Well, that really depends on what you call a zombie. Danny Boyle really has stretched the term to it's limits. He went out to create a zombie flick and came out with something that many people wouldn't call a zombie flick.darkless said:An awful lot of people seem to confuse 28 days later with a zombie movie it wasn't a zombie movie at all.
Anyway fast zombies make less sense than regular one's.
Sadly by using logic you kill both fast and slow zombies with a single blow. By the same means of them not being able to run, a dead person's physical strength would drop dramatically and it would be like fighting a bunch of senior citizens. You shove them, they fall over break a few bones and wither there.Midnight0000 said:I don't understand why you only give us 2 options of either hate or not. I don't "hate" fast zombies, but I just think that they don't make sense.
Zombies by definition are the living dead, meaning that their flesh and bones won't be what they used to be, which can include decomposition and rot. It would make more sense (if zombies were real) for them to be slow lurching bodies rather than psycho crazy marathon runners. It's easy for someone to say "oh but a virus could improve their movement!" - no. Because someone that has died and come back to life as a zombie would still have the same, if not worse, physical capabilities or handicaps that they had when they were alive.
I've still got to disagree. In films the slow zombies have always scared me more, mainly because the tactic you suggest never ever works - you do get over-run eventually. In the short term you feel safe, that you can keep them away, but in the end everything you do is futile and it takes a long time for you to realise that.Dontai said:Slow zombies - either kill them early on which will be very easy (run away from them and while their catching up you catch your breath. Then run away again, while placing a clever trap)shoot them from very very far away or you will be over run. Seriously you act like your already over run. In the begging their going to be vary few
Fast zombies - your always overrun. Running is pointless. Find some place and wait for them to starve to death. The good news about most of these zombies is you can out last them. Once their dead you can come out to reclaim the world. Unless their undead runners and your just doomed. Re redheads or 2004 dotd
I am legend zombies - bullet to the brain unless you like hiding during the day. Depending on the source, they can only be killed by destroying the heart/brain, can run, can heal their wounds and can drain your blood.
game wise I am legend trumps all. Slow is more fun then fast in game. It gives you thinking time. If you want to be scared though, fast zombies. Hard to be scared when the thing takes fifteen minutes to get to you.
Can I get a cookie for noticing the Shawn of the Dead reference?RobRush said:I first saw fast zombies in DOTD '04, and that completely revived my zombie interest. Old, slow, shambly zombies have become somewhat of a stale joke, just stay in the open and keep your distance, and you can laugh it off as you pick them out from miles away.
Fast zombies however, and I mean ZOMBIES, the reanimated dead through a virus or whatever, but ZOMBIES, are shit scary, and the idea works.
Particularly in the case of a newly made zombie (before the body has a chance to decompose), the undead have no brain capacity and feel no pain, just an urge to feed. In basic primal instinct they would run, and because of feeling no pain, would never tire, or at least not notice. To me it just seems to be the most complete idea, and the most pant-pissingly scariest. So both in game and in film I prefer this as it just creates a genuinely terrifying experience.
Although, agreeing with the above, if the zombie apocalypse comes, I hope I'm terribly, horribly wrong. Please just give me slow fuckers and a cricket bat![]()
I'm sorry but who the hell are you?!Seattle Brian said:Most Zombies are safe from Seattle Brian!!!
Well if we're going to go that far back in time, might as well toss The Crazies out there. 1973 with a remake slated for 2010. It's directed by George Romero himself and is actually 28 Days, rather than a true zombie movie.Jamash said:Actually, the infected zombies in David Cronenberg's Rabid [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabid] moved pretty fast, and that film was made in 1977, 8 years before Return of the Living Dead.crabdog62482 said:First and foremost, fast zombies did not start in the 28 series. They started in Return of the Living Dead.
What do you mean "going that far back in time"? The 1970's were hardly a different epoch.crabdog62482 said:Well if we're going to go that far back in time, might as well toss The Crazies out there. 1973 with a remake slated for 2010. It's directed by George Romero himself and is actually 28 Days, rather than a true zombie movie.Jamash said:Actually, the infected zombies in David Cronenberg's Rabid [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabid] moved pretty fast, and that film was made in 1977, 8 years before Return of the Living Dead.crabdog62482 said:First and foremost, fast zombies did not start in the 28 series. They started in Return of the Living Dead.