Why do Zombies never finish a meal if they're so hungry(bro)?
*Submitted by Mr K
I'm not ashamed to admit that I giggled like a randy school girl when I heard this one; it's something I've never actually thought about in depth before. It is true though - think of every Zombie film you've ever seen and the massive horde that descend upon that poor (see: stupid) survivor always manage to leave them intact so that they are recognisable on their shock appearance later on. You'd think the Zombies would finish what's in front of them before making a move on their next prey.
This question did get me thinking and I do have a few answers (opinions) for you. I couldn't settle on just one so I've put them in order of my favourite to least favourite.
*They can't swallow (heh.)
Think about The Traditional Zombie, in the sense that they reanimate because a small section of their brain continues to function, the section that contains the very primal instincts for survival. Essentially the reason they're so fucking bro hungry all the time. On that merit, the rest of the Zombies body is dead and no longer functioning. I doubt they can swallow, and even if they can, they are most certainly no longer able to break down food. Therefore what they do eat simply piles up in their mouths/throats until they can fit no more in. I spreckon a sort of frustration kicks in over the fact that their hunger is not being sated and they move on in search of a more nourishing treat. Plausible, no?
*They're not cannibals (irony, right)
It's the bite that brings you back but first you have to die. Even while being snacked on, it does take a little time to bleed out and a little while more after that to start mumbling "brains". Perhaps once the Zombies realise that what they're feasting on is actually one of their Zombros, they 'think' (buhuhaha *wipes tear away*) better of it.
*They're more interested in the chase
Zombies are meant to regress into animals. Well. That's the social satire side of it anyway, you know, the devolution of man (super serial post on the subject incoming) and all that jazz. Whenever I've seen a dog take down a rabbit, a cat down a bird or my hamster attack my ex girlfriend they very rarely stick around after to eat their victims... It's just in their nature to hunt.
I hope they sated your question anyway bro!
Bottom Line: When a buddy goes down, or you cap Otis in the leg to cover your escape, don't hang around. The Zombie is a fussy eater and it won't take long for him to decide that you look the tastier option. Get the fuck out of there!
Slay Safe,
Merke
Sunday, 7 October 2012
Would it be a good idea to take refuge in a castle during the coming Zombie Apocalypse?
Would it be a good idea to take refuge in a castle during the coming Zombie Apocalypse?
*Question submitted by Mr C
Built to withstand an onslaught from heavily armed gents who want to beat on your face - and not in a good way - surely a castle has all the essentials? Big walls, deep moats, iron gates and a 360° view of the surrounding area. They're often museums these days and would contain plenty of maintained weaponry (I'd LOVE to try out a flail) so you could go medieval on some asses. Should a break-in occur, castles tend to have plenty of secret passageways to escape through, ones that often lead a fair distance before emerging. Having a way out of your home away from home is essential.
That means it ticks all the boxes?
Perhaps half a millennia ago. The problem is that most are now ruins. Meaning there are holes, often big holes, for Zombies to ninja-zombie in. I doubt the portcullis mechanisms are still working. Although stocked with some essentials (FLAIL!) it is unlikely there will be food nearby as castles tend to be quite rural.
If the walls and gates are still intact then it's a very reasonable idea. It could be used as a haven, though my immediate suggestion to you is to set up some kind of rope ladder or pulley system. This will get you and your rekill-hungry posse in and out over the walls, thereby avoiding that danger of opening the front door. Once they're in, they're in. And as good as castles are at keeping people out, they're fantastic at keeping them in too.
There's a book called Zombie Britannica by Thomas Emson. I'll try not to reveal too many spoilers but there's a castle in it... Told you I wouldn't reveal too much. The characters are a little one-dimensional but hey, it's literature with a Zombie theme. ;) What do you expect?
Bottom Line: Don't pick a random one if you're set on the idea. Scout it out now, take note of the layout, and most importantly make sure you can secure it. If the flaws I've highlighted above aren't issues with your selected house-of-awesome then go for it!
Slay safe,
Merke
*Question submitted by Mr C
Built to withstand an onslaught from heavily armed gents who want to beat on your face - and not in a good way - surely a castle has all the essentials? Big walls, deep moats, iron gates and a 360° view of the surrounding area. They're often museums these days and would contain plenty of maintained weaponry (I'd LOVE to try out a flail) so you could go medieval on some asses. Should a break-in occur, castles tend to have plenty of secret passageways to escape through, ones that often lead a fair distance before emerging. Having a way out of your home away from home is essential.
That means it ticks all the boxes?
 |
| Behold: The Flail |
Perhaps half a millennia ago. The problem is that most are now ruins. Meaning there are holes, often big holes, for Zombies to ninja-zombie in. I doubt the portcullis mechanisms are still working. Although stocked with some essentials (FLAIL!) it is unlikely there will be food nearby as castles tend to be quite rural.
If the walls and gates are still intact then it's a very reasonable idea. It could be used as a haven, though my immediate suggestion to you is to set up some kind of rope ladder or pulley system. This will get you and your rekill-hungry posse in and out over the walls, thereby avoiding that danger of opening the front door. Once they're in, they're in. And as good as castles are at keeping people out, they're fantastic at keeping them in too.
There's a book called Zombie Britannica by Thomas Emson. I'll try not to reveal too many spoilers but there's a castle in it... Told you I wouldn't reveal too much. The characters are a little one-dimensional but hey, it's literature with a Zombie theme. ;) What do you expect?
Bottom Line: Don't pick a random one if you're set on the idea. Scout it out now, take note of the layout, and most importantly make sure you can secure it. If the flaws I've highlighted above aren't issues with your selected house-of-awesome then go for it!
Slay safe,
Merke
Friday, 21 September 2012
Outpost II: Black Sun Review
Film: Outpost: Black Sun
Director: Steve Barker
Actors: Richard Coyle, Clive Russell, Michael Byrne, Catherine Steadman
Release: August, 2012
My Rating: 5/10*
What could be better than an influx of Nazi Zombies to the film industry? The answer, my friends, is nothing and Outpost II follows the first as we join our favourite group of stab-happy Storm Troopers be, well, stab-happy. I was tingling with excitement bordering arousal when I stumbled across it in a local shop. I found the first one, despite a few niggling flaws, intensely enjoyable. So how did it's descendant get up and shamble?
It certainly carries the torch for the first: unstoppable Nazi Zombies? Check. Horribly stereotypical (this time British) soldiers? Check. A hog-tied, slapped-around-a-bit version of the Unified Field Theory to explain this conundrum? Yeah that's still in there! There's a fantastic return to that damned bunker that makes me think of World At War and even that creepy bitch from Insidious makes an appearance.
It deserves a quick mention that Outpost: Black and it's predecessor are both relatively low-budget films but as the audience you won't notice; the costumes, sounds and scenes are all brilliantly built and modelled to be intense but believable.
I think I'll just cut to the chase with this one - I didn't like it. I wanted to, really I did, but I didn't. And I can tell you why. I think, if you completely removed the female lead and her storyline from every scene, even the ones with dialogue, it would be a better film. Her part in the grand scheme of things was tacked on. It didn't drive the story regarding our very hungry bros. She was looking for the mastermind behind it all. A man who gets possibly two minutes of screen time at best. The only use to come of that plot line is the nice cliffhanger and how it paves the way for another film. Well, kind of paves the way. I didn't care enough about her crap to be excited for things to come... I'm not saying I don't care about Nazis... And the holocaust... I'm just saying that... She... Urgh damn it! I know I could say this in a number of ways and I'd just be burying myself (point of information: get cremated) further but the point I'm trying to make is that she lacked the presence to be the main character...
Oh, and expect a cameo from Darth Sidious.
Bottom line: If you're a fan of the first one, watch it, but don't hold out too much hope. I've found from my feedback that this film is definitely hit and miss. For me it was miss but who knows, you might love it.
Director: Steve Barker
Actors: Richard Coyle, Clive Russell, Michael Byrne, Catherine Steadman
Release: August, 2012
My Rating: 5/10*
What could be better than an influx of Nazi Zombies to the film industry? The answer, my friends, is nothing and Outpost II follows the first as we join our favourite group of stab-happy Storm Troopers be, well, stab-happy. I was tingling with excitement bordering arousal when I stumbled across it in a local shop. I found the first one, despite a few niggling flaws, intensely enjoyable. So how did it's descendant get up and shamble?
It certainly carries the torch for the first: unstoppable Nazi Zombies? Check. Horribly stereotypical (this time British) soldiers? Check. A hog-tied, slapped-around-a-bit version of the Unified Field Theory to explain this conundrum? Yeah that's still in there! There's a fantastic return to that damned bunker that makes me think of World At War and even that creepy bitch from Insidious makes an appearance.
It deserves a quick mention that Outpost: Black and it's predecessor are both relatively low-budget films but as the audience you won't notice; the costumes, sounds and scenes are all brilliantly built and modelled to be intense but believable.
I think I'll just cut to the chase with this one - I didn't like it. I wanted to, really I did, but I didn't. And I can tell you why. I think, if you completely removed the female lead and her storyline from every scene, even the ones with dialogue, it would be a better film. Her part in the grand scheme of things was tacked on. It didn't drive the story regarding our very hungry bros. She was looking for the mastermind behind it all. A man who gets possibly two minutes of screen time at best. The only use to come of that plot line is the nice cliffhanger and how it paves the way for another film. Well, kind of paves the way. I didn't care enough about her crap to be excited for things to come... I'm not saying I don't care about Nazis... And the holocaust... I'm just saying that... She... Urgh damn it! I know I could say this in a number of ways and I'd just be burying myself (point of information: get cremated) further but the point I'm trying to make is that she lacked the presence to be the main character...
Oh, and expect a cameo from Darth Sidious.
Bottom line: If you're a fan of the first one, watch it, but don't hold out too much hope. I've found from my feedback that this film is definitely hit and miss. For me it was miss but who knows, you might love it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)