PS: Two things that keep this from being completely and totally awesome: the narrators are vamping just a bit too much and the mocking tone needs to… well, go away. You absolutely have to deadpan parodies like these; after all, the films that they’re mocking took themselves absolutely seriously, which is why people want to mock them in the first place. Obvious sarcasm detracts from the result, ever-so-slightly.
As in, the double standard argument? – because it’s freaking hard to argue with this logic:
Although Brooks argues – fairly convincingly, I think* – that if you’re going to go with a firearm a .22 target pistol is better for zombie-killing.
*My major problem with Brooks’ general arguments against using high caliber weapons against the living dead is that I don’t think that he takes kinetic impact fully into account when judging their effects. The same relative lack of internal body fluids that minimize the effects of hydrostatic shock will also provide a zombie’s internal frame with less structural integrity; and, at any rate, Newton’s Third Law still applies. If a zombie stops a 20 mm bullet moving at a mile per second (I think that the above’s a M61 Vulcan, but this isn’t my field of study) something’s going to happen that will wreck the zombie’s day; I wouldn’t be shocked if the older ones didn’t get shredded on the spot.
I encourage my readers with military experience to correct any errors. Again, military weaponry is not one of my fields of study.
I would normally come up with a ponderous parody response to the parody that is the Zombie Rights Campaign (ZRC), but I’d thought that I’d spare everybody that for once. Besides, people know where I stand when it comes to the Undead Menace: I don’t have to spell it out.
PS: It really does get the general tone right of the sites that it’s parodying, though. Down to the ever-so-slightly smug hectoring. One wonders…
I always think that I sound weird and nervous in these. The first doesn’t bug me – after all, I am weird – but the second is not something that I can do anything about, besides do more things like these. Thirty minutes or so of very strange policy analysis on Breitbart’s B-Cast below:
Which you all know that I can’t resist commenting on. TAP’s Paul Waldman piece is here; Ace of Spades HQ’s Open Blog (Mætenloch) piece is here. Let’s get this out of the way: I agree with AoSHQ that Waldman’s done his homework, but I have to take major exception with his statement:
There are no highbrow zombie movies or novels, and admitting you love them amounts to a declaration that your tastes are unrefined.
It will all depend on how you define ‘highbrow’ – but I think that The Serpent And The Rainbow would qualify, as would 28 Days Later. Admittedly, the first is more Afro-Caribbean than the standard zombie flick, and the second breaks a lot of the conventions, so I may be on thinner ice than I like – but if Waldman can include The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari in his list, then I can use these two*. As to whether zombie films default liberal or conservative: well. They default to satirical, in my opinion; and you don’t want to end up getting too overtly partisan there. If you do, you end up making movies like Homecoming, which I cruelly mocked at the time (without even seeing**) as an inept attempt to use dead soldiers as mouthpieces for the antiwar movement (given that the living ones loudly declined the ‘honor’). There’s a lesson there, really.