Good article on why zombies shouldn’t be fast…
Cool. Thanks for the link. He’s such a great writer.
Well written expression of what the slow zombie contigent on this board have said for ages.
Awesome. Sums up my feelings on running zombies exactly.
knew there was something I was supposed to watch on TV last week. Nice article though.
I like fast zombies. Slow zombies are not as threatening or scary. See the old ‘Kids In The Hall’ sketch where the protagonists flail weakly at a slow-moving zombie and hit it with a shoe. “We’re safe, but for how long?”
Rigor mortis, nuff said.
The appeal of zombies have always been the fact that even though you manage to kill or evade a few, there are always thousands more.
You’re wrong and didn’t read the linked article.
Peggs analogue to the unavoidable death is apt - fast zombies might be scary (or BOO-scary), but they’re just not zombies anymore.
Rigor only lasts for a few days.
I’m wrong? Awesome! Nice to know that Hanzii knows what I like better than I do.
I read the first few paragraphs of the article and that was all I could take. I find Simon Pegg about as funny as cancer. But even so, I wasn’t commenting on the piece, I was writing about what I like. A domain over which you hold no authority.
Oh good, now you’re even wronger.
That’s an awesome sketch. I think his point, though, is really that fast-moving zombies aren’t zombies at all, because to him (and this makes sense to me as well), the slowness and ineptness are one of two defining characteristics of a zombie (the other being that they’re dead). That’s why he mentions that he has no problem with “zombies” being fast-moving if they’re not actually zombies (a la 28 Days Later), because that’s an acknowledgment that they no longer serve as a metaphor for death itself.
Tell it, brother!
What he said.
Also, you’re wrong!
That’s not a fact just my opinion, something over which you hold no authority.
I thought we were discussing Peggs article. Perhaps even why slow zombies aren’t really zombies (or are, if you want to actually argue your point). Instead we are apparently just posting opinions vaguely related to an article we didn’t bother reading.
I like ice cream.
Which is really the distinction in lore as well - zombie = dead, trance-like beings, original from Voodoo.
Ghouls = flesh-eating, swift-moving undead
Even D&D got it right!
Great article by Simon Pegg.
Yup, that was good. Mind you, the great tragedy of zombie cinema is that the majority doesn’t make use of the greater weight available to the Slow Zombie.
Beyond the creeping and crushing inevitability of death that can only be delayed, not prevented, I think slow zombies are also more resonant to anyone who just plain doesn’t like crowds. Since one of my A+++ WOULD BE DAMNED AGAIN visions of Hell is trying to simply move through an overcrowded room, the exit in sight but all progress towards it consisting of getting jostled and personal-space-invaded by Zeno and his pet paradox, all my electoral votes are cast for the Slow Zombie ticket.
I will always love the slow zombie, the inevitable doom of thousands upon thousands of slowly shambling corpses trying to get your brain.
They don’t sleep, they don’t need to rest, they don’t worry about trendy fashion, or how much money they have, they only want to eat your brain.
I like zombies more than vampires, werewolves, and space monsters.
The mummy, the old shambling mummy, is that kinda creaking floor board, never gonna stop until your dead zombie.
And yes, Ghouls are your fast “zombie”.
I always think of ghouls in the Lovecraft context.
They’re not unreasonable.