Zombies?
For extremely boring reasons I'm looking for anything from the production team that goes into why they chose running zombies over walkers.
https://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdcxilKajH1qfwltw.jpg
Apparently slow walking zombies seemed comical and they wanted something that seemed more dangerous.
I prefer running, aggressive zombies. Something chasing after you or running at you with it's teeth bared is much more frightening.
I've read that but I can't seem to find a source anywhere.
As for which is better I honestly can't pick, the ones from the original still creep me out to this day there's just something about them that gets under my skin while the running ones just outright scare me.
https://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdcxilKajH1qfwltw.jpg
This is purely my opinion, but the success of "28 Days Later" probably caused producers to push for running zombies.
shareThe ironic thing about that is that in the director's commentary, he talked about how zombies that had been turned longer, would have darker, less viable blood, and thus would move slower.
I know it is all fantasy, but it is why I have a love/hate relationship with zombie movies. There is no reason, short of simply being under a hypnotic spell, why zombies that have been turned for a significant amount of time would be able to move at any normal rate of speed. Their blood would turn to sap and they wouldn't be able to move.
Snyder's commentary was so annoying. Everyone & everything was a "rock star".
shareSo, if it's a dehydration thing, wouldn't running make them dry up more quickly? Guess that depends if the cardiovascular and pulmonary systems are working...which I doubt they are. Maybe the infection would replace these functions, somehow.
Oh, but this leads to whatever z-biological specific formula the series is to adopt.
Like I said - a 'love/hate' relationship with zombie movies.
For instance, how do they go from being human one minute, and the very next being a blood-thirsty zombie who will ONLY attack a human, but have the ability to tell the difference between a human and a zombie?
I know it is all fantasy, but it is why I have a love/hate relationship with zombie movies.
As I said, a love/hate relationship with zombie movies.
Like, how the MOMENT they turn, they have a hyper-developed sense of who to attack and who not to attack. We don't have that "sense" as humans, but the moment they turn, a zombie knows to attack a human and not a fellow zombie.
Sometimes they attack animals, sometimes they don't.
If they lose a limb they don't bleed out. But, that would mean their blood is so thick that it doesn't bleed like humans. If that is the case, then they couldn't move at all or at least slower than a "mummy" carrying a refrigerator.
Anyway, it would be interesting to see fiction where the "laws" of zombie supremacy were changed to the point where human organization and resistance were effective enough to contain an outbreak, but perhaps not necessarily enough to extinguish the phenomenon.
It would be interesting to see a zombie film where the outbreak happened, but it was contained but not entirely eliminated and how society evolved to cope with the risks.
shareCome to think of it, that actually describes the recent Arnold Schwarzenegger film Maggie.
--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250
the idea of zombies that moonlight as marathon runners
[deleted]
I try to look for "reasonable" explanations for some of the stuff - as in, they move that fast because they don't feel pain and if they pull a hammy or hurt their foot they won't feel it.
But that doesn't work for long times and doesn't work when they've been turned for a long time.
I accept the unrelenting part of their being, but at some point they have to fall down and become a non-threat due to their blood turning to sap.
[deleted]
Fast zombies don't seem right to me, because usually movies portray zombies as being slow, so that's what I expect, but slow zombies shouldn't be threatening (except in large numbers), because they're slow, and you should be able to stay away from them, if you walk briskly. And zombies should be slow, because they're......dead.
"My girlfriend sucked 37 d*cks!"
"In a row?"
They're metaphors, basically; I don't believe they're meant to adhere to real biology.
shareWhy? Same reason we see so much hyperactive mtv editing in films nowadays. ADD, ya know.
shareI don't think it has anything to do with 21st century editing kitsch (okay, except for World War Z, which was like a music video by way of Bollywood). It's about realism.
A slow zombie slowly loping at you is scary only if there is a portion of time that you think it might be a normal person. If at first you think they're fine, the realization that something must be seriously wrong is horrifying. The trouble is, once you've seen one zombie movie - any zombie movie - you can never again have such an experience as a viewer.
Slow zombies, therefore, have no staying power as scary objects. I can't personally get anything out of a film with slow zombies unless the point is humor and not horror, which is why I think slow zombie films trended in the direction of comedies very quickly.
For zombies to continue in the horror genre, they needed to be dangerous. Once we as viewers see them, we know what they are, and we'd be running, and we need our characters to react that way, too. In fact, how could they not? It has gotten to the point where it is part of the universe of every zombie film made that nobody in the film has ever heard of a zombie before, because if they had, they would immediately reach for their zombie survival guides while wearing Romero T-Shirts and react in the same postmodernist way we would.
Realism is scary, fantasy isn't. 28 Days Later does the best job of being scary to me precisely because its zombies aren't undead. If you're working with fast zombies that are undead, they won't remain fast for long (blood loss, ketosis, as someone mentioned earlier, loss of ligaments in the legs), so giving your monsters an expiration date based on starvation, dehydration, etc., is no great loss, really, unless you're making a zombie story that lasts years instead of about a month. Most zombie films are about a 48-hour period. For that period they are running fast and so are you.
The one thing I will say about editing choices with fast zombies, it is a fine art regarding how much to speed up the frames (and it is artificially sped-up in all of them). 28 Days hits it just right, where I think Train to Busan undoes all the realism it was going for by keeping half of a shot 1x speed and then cranking it to 11 a second later - too starty-stoppy.
[deleted]