Horror Hypothetical: Where Would You Try To Survive?

A Star Trek-themed spoiler warning.

Spoiler Warning: Beware of spoilers for the films, games, and TV shows discussed below.

With Halloween rapidly approaching, I thought we could have a bit of fun by playing one of those “hypothetical question” games that you often see doing the rounds on social media. I’m going to choose one with a seasonally-appropriate horror theme, and try to go through a few possible answers, weighing up the pros and cons of each.

So what is this horror hypothetical, you rightly ask?

If you had to spend 72 hours (that’s three days) in one fictional universe from a horror property, which one would you choose? And, perhaps more pertinently: which horror franchise/universe presents the highest chance of survival?

Stock photo of two Jack-o-lanterns.
Happy Halloween!

Let’s lay down some ground rules – because rules are always fun, right?

In this scenario, I’ll have to spend 72 hours in one fictional universe of choice – and it has to come from a recognised horror film, TV series, or video game. Scary episodes or levels of non-horror properties don’t count – so there’s no trying to wriggle out of it by picking something like Star Trek: Deep Space Nine’s Empok Nor. We’re talking full-blown horror only!

Most stories take place in a larger fictional world – but it wouldn’t be *any* fun at all to pick, say, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre and say that I’d avoid it by catching the first bus out of town, or to say that I’d survive in the Alien universe by just never going into outer space. So we’re assuming, for the purposes of the hypothetical, that I’m dropped in the middle of the danger zone. Running away is possible – but only using the equipment and technology that we’ve seen depicted on screen, *and* that I’m reasonably confident I’d be able to use. So… no hijacking a nuclear bomb or anything like that!

Still frame from Star Trek: Strange New Worlds showing Hemmer as a zombie.
Argh!

I’m also going to assume that I’m in reasonably good health in these hypotheticals – which is categorically *not* the case in real life, unfortunately! But, again, it doesn’t seem like it’d be a lot of fun to have to take into account my limited mobility in every scenario. So, if you’ll indulge me, I’m going to assume I’m in better health than I actually am!

Finally, as I always like to say, everything we’re going to talk about is subjective, not objective. If you hate the horror franchises I’ve chosen, think I’ve totally messed up my survival, or just feel I’ve got the wrong end of the stick somehow… that’s okay! All of this is just a bit of Halloween-themed fun, at the end of the day. And since neither of us are ever going to be actually dropped into a horror franchise (well, fingers crossed), none of this really matters! It’s just for fun – and I share it with the interweb in that spirit.

I’ll talk a little bit about each scenario, then give it a survival chance at the end using a simple 1-10 scale, with one being the lowest chance of survival, and ten being the highest.

So with all of that out of the way, let’s get started.

Option #1:
28 Days Later

Still frame from 28 Weeks Later showing a zombie breaking in through a window.
A zombie.

28 Days Later redefined the zombie genre, and it was genuinely one of the most terrifying depictions of zombies I’d ever seen. Fast “sprinters,” able to infect people with a single drop of blood, and blinded by rage… this is gonna be a tough one!

For the purposes of our 72-hour survival challenge, the best thing to do would be to shelter in place, using whatever resources are available in the immediate surroundings. Venturing outside, especially in a large city the size of London, seems like it would be immediately fatal, so as long as I have some kind of shelter and hopefully some water or something else to drink, I’d try to hunker down, keep quiet, and stay away from any windows!

Still frame from 28 Days Later showing two zombies dying.
Dying zombies.

That being said, we’ve seen how aggressive 28 Days Later’s zombies can be, and how a small flicker of light or a seemingly innocuous sound can attract an entire horde. Assuming we’re in London or a similarly-sized urban area, and all we have for defence is the contents of the average house… I don’t think this is going to end well, to be blunt about it. One loud snore, one step too close to a window, or one candle at night would be all it’d take to send the zombies crashing through the windows and doors.

I deliberately chose 28 Days Later ahead of something like The Walking Dead because of how much more intense and powerful its zombies appear. But that could be what screws us over! If we get lucky and the hordes pass us by, I think sheltering in place for 72 hours is plausible. But if we run out of water and have to venture out, if our base is compromised, or if we make one small mistake… that’s all it’d take.

Survival Chance: 3/10

Option #2:
A Nightmare on Elm Street

Promo photo for A Nightmare On Elm Street showing Freddy Krueger.
Freddy Krueger.

