as anyone else.

The seemingly unlikely root to zombie-ism might actually be in the dreaded example that actually occurred in real life – Mass Hypnosis. During the reign of China’s ruler Mao, some groups were so prejudice and possessed by “mob-mentality” that hundreds went on a rampage to kill and actually “eat” their opposition. This came about because the leader killed and ripped out the heart of a victim, then proceeded to eat it! He then made an example, by telling his followers that they should not only kill, but eat their victims. Sadly this did occur, as dozens of mobs storm-trooped villages, in one case, breaking into a school house and eating their teacher. As fictitious as this sounds it’s quite true, so rebel rousing mob-mentality is definitely a key factor in creating real-life, brainwashed zombies.

It is also heavily rumored that a chemical compound that induces rage (much like that in the film 28 Days Later) was tested and deployed about a hundred miles away from Rwanda, Africa. Just months later, the insane Rwanda Genocide occurred – coincidence? No one really knows. Yet still, crazed mob-murderers are not Undead zombie ghouls, although they certainly are reminiscent to some of the newer zomboid concoctions presented in films.

The Rot Thickens

The Battle of the Rot:

If zombies somehow did occur in real life, how would it go down? Well, both Runners and Walkers spread by infection through bites, so this would be the main fear.

Walkers: The Pros & Cons

The Pros--

Walkers could take advantage of their more curious, if not more intelligent attributes, by stalking people. They seem less noisy and make less of a ruckus when shambling about, so this gives them a stealthier aspect then the rabid and noisier Runners. In fact, Walkers are featured as gradually more intelligent as Runners and some have even been featured clumsily using weapons or haunting familiar places from their past lives.

This single important factor is a great advantage for Walkers, because this would help them deal with the oncoming militia with a bit more cleverness than their Runner rivals. Also the fact that they seem to retain some knowledge of their past lives, instantly makes them more adept at hunting us, because they would seem to know where we would hide (as seen in the original Dawn of the Dead) and also they’d be able to rally more ghouls to form greater mobs. If this were to happen quickly, like say in a small town, then Walkers could get an early advantage in numbers. Moving from small town to small town would be the best way for Walkers to gain the numbers they’d need to finally rampage a whole city.

The Cons—

Walkers are slow, and even if you need to make a head-shot to kill them, they can still be killed quite easily. This is why it’s very unlikely that an outbreak occurring in a big city would be successful. It would soon be extinguished, and fairly fast at that. Big cities are well prepared for almost any outbreak, including terrorism and disease. It’s only when a catastrophe occurs with amazing speed and power (such as Hurricane Katrina) are big cites befallen.

Walkers would not be able to cause mass infection in the time needed to knock the National Guard or any other federal militia out of commission. As soon as an outbreak is detected, the area would be quarantined and the Walkers shot down. With the armory we have at our disposal, taking care of a Walker pandemic in its early phase would be child’s play. The only way Walkers could be successful in infecting a big city, let alone the whole world, is to somehow gain a very vast number of ghouls in a very short amount of time. Based on the speed to which they infect, and their vulnerabilities, this would seem very unlikely to achieve.

Runners: Pros & Cons

The Pros--
Runners are not as smart or curious as Walkers, and it seems they have hardly any if no memories of their past lives, but this doesn’t make them any less dangerous. Runners act on instinct alone. They chase after people with insane bloodlust and won’t stop unless they’re killed or get what they want – your flesh! Runners have a very distinct advantage over Walkers in the pandemic arena, namely their speed. This sole benefit is what makes them a clear and viable threat to any community, even a big city. Runners can infect people through bites, and do so quickly and multiple times; thus they can start an epidemic very rapidly.

If one populated area such as a hospital gets a Runner as a patient, it won’t take long for that ghoul to infect dozens in a small amount of time. Why? --Because they would be more successful in their attempts at biting people than Walkers would. Due to their speed and ferocity, it would be very difficult for unsuspecting persons to ward off a Runner. Also, their rate of “Turning” seems much quicker than those of Walker varieties. In films like 28 Days Later and Dawn 2004, they turn in seconds, while in Walker films such as the original Dawn of the Dead, it takes quite some time for them to resurrect themselves. Based on their ability to infect and their faster turnout rate, Runner ghouls seem far more likely to overrun a city and over stress its defensive resources.

The Cons—

Runners have some fickle aspects that can make them more susceptible to human opposition than their slower contemporaries. In many films Runners are not Undead and can be killed with enough damage to their bodies or any fatal blow. This is seen in popular Runner films like 28 Days/Weeks Later and in Zombieland. This makes their slower Walker rivals tougher than them. If Runners could be killed by any powerful gunshot, a series of automatic gunfire would certainly kill them far more quickly than say a Walker, which would need to receive a blow to the head to really die. Still, Runner types in Snyder’s Dawn Remake also need a head-shot to croak, so the Runner might still be a more formidable threat. On another note, Runners could, and probably would, be trapped easily and herded into certain regions and death traps by the military.

