Poll: How do you like your zombies?

[Locko96]

Slow and Shuffling. Easy to combat and easy targets! It'd almost be kinda fun if it weren't an apocalypse.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

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.

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.

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.

Mummies: They have indeed seen more screentime than other types, but nothing that puts them outside the pulp domain.
Ghosts: Aren't undead, just dead.

 

[sketch_zeppelin]

I don't care if the Zombies are slow or fast. What makes a good Zombie story are the humans. The reason the Remero flicks and even 28 days later are so good is because they focus on the pshyoclogical break down of people when faced with a hopless situation. The dead are walking and the world, for all we know, is ending so how do you deal? yes the zombies eventually get in because there as inevitable as the tide but what makes these movies great is the survivers.

The only real difference in fast or slow zombies is pacing. Do you prefer tension building more and more till it explodes in a never ending wave of violance or do you rather high energy spurts of terror.

As long as the human story is good i enjoy either, because lets face it. with out compleling human charcters in a zombie story then all your left with is a bunch of walking dead guys looking for road kill to eat.

 

[Kaltazraza]

It ain't a zombie if It can run.

 

[Ldude893]

The dead cannot come back to life. Infected zombies are more realistic, and I prefer them to be fast and come in hordes.

 

[CyberSkull]

Well ventilated.

 

[Fingolfin High-King of the Noldor]

Personally I prefer them dead but that's not an option... I want the zombies that I can actually fight against without running too much.

 

[bladeofdarkness]

i don't know about you, but i generally like my zombies - dead

 

[ScruffyTheJanitor]

Zombies are dead. It's harder to animate the dead that it is to hyper-activate live ones. And as the rule goes, an zombie is undead, thus already dead.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

The ones you gotta watch out for are the ones that act all slow and shambling, and then turn all quick and agile when you're not looking.

Damn sneaky zombies....

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

I like my zombies slow, and my infected fast. But I like the idea of fast zombies that slow-down over time. That actually makes alot of sense.

I hope the World War Z movie does the shuffling zombies right, though (and hopefully kills the current vampire fad). With today's special-effects tech, we should be able to see spectacular shuffling zombie movie. I'm personally looking forward to seeing the NYC zombie infestation over-run the US army at Yonkers.

Wait they're making a World War Z movie?!?!? That's awesome! I loved the book and a movie sounds like an awesome idea. I wonder if they'll switch narrators like in the book or if they'll stick to only a couple of people.

 

[leviathanmisha]

I like 'em fast, but I'm also the chick who was playing Left 4 Dead after getting back from the eye doctor and had my eyes dilated.

 

[azncutthroat]

I like my zombies slow, and my infected fast. But I like the idea of fast zombies that slow-down over time. That actually makes alot of sense.

I hope the World War Z movie does the shuffling zombies right, though (and hopefully kills the current vampire fad). With today's special-effects tech, we should be able to see spectacular shuffling zombie movie. I'm personally looking forward to seeing the NYC zombie infestation over-run the US army at Yonkers.

Wait they're making a World War Z movie?!?!? That's awesome! I loved the book and a movie sounds like an awesome idea. I wonder if they'll switch narrators like in the book or if they'll stick to only a couple of people.

Take the movie with a bit of salt, though, since the author has practically zero control on it.

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Take the movie with a bit of salt, though, since the author has practically zero control on it.

Oh that doesn't sound as good then. If he was part of its making I'm sure it would be great. Now I'm not so sure. I still hope its good though.

 

[Andantil]

Fast and insane.
It might be harder to run from and harder to kill, but it makes for much better action.

 

[Salakayin]

While I'm the kind of guy that prefers the faster ones...

I don't care if the Zombies are slow or fast. What makes a good Zombie story are the humans. The reason the Remero flicks and even 28 days later are so good is because they focus on the pshyoclogical break down of people when faced with a hopless situation. The dead are walking and the world, for all we know, is ending so how do you deal? yes the zombies eventually get in because there as inevitable as the tide but what makes these movies great is the survivers.

The only real difference in fast or slow zombies is pacing. Do you prefer tension building more and more till it explodes in a never ending wave of violance or do you rather high energy spurts of terror.

As long as the human story is good i enjoy either, because lets face it. with out compleling human charcters in a zombie story then all your left with is a bunch of walking dead guys looking for road kill to eat.

...I fully agree with what you say. The human story is what makes zombie scenarios so entertaining. You're correct in that without a good human story, it ain't all that enjoyable. At least it my opinion. The humans are the most interesting factor in the overall equation, and without 'em zombies are just that. Zombies rustling around with no story whatsoever.

When it comes to preferring the fast variety, its more because I personally really enjoy the approach the is made to justify the concept of them being downright, terrifyingly fast. When they approach the concept well, of course. L4D just being one of a few, in which the other few I can't remember at the moment. Curse my occasional, spontaneous burst of poor memory!

 

[AceyBear]

Come on, a slow walking zombie is like taking candy from a retarded blind baby...with down syndrome, (Overkill). If a zombie is running at you at top speed it makes it more exciting and challenging especially when there tubby and explode with purple mucus atracting hoards. <3

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Tradition tells me that the only reason Z-day is plausable is if the zombie horde is huge. Weight of numbers will kill humans eventually anyway so I'd like my targets to be slow and stupid rather than fast and smart.