77 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @ZombieGoBoom said: Over at the Spacebattles forum some of them are calling these WWZ movie undead, 'zoombies'.

    ROFL

    I am totally using that from now on to refer to any fast zombies.....

  • This movie should be called 365 Days Later since the zombies are moving like the rage infected from 28 Days Later LOL:p

  • This film's great - go see it - and the zombies are fantastic. I know 'cos I was on the set in Glasgow, Scotland, when they were filming it. Not as a zombie unfortunately - I was providing medical cover hehe.

    Seems strange for people to complain about the authenticity of the zombies... given that zombies are a loosely defined fictional construct.

    Plus, come the ZA, I won't be hanging round and pointing & going 'THAT'S not a zombie, it moves too fast' :p

  • @Nokando said:
    Seems strange for people to complain about the authenticity of the zombies... given that zombies are a loosely defined fictional construct.


    Not really. Zombies have been well defined by their creator - George Romero. TWD is based off Romero's universe; so, it's not that strange that people find fault with it. I certainly don't care for fast zombies. They're dead, damn it! I can understand fresh zombies being quicker, but not crack-head speed!


    Also, 28 Days Later was a wonderful horror film about a rage virus. NOT A ZOMBIE VIRUS! It's okay for them to run.

    Also, Also ---- my favorite part of the trailer?

    "Stay in the car!"
    BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
    "Stay in the..."
    BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
    BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
    BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!

    Jeez! It seems like every other trailer has that damn sound in it now!

  • @AceStarr said: This movie should be called 365 Days Later since the zombies are moving like the rage infected from 28 Days Later LOL:p

    They behave more like ants. Definitely a group effort here.

    first-footage-of-brad-pitt-in-world-war-

    Why would they do that? Maybe if someone was hanging some poor soul over the wall as bait might get that reaction. I want to like this movie but the CGI zoombies might be too ridiculous to watch.

  • @crash665 said: Not really. Zombies have been well defined by their creator - George Romero. TWD is based off Romero's universe; so, it's not that strange that people find fault with it. I certainly don't care for fast zombies. They're dead, damn it! I can understand fresh zombies being quicker, but not crack-head speed!

    Romero didn't "create" zombies.

  • @DreadMagus said: Romero didn't "create" zombies.

    He did create what people around here are talking about when they say "zombies"

    He created the undead cannibal that can only be killed by a headshot and the whole idea of the zombie apocalypse.

  • Zombie apocalypse... yes.

    The "Hungry Dead" arch-type? No.

    It might be more accurate to say he defined the modern arch-type. The same way Bram Stoker defined the "modern" vampire.

  • I don't see the problem with changing what is typically seen as a zombie. You are not talking about a creature, such as a lion, suddenly doing something it is incapable of, for example: flying. You are talking about a creature that does not exist: a dead human that is capable of moving around, and has only the desire to eat other living flesh as a motivator. So if the creature doesn't exist, why not have some imagination and fun with it? The dead can't move around anyway, so if they are going to move, why must they shamble? Go at a dead run and work together; it doesn't make any less sense that their brains can perform this function than any other thing you've seen them do in other films. By the way, I haven't read the book, and don't think I'll see the movie till it's free on T.V. in a few years and I'm home sick vegetating one day.

  • @dustpuffs said: I don't see the problem with changing what is typically seen as a zombie. You are not talking about a creature, such as a lion, suddenly doing something it is incapable of, for example: flying. You are talking about a creature that does not exist: a dead human that is capable of moving around, and has only the desire to eat other living flesh as a motivator. So if the creature doesn't exist, why not have some imagination and fun with it? The dead can't move around anyway, so if they are going to move, why must they shamble? Go at a dead run and work together; it doesn't make any less sense that their brains can perform this function than any other thing you've seen them do in other films. By the way, I haven't read the book, and don't think I'll see the movie till it's free on T.V. in a few years and I'm home sick vegetating one day.

    mythology (or what ever the proper word is) is why its important and why there is a problem, look up ghouls and revenant and you will notice that zombies aren't the only mythological creatures that are undead and eat human flesh, if they wanted to create there own monsters they shouldn't have called them zombies, what if they gave them the ability to fly and have laser eyes would they still be zombies to you?

Add Comment