This is because they act on instinct, and it would be very easy to lure in hundreds, or even thousands with bait and trickery. Once herded into a death zone, the military could firebomb the region with air-power and kill hundreds at a time. Walkers, being cleverer, would probably be able to seek out refuge and also disperse themselves in ways that would make them harder to wrangle.

The smarts of Walkers can be seen in films like Land of the Dead, where they show a surprising set of intelligent traits, such as reluctance to fall into traps, overcoming their primal fear of lakes and rivers, and even learning to use tools and weapons. Runners display none of these traits, and this would go against their success in maintaining ground or more figuratively, “occupying” a nation for any long period of time. Also, if the Runners in question were not truly Undead, most of them would simply starve to death or become victims to illness and exposure (as seen in 28 Days Later).

Whatever the case, the debate continues for who is the deadliest ghoul, the Walker, or the Runner? Which do you choose?

Cool thread darkriddle you should have a go at this versus fight I made.
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f102/t556514.html

Romero Zombies do have a degree of intelligence after a while and as shown in the films do begin coordinate themselves. Romero zombies also learn to walk underwater and so do Fulci Zombies from the film ''Zombie".

Running zombies will always be better if they retain the same undead qualities. Meaning they'll never starve and can only be destroyed via head wound. 28 days zombies were infected people who died after a shot in the chest.

You have to look at the zombies individualy in their respective films. Some walking zombies in films stomp most runners.

Best Walking Zombies. Lucio Fulci's City of the Living Dead.
Best Running Zombies. Return of the Living Dead series.

What do you think about the scare factor of the two types?

I had a friend, who is much younger than me, say that the slower ghouls aren't scary anymore. I disagree. But had quite a few teenagers say the same. Do you think that most of the new generation think runners are scarier?

Scare Factor between generic Romero Zombies and their running counterparts?

Obviously the fast because of their initial threat.

But it depends on the movie.

Regardless of which makes better suspense or horror between Walkers & Runners, one thing I always find odd in zombie films is the lack of realism that rotting flesh not only reeks but spreads pestilence too.

Survivors would be gagging at the stench of rotting dead bodies whether it be humans or zombies alike. Flies & maggots would be everywhere spreading disease. Zombies wouldn't be able to "creep" up on you as you'd smell them first.

Oxygen/gas masks would just be as important as carrying a weapon.

old school slow walking zombies are the best

i hate the whole idea of running zombies aimed at ADHD MTV generation of wankers

What "Esau Cairn" said is probably quite true, the sheer putrification of the zombie body would make them smell incredibly strong and it would also exude poisonous gases, just as decomposing bodies do in reality.

When the WW2 holocaust and even the more recent Rwanda genocide occured, it was reported that the horrific and hazardous stench of thousands of bodies could be smelled many miles away.

If this is true, "billions" of dead corspes walking around, would make the layer of air near the ground in certain cities un-breathable, or nearly so.

I would think that there would be some kind of natural "mummification" method that partially stops the ghouls' decomposition after its flesh and organs dried out.

But who knows, its fiction...right? LOL.

I think runners would most likely take over but the walkers are sneaky as hell i notice in every zombie movie i watch with walking zombies they used the surroundings like hiding in closets elevators or sneaking up behind you and they can be really quiet and to me they are smarter than the runners while runners do force people to run at they best speed therefore after a while forcing you to try and keep running even when you are tired out but eventually you will fall over or slow down and guns only slow zombies down for a moment but i dont think it would be a enough for you to catch your breath unless you try to run and gun but again thats kinda pointless if you are tired out or dont have good aim you might as well shoot yourself lol i would rather have walkers but thats how i see it and these days lets face it there are alot of people that are not team players and will not hesitate to sell you out lol to me thats realistic with walkers i think it would be easier

I prefer the slow movers more, living rate for man kind is higher..
for the infected ones in movies like 28 w/e I can see mankind dead under a year.

Originally posted by JediRouge
I prefer the slow movers more, living rate for man kind is higher..
for the infected ones in movies like 28 w/e I can see mankind dead under a year.

Well the infected in 28 Days Later eventually would starve out wouldn't they? They weren't really dead.

True, but we would have to really stock up on food...

If they were slow, then I would do my best to kill as
many as I could.

If they were fast, then I would be like.... screw it. lol

I heard that a company is gonna do a remake of the Day of the Dead. The thing is that they're still gonna use the walkers instead of runners, try to stick closer to the original.

Thank gawd...lol

Did any of you see the recent Day of the Dead?
They actually speed crawled along ceilings and tore peoples guts out below. 😂

Yeah, it looked more demonic possession than zombies- ex. Rec 1 & 2

Woow Brilliant I appreciate your thinking