Freddy Krueger has one major weakness: he can only hurt me in my dreams. If this was a “survive indefinitely” challenge, that would be a problem! But if I have to make it 72 hours… I reckon I could manage to stay awake. A combination of caffeine pills, energy drinks, and coffee should keep the spooky lil’ guy at bay!

But okay, that’s getting dangerously close to cheating territory, I suppose. There have been more Nightmare on Elm Street films and spin-offs than I thought, and it seems as if Krueger’s backstory and the source of his powers have changed since the original. But if we assume that Krueger is fuelled by his victims’ fear, as the first film depicted, then trying to stay calm will be the biggest obstacle. And all that caffeine we just chugged? That probably won’t help with keeping calm!

Still frame from A Nightmare On Elm Street 3 showing Freddy and Nancy.
Krueger and Nancy in one of the sequels.

I don’t think I’d be able to figure out all of the other stuff depicted in the sequels: things like purifying Freddy’s bones or staging a group hypnotherapy session in order to enter his world and take the fight to him! So my plan, to be honest, would really be to try to stay awake for as long as possible. 72 hours seems like a stretch – that’s three full days – but if the alternative is a violent and painful death… well, that’s a pretty good motivator.

If possible, I’d try to meet up with anyone else who might be one of Freddy’s targets. Perhaps by working together, we could develop a more solid strategy!

Survival Chance: 6/10

Option #3:
The Last Of Us
(Video game version)

Promo screenshot for The Last Of Us showing Joel fighting a clicker.
Fighting a clicker.

In this scenario, we survived the main event (or we were born after it) and we’re now a couple of decades into the post-apocalypse, as depicted in the main part of the story. For a 72-hour survival challenge, I’m torn between seeking out a safe zone, like Boston, where the first game starts, or simply finding an abandoned property and taking shelter.

In either case, I don’t want to spend much time on the road or travelling, as that seems like the time for the mushroom-zombies to strike! Finding a truly safe space outside of one of the established settlements or safe zones seems like it would be challenging, but trying to enter one of these places would also have its drawbacks. Some guards seem especially trigger-happy, so one wrong move (or sarcastic quip) could lead to a premature demise!

Promo screenshot for The Last Of Us showing a clicker on a red background.
We don’t want to run into any of these…

The video game version of The Last Of Us also showed how deadly fungal spores could be. Without proper protection, spores would quickly infect me and bring my run to an end – and I can’t rely on having access to a proper hazmat suit or gas mask! And knowing me, I’d struggle to get the damn things on in time even if I was lucky enough to have them. This side of things makes venturing anywhere pretty dangerous, not least derelict buildings which could hold clouds of cordyceps spores.

Perhaps the least-bad option would be to just… pitch a tent in a field somewhere and hope that you’re far enough away from the zombies to survive for three days? There are also scavengers and gangs to worry about, though. Being alone in this post-apocalyptic world wouldn’t be a lot of fun, that’s for sure.

Survival Chance: 4/10

Option #4:
The Thing

Still frame from The Thing showing a character holding a lit flare.
The Thing.

In The Thing, you’re trapped at an isolated outpost, unable to tell your friends from the creature, and… I think it’s gonna be a bad time! Unlike in other scenarios, going off alone and trying to hunker down won’t work; the Antarctic base is relatively small, and the creature seems to have a pretty good method of navigating it. Leaving the base, even if well-equipped, means facing Antarctica in the dark in the middle of winter… so I’m not making it 72 hours that way!

If possible, I’d try to organise the survivors into one group, occupying a “safe” room with resources, like the cafeteria. Taking shifts, so at least two or three people are awake at a time, I’d try to keep the creature at bay for as long as possible. But I have no doubt that the shape-shifting abilities would be a waking nightmare; not feeling 100% confident in trusting anyone would take a toll.

Still frame from The Thing showing a character using a flamethrower.
Kill it with fire!

With nowhere to run, the best way to survive 72 hours in this world would seem to be by befriending everyone at the facility and trying to stick together in one group. That means if there’s something to attend to outside of our safe room, the whole group goes. No one uses the bathroom alone, sleeps alone, or does anything alone. For someone who struggles with human interaction… that might not be the most fun I’ve ever had! But, as above, the fear of a violent death is a pretty good way to keep me motivated!

With all that being said, facing off against an intelligent and efficient predator like this, one with such a perfect ability to mimic animals and people… I don’t think the odds are especially high!

Survival Chance: 2/10

Option #5:
Alien

Still frame from Alien: Earth showing someone trying to hide from a Xenomorph.
Hiding from a Xenomorph.

