Do you prefer fast or slow zombies?!
Question: i would prefer fast and smart zombies since there would be more action and adrenaline! in real life however i would want very slow and retarted zombies so i would be able to kill them easier i thought dawn of the dead was pretty good (both of them) land of the dead no so much..
Answers: i would prefer fast and smart zombies since there would be more action and adrenaline! in real life however i would want very slow and retarted zombies so i would be able to kill them easier i thought dawn of the dead was pretty good (both of them) land of the dead no so much..
Fast ones are more realistic. If zombies got rigor mortis they wouldn't be able to move at all by the way.
I'd think zombies could move as fast as their muscles could allow them until their muscles wore out. In reality zombies wouldn't last too long because they are unable to rest and their bodies don't repair themselves - they'd become immobile fairly quickly and once their brains decayed they wouldn't move at all. How long could they see for instance before lack of blood to the eyes caused them to go blind?
The immediate threat of zombies would be the first few days, survive that and you'll probably survive the zombie menance. It makes for scarier stories to have the zombies around until they are killed though doesn't it.
slow.
lol Obviously I would choose the slow one's but it would be very interesting if they were actually smart instead of retarded.
But slow and retarded does sound whole lot safer than smart and fast ones.
One of the main reasons I like land of the dead and hated the dawn of the dead remake. =.= It suxed.
Slow zombies. Fast ones are unrealistic. True, in Bram Stoker's Dracula it is said that the dead travel fast, but rigor mortis and/or putrefaction tend to slow a corpse down.
Also, slow zombies are far more insidious, in an unrelenting sort of way.
Fast ones are scary, (make you jump) but the slow ones are just creepy.
Different kinds of scary. I like both kinds.
;-)