Thursday, October 22nd, 2009


Let's hear it for zombies, the monsters for real Americans: "Zombie enthusiasts are a special subset of horror-movie fan. Many say the monster's low-tech egalitarianism appeals to them. (Unlike vampires, sometimes portrayed as aloof aristocrats, anyone can be a zombie.) Sometimes called blue-collar monsters, zombies who seek the flesh and brains of the living require few special effects, compared with aliens and other monsters. Some say their relative ordinariness makes them scarier." Also up for discussion: Which kind of zombie is more correct? Your traditional, slow-moving grunter or the 28 Days Later zoomy/chompy type? Think wisely before you answer, there's a lot riding on this one.

19 Comments / Post A Comment

jfruh (#713)

In that paragraph alone there are more "some say" and "many say" attributions than would be acceptable in a Wikipedia article of mid-level importance, let alone the WSJ.

titfos (#1,983)

The current Zombie fascination seems very artificial. Zombies have become a catch-all type idea-de-art, they seem to be the idea of unique sub culture without any substance or meaning beyond symbolic psuedo cult referent, And by that I meant cult in the category available via Netflix sense.

Q: whatdya into?
A: I like Zombies, Converse One-Stars, and shit like that.

Matt (#26)

Hot Topic bros and chicks, all.

boyofdestiny (#1,243)

I think the question is flawed. If I recall, the 28 Days Later zombie wasn't even technically a zombie, but rather a regular human infected with a consciousness-stealing, rage-inducing virus. Whereas your George Romeroâ€"style zombie is an actual reanimated corpse.

All of this is to say, both seem correct! The more variety in our zombies, the better.

hazmathilda (#839)

Slow moving grunter is more "correct" and open to more zombie as humanity type metaphors but zoomchomp is better at leaving me so, so terrified.

brent_cox (#40)

First time I saw a movie with the running-screaming zombies (Return of the Living Dead?), I was outraged for ten seconds that zombie orthodoxy had been fucked with, and then terrified and sleepless for about a week.

WindowSeat (#180)

I like a mix of slow and fast zombies when I'm wandering the Willamette Parkview Mall.

Jesse Poe (#2,002)

Nice post, a week ago I posted a blog addressing the question: Why Zombies? And Why now?

I am a descendant of E.A. Poe, but I am no Zombie authority, but you'll find links to Zombie:


Bob Hope Zombie action

and some other interesting tie ins.

Given that a 14-minute music video shaped my entire awareness and understanding of zombies, I prefer the slow-grunty zombies that eventually create a pyramid formation and break into an intricately choreographed dance number.

Bittersweet (#765)

What Bike said.

Alex Balk (#4)

But how do you feel about incarcerated Filipino zombies?

I'm surprised the WSJ completely missed the real economic angle. Zombies tend to rise on the pop-cultural radar at moments of great governmental debt. The late 80s, for example, during Reagan's second administration, was the golden age of zombie films. One might even go so far as to argue that necrified zombies are the archetypal symbols of public debt.

On the real.

But I'm not surprised they felt free to gloss over any left-anarchism and anti-consumerism in Romero's zombouevre.

HiredGoons (#603)

I'm gonna go with Michael Jackson 'Cat Creature' from Thriller and just avoid the issue.

Fifi (#1,639)

I'm jumping on the Resident Evil zombie train.

RickVigorous (#214)

Not even a mention of the ass raping zombies?

Post a Comment