Spoiler Alert Saw World War Z

[swish7]

It received some tepid reviews, and the word on the street from the comic book geek crowd was no bueno.

I liked it. I didnt love it, but I certainly didnt hate it. This movie's job was to be a summer blockbuster, and it is satisfactory in that regard.

It is not going to end up in the upper echelon of Zombie flicks. However, I would place it in the top 7 of non-comedy zombie movies.

People might cry foul because it is not faithful to the book. I say there is no economical way to make movies out of that book.

I'm curious what others thought.

 

[moqui]

Seeing it tomorrow night . . . my expectations have been low since Max Brooks disavowed the film, but given the fact that most zombie films are actually terrible, it should still be plenty good enough due to the money they spent.

 

[jekelish]

I haven't seen it yet, but you're absolutely correct that there was no way to make a movie faithful to the book. I always thought it would work best as 10 part miniseries on HBO. Treat it like Band of Brothers in which you have "talking heads" with "survivors" being interviewed at the beginning of the episode to stick with the whole oral history conceit of the book, and then have the rest be about what happened in certain battles, etc. I think that could have been pretty amazing.

 

[moqui]

you are both correct that an exact reproduction of the book was not possible, but Brooks knows that, too, and that is not why he disavowed the film. Pitt and his team supposedly have made substantial changes not just to format but to the themes and basic foundations of Brooks' story.

Which is fine - it's a zombie movie that shares Brooks' title and little else. I'm disappointed that I don't get to see the cinematic interpretation of such a fun book, but I still get to see the largest budget zombie movie ever made.

My expectations are low because of other things I have read, which I won't go into until I see them (or not) for myself tomorrow night.

 

[jekelish]

My thing with this movie is that if it had any other title, I'd be really excited about seeing it, because I'll watch just about any zombie movie so one done on that scale with one of the biggest stars in the world is appealing.

I've actually read decent things about the movie, which just confirms to me that I'd probably like it (and I still may) if it wasn't called World War Z.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Guinness]

As a stand alone zombie story it was okay. Those who have not read the book will like it. It is the expectations the title brings that made is so very disappointing to me.

 

[moqui]

so, I liked it. mildly disappointing - one thing zombie movies are known for is gore, and this one kept the gore to a minimum. it was more of an action/adventure flick featuring zombies than a true zombie flick.

also, it was clearly made to appeal to a wide variety of foreign markets and maximize its overseas earning potential. Not unlike another Brad Pitt vehicle, Troy, which was considered a bit mediocre and somewhat disappointing at home, but was a massive international hit.

Saw the 3D version, and the 3D effects were nothing special and not particularly necessary. Save yourself a few bucks and see the 2D version.

 

[Guinness]

so, I liked it. mildly disappointing - one thing zombie movies are known for is gore, and this one kept the gore to a minimum. it was more of an action/adventure flick featuring zombies than a true zombie flick.

also, it was clearly made to appeal to a wide variety of foreign markets and maximize its overseas earning potential. Not unlike another Brad Pitt vehicle, Troy, which was considered a bit mediocre and somewhat disappointing at home, but was a massive international hit.

Saw the 3D version, and the 3D effects were nothing special and not particularly necessary. Save yourself a few bucks and see the 2D version.

SPOILER


There was a reason for the lack of gore (besides wanting the PG13 rating). They twisted the genre a by making the zombies faster and not having them bite people for food purposes. It was the virus forcing them to bite to spread itself instead.

I kind I like when stories change things up for the established norm a bit.

 

[moqui]

There was a reason for the lack of gore (besides wanting the PG13 rating). They twisted the genre a by making the zombies faster and not having them bite people for food purposes. It was the virus forcing them to bite to spread itself instead.

of course . . . but that doesn't explain the lack of highly graphic zombie destructions, which is an honored tradition in the zombie canon

and they didn't really twist anything - fast zombies/virus carriers is a sub-genre created by Danny Boyle and Alex Garland over a decade ago.

 

[Guinness]

of course . . . but that doesn't explain the lack of highly graphic zombie destructions, which is an honored tradition in the zombie canon

and they didn't really twist anything - fast zombies/virus carriers is a sub-genre created by Danny Boyle and Alex Garland over a decade ago.

I think they followed the canon about as much as they did the WWZ book. Like you said more of an action flick than a zombie one.