The Rabbit Hole

They're coming to eat my BRAINS. MY DELICIOUS BRAINS.

Really, I cannot think of anything that could freak me out more at a 3D cinematic adventure.

Unless they made 28 Days Later the 3D. Or Dawn of the Dead (2004) 3D. Okay, okay, so maybe I got lucky and it's just Night of the Living Dead.

BUT STILL.

I won't be able to see this with anyone I know. I'll have to take a day off work and see it in the middle of the day when I can sit in the middle of a (preferably) emtpy theater so as not to decapitate friends or random strangers when I flip out (and I will).

From:

shotgun?

Are

teneda and I the only ones who know anti-zombie hand-to-hand tactics?

*sigh*

It's going to be lonely when the dead take over.

From:

teneda.livejournal.com

Anti-zombie h2h are great, but you get tired.

From:

True that, but it's better than letting every zombie within a few blocks know where you are when you are defending yourself. Dude, think about it. Why do you never see ninjas killed by zombies? It's because the zombies don't know where the ninjas are, even when the ninjas are killing other zombies. Food for thought ^_^

From:

Listen you, you take your hand-to-hand, and you stand a decent chance of a scratch or a bite that leads you to being one scary zombie mofo. The rest of us just can't take that chance.

Besides which, everyone knows that I am destined to the be the sole survivor of the zombie crisis as I'm the only one actively taking measures to secure myself. Except for being able to shoot a gun, but that's high on my list of things to do...and soon.

But I've got the getaway vehicle planned, the ideal range and close-combat weapons, ideal clothing, planned food stuffs, the hideaway in and out of the city...

Yes, I'm insane, but I'll live.

From:

Ok last time I checked zombie scratches didn't change people (with the possible exception of Return of the Living Dead type zombies and 28 Days Later types if their blood get into the wound). The problem with firearms and zombies is that you have to hit a rather small area to have any real effect (usually head). So every time you miss you survival probability drops. Hand to hand in biker attire limits a zombies ability to convert you so long as you avoid large mobs of zombies. Not to mention in the case of scent following zombies leaves far less of a trail for them to follow (the sulfur in gunpowder is easy to smell).

On thing that seems to hold true about vehicles and zombies is that once you acquire a vehicle the zombie hordes always manage to find you. Vehicles do little to stop them from getting in (hard shell but hello juicy center). About the only vehicle I think you'd be safe in is a boat given that with very few exceptions, zombies can't swim.

*ponders*

Hmmmmm... why haven't I thought about that in the past? I just realize that their my exist a clause by which zombie would leave me be (assuming they are people-eating-only type zombies). It would be rather amusing if I could walk among the zombie hordes and be left alone, though the smell =-O

From:

Oh how much ye have to learn about combating zombies.

First of all, I wasn't disputing the fact that guns aren't necessarily the greatest things to use. Having them versus not, though? Not even a question--always have one.

Next, weapon of choice? Machete. Save for crowds of zombies, it's an ideal length for zombie combat, not too short, not too long to lose the power of your swing. Shaolin spades come highly recommended, but I'd need training.

You don't realize that motorcycles/bikes would be probably your best small vehicle to use--manueverable for the inevitable pile-ups on the highways and dodging zombies, plus not too difficult to get used to riding in. Yes, no shelter per se, but that's what the leathers are for. After that, if you're in a group, an armored vehicle--bank deposit truck is a good one--is the safest bet. Hard to refuel (diesel only) in some ways, and cumbersome, but awesome mobile protection.

Boats are only safe so long as they have both sail and engine power, and then you have to deal with the perils of the water, obtaining fresh water, avoiding scurvy, the like...

From:

chuckro.livejournal.com

No, no, the best weapon is a flamethrower. Then maybe a machete, or if you have the arm strength, a broadsword.

Not to be confused, of course, with vampires, against whom the best weapon is a super-soaker filled with holy water.

From:

*sigh*

Ok if you really want the best "anti-zombie" weapon, they you're are going to have to go with some type of explosive. Even if you don't blow the zombie to bits (I can't tell you how hard it would be not to) the force of the blast is likely going to push the zombie someplace where it may not see or get to you easily. Plus you get the added benefit of confusing the hell out of the thing since he would have to take a moment to get a beat on you. Flamethrowers are not an effective anti-zombie tool since you have to wait for the body to fully incinerate, and during that time you can be attacked by a flaming zombie (who will most likely cause the fuel tank on your back to go). The only kinds of zombies that flamethrowers work on are ones that have the ability to feel pain (a rare type of zombie).

I still prefer the hand-to-hand though. Nothing says you aren't a zombie faster than tool use (except maybe the use of language).

From:

I think the flamethrower is overrated. Not feeling pain, it won't slow a zombie down much. Plus fuel and clean up and relative availability are all against it. Not to mention you'll be carrying flammable material with you to fuel it, which is a hazard in and of itself.

The vampire solution is fairly brilliant, though, I grant you.

From:

slackwench.livejournal.com

Come visit and I'll teach you. We have three shotguns here at the moment. One is double barrelled, for extra movie/videogame violence goodness.

From:

Heh, I may do that. Honestly, I want to take a gun class just so I know how to safely handle one. They're dangerous, and they're more dangerous when you don't know what you're doing. God forbid I ever have to know how to use one, but better safe than sorry.

