# World War Z



## Tyler (Jun 22, 2013)

From somebody who read the book, I actually enjoyed the movie greatly without disappointment. I wouldn't say its a spot on representation of the book but great nonetheless. It wasn't your normal kind of scenario movie and seemed like it flowed nicely and had a sense of reality throughout the entire film. Im definitely gonna try and see it again soon.


----------



## User Name (Jun 22, 2013)

i was somewhat dissapointed as the quthor of world war z is also the author of the zombie survival handbook. and the zombies in the movie and world war z book totally break the rules of zombies the author establishes in the survival handbook. 

the main one being that zombies cannot run, whereas in the movie they do.


----------



## Tyler (Jun 22, 2013)

User Name said:


> i was somewhat dissapointed as the quthor of world war z is also the author of the zombie survival handbook. and the zombies in the movie and world war z book totally break the rules of zombies the author establishes in the survival handbook.
> 
> the main one being that zombies cannot run, whereas in the movie they do.



That was the biggest deal I had a problem with if any. But at the same time I understand that they did it to spice the movie up. In the book the zombies move slow yet are terrifying, but I feel it would be hard to capture that feeling on film


----------



## User Name (Jun 22, 2013)

nellings6 said:


> That was the biggest deal I had a problem with if any. But at the same time I understand that they did it to spice the movie up. In the book the zombies move slow yet are terrifying, but I feel it would be hard to capture that feeling on film


true indeed, its all about the cinematic experience and really, a zombie movie where zombies just walk would kind of be ....ing lame haha.


----------



## Basti (Jun 22, 2013)

I still have to see it but I love zombies and my sis's godfather has a part so I'll be there fo sho


----------



## 7Heavyness (Jun 22, 2013)

Hmm...zommbie movies to me were always dumb and extremelly boring, everything predictable and.......boring(at least the ones I watched).
I hope this one will bring a new feeling about zombie movies to me.


----------



## Mexi (Jun 22, 2013)

check out warm bodies if you want a really different kind of zombie movie


----------



## 7Heavyness (Jun 22, 2013)

Mexi said:


> check out warm bodies if you want a really different kind of zombie movie



Thanks but that's not what I want.
I want evil, mean, strong and fast zombies, I want a zombie movie which is really scare and not a dumb joke like all I watched.
I'm still waiting for a more "real" Superman, with a mean side that crushes bad guys or something, I'm tired of "teletubbies mood" everywhere 
Bring on the dark side of everything 

I liked 28 Days Later mood but that end at that military place was a joke and ruined the whole movie, still until that part I was really liking it, mood was cool.


----------



## User Name (Jun 22, 2013)

Mexi said:


> check out warm bodies if you want a really different kind of zombie movie



zombie romance? thats not a genre!


----------



## 7Heavyness (Jun 22, 2013)

User Name said:


> zombie romance? thats not a genre!



Yep it is...another crap zombie genre


----------



## Bekanor (Jun 23, 2013)

User Name said:


> true indeed, its all about the cinematic experience and really, a zombie movie where zombies just walk would kind of be ....ing lame haha.



1991 Tom Savini remake of the original Night of the Living Dead. 

You're welcome.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 24, 2013)

User Name said:


> a zombie movie where zombies just walk would kind of be ....ing lame haha.


----------



## wrongnote85 (Jun 24, 2013)

i ....ing love you ^^^^


----------



## TheKindred (Jun 24, 2013)

More like World War ZZZZZZ .

Just didn't do it for me. So much build up and then no real climax. Left me with cinematic blueballs.


----------



## pink freud (Jun 24, 2013)

Are the special effects as bad as the previews make them seem?


----------



## ferret (Jun 24, 2013)

Not that's I'm opposed to Brad Pitt running around shooting zombies.


----------



## baptizedinblood (Jun 25, 2013)

Just saw it last night, solid film, nothing in common with the book though.


----------



## GizmoGardens (Jun 25, 2013)

Did it bother anyone that it was PG-13? I want to see it, but I'm afraid it's going to be soft because of the rating.


----------



## KevHo (Jun 25, 2013)

I have such expectations that I am sure I will be disappointed when I get to see it.


----------



## Big_taco (Jun 25, 2013)

It was very middle of the road. I love the book and went in to the movie knowing it would have very little, if nothing, in common with the book. That said I didn't hate it but it had some major flaws such as a weak as shit second and third act, bad pacing, no character development, and ZERO gore. I'm not a gore hound, this movie needed some of it to add to the terror of the zombies it presented. They crammed way to much into an hour and a half ish movie, although I understand why a studio wouldn't gamble $100 and something million on a three hour global zombie epic. Outside of Brad Pitt you are given no characters to really care about, not even his family. None of the books themes really come into play such as the unity, depravity, or politics of the war. There are references and a few lines sprinkled through out that fans of the book will pick up on but they are blink and you miss them moments. 

That all said, I did think that epic zombie shots were amazing like Israel and the opening scene. Plus the montage shots at the end, that I'm thinking some of had played into the original third act that was reshot. Also, as an action movie it doesn't really suck, it isn't terribly original, but it doesn't suck. It just could've been so much more. 

Maybe I did hate it kinda but not as much as I thought I would.