In space, no one can hear you scream… so let’s *try* not to have to scream! I think our survival chances in the world of Alien improve significantly if we’re on the ground – a colony or settlement – rather than aboard a spaceship or space station. But either way, the Xenomorph is coming for us, driven by little more than a desire to feed and breed.

If we have enough room, I’d try to put as much distance between us and the infection site as possible. We could try to commandeer a vehicle – like one of the ground transports seen in Aliens. Or, if trapped aboard a ship, sneakily trying to use an escape pod might be a viable option. Remember, we just have to survive for 72 hours – so getting as far away from the Xenomorph as possible should be top priority!

Promo screenshot for Alien: Isolation showing the Xenomorph.
Alien: Isolation.

If escape isn’t an option, though, and we’re in a worst-case scenario aboard a cramped slow-moving spaceship, then I think – as the films and series have repeatedly shown – we’re pretty much screwed! If we catch the infection really early, and can kill the facehugger or infant Xenomorph, maybe things would look a lot brighter. But by the time we’ve passed the chest-burster stage and the little bugger has disappeared, our best bet is honestly to run to the escape pods.

I’ve recently been playing Alien: Isolation, and it’s genuinely one of the scariest games I’ve ever played – and perhaps second only to the original Alien film in terms of how terrifying the Xenomorph feels. Playing it was part of the inspiration behind this piece, as I honestly struggle to survive in the world of Alien – so it made me wonder which other horror properties might be equally as unforgiving!

Survival Chance: 2/10

Option #6:
Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Still frame from Buffy the Vampire Slayer showing two Season 1 vampires.
Vamps!

Gosh, where do we start with this one? There’s a lot more to Buffy than just vampires – so you can expect to be contending with werewolves, witches, ancient demons, and many other supernatural baddies! Honestly, just holding your own against vampires for 72 hours would be a stretch, but if other entities also join the hunt? This could be a very short challenge!

The flip side to all of that is, unlike in every other scenario we’ve examined so far, there’s a gang of people dedicated to hunting down and stopping the vampires and other creatures of the night. We wouldn’t even need to meet or befriend Buffy, Giles, Willow, or anyone else – if supernatural shenanigans are going down in Sunnydale, they’re probably already on the case. It might be too late for us if we’re the first victim of a new monster, but what are the odds of that happening in the first 72 hours?

Still frame from Buffy the Vampire Slayer showing the gang in the library.
The Scooby Gang.

Okay, you’re right – I guess seeking shelter at The Magic Box might not be a terrible idea! If we could make it there in the daylight, and explain we’re in danger… all we gotta do is hang out with the gang and wait! But if there’s no slayer, no Magic Box, and just a plethora of vampires and monsters terrorising Sunnydale… I think we’re in a lot of trouble. Stay inside, lock the door, and maybe try to get some kind of really strong UV lamp!

Because Buffy ran for seven seasons, the show sank its teeth into all kinds of monsters, vampires, and ghouls. Sunnydale is a very dangerous place, it would seem. If Buffy and the gang are there and willing to help, this could be a cakewalk. But if we’re unlucky and Buffy’s gone on vacation, we might’ve accidentally stepped into one of the most dangerous, monster-infested settings out there!

Survival Chance: 4/10
(8/10 with Buffy and co., 2/10 without)

So that’s it… for now!

Stock photo of Halloween-themed food.
Halloween snacks!

I hope this has been a bit of Halloween-y fun! I actually really like this “hypothetical question” idea, and it’s one I’d love to revisit in the future – both in horror and non-horror contexts. I’m already brainstorming more questions and scenarios to write about, so if you enjoyed this idea… watch this space!

But I suppose we should pick one of the six options, shouldn’t we, as the answer to the hypothetical posed at the beginning?

I think I’m still leaning towards A Nightmare on Elm Street. I’m confident that I could go 72 hours without sleep, even if it was 1984 and there were no energy drinks or caffeine pills, and all I had was coffee. I know it’s a bit of a sneaky answer, but the objective was to survive 72 hours in a horror setting – not defeat every demon and monster that inhabits it!

Still frame from A Nightmare on Elm Street showing Freddy and Nancy.
I’m choosing A Nightmare On Elm Street for this hypothetical!

So that’s gonna be my pick. Buffy the Vampire Slayer was tempting, but I think it’s only really survivable if you’re able to team up with the Scooby Gang as soon as you arrive. If you get to nightfall in Sunnydale without support – and without a place to hide – you’re toast. So A Nightmare on Elm Street it is.