From:

slackwench.livejournal.com

It's just common sense, really. Make sure the gun is unloaded, that there isn't a round in the chamber and the safety is on before you do ANYTHING other than actually shoot it. If you've got a trigger lock, put that on too. If you're getting ready to shoot, make sure the safety is on, then load it. Don't take the safety off until you are standing (or sitting or whatever) where you will be shooting. Don't point the gun at anything you're not prepared to shoot at, even if you think it's unloaded safety is on etc. When you're carrying it, always point it down (but not at your foot). For rifles, make sure you know what's behind whatever you're going to shoot at, since even a low powered round can fly a mile or more.

Of course, some of this is different if you're not doing target shooting. If you were (heaven forbid) trying to defend yourself, you'd have the gun pointed up and the safety off when walking. For hunting, you'd still point down, but the safety would be off. Both situations would obviously require you to have the gun loaded long before you fire it.

One thing you can't learn without just doing it is how to hold a gun. If you do it wrong, it'll hurt when you fire it, and your accuracy won't be as good. It's not something a video game can teach, cuz even the best arcade simulators don't have as much kick as a real gun.

From:

The last part is what I want to learn most. Common sense, as you so accurately put it, should encourage the most safe handling of the weapon you can imagine if you're at all uncomfortable with guns. The weight of a weapon, though, it's recoil, the bits you have to watch out for snapping you on the hand or finger, that you have to get by doing.

From:

I remember reading on the back cover of this book that one of the tips is to "ditch the car, ride a bike." I should buy and read the rest of the book.

Meanwhile I have a cricket bat.

From:

Du-uh, I own that book. I read it twice over at least. Where do you think I got most of those ideas?

From:

ecmyers.livejournal.com

I sure don't want to get too close to them--plus the shotgun will come in handy for shooting any friends that get bitten, before they change.

From:

Ok, had a thought the other day. Given that in many zombie flicks that zombies tend to retain some tiny fraction of stuff from there lives; what happens when you are dealing with former military and combat type zombies? Do they in fact have the ability to remember any of their combat training or tactics? If a special forces type, can they sneak up on people and eat them before they know the zombie is even there? If Chuck Noris was a zombie, would he still kick so much ass?

From:

slackwench.livejournal.com

You have just built the skeleton for my next stupid movie plot.

From:

So long as you credit me or hire me as a technical consultant use it ^_^

From:

Maybe you know but I'm not feeling it's clear:

THIS IS NOT GEORGE A. ROMERO'S NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. THIS IS A 2006 REMAKE OF NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD.

But it looks alright, I suppose.

From:

Oh dear. OH NOES. That means they could come jumping off the screen at me.

Well, maybe it will work? I mean, the Dawn of the Dead remake was good...

From:

Yeah, like I says, it looks alright. Meanwhile, if you haven't heard, someone else was remaking Day of the Dead at a separate studio than the Dawn remake, and I guess they lured Ving Rhames back to tie the films together, which is weird. The Night of the Living Dead series gets so convoluted. All three of the original chapters have been remade at separate studios on separate occasions, all three have indirect sequels, the otherwise separate Dawn and Day remakes are now following some sort of direct continuity...it's enough to make someone's head spin.

From:

And they were still planning to make a sequel that wasn't Day to Dawn 2004 at Universal. Who knows if that will happen but it adds even more confusion.

I hope you've seen Shaun of the Dead.

From:

Of course I've seen Shaun. I love that movie (and own it, too).

Uh, is the one that's not a remake supposed to be a sequel to Land of the Dead?

From:

No, since Land is a Romero flick and he was not involved with Dawn 2004. It was just tenatively called Dawn of the Dead 2 and Dawn 2004 director Zack Snyder was attached but now he's doing Frank Miller's 300 and possibly Watchmen.

Meanwhile, I think Land of the Dead's follow up (it's supposed to be its own new trilogy) is called World of the Dead, and Simon Baker is slated to come back, as this trilogy follows continuity.

From:

I liked Land of the Dead, though I disliked the idea that the zombies can learn. We're fucked if they do. I'd still go see the sequel. Simon Baker was good in his role, and I liked the characters they introduced. I really liked John Leguizamo, surprisingly, especially when he chose not to be killed after he got bitten--"I want to see how the other half lives," is how he put it, I think.

Dawn of the Dead 2? Pass. That's another movie that was surprisingly GOOD in addition to being a fun zombie movie, and if I've learned anything from trashy sequels to surprise hits, it's that they're never any good.

I'm on tenterhooks about Snyder doing Watchmen, only because I really, really, really don't want the movie version to fuck up Rorschach. Maybe if he does a good job with 300, I can calm down...

From:

That's right--there was a Day of the Dead 2, wasn't there? My mother bought it for me, and I promptly returned it without opening it.

The Tom Whossis remake of Night was terrible, I hear.

From:

Savini, and I thought it was pretty good. I'll buy it. And hey, Romero was directly involved, something none of the other remakes can say.

From:

teneda.livejournal.com

Savini, and I thought it was pretty good. I'll buy it.

Says the guy who actually owns Superman 3 AND 4.

*ducks*

From:

What? No, I don't...you must have me confused with someone else...

From:

teneda.livejournal.com

Oh right, you have the Schumacher wannabe batmans on DVD.

even worse.

http://trinityvixen.livejournal.com/228904.html

From:

I bought the box set dammit, it was $40 and the first two movies separate are also $40. Special features are special features and it has a cool box. Just because I own them doesn't mean I watch them.

From:

I'll probably end up with that set at some point, but I'd actually watch it for the commentary. I hear it's hilarious. Not worth watching the movie again, maybe, but I can just listen, right?

From:

My TV is hooked up to a sound system, I can switch the set off and still get the audio. Also, I can fire it up on my computer and cover it with AIM windows.

From: