This weekend on the very special Halloween edition of MILFcast (aka: the Man, I Love Films podcast), we are set to have a debate I’ve been waiting a long time to have… and I want your feedback on the issue. My guest, Nick Jobe of Random Ramblings of a Demented Doorknob, is a firm believer that films like 28 Days Later are NOT Zombie films. I happen to feel quite the opposite…

Is it just me?

18 Responses to “IS IT JUST ME?”

  1. Technically, Nick Jobe is right. A zombie is, by definition, a reanimated corpse, whereas the ‘zombies’ in films like 28 Days Later are just people who have contracted a disease. It’s never made clear that these people die first. In fact, it’s fairly certain that they don’t. They just go crazy. So they’re not zombies at all. It’s just convenient to slot them into the zombie film genre because that is where the inspiration comes from, I guess.

    I rest my case. 🙂

    • “A zombie is, by definition, a reanimated corpse”

      Although I don’t disagree with this, in folklore a living person who has their will taken away and is controlled by a person using magic is also a zombie. Therefore I go with the idea that if it walks (or runs these days, an entire debate in itself) like a zombie, is mute like a zombie and tries to eat your flesh like a zombie, why not call it a zombie.

  2. I think most post-apocalyptic films these days are automatically labelled as zombie films. 28 days later is quite firmly in the post-apocalyptic category and what with semi-dead people staggering around everywhere trying to munch on the rest of humanity, it’s only normal that people jump to the conclusion of zombie.
    I class it as a zombie film but I do see the arguments for not classifying it as such. It depends on whether or not you’re a zombie purist.

  3. I’d have to agree with Nick and Richard. If they’re not undead, they’re not zombies.

  4. Editor In Chief Says:

    I agree…I think 28 days is an “outbreak” movie, but the infected act like zombies…so there are definitely similarities…

  5. Technically, for the reasons mentioned above, they are not zombie movies.

    However, for brevity’s sake I call them such anyway.

  6. Technically, Rob is right but I don’t care, I still consider these zombie movies!!!

  7. They’re not zombies! And I thank all of you who agree with me.

  8. BTW, I am keeping mute on this until the podcast but keep leaving comments cuz I would love to read them on the show… ANDY RULES!!!

  9. Wait, so you can say that you disagree with me in an entire post about the topic, but I can’t say I disagree with you in the comments? 😛

  10. /face palm!!!

    You guys are ridiculous, although I am anxious to hear how the feud that started on that fateful LAMBcast is settled!

  11. It’s just you.

  12. Saying they are not zombies is like back in the 90’s when snobs said Silence of the Lambs isnt a horror film.

    28 Days Later ripped huge parts from Romero films too.

  13. It’s NOT a Zombie film. I would say that what constitutes a zombie is the fact that they eat the flesh of a human being which can and does go hand in hand with them being “dead”.

    In 28 Days Later, they had neither instance. Plus the way the “rage” was transmitted had nothing in common with methods associated of traditional accepted Zombies.

    I second Paul, it’s just you:)

  14. I’ve already stated my opinion in the podcast, but I’d say both sides make valid points and arguable to the death, and since I didn’t personally say exactly how I feel in the podcast I will state my thoughts now.

    Specifically in the film 28 Days Later it seemed the intention of Danny Boyle was to make it more of a post-apocalyptic outbreak film rather than the focus of it being on the whole zombie/infected scenario. However, if one was to argue that the infected were actually zombies it’s a completely reasonable and legit comparison. Romero’s zombies are the ones that set the precedent for biting, not zombie flicks in general, and besides all filmmakers and writers use artistic integrity to put a twist on common myths in these kind of genres anyways. Look how many different point of views you have on the vampire genre!

    So yeah, I think the infected in 28 Days Later weren’t specifically zombies, but to refer to them as such or think of them as another manifestation of where the genre has led is completely reasonable. It’s really a personal call. There isn’t a right or wrong on this one.

    • Honestly, I just want to call it a Zombie movie to save time in my life and not have someone sigh when I do it! 🙂
      PS. Totally cut you out of that argument…. BAD HOST!!! I will continue to work you in better as we go on. I try to focus so much on the guests that I talk over you some times… APOLOGIES!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: