World War Z

[Richards]

And I much prefer fast zombie over slow ones.

I consider "fast zombies" to be an oxymoron.

As for this movie, I'm with Umbran - I would have loved to have seen an actual adaptation of the original novel, and I'm kind of ticked that by basically stealing the name "World War Z" and grafting it onto a movie that is in no way, shape, or form anything like the novel "World War Z," I'm not likely to ever get to see a movie version of the "World War Z" novel. Which is a shame, because that was an excellent book, and it could have been an excellent movie. Part of the appeal is that it's such a mosaic; this is definitely not a story that should revolve around a specific, "star" character.

Oh well. Plenty of other movies coming up that look interesting. "Kick Ass 2" is out in two months; hopefully that will be good.

Johnathan

 

[Morrus]

I suppose a good analogy would be the Philip K. Dick movies/films. Total Recall, Blade Runner, I Robot, Minority Report.

 

[Umbran]

I suppose a good analogy would be the Philip K. Dick movies/films. Total Recall, Blade Runner, I Robot, Minority Report.

"I, Robot" is ASIMOV!

But yes, it is a good analogy. The saving grace for them is that I hadn't read Dick before seeing the films. I had read the Asimov, and while I did see the film, my excuse was that it was August, and I wanted an excuse to get a couple of hours in air conditioning.

 

[tomBitonti]

And for those wise-guys who might try to analogize to D&D editions, that fails in one major point: The people who make D&D are up-front that a new edition isn't the same as the old.

Major nit: Saying that you are doing something wrong doesn't make it less wrong.

But, to all: What did you think about the movie? Whether or not it's the same as the book is one thing, but the discussion has become an aside from the movie itself. Did you like it, would you recommend it?

I thought that it was an excellent movie. Worth noting: Gore is minimal. There are lots of good and creepy zombie close-ups. But if you want gore, you will be disappointed. (And to say: a lot of reviewers are in this camp, leading to lots of negative reviews.) The movie does have a goodly amount of suspense --

Spoiler

one of the earlier scenes in the building leading to the helicopter rescue gave me a good jump.

Also, the acting seemed to be quite tight. That's another negative to a lot of the reviews, but I thought it was refreshing to see tight character pieces, and to see less overdone presentations. I rather thought the actress playing the Israeli soldier (you'll know who I mean if you see the movie) did a good job.

One complaint that I had was that

Spoiler

the Israelis did not have observers on all points of the wall. And, that the zombies reacted strongly to sound seems like, duh, and should have been well noted by then. And wouldn't you put in a wider exclusion zone? A wall inside the wall. At the very least, an area free of people. (Maybe they were too short on space for that.)

Thx!

TomB

 

[The Gibbergeist]

Gonna see it next week, looks like fun!

 

[Derren]

I consider "fast zombies" to be an oxymoron.

They probably found no way to make slow zombies threatening in any form to the army. Against some ragtag band of survivers with no weapons and combat skill yes, but soldiers with high powered rifles?

Yeah, I know about the big battle in WWZ where the army gets soundly defeated but there was so much wrong with that scene that I can't take it seriously.
Generally I didn't like the book much. Too much caricatures in it. The blind japanese swordsmen and his computer addict pupil was simply too much. Not that many other characters or countries are better.

So, as the movie does not follow the book does that make it more watchable? After the reviews I think I will pass, too.

 

[sheadunne]

Watched it last night.

I felt that it took place in the same "universe" as the book, just told through a different character. There were plenty of visuals that met my needs for feeling that way. I didn't find myself comparing the movie to the book while I watched it though. It keeps a decent enough pace. Some of it was cheese though (the smelly untasteful kind) and I felt the ending was crap.

What bugged me about both the movie and the book equally is that one of the major points of the zombie genre for me is that eventually the zombies win (fast or slow). A zombie story isn't about stopping the zombies, it's about seeing how long you can survive before eventually you die. And a good story is one where the zombies are just part of the setting and the real conflict is between the humans in the story. Both the book and the movie pretty much ignored that.

Overall I'd say it was a fun movie but not very good (I felt the same about the 2nd star trek remake).

 

[ShadowDenizen]

Some really interesting thoughts here, and I agree with alot of what's been said.

I agree with @Umbran that this was a sort of bait-and-switch, and that the move bears little, if any, resemblance to the book. (Full disclosure: Though I appreciate what Max Brooks was trying to do, I was still somewhat apathetic about the book, to be honest, and thought it was wildly overrated.) Perhaps it did, at some point, but not in the final cut.

I agree with @Sheadunne this this movie utterly missed the defining things that characterize a movie, and that the zombies are really a setpiece to motivate the human drama. (That’s why, in almost any piece of zombie fiction, the zombies are able to eventually win due to the fractured nature of humanity and the actions of the humans.)

I agree with @Richards that a film that posits a “World War” cannot be told through the eyes of one person, who by necessity, sees only a tiny piece of the overall situation. (I think there are circumstances where it’s an appropriate format [“Saving Private Ryan”], but I would have preferred this to be either an anthology-style film, or perhaps told in the format of news reports/interviews?

I also agree that robbing the film of gore (and I’m NOT a torture porn enthusiast!) takes away some of the visceral threat of the zombies. Even when

Spoiler

Brad Pitt cuts off the hand of the army chick we don’t really get to see it, even when he’s bandaging her up!!

.

So, in case it’s not clear?
I loathed this move with every fiber of my being.

 

[Bagpuss]

Just seen, I liked it a lot. I've read the book, and I think it owes more to the book than people are giving it credit for.

The book was a different take on the zombie mythos. It was clear from the start of the book that humanity won the war, at a great cost, but they won. Previous zombie genre films and books tended to assume humanity loses, and concentrate on how the characters react in such a hopeless situation. The book was about how humanity survived, it is hopeful in it's outlook, and in human resourcefulness.

This isn't a horror film like other zombie movies this is an action movie, so it doesn't need or warrant the gore some think is missing. It doesn't need the claustrophobic environment with people turning on each other, that is traditional to the genre, it's about people helping each other.

You get the global scale through Brad Pitt's globe trotting, and get to see and hear how nations and various people have reacted to the plague. In a normal zombie horror film it is normally very localised, and it only hints that the rest of the world things are also going to .

As an action, race against time, type movie it works well, it is a new take on the zombie genre and I think breathes a bit of life into it.

One failing I think it does have is in the pacing of the third act, which is much slower and more claustrophobic than the first two acts, which were almost at break neck speed from the get go.

 

[Hand of Evil]

This isn't a horror film like other zombie movies this is an action movie, so it doesn't need or warrant the gore some think is missing. It doesn't need the claustrophobic environment with people turning on each other, that is traditional to the genre, it's about people helping each other.

This is very important and it seems the box office Mojo agrees:

In its second outing, World War Z fell 55 percent to an estimated $29.8 million. While that sounds like a steep drop, it's at least on par with big-budget Summer action movies and not in line with horror movies (which was the fear in some corners).