Zombie vs Vampire

[. offline]

Seeing as how I'm working in a bookstore now, I'm rather ticked about something.

Why do we have about a zillion books written about Vampires and stuff that bassically just the movie underworld rehashed a zilllion different ways and yet we only have two books about the living dead?

World War Z and the Zombie Survival Guide.

I see the opening for a niche market. Don't you?

[Sithking Zero offline]

Granted, WWZ and Zombie survival guide are great books, but...

I personally can't understand the attachment to vampires. They're horrible undead beings that drain your blood... horrible...

What's worses is when people "Romanticize" the vampire: Make them look kind, and understanding. No. Vampires are evil creatures who hunt the night and rule through fear, power, and hypnotic eyes.

[. offline]

I hereby ban all Vampires... except for Grim Adventure's Dracula.

WHO WANNA SEE DRACULA DANCE!

[Kamekai offline]

I never get tired of him! That episode with Dracula & Van Helsing, ever seen that one? I though I was going to die of laughter... and kidney problems.

[Tangent128 offline]

Zombie vs. Vampire? Stalemate. The vampire can't drink the zombie's blood, and the zombie's not smart enough to find a stake.

[. offline]

Zombie vs. Vampire? Stalemate. The vampire can't drink the zombie's blood, and the zombie's not smart enough to find a stake.

Non. The Zombie would eat their flesh.

[MY85 offline]

Why do we have about a zillion books written about Vampires and stuff that bassically just the movie underworld rehashed a zilllion different ways and yet we only have two books about the living dead?

'Cause vampires are way more cooler than zombies.

And throughout the little I've seen from zombies, they are just portrayed as minions. They're just nothing really special... but that's just me.

[Sithking Zero offline]

Zombie vs. Vampire? Stalemate. The vampire can't drink the zombie's blood, and the zombie's not smart enough to find a stake.

Non. The Zombie would eat their flesh.

... no. The vampire would just fly away or something. Remember, Zombies are essentially weakened humans with no cognitive functions, while a Vampire is a human, mind intact, and so much more...

[G-Force offline]

Well its easy for an author to have a vampire fill out all sorts of character archetypes because of their free will: Count Dracula, Alucard, Blade etc. Stories of vampires can be about one's fascination with a unique subculture, the classic monster hunting tale or even a story of one's salvation.

It's hard to wield such variety with zombies due to their lack of free will, Xombie by James Farr is the only exception I can name right now. They tend to just be mindless drones for the heroes to overcome and it would be pretty hard to portray a story where a zombie is the lead and is only a mindless drone.

[zex marquise offline]

You forgot Stubbs the Zombie in Rebel without a Pulse. Now there's a zombie the audience can love.

[Gauntlet offline]

Zombie vs. Vampire? Stalemate. The vampire can't drink the zombie's blood, and the zombie's not smart enough to find a stake.

Non. The Zombie would eat their flesh.

... no. The vampire would just fly away or something. Remember, Zombies are essentially weakened humans with no cognitive functions, while a Vampire is a human, mind intact, and so much more...

...I really can't believe that argument even started, but I'll comment anyway. Knowing general culture, the vampire will make the zombie wash his car, and the zombie will just go right along without a worry in the world. Bless his little heart.


Anyways. I think vampires are more likely to be portrayed in books, simply because they have a richer history than zombies. Vampires can be good or bad; any writer can do that, and there is nothing wrong with making a misunderstood vampire (other than making an angsty rival archetype to the "I vant to suck your bluuud!" archetype). On that token, it's much easier to write about a character who's brain isn't for decoration, though it must be fun (and challenging) to write from a zombie's point of view.

Because of that, zombies, on the other hand, are really only ever portrayed in video games, films, and similar media. I'm pretty confident that zombies are featured more frequently in films (as antagonists), enemies in games (fodder for the player), and in comics/mangas/etc. than vampires, simply because they are easy to fit into that mold. .

Personally, I prefer zombies to vampires; vampires are portrayed as the cool-leveled headed kind of guy, usually, which I find kind of...unlikely, considering that they're nearly immortal (and everyone knows the grievances living forever will cause). Zombies--hey, mingle in with the crowd, and no one will ever expect much from you. You can love, cuddle, and accept them for who they are, and no matter how many times you bop them in the mouth, they'll bounce right back without a grudge. That's my kind of happy meal.

My two <s>bulbs of garlic</s> cents.

[. offline]

Zombie vs. Vampire? Stalemate. The vampire can't drink the zombie's blood, and the zombie's not smart enough to find a stake.

Non. The Zombie would eat their flesh.

... no. The vampire would just fly away or something. Remember, Zombies are essentially weakened humans with no cognitive functions, while a Vampire is a human, mind intact, and so much more...

...I really can't believe that argument even started, but I'll comment anyway. Knowing general culture, the vampire will make the zombie wash his car, and the zombie will just go right along without a worry in the world. Bless his little heart.


Anyways. I think vampires are more likely to be portrayed in books, simply because they have a richer history than zombies. Vampires can be good or bad; any writer can do that, and there is nothing wrong with making a misunderstood vampire (other than making an angsty rival archetype to the "I vant to suck your bluuud!" archetype). On that token, it's much easier to write about a character who's brain isn't for decoration, though it must be fun (and challenging) to write from a zombie's point of view.

Because of that, zombies, on the other hand, are really only ever portrayed in video games, films, and similar media. I'm pretty confident that zombies are featured more frequently in films (as antagonists), enemies in games (fodder for the player), and in comics/mangas/etc. than vampires, simply because they are easy to fit into that mold. .

Personally, I prefer zombies to vampires; vampires are portrayed as the cool-leveled headed kind of guy, usually, which I find kind of...unlikely, considering that they're nearly immortal (and everyone knows the grievances living forever will cause). Zombies--hey, mingle in with the crowd, and no one will ever expect much from you. You can love, cuddle, and accept them for who they are, and no matter how many times you bop them in the mouth, they'll bounce right back without a grudge. That's my kind of happy meal.

My two <s>bulbs of garlic</s> cents.

Non. You can't persuade a Zombie from attacking. Their like the terminator, albeit weaker. Sure a Vampire could fly away but it would be futile as the infection spread. Eventually it'd catch up to them and they'd be dinner.

[Vodka's Vengeance offline]

Max Brooks ranks up with J. K. Rowling in my favorite authors list. Zombies would always win.

[mitchmcmichael offline]

Vampire.
Zombies are too stupid(brain wise) but I still want to see a Vambie (vampire/zombie)

[Reesane offline]

Doesn't matter.
Ether way we're going to end up with two vampire zombies on our hands.

[. offline]

mmm a Vambi would just be a Zombie with fangs at that point.