Menu
User Avatar Image

Whats your favorite zombie FILM and why?

posted by ItsMeArmani on - last edited - Viewed by 1.3K users

My vote goes to Romero's "Day of the Dead". I'm interested in seeing your favorites.:)

83 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @distortion said: 28 Days Later. I don't know why people don't consider it to be a zombie flick. Just because they're not shuffling along on broken ankles with their arms outstretched doesn't mean they aren't the undead. It's even scarier thinking they can run just as fast as you can.

    I'm not 100% sure but i think the infected in 28 days later aren't dead just insanely angry

  • @distortion said: 28 Days Later. I don't know why people don't consider it to be a zombie flick.

    Some people don't consider it to be a zombie flick because before the film was released director Danny Boyle specifically said that it wasn't a zombie film. He later retracted those comments.

  • @thestalkinghead said: I'm not 100% sure but i think the infected in 28 days later aren't dead just insanely angry

    Infected with Rage, yeah. Though it could just be a different understanding of the same thing, maybe. They still do all the same things as zombies. The argument could also be made that they die and come back to life too, just far faster than in any other movie.

    @thestalkinghead said: Some people don't consider it to be a zombie flick because before the film was released director Danny Boyle specifically said that it wasn't a zombie film. He later retracted those comments.

    There's something I didn't know. Though if he retracted them, maybe he changed his mind and thought it should be considered among the zombie genre.

  • People don't consider 28 days later zombies because they're not dead. It's why they starved out. And why they were fast because their muscles weren't deteriorating. But I still think of them as zombies. They're mindless aggressive people who's goal it seems is to attack uninfected people.

  • @trd84 said: People don't consider 28 days later zombies because they're not dead. It's why they starved out. And why they were fast because their muscles weren't deteriorating. But I still think of them as zombies. They're mindless aggressive people who's goal it seems is to attack uninfected people.

    yeah i think its the mindless and relentless aspect of them that puts them in the zombie genre even though they aren't really zombies

  • @thestalkinghead said: yeah i think its the mindless and relentless aspect of them that puts them in the zombie genre even though they aren't really zombies

    I would consider it a special case, kind of like Richard Matheson's I Am Legend, which created the entire apocalyptic survivor story antagonized by the undead genre, which vampires were the culprit. That story would later on inspire George A. Romero to write his own short story, and ultimately lead to The Night of the Living Dead.

    So, it's not terribly hard to accept it as a zombie film. It's just alternative.

    @thestalkinghead said: 01.jpgGroovy...

    I seriously need to rewatch that film. It's been awhile.

  • Had to choose 28 Days Later. Thought it took the "typical" zombie movie in an unusual direction. Check out the alternative endings for a different perspective on the story.

  • Of the movies listed I'd say the original Dawn of the Dead is my favorite. 28 days is not a zombie flick and I wish it would stop getting categorised as one. Films like Zombieland are too corny and I never cared for them. The one film IMO that ranks among the premier zombie flicks and is a personal favorite is an italian film directed by Lucio Fulci and named simply Zombie. A great film that should have been included in your list since it is much better than most you did list. From the scene where a screaming womans eye is pierced by a splinter of wood as her head is pulled through a hole in the door by a rotted hand, (still makes me wince), a underwater battle between a zombie, a shark, and a very hot, topless woman, to a 400 yr old worm infested conquistador zombie bursting from his grave to rip out the throat of a woman with a single bite it stands as a pinnacle of what a zombie movie should be.

  • There's something I didn't know. Though if he retracted them, maybe he changed his mind and thought it should be considered among the zombie genre.[/QUOTE] I think the retraction probably came by order/request from the studio. Boyle was specific about not wanting this film slated as a "zombie flick", thinking it much more realistic as a biological infestation, and since that was his view I'm sure he directed it in a way to reflect that. I never heard of his retraction but it sounds like something that might have come by order of the head of the studio to increase revenue by bringing in the zombie fans. I've never thought of it as a zombie movie, but it does'nt need to be. 28 Days Later does'nt need to be part of the zombie genre, its a great movie.

  • I was under the impression that Boyle made the comments in the first place to distance his film from what was perceived at the time as a hokey and no longer relevant genre, then admitted after it was released that yes, it was intended to be a zombie film, albeit a re-imagining of the genre.

    He didn't want people to have preconceptions about the film before they even watched it, and a label like 'zombie film' comes with many preconceptions, particularly before the genre was revived. Funnily enough, a huge part of the genre's revival can be attributed to 28 Days Later.

    Whether you consider it a zombie film or not, it's really a moot point. But as far as cultural impact is concerned, the film owes a lot to the zombie genre and the zombie genre in turn owes a lot to it.

Add Comment