Not signed in (Sign In)
Categories
- Main Junction
- CROSSED
- London Zoo
- Freakangels
- Music
- Printheads
- Culturegasm
- Web Nuggets
- WorldWeird
- Blogs
Welcome, Guest
Vanilla is a product of Lussumo:
Documentation and Support.
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.
-
Because of my all-encompassing love of all things Zombie related I thought I might share with you a wonderful article by a gentleman by the name of Patrick Rothfuss. This particular article was from when he worked on a humor column for a local newspaper...
Dear Pat,
My social group is fiercely locked in the fast zombie vs. slow zombie debate. While I'll admit that 28 Days rocked, I still think slow zombies are much scarier than their faster counterparts. Can you shower us with your wisdom? I fear this debate will cause a schism in our group that may never mend.
John S.
Thanks for the letter, John. It's always nice to hear from a guy who's not afraid to use the word "schism."
Though not many folk know it, the fast vs. slow zombie debate goes all the way back to the early days of the church. It was part of a disagreement between James the greater, and Paul, formerly Saul of Tarsus. You see, James believed in salvation according to works, slow zombies, and that watching two women kiss was, in his words, "wicked cool."
On the other hand, Paul believed in salvation according to faith, fast zombies, and the fact that women were "kinda icky" therefore two kissing would be, "double icky."
Now normally when there was a disagreement, they turned to Thomas. But Thomas thought it should be faith AND works. And he'd never actually seen two women kiss and didn't believe that sort of thing really happened. As for zombies, well... the thought of people getting up and moving around after they were dead was just too much for him, and he told the other disciples that he had better things to do than sit around and listen to them tell silly stories.
And so the issue remains unresolved to this day, stirred up by recent fast zombie movies like Dawn of the Dead and 28 Days.
So let's lay this to rest once and for all, shall we?
Now to a certain extent whether you like fast or slow zombies is simply a matter of personal taste.
It's like sex. Fast sex is different from slow sex. But they both have their good points. A quickie is fun. It's a romp. It's exciting. Slow sex is different. It's an experience. It's an adventure. It's an African safari which necessitates the use of a special type of hat.
But while they both have their selling points, the fact remains that slow sex has a lot more style. More room for finesse. More opportunities to wear exciting hats.
The same thing is true with zombie movies. Everybody who isn't all a total tightass enjoys a good zombie movie now and then, fast or slow. But ultimately, a slow zombie movie has a lot more style. More finesse. The purpose of a zombie movie is to scare you, and ultimately, slow zombies are more frightening.
Now before all you fast zombie advocates get your knickers in a twist, listen to me. Slow zombies are frightening. Fast zombies are startling. There's a huge difference, let me explain.
You know the part in the horror movie when the young co-ed is looking through the attic with a flashlight? It's dark, the music gets real dramatic, then BAM! A cat jumps out from behind a stack of boxes.
Pretty scary, huh?
No. No, that was not scary. It was just startling. It's cheap. If you don't believe me, just think of a whole movie full of nothing but cats jumping out at people. Would that be a scary move? No. It would just suck. The same goes for a movie full of nothing but fast zombies jumping out at people, or, come to think of it, relationships full of nothing but fast sex.
That is, unless you're having a relationship with a slow zombie that wore an exciting hat when you had sex with it. That might work, I think.
His blog can be found at http://www.patrickrothfuss.com/ -
-
CommentAuthorPete Martin
- CommentTimeFeb 13th 2008
I thought zombie were meant to be slow, since the original thing was there were dead human meat puppets for other people (right?)
What always bothered me is how a zombie bite would turn you into a zombie. Going on the zombie-virus cliche, it would hardly spread quickly if they were slow moving. For a horde to form, it'll take years just for enough of them to chase someone into a corner.
That's why a zombie-virus would be airborne. All that rotting flesh oozing puss, firing off Zombie Death like mutated Bird Flu. No-one could run or hide from it, zombies fast or slow would only have to gob on the floor near you and that'll be it. -
-
@Pete
I've always thought of the biting virus this way. In the beginning when no one knows they're zombies yet and just think they're very sick, people try to give them medical attention. Those people may get bitten, since Zombies are supposed to be rather strong and don't feel pain, so it's hard to stop them. It's easy to conceive that unkowing friends or family, or even medical staff could get infected like that. They would be caught off guard while trying to address human medical issues, not realizing that the only thing the Zombies want is to bite them. Think of this happening in a hospital too, with lots of patients to sick to fight back. They're easy targets, and when they com back, they get up and join the horde. All you need i enough to turn and enough uninformed or unaware victims, and you can reach critical mass.
I think Max Brooks (who based his books off of the George Romero movies) would agree. Pick up and flip through either the Zombie Survival Guide or World War Z. Brooks does a good job of supposing the Zombie physiology, which includes increased strength. What limits a human from reaching their full potential is that our muscles tear and we feel pain and stop. Zombies, not feeling pain, can utilize their muscles until they basically rip in half. In the long run this means they get weaker as they go on since their muscles don't regenerate, but in the short term it means they are stronger than the person they turned from.
Just some thoughts. :-)
*Edited: caught some, but probably not all, typos* -
You guys know that zombies are actually real and the process for creating them has actually been scientifically documented, right?
-
Weeee zombies.
Now that that is out of the way...