----------



## Wings of Obsidian (Jun 25, 2013)

Big_taco said:


> It was very middle of the road. I love the book and went in to the movie knowing it would have very little, if nothing, in common with the book. That said I didn't hate it but it had some major flaws such as a weak as shit second and third act, bad pacing, no character development, and ZERO gore. I'm not a gore hound, this movie needed some of it to add to the terror of the zombies it presented. They crammed way to much into an hour and a half ish movie, although I understand why a studio wouldn't gamble $100 and something million on a three hour global zombie epic. Outside of Brad Pitt you are given no characters to really care about, not even his family. None of the books themes really come into play such as the unity, depravity, or politics of the war. There are references and a few lines sprinkled through out that fans of the book will pick up on but they are blink and you miss them moments.
> 
> That all said, I did think that epic zombie shots were amazing like Israel and the opening scene. Plus the montage shots at the end, that I'm thinking some of had played into the original third act that was reshot. Also, as an action movie it doesn't really suck, it isn't terribly original, but it doesn't suck. It just could've been so much more.
> 
> Maybe I did hate it kinda but not as much as I thought I would.



I am going to concur with Big Taco here.

I do professional film reviews for a local paper/magazine, so here is my take.

_In my opinion, World War Z, as a stand-alone film by itself, was ....ing phenomenal!!! This was due to the wide variety of complex shots, unrelenting suspense, and the wonderful use of clearly well-practiced stunts. This film is a well-executed piece of cinematography (again, as a stand-alone film). Sure, people are complaining because the film is so divergent from the book, (and in fact, the two stories have almost nothing in common). However, the reason the screen-writers adapted the film into the screenplay the weird way that they did was merely so that the film could be turned into an ultra-fast-paced action/adventure summer blockbuster as opposed to a slow, churning "oral history of the zombie apocalypse" horror flick. Personally, I think the visual effects were top-notch, but I would have liked to see A TON more blood and gore. (They could have done wonders in that department). But then again, keeping it minimal and rated at a mere PG-13 level ensures the summer blockbuster status of the film since kids would be able to openly see it. (Excess blood and gore would have made the film too damn close to 28 Days Later though...)"_

So, yes, Big Taco, I agree with you. I, however, am a gorehound.


----------



## UltraParanoia (Jun 27, 2013)

It remains my movie of the year...so far.


----------



## Edika (Jun 27, 2013)

Another movie I could have lived without seeing but didn't hate. I haven't read the book so I didn't have any expectations. As an action movie it was ok, didn't really develop the plot that much or as other people have mentioned the characters. It was scary as the creatures were really fast but they just bit to infect and nothing more. I haven't seen that many zombie movies as I am not a horror fan but this was no horror movie. it was a stressful movie.


----------



## Wings of Obsidian (Jun 29, 2013)

TheKindred said:


> More like World War ZZZZZZ .
> 
> Just didn't do it for me. So much build up and then no real climax. Left me with cinematic blueballs.


 
Agreed in a sense.

I was expecting a massive death or massive explosion, "then" they find the cure or something as the falling action after the climax.


----------



## Wings of Obsidian (Jun 29, 2013)

Edika said:


> Another movie I could have lived without seeing but didn't hate. I haven't read the book so I didn't have any expectations. As an action movie it was ok, didn't really develop the plot that much or as other people have mentioned the characters. It was scary as the creatures were really fast but they just bit to infect and nothing more. I haven't seen that many zombie movies as I am not a horror fan but this was no horror movie. it was a stressful movie.


 
Read my words above. This CLEARLY, and again I repeat, CLEARLY is NOT a horror movie. This was an action/adventure movie with a bit of suspense thrown in for good measure because the climax is...well...finding a cure for the infection...not some massive explosion or death like in other action/adventure flicks. (i.e. - they couldn't think of anything else to do other than throw in some suspense.)


----------



## Basti (Jul 1, 2013)

"ZOMBIE" looks pretty good...is it?


----------



## UltraParanoia (Jul 1, 2013)

Basti said:


> "ZOMBIE" looks pretty good...is it?


 
It is mandatory zombie movie viewing


----------



## Demiurge (Jul 3, 2013)

Just came back from seeing it. Despite being totally past my saturation point with zombies in pop culture, I liked it as a "turn the brain off and enjoy the action scenes" movie.

One of my quibbles:


Spoiler



Dreamboat Brad comes to the conclusion that the zombies avoid people that appear to be in poor health, and one example was the soldier in Korea that got out of a zombie skirmish unharmed because he had a minor limp from a bum ankle. Okay, so if the zombies are that picky, then wouldn't Brad's grotesque abdominal wound (btw, who of those clinical lab people doubled as a surgeon and closed him up?) count for something? Maybe that's splitting hairs... especially in the "fast zombie" genre where undead muscles and tendons become athletically limber, so we might as well be talking about the science of black magic.


----------



## Tyler (Jul 3, 2013)

Demiurge said:


> Just came back from seeing it. Despite being totally past my saturation point with zombies in pop culture, I liked it as a "turn the brain off and enjoy the action scenes" movie.





Spoiler



I like to view them more as the 28 Days Later type zombies where they arent necessarily "dead" but filled with rage more so. Sort of makes me feel better about the science of it all from the survival guide when it comes to the muscles breaking down and such.


----------



## Demiurge (Jul 3, 2013)

nellings6 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I like to view them more as the 28 Days Later type zombies where they arent necessarily "dead" but filled with rage more so. Sort of makes me feel better about the science of it all from the survival guide when it comes to the muscles breaking down and such.



That definitely makes more sense in the given context, but


Spoiler



if the zombies are still clinically alive, they still have metabolisms and would/should succumb to fatigue, starvation, or even the end-stage of whatever disease they have.


----------



## wankerness (Jul 4, 2013)

You know that a movie has failed to hold your interest when you spend all your time wondering about zombie biology during it


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Jul 4, 2013)

I saw it 2 days ago and thought the plot was stupid. Overall, it was just OK. But i went to see it because i loved wwz the book. This had nothing in comon so it was really a cheap cash grab IMO.


----------