As I think I said last time, this year, October has turned out to be a stupidly busy month, so I haven’t had time to write all of the horror and Halloween articles and columns that I’d originally planned. Such is life, I suppose! Some will undoubtedly have to go on the back burner until next Halloween. By the way, is that the first time you’ve heard someone talk about Halloween 2026?

Still frame from The Rise of Skywalker showing Rey and ghost Luke.
A spooky ghost!

As I said above, this piece was partly inspired by the video game Alien: Isolation, which I’ve been slowly working my way through. Trying to survive in that world is genuinely tense and terrifying, and it got me thinking about other horror settings and how long I might last! I think the basic ground rules made for a fun thought experiment, at any rate.

So if I don’t catch you again before the 31st, I hope you have a fun and appropriately spooky Halloween! If you missed it, I wrote up a list of five seasonally-appropriate TV shows that you might want to check out before Spooktober comes to an end – you can find that piece by clicking or tapping here. And if you want a more personal look back at some of my Halloween memories, I wrote about that a couple of years ago – you can find it by clicking or tapping here.

Happy Halloween, everyone!


All films, TV shows, and video games discussed above are the copyrights of their respective studio, broadcaster, distributor, developer, publisher, etc. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

Do We Really Need A Buffy Reboot?

In the ’90s and early 2000s, I was a pretty big fan of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The show felt fresh and different; taking horror villains and tropes but bringing them into a fun, modern setting. There was a great cast of characters, too, that changed and grew over time, and some well-executed longer arcs mixed in with plenty of episodic storytelling. There’s no doubt in my mind: Buffy was a great show.

I haven’t actually re-visited Buffy the Vampire Slayer since it was on terrestrial TV here in the UK. The final episode would’ve aired in late 2003, I guess, meaning I haven’t seen it in more than twenty years! Can I still call myself a fan of something two decades later? I don’t know… but I still consider myself a fan, at any rate.

The main cast of Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 2.

So why are we talking about Buffy today? The answer is simple, unfortunately: Buffy the Vampire Slayer is the latest series to be targeted for a resurrection by its corporate overlords. They’re hoping to add more content to Hulu – an unsuccessful streaming platform. A Buffy reboot is in the offing… and honestly, I think it sounds like a terrible idea.

When interviewed about the reboot – which is still at a very early stage – Sarah Michelle Gellar likened the show’s revival to the likes of Dexter and Sex and the City. Y’know… those notoriously successful reboots that everyone just adores. Given that several members of Buffy the Vampire Slayer’s old cast have retired from acting (or couldn’t be part of a reboot for other reasons), I think a more apt comparison would be something like Frasier. That show, which also had its heyday in the ’90s, was revived with only one of its main characters returning. And, as anyone could’ve predicted, it flopped.

Sarah Michelle Gellar (Buffy Summers) in 2024.
Photo Credit: IMDB/Getty

A reboot is not inherently bad in and of itself, but it has to be created for the right reasons. There have to be new stories to tell, something more to say, and a purpose beyond a corporate board and investors looking to make a quick profit. The streaming TV landscape is also oversaturated with attempted revivals of once-popular shows, as well as franchises trying to recapture their glory days. There’s much more limited room for manoeuvre for a Buffy reboot in 2025 than there might’ve been even a few short years ago.

If I recall correctly, Buffy’s seventh and final season came to an explosive end – but left the door ajar for potential future stories. But with many character arcs being complete, and with Buffy herself having literally been to hell and back, what kind of new adventures could she realistically get into? And with several characters dead and other performers no longer available, would fans be interested in half of a reunion? Would brand-new characters – who would need to be added to fill out the lineup – be as interesting or as welcomed by the returning fans that the reboot’s producers hope to entice?

Buffy at the end of the series.

There was a charm to Buffy the Vampire Slayer in its original form. It was something different on TV; soft horror that had a lot of the monsters but without crossing over into anything outright terrifying. It could be light-hearted and funny, but it was also serious enough in the way its characters were handled that moments of drama and tension still worked. The mix of episodic storytelling – a literal “monster of the week” – with ongoing story arcs and character development was also something rare on television at the time.

I don’t know how you replicate that today. With so many other horror shows on the air – from Stranger Things to The Terror and beyond – there’s a risk that Buffy the Vampire Slayer would seem tame or campy in comparison to some of those other offerings. Or, conversely, if Buffy was “updated” to be more violent and terrifying, really leaning into the horror angle, that the show would lose itself. Everything that made it unique would be erased; lost in the slop of big-budget streaming TV.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer didn’t need to rely on cheap jump-scares or gore to be entertaining.

