Zombies! discussion

How do you like your zombies? Fast and vicious like the modern movies or, slow and lumbering like The Night of the Living dead? I like them either way, but they must smell of the graveyard and have maggots running through their decaying skin.

David H. Donaghe,
author of Monroe's Paranormal Investigations.

I like both, but prefer them mixed, a highly damaged or rotten body should be slow, a fresh one has no reason to be slow and must be fast as in life, at least for the first few hours. Having a mixed group of types of zombies make it more unpredictable.

I used to be a total Romero purist (Slow, dammit! Big Daddy zombie in Land of the Dead irritated me), but after Dead Set... well, I've grown fonder of fast zombies in the right setting. I like A's view quite a bit.

Yeah, I was always a fan of the slow zombies, but Joe McKinney's mix of speeds makes it a bit more unpredictable... but, for the lidte of me, I can't seem to write anything other than slow zombies...

Armand Rosamilia
Dying Days

Armand wrote: "Yeah, I was always a fan of the slow zombies, but Joe McKinney's mix of speeds makes it a bit more unpredictable... but, for the lidte of me, I can't seem to write anything other than slow zombies...."

You and me both, Armand...

I usually prefer slow zombies, but loved the fast ones in Zack Snyder's reimaging of DAWN ON THE DEAD.

I like them all as long as they rotting and stinky.

Scott wrote: "I usually prefer slow zombies, but loved the fast ones in Zack Snyder's reimaging of DAWN ON THE DEAD."

Yeah, still my favorite zombie movie... I've watched it a dozen times...

Armand Rosamilia
Highway To Hell

I'll always love the original Dawn of the Dead best (did I mention it was my first date movie?), but a couple of the fast zombie movies have really kicked butt and made 'em really creepy. Have you all seen La Horde yet? It's a recent French zombie movie and it's excellent, other than some gratuitous ammo wasting.

La Horde was awesome! Very visceral.

At one time I would have said that only the Romero type of shambling undead would be acceptable. After reading a number of novels & short stories, plus watching too many films I still prefer the slower ones, but don't have a problem with the 'fresher' zombie having a bit of speed.

I think House of the Dead (based on the video game) was the first film that had both the slower and faster zombies.

I don't remember slow zombies in that movie. I'll have to go back and watch it.

I don't think I can watch House of the Dead again without copious amounts of alcohol...

Dana wrote: "I don't think I can watch House of the Dead again without copious amounts of alcohol..."

Hahahaha! I was thinking the same damn thing, Dana. :o)

Scott wrote: "I don't remember slow zombies in that movie. I'll have to go back and watch it."

There weren't many but as the as the zombies get further from their 'turing' they lose some of their speed. I noticed this more since some of the cast & crew from the film had a showcase at a Fangoria Weekend of Horror in NYC, shortly before the film was released. They talked about how & why they did that.

Great group discussion! I'd vote for fast . . . seems a bit more creepy . . . maybe it's because I'm a smoker.

I'm a bit of a Romero purist, but fast zombies are definitely creepier.

I think the fast ones are only creepier because there's less chance of escape... but I find the slow ones that just won't stop to be extremely creepy.. no matter how far you run, they'll just keep shambling after you...

I find both to be bothersome, but I'm pretty sure a head shot will end both problems, or at least I hope so. Wouldn't it be terrible to find out that it doesn't matter what kind it is, head shots don't work?

Have you seen REturn of the Living Dead, Brandy? That's one of the things I loved about that movie even as yeah, I found it totally disturbing that headshots didn't work. "You think the movie lied?" :-)

Fast zombies have to be done right or they don't work. The only two movies I've seen where they work are RotLD and the reimaging of Dawn of the Dead.

Scott wrote: "Fast zombies have to be done right or they don't work. The only two movies I've seen where they work are RotLD and the reimaging of Dawn of the Dead."

I'd add Dead Set and La Horde to that list, Scott, but otherwise I am in agreement with you. I don't count 28 Days Later 'cause it's infected folks, not zombies.

I would prefer a slow zombie. The fast ones through me off. I feel like it goes against everything zombie. They don't have to be Night of the Living Dead slow, but if they're super zombie fast, then that really doesn't leave us with much hope.

Forgot about La Horde. I'll have to see Dead Set.

Faster so they can catch their prey!

Well, my practical mind sez that they may start out aggressive, when they are less 'dead' but eventually they have to slow down because of deterioration. But is it stupid to think logically about zombies? (yeah)

I guess if they are reanimated dead, i expect them to be slow. If they are virus infected I expect them to be fast as a normal human, at least at the beginning.

Each has its element of horror, although the slow ones tend to end up comical or just sad.

Scott wrote: "Forgot about La Horde. I'll have to see Dead Set."

Dead Set is awesome. I bought an all region DVD player for that.

+1 for Dead Set and The Horde. Both were really good. I dvr'd Dead Set when they showed it on IFC back around Halloween. The Horde is available on netflix. As far as fast or slow.....not being in top shape I'd say slow movers, or shamblers lol. Rule #1 Cardio!

I actually like both fast and slow movers - the only time I really have a strong opinion is when the two get mixed. Either stick with fast movers, slow movers, or have a good reason (or mysterious reason - aka plot device) to make it make sense.

Traditionally, however, I've always been a fan of slow-moving, shambling, unintelligent husks when it comes to the undead. There's just something so visceral about a horde of undead, moving slowly but never stopping, that makes them all the more frightening. A mass of writing, relentless corpses shuffling ever closer - ah! Love it!

The fast-movers are interesting in an 'infected' kind of way, I'm just not a huge fan when they have above-average speed - pushing the limits of human physique is one thing, but giving them super powers (beyond being able to take considerable punishment) is just a bit ripe for me.

