World War Z

[jellydonut25]

[The Real McCoy]

[klen7]

[jellydonut25]

A buddy of mine really wanted to see this, so I went along...

World War Z - what a f*cking travesty. how they turned THAT book into THIS movie escapes logical thought. Remember the scenes in the book where zombies dragged helicopters out of the sky? or climbed the walls built to keep them out? or swarmed like ants even building hills and towers out of each other? Yeah, neither do I. And remember those scenes that were actually in the book, where there were huge, failed battles against the hordes of undead who won out due to sheer numbers alone? or where we finally figured out a way to fight them effectively? or where Canada is turned into a wasteland? or where we learn the dangers of boats and islands? NONE of that is in this movie. I have ZERO idea why they even decided to call this World War Z...zombies are big enough right now that they could have just called it:

Brad Pitt's Zombie Fantastique - (my title for this) which is actually not a bad movie on its own merits. It has some ideas I've never seen in a zombie movie before, and some unique, creative points. AND the PG-13 rating, though harmful at times, almost seems to go to the movie's benefit at other times. Sure, it wasn't as visceral as it could have and should have been, but it also didn't waste unnecessary time just trying to gross me out and forced me to use my imagination at times with regards to the gore, which I appreciated. I was actually surprised that the best, most tense scenes of the movie weren't just giant action-fest effects-ridden scenes, but were actually a little more contained (I honestly really liked nearly everything that happened in the W.H.O. offices).

I get it, I get what they were trying to do and I understand that they wanted to do something totally different with the idea of zombies. Unfortunately, World War Z is exactly NOT the place to have done it...Max Brooks went out of his way in the book to show us how the "stereotypical zombie apocalypse" could happen, the long-lasting effects it would have not just on humanity, but on the ecosystem, and how humanity could ultimately win and continue on in a world where zombies exist. This is just a zombie movie that changes the typical formula, with mixed results. An enjoyable enough action movie, and a fun experiment, but a SH*T adaptation of the novel.

[Shin_Edda_Robo!!!!!]

[MouthForWar]

[Shonokin]

I dunno man. As someone who really appreciated the book and as someone who used to like zombie stuff, I don't really understand why this movie exists.

If it has nothing to do with the book then why is it called WWZ?

Of course I'm speaking outta my back side because I haven't seen it but to me, it seems to have nothing to do with the undead. Why is it a zombie movie when there is no real use of them AS zombies? What I mean by that is that the most effective and powerful elements of zombie media is the personalization of things that used to be human, used to be your friends and family, are now these horrible monsters that are out to get you. Distant shots of CGI globs of sandworm bodyparts is easily interchangeable with killer bees, gas clouds, rabid crocodiles, the blob, water, , etc.

[jellydonut25]

[Alpha OTS]

[Henry88]

[mr.negativity]

THR:



The successful debut of the zombie apocalypse tentpole marks the actor's biggest box office opening to date and could put him at the helm of his own studio franchise.

[Henry88]

[klen7]

[Pkmatrix]

I saw this yesterday. As others have said, it's NOT World War Z, it has just about nothing to do with the book beyond a few plot points that seem vaguely similar. That said, I went in knowing it would be nothing like the book and found it a good fun summer action/horror movie. It's genuinely exciting and tense at times - the sequences in Newark and at the WHO offices were great, IMO. There isn't as much CGI as people seem to think, it's not like they went the "I Am Legend" route and had all-CGI zombies for the whole movie. I also agree that Brad Pitt really sells this movie, he puts in a good performance and takes the role seriously enough that the audience is able to accept all of it without hesitation.

The theater I saw it at gave it applause. I'm not surprised its doing well, it's a good movie and deserves it. Really, I think everyone would've been happier had they come up with a different title since it ended up having so little to do with the book, but otherwise I'll give it a thumbs up.

[GhostMachine]

The biggest problem I've heard from people who have seen it (I haven't and don't plan to) is that they distilled everything down to happening over a week, rather than 10 years like in the book. Which makes the title stupid, if you think about it.

[jellydonut25]

[Pkmatrix]

[william newell]

[Henry88]

[ebirahsmeg1]

Honest Trailers- World War Z:



This was actually better and more entertaining than the film itself...

[Henry88]

$538,539,000
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=worldwarz.htm

[ebirahsmeg1]

HISHE: World War Z

[ebirahsmeg1]

CinemaSins: Everything Wrong with World War Z:

[Russzilla]

Not really into the zombie thing anymore as its kinda gotten stale to me. We watched this a few weeks ago. It was ok. My wife thought it was one of the best zombie movies she's seen in a long time though.

[jellydonut25]

Sequel is a go.
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/65410

Juan Antonio Bayona to direct. I've only seen one of his previous films, The Orphanage, which is a pretty good film, so hey, not a bad piece of news to start.