Some films and TV shows work in context – but they’re very much anchored to the time and place of their creation. You couldn’t reboot Cheers in the 2020s – not successfully, anyway. It’s an ’80s show with an ’80s theme and tone, and it wouldn’t work if you tried to transpose it to a brand-new decade. I can think of plenty of others, too – from British classics like Fawlty Towers to big-budget American shows like Seinfeld. Some story premises are genuinely timeless… but others aren’t.

Is Buffy the Vampire Slayer in that category? Is it a show so inherently linked to the turn of the millennium that it couldn’t work in the 2020s? I fear it might be – and while I could entertain, perhaps, the idea of a complete reworking of the concept, with a brand-new cast of characters taking on a horror series with episodic elements, I’m not sure bringing back some of the original cast will work, either. Twenty-five years ago, Buffy and her friends were at high school and university. Now… what will they be doing? They’re all going to be in completely different places in life, and that would also take something important away from the series – part of its core identity.

Is Buffy too much of a late ’90s/early 2000s show to work in the 2020s?

I’ve been wrong about these things before, and if this reboot does go ahead, then I’ll probably at least take a look at the trailers to see whether it seems like it has a chance of being any good. But to me, it feels like the kind of utterly soulless project born in a corporate boardroom, not a genuinely organic creation. To bring back a series that already ran to 144 episodes across seven seasons, you need to find a reason for doing so – and some way to tell new stories that weren’t possible last time. I don’t see what those stories could be, and without key characters who were essential to the original show, as well as the school setting which did so much to keep things grounded and relatable… what’s left?

I look at the failure of many recent reboots – Dexter, Frasier, Roseanne, and even, to some extent, the likes of Star Wars – and wonder what fans of Buffy will make of this idea. Returning to the core concept might have some merit to it, though even then I’d probably argue that a new series, with new characters, would be less restricting and a better way to go. But bringing back a handful of characters, now in their forties or older, to revive this high school drama? I mean… doesn’t it seem like a bit of a stretch?

A Buffy reboot without most of its cast will likely go about as well as the Frasier reboot did under similar circumstances.

Having said all of that, I was pretty excited in 2019 and 2020 for Star Trek: Picard – a series which brought back the fan-favourite character from The Next Generation for a new adventure. So perhaps the Buffy die-hards will be just as thrilled at the prospect of her return as I was for Jean-Luc Picard. And maybe, if the reboot is a success, it’ll be more a case of passing the torch from one generation of vampire slayers to another – and those new characters could go on to expand the franchise.

There is room, I would argue, for more episodic television in 2025, and that’s what Buffy used to be. The biggest horror and horror-adjacent streaming shows today are wholly serialised affairs: From, The Walking Dead, The Last Of Us, etc. And there’s room for a show inspired by the success of Buffy the Vampire Slayer to go back to the format’s episodic roots instead of telling one ongoing story. I don’t know whether this planned reboot even intends to do that… but I think there could be space for a series like that. If there’s a gap in the market anywhere, it’s on the episodic side of things.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer may be back on our screens in the years ahead.

So I guess that’s where I’m at when it comes to this idea. Part of me hopes that it won’t go ahead at all; Buffy was such a unique and singular show that tainting its legacy with an uninspired, corporate reboot – which will probably be squashed into eight-episode serialised seasons that don’t suit the format – would be a disappointment. If it does actually enter production, though, my only hope is that the creative team genuinely understand what made Buffy work in the first place and work on the reboot with that in mind.

Will I watch an all-new Buffy the Vampire Slayer if it gets made? I think, at the very least, morbid curiosity will push me to check out the trailers and see how it looks. But I’m not optimistic about a reboot in the current media environment, and it feels like a project that’s been sharted out by a corporate leader in a suit who’s desperate to find “content.” That doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in the potential quality of the revived series! If it looks good and reviews well, though… who knows? Never say never, I guess.

Honestly, though, I think I’d rather leave Buffy in the early 2000s where it belongs.


Buffy the Vampire Slayer (the HD remaster) is available to stream now on Disney+ in the UK, and Hulu in the United States. The series is also available on DVD. Buffy the Vampire Slayer may be the copyright of the Walt Disney Company, Mutant Enemy Productions, and/or 20th Century Fox Television. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.