One thing I found specifically interesting in 28 Days Later was that when the... rage infected humans (they aren't zombies, sad to say, although I still consider it a zombie flick) vomit blood up on people, those people get infected. In Brook's Survival Guide there is the traditional method of getting the virus, as well as something similar to the 28 Days Later thing, but way it's handled in 28 Days Later is very interesting to me. However I don't think airborne is - the whole Resident Evil T-Virus airborne crap wasn't that interesting to me. I mean... yeah it could work, but that not the traditional Zed-head method.
As for slow vs. fast - I think the idea is based off of the whole tortoise and the hare idea - slow and steady does the trick. As that article said, Fast Zeds are startling, but Slow Zed's are fucking scary as hell. Because it doesn't matter what you do (other than kill them), they keep coming, slow and steady. It doesn't matter how many barriers you put in between you and them, they can keep coming. Forever. Plus there's the moaning thing, which Brooks talks about...
Read the Zombie Survival Guide. -
@Oddcult
Are you referring to Voodoo zombies? -
Google "Clairvius Narcisse" and "Wade Davis"
-
- CommentAuthorMark Sweeney
- CommentTimeFeb 13th 2008
The one thing with every zombie movie in the world is that they're all set in a world where there has never been a "zombie" movie or frame of reference, unlike say, vampires.
Every vampire movie in the world still acknowledges the lore of vampires/dracula, even if the world doesn't believe they exist. So people have ideas on what to do when vampires show up/exist. But the zombie movies, there's that part where someone finally figures out, "Hey, Shoot them in the head and they fall down!"
Zombie movies should just be enjoyed, not examined for logic, otherwise they fall apart like a house of cards in a hurricane.
Novelist Brian Keene has done some fantastic takes on the zombie genre, including Dead Sea. The Rising & City of the Dead is a two-book series.
Personally, as far as fast vs. slow.... it all depends on what works best for the story. -
A) Growing up, all the zombies were slow zombies. And I was terrified of them.
B) First time I saw a movie with a fast zombie ("Return of the Living Dead", I think), where the zombies run at a dead sprint and swarm the living, I didn't sleep for a week. And I was, like, 15, or something -- well beyond the age of losing sleep over monsters.
So, I guess that makes my vote for fast zombies. -
My fear is that of the zombie cliche, which inevitably puts them in the pirate, ninja realm. I mean granted, It's hard to not be a fan of zombie movies, but it what makes them so bad that gives such an appreciation to their genre.
One might digress, that hypothetically, if the dead were to rise my life would be hell. Some people are dead for a reason. Bringing them back would just be inconvenient.
Amongst the brain eating, slow moving er michael jackson back up dancing; whatever they maybe doing, it's just going to annoy the hell outta everyone. -
@Oddcult
so... yes, you are. Heh. -
-
CommentAuthorjoe.distort
- CommentTimeFeb 13th 2008
i love zombies, and have come to the conclusion that if you EVER see fast zombies, kill yourself immediately. there will only come more horror and doom if you continue to live in a world with running undead. or the run-dead, but that sounds fecal related. -
-
- CommentAuthorsacredchao
- CommentTimeFeb 13th 2008
Google "Clairvius Narcisse" and "Wade Davis
Interesting. I think Dahmer, or some other twisted fuck, tried to turn his victims into zombie sex slaves by cutting holes in their heads and pouring acid onto their brain. It didn't work so well, however.The one thing with every zombie movie in the world is that they're all set in a world where there has never been a "zombie" movie or frame of reference, unlike say, vampires.
Every vampire movie in the world still acknowledges the lore of vampires/dracula, even if the world doesn't believe they exist. So people have ideas on what to do when vampires show up/exist. But the zombie movies, there's that part where someone finally figures out, "Hey, Shoot them in the head and they fall down!"
They seem to be vaguely aware of pop-culture zombies in Walking Dead. But, for the most part, you are right. -
-
CommentAuthorPete Martin
- CommentTimeFeb 13th 2008
@SledHeavy
A pirate zombie or a ninja zombie? -
-
It's possible that they KNOW about pop-culture references to Zombies in a lot of zombie movies, it's just that they have no idea that the things popping up ARE zombies.
Take Shaun of the Dead for example - Shaun yells at Ed for for calling them zombies. They know ABOUT zombies, it's just, they don't want to accept that these things ARE zombies.
Perhaps.
I could be completely wrong. -
Ninja Zombies? oh sweet cthulhu no... THAT would be the end of the world.
"Zombie... vanish!"
... Teenage Mutant Ninja Zombies? -
-
CommentAuthorPete Martin
- CommentTimeFeb 13th 2008
@ravnos
"BrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaainsHWAH! -
-
-
CommentAuthororwellseyes
- CommentTimeFeb 13th 2008
28 Weeks Later was more unnerving than the first film because it got past the "fast/slow" thing and got to the meat of it, which is the feeling of being trapped.
There's a scene during a lockdown where there are infected somewhere in the room. People are being attacked, no one can move, it's dark, everyone is screaming, crying, surging around, panicked human animals. Speed doesn't matter there, you're just simply locked in a room with something human-shaped that wants you dead. -
-
-
CommentAuthorPete Martin
- CommentTimeFeb 13th 2008
you're just simply locked in a room with something human-shaped that wants you dead
Warren, how was your San Diego experience? -
-
HAHAHAHA.
Also, I hated 28 Weeks Later... but to me it felt more like a.. people killing people movie than a "zombie" movie. You know what I mean?
It was almost as if the "zombies" were just there for show.
"Hey, look at all the soldiers shooting everyone.
More shooting...
More shooting...
HEY A ZOMBIE!
Oh wait... back to the soldiers..."
I dunno... just... bored me.
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.