Poll: Which zombies do you prefer and why

[Tullaryx]

I'm sure there's been a poll like this in the old forum, but I've searched back all the threads since this new one came up and didn't find one. So, I thought to try this and see where everyone stands. Since Romero started his Living Dead series and pretty much wrote the rules in terms of the proto-typical film zombie, there's been some changes made by others to add their own spin on things. From 28 Days Later's infecteds. ROTLD's brain-eating, quick thinking runners. To Brian Keene's demonic-possession zombies. Which type of zombies do you still consider the best and still the gold standard of all zombies.

[axlish]

Zombies are cool in any form.

[Zombie-A-GoGo]

Agree with thee above.

[Tullaryx]

As much as like all the zombie types I listed, I have to give my vote to GAR's classic shamblers. For if they haven't been born from the mind of George our zombies may still be stuck to just plain old Bela Lugosi White Zombie type of undead.

[bassman]

Romero's...without a doubt. He's the only one of the zombie genre that can create a REAL horror film. The others are basically nothing more than action flicks to me. Romero also knows how to showcase what really is the problem....humans. In short, Romero is called the Godfather of horror for a reason. He "made an offer no one could refuse" Keep in mind, these are my opinions. I'm sure someone will come along and say something along the lines of "Evil Dead is not..." or "ROTLD is..." but the fact of the matter is....Romero makes "thinking" films. The others tend to make action, teenager's saturday night flicks.

[jdog]

GAR shamblers all the way! only kind of zombie for me.

[Svengoolie]

I voted for all of the above. And GAR, by his own admission, didn't create the genre...all he did was take what he saw in "The Last Man on Earth" and modernize the original idea of vampires--which has more to do with a rotting, shambling corpse out to drink blood than it does with the suave MFs with fangs in tuxedos and capes made popular by Lord Byron, Dr John Palidori, and Bram Stoker.

[Tullaryx]

Well, I have to say that GAR at least introduced the flesheating part and also the shoot them in the head rule. I still think that one rule for his zombies made it his.

[Svengoolie]

Well, I have to say that GAR at least introduced the flesheating part and also the shoot them in the head rule. I still think that one rule for his zombies made it his. As I said, he simply modernized the original concept of the vampire. Vampires were killed through the old "stake in the heart" because until modern medecine proved otherwise, the heart was considered the most important organ in the body...and they fed off blood because "life blood" was considered the essence by which life flowed. All GAR did was take that concept, and add some modern ideas to it--now we know that the brain is the most important organ in the body. Hence, the "destroy the brain" rule. And, GAR probably figured "why just have the ghouls be out for blood? If they're going to eat a part of a person...have them go for the whole person!" and went from there. The others tend to make action, teenager's saturday night flicks. I guess that's why GAR's zombie flicks were primarily marketed at teens and young adults and found most of their success in matinee, midnight, and Drive In showings.

[bassman]

I guess that's why GAR's zombie flicks were primarily marketed at teens and young adults and found most of their success in matinee, midnight, and Drive In showings. Most of the theaters had to play them late because they were unrated. And who says they were marketed for teens? You? Teens went, saw them, and i'm sure they enjoyed them but the stories were more targeted to(once again) "thinking movie-goers" with the social under currents and REAL horror that Romero incorporates. Ask someone in about...oh, 10-15 years if they remember Yawn04....

[Tullaryx]

I think people into zombie movies will remember the remake, but the casual filmgoer and critics probably won't. On a different note, am I the only one who didn't enjoy Brian Keene's book as much as most fans. The new twist on the zombie plague and then how he pretty much superfied them at the end of the first book and through most of the second just didn't sit right with me.

[MinionZombie]

GAR's shambling flesheaters of course. The most 'realistic' out of the bunch and the most terrifying, the fact that you could deal with one or two quite easily, but en mass you're screwed. Also - the fact that mankind's downfall is half down to mankind itself.

[Tullaryx]

GAR's shambling flesheaters of course. The most 'realistic' out of the bunch and the most terrifying, the fact that you could deal with one or two quite easily, but en mass you're screwed. Also - the fact that mankind's downfall is half down to mankind itself. Very true. With the exception of ROTLD's zombies, all the other types really have the zombies as the prime cause of humanity's downfall. Either they were too fast to be handled well or as smart, or smarter than humans. In GAR's world if humans just took their heads out of their asses they could've easily contained the situation. But they didn't and well you all know the rest.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I am of the school that says All of the above. However, i am only using shamblers and runners in my flick.

[Svengoolie]

Most of the theaters had to play them late because they were unrated. And who says they were marketed for teens? You? Teens went, saw them, and i'm sure they enjoyed them but the stories were more targeted to(once again) "thinking movie-goers" with the social under currents and REAL horror that Romero incorporates. Ask someone in about...oh, 10-15 years if they remember Yawn04.... Actually, that's not true at all--all three of GAR's original zombie flicks were shown throughtout the day at most venues (I personally remember seeing the ad for Day showcasing the various showtimes at all of the Chicago area theaters that had it)...they simply found a good deal of their success in midnight runs. And, whether you'd like to admit it or not, most horror films are marketed towards their main audience--teens and young adults....and they were GAR's target demographic at all of those Drive In theaters. As for your comment about whether or not people will remember the remake in 10-15 years, the general population will probably remember it as well if not better than any of GAR's flicks, depending on whether or not there's a sequel. Hell, GAR is and always has been a cult figure just out of the reach of the mainstream...and while most horror freaks know who he is, the majority of the population doesn't, and lump all zombies into pretty much the same category (I even read an interview of a zombie extra from Land that talked about eating brains ). As for MZ... The most 'realistic' out of the bunch... Please explain how they're the most 'realistic'.