Anyways, keep reading and I love all the opinions! Keep 'em comin'!

IDGS
Grey Dogs: Zombie Survival

Ian, I so agree: re the super powers. The remake of Day of the Dead zombies that could suddenly crawl sideways on walls just pissed me off. Well, many things about that movie pissed me off. Especially the super doctor zombie that sounded like a T-Rex...

I would have to say that I have a preference to the classic dead... the classic rotters that you find in novel like Day by Day Amageddon and such. The Slow Movers that just refuse to die. the ones that come from out of nowhere to grab you by the bicusbids! Great Stuff right dere!

ssssssllllllloooooooowwwwww

it's like Max Brooks put it in an interview: "It's not that these creatures are dead that's scray, it's our inability to deal with the problem."

I have no problem with fast or slow zombies. Well, I do have a problem with them, but only by a survival aspect. Slow zombies make sense depending on how long they've been around and what's been done to them that didn't ultimately take them out of existence. Fast moving zombies make sense as long as they are not faster than they were in life. For example, if a track star was turned zombie, it would only make sense that they would be fast. At least for a while, before the decay started getting to them. So fast within reason is acceptable. I had issues with the later Resident Evil movies. Suddenly the dogs were like these strange alien looking things. Where did the extra mouths come from? When I write, I prefer my zombies to be closer to human. It gives them more realism. I also don't like to cross the species boundaries. While there are diseases that jump from animal to human, the human to animal jump seems a bit off. For example, animals do not get the human version of the stomach flu. And for a human to get a rare animal disease, it has to go through a lot of mutation to reach that point. There are so many other aspects that I could use to explain my personal zombie theories, but those are the main points.

you guys suck

u suck

I am a big fan of the fast zombies, to me that is more terrifying, they are harder to escape and seem more determined.

Although... Slow Zombies make for some suspenseful moments.

I like my zombies slow. Remember, they don't get tired or stop chasing you, even it water. You might out-sprint them, but you won't outlast them. I think that slow, but inevitable chase make them unique.

I'm more a 'slow zombie' guy but don't have a problem with those who have just turned being a bit more active. In his "Can You Survice the Zombie Apocalypse" Max Brallier has his undead shuffling around, but capable of bursts of speed when they smell a living person. Adds to the danger.

I believe I answered this before, but I think it depends on what the writer is trying to do with the zombies. I like how in some books the undead begin with the speed they had prior to passing, but slowly as their body decays they become slower. The zombies in Z-Nation, for instance, seem faster than those in The Walking Dead.

Steve wrote: "The zombies in Z-Nation, for instance, seem faster than those in The Walking Dead."

Especially when they're on drugs. :)

Not sure how that works since they don't have a working digestive tract or circulatory system. :(

Wow - a zombie thread ... about zombies!

If ever a zombie apocalypse does happen, and you and I found ourselves holed up inside a shopping mall, then I reckon one of the first things we should do is to work out which type of zombies were facing.

Romero-esque moanyshufflers? Or the post-modern Nike shod athletes?

That's a pretty important thing to know. That, and the method of transmission. Does everyone who dies turn in a Z, or only people who are killed by biting, or does every bite become infected?

Then there's the "bwains!!!" or flesh debate. Does your particular species of the undead like to munch on any part of the human anatomy or just the pink stuff between the ears?

What are the rules for killing Zs? Is a headshot lethal, or do we allow dismembered hands and arms to scuttle around for comic effect?

Can animals become zombified? Hell, I had zombie cows and pigeons. Why the heck not? Mind you, my zombie hero also had sex, so he's hardly typical.

You see, people think that zombies are these two dimensional caricature bad guys. It's that old racist thing of "they all look the same to me."

There are also stories that have both slow AND fast zombies.

And some where at least a few zombies retain some degree of intelligence. Enough to send a feint of several dozen zombies (the most damaged ones) against one side of a human settlement, while hundreds await the human response before attacking their side of the settlement.

And also stories where some alien intelligence uses the zombies as a kind of hive mind.

The headshot thing bothers me in TWD. If it's the brain stem that is reanimated, would Darryl shooting a crossbow-bolt into the forehead, or Maggie thrusting a knife into the eye, really make any difference?

And then you have some stories where some zombies can actually become human again. That would really screw with your mind if you're trying to decide what to do with family members that have become zombies.

Randy - I think the answer to your TWD question might be connected to the "bad guy invulnerability curve". It goes something like this:

When a bad guy is first introduced they must seem to be invincible and all-powerful. Zombies in TWD, the Borg in Star Trek, the alien in ... ahem ... Alien.

But part way through the book or film, the bad guy needs to become vulnerable (vincible?) so that the good guys can win.

So TWD starts with incredibly scary zombies and then moves on to the remaining survivors being able to take them out very easily. It is not unusual for TWD characters to mow down an entire swarm of wockers by using little more than a paperclip. I exaggerate slightly for comic effect.

Randy wrote: "Steve wrote: "The zombies in Z-Nation, for instance, seem faster than those in The Walking Dead."

Especially when they're on drugs. :)

Not sure how that works since they don't have a working dige..."

I give Z-Nation some leeway with this. It has more of a fantasy element to it than the more realistic Walking Dead. It's such a fun show.

Both are good, but it depends on the context. Slow zombies are great for a creepy story, while fast zombies add an adrenaline rush. I prefer slow zombies, because they lunge out of the shadows of dark and forgotten places as their victims walk past.

In my upcoming novel, they are both fast and slow. Fast at first until rigor mortis sets in, then slow after that.

By the way, you can go to http://deadfall.gr8.com/ and sign up to get on my mailing list to receive updates on Dead Fall.

You can also find some cool promotional t-shirts and coffee mugs here: https://teespring.com/new-deadfall There are shirts for men and women.