Ill second that, 28 Days Later was the first "Zombie" movie i saw that i really loved.Zhukov said:Fast zombies every time.
The slow shambling model utterly fails to frighten me. Why would one feel threatened by a creature that one could escape from at a brisk walk?
Fast zombies on the other hand combine the insatiable relentlessness of their slower cousins with the ability to actually catch you.
Yah. Half of zombie movies are about an initial outbreak that turns into a zombipocalypse. It's hard to show the whole world slowly being overrun in ninety minutes. Romero did it fairly well across four films though.Thaius said:Fast and insane zombies are an excuse. When people aren't good enough to make slow, shuffling zombies scary, they make them faster to make things easier on them. It's very hard to make slow, vulnerable monsters scary. Some people can do it: others change the zombies to cover for their lack of skill. It's sad, really.
World War Z is the answer to how slow zombies would take over the planet. (mostly due to the living)Zhukov said:The slow shambling model utterly fails to frighten me. Why would one feel threatened by a creature that one could escape from at a brisk walk?
Fast zombies on the other hand combine the insatiable relentlessness of their slower cousins with the ability to actually catch you.
Oh! I like that. That's going to be my theory from now on.Furburt said:However, a formula I like is that they're fast for the first month or so, then as they decay, they begin to get slower. It makes sense, too.
not so, the mummy has seen plenty of on screen time both in classic and modern film, and does any other americans on here remember a cartoon called "mummies alive!"? skeletons are the unfortunate red-headed stepchild of the undead, they're the weakest, media wise easiest to be rid of with a simple sword slash like in clash of the titans (though how does one really kill a skeleton? other than breaking it to the point of immobility?) and look at ghosts, they've had more screen time and more stories than any other type of undead. another point to make about the infected type "zombie" is that it treads upon the frankenstien monster/reanimator aspect (in the fact that science created them) and the resident evil type zombies and creatures all stemmed from a single virus, which typically kills then will reanimate and mutate dead creatures (and live ones), and not all of the zombies were slow shufflers.Hurr Durr Derp said:Because of pop culture. Zombies and vampires are more or less accepted as 'mainstream' monsters, but skeletons and mummies and other undead are still very much in the 'pulp' domain.Layz92 said:Am I really the only one (I always halt after using that phrase but whatever) that is tired of zombies? Why can't we use other undead in movies/games as the main enemy creature? (vampires don't count) Like wights or shades or something similar. I personally wouldn't mind seeing a skeleton horde for a change. So in answer to your question I would prefer my zombies in the form of another monster.