Movie Defense Force: World War Z - Despite The Title, A Great Zombie Flick

Razorback0z

New member
Feb 10, 2009
363
0
0
Same as Jim I avoided watching it because I had heard it was crap. I too was pleasantly surprised and not for the first time recently found myself thinking, "what do people expect". I think people are starting to expect a little much and considering we keep telling each other not to fall for the hype, you have basically no one to blame but yourselves for disappointment in most cases.
 

Hunter Creed

New member
Jun 27, 2012
10
0
0
Fayathon said:
Avaholic03 said:
Don't think of it as a virus giving super human abilities then, are you are aware that humans in general are a hell of a lot stronger than we show, but it's due to innate mental blocks that we never really get to use the full extent of our strength. It's for our own good though, as our full strength can do massive damage to our bodies if we were just to use it all the time.
Okay, can you source that? Because that sounds like horse shit.

When I was in high school, a mate of mine told me; 'You know, there is some old woman who is, like, a mental or something. And they have to lock her up right. Because she is super strong. Not cause she works out or nothing, but because she doesn't have the mental block that stops us from using our super strength. They wrapped her in iron chains and she ripped them apart'.

I make him sound stupid, but he was a smart guy. Now if I'm wrong, then I guess I've been looking at him like a tool for damn near a decade.

Hunter C. Creed
 

Scorpid

New member
Jul 24, 2011
814
0
0
I actually disagree with Jim here. The movie does infact resemble the source material but not the aspects of the source material people really remember. The 1st act of World War Z the book was more action oriented. With panic spreading around the globe, the Military and governments trying but failing to contain the outbreak or at least keep order, zombies literally breaking through windows of family homes that thought "it won't come here" and individual people saving one another in a moment of crisis when they didn't have to.
Plus it had the journalistic moments where Brad Pitt sits down with people to get their stories. I think people are mad at the film because it wasn't as world building as the book but it was as much as it could be while still being able to be in film format. People would only be happy if it was a TV series with each one to three episodes being some persons story but than whats the point of a adaptation if you just transpose the events and characters exactly and faithfully as you can from the source material to the new media. Just read the damn book if you want that.
Personally I thought they did great work with what they had and they could of easily phoned it end and made tons of money with much less inspiration.
 

OneCatch

New member
Jun 19, 2010
1,111
0
0
Avaholic03 said:
I watched this movie (the unrated version on Netflix) last weekend, and I pretty much agree with you on all your points. The only real problem I have with this movie (and I had the same problem with 28 days later, I Am Legend, and other similar movies) is that I have a tough time suspending disbelief that a virus would actually give people super-human strength and speed. It's not that I'm some slow-zombie purist or anything, it just doesn't seem scientifically sound.
See, I always thought that fast infected were rather more plausible - I always figured any virus which degraded the body to the extent that it would stop slow zombies from running or climbing would also stop them from being able to co-ordinate basic movements, or even staying upright. Fast zombies make somewhat more sense because the idea is that their nervous system is entirely intact and functional - the virus has just reprogrammed them to attack people, in the same way that other illnesses can cause (admittedly less severe) behavioural modification, eg rabies.

In 28 Days they're basically like humans which are entirely unconcerned with pain or danger, but they aren't actually stronger than they would have been alive (the humans do manage to kill a few hand-to-hand).
I do agree that they're slightly OP in World War Z - I think they could have made the individual zombies slightly less agile (less of the midair tackling and general bullet resistance) while still maintaining the whole 'Ant Hive/Tsunami of the Undead' thing they had going on.
Still thoroughly enjoyed WWZ though - and it ends near where I live! (spoiler; We don't actually have a topsecret WHO research centre in the Valleys unfortunately).
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
My brother, knowing how much I loved the book, didn't even tell me the name of the movie until after I watched it. He just called it "some zombie flick". And it actually was a decent zombie movie. I have no idea why they didn't just call the movie something else and film an actual movie based on the actual book, where the story of the infection is told through flashbacks during interviews that the reporter is doing around the world. Then, this movie would be called, I dunno, "Infection" or something like that (Hey, I'm not a writer) and the actual movie would be called "World War Z".
 

Fayathon

Professional Lurker
Nov 18, 2009
905
0
0
Hunter Creed said:
Fayathon said:
Avaholic03 said:
Don't think of it as a virus giving super human abilities then, are you are aware that humans in general are a hell of a lot stronger than we show, but it's due to innate mental blocks that we never really get to use the full extent of our strength. It's for our own good though, as our full strength can do massive damage to our bodies if we were just to use it all the time.
Okay, can you source that? Because that sounds like horse shit.

When I was in high school, a mate of mine told me; 'You know, there is some old woman who is, like, a mental or something. And they have to lock her up right. Because she is super strong. Not cause she works out or nothing, but because she doesn't have the mental block that stops us from using our super strength. They wrapped her in iron chains and she ripped them apart'.

I make him sound stupid, but he was a smart guy. Now if I'm wrong, then I guess I've been looking at him like a tool for damn near a decade.

Hunter C. Creed
Don't have one off hand, but I'll dig until I do, give me a little bit. It's just one of those tidbits I find fascinating about us humans but I never seem to keep where I got the info from on hand, you know?

EDIT: http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/arts/circus-arts/adrenaline-strength1.htm

Link cites multiple studies at the end, and it's an interesting read.
 

Hunter Creed

New member
Jun 27, 2012
10
0
0
Fayathon said:
Hunter Creed said:
Fayathon said:
Avaholic03 said:
Don't think of it as a virus giving super human abilities then, are you are aware that humans in general are a hell of a lot stronger than we show, but it's due to innate mental blocks that we never really get to use the full extent of our strength. It's for our own good though, as our full strength can do massive damage to our bodies if we were just to use it all the time.
Okay, can you source that? Because that sounds like horse shit.

When I was in high school, a mate of mine told me; 'You know, there is some old woman who is, like, a mental or something. And they have to lock her up right. Because she is super strong. Not cause she works out or nothing, but because she doesn't have the mental block that stops us from using our super strength. They wrapped her in iron chains and she ripped them apart'.

I make him sound stupid, but he was a smart guy. Now if I'm wrong, then I guess I've been looking at him like a tool for damn near a decade.

Hunter C. Creed
Don't have one off hand, but I'll dig until I do, give me a little bit. It's just one of those tidbits I find fascinating about us humans but I never seem to keep where I got the info from on hand, you know?

EDIT: http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/arts/circus-arts/adrenaline-strength1.htm

Link cites multiple studies at the end, and it's an interesting read.
Thanks. Looks like I've been a giant cock, thinking that guy was a nutter for 10 years. Never told him directly, so I guess there isn't anything to apologize for.

And you're right, an interesting read indeed. Thanks for the link. Have a good one.

Hunter C. Creed
 

xGrimReaperzZ

New member
Dec 8, 2013
28
0
0
Yes, maybe it IS a GOOD zombie movie COMPARED to the ones we've been getting, but it's still a movie that had a rushed plot and an extremely unsatisfying and rushed ending.

And i'm not saying that because i'm a fan of the book, i actually never read or heard of the book prior to watching this movie.

I don't think that it's fair to say that this crap is good, because i've only been able to have worse in the past 6-10yrs.

And if you're judging the movie based on its entertainment value then, yes, it's not a terrible flick, but it's not good, it's just decent.
 

Vareoth

New member
Mar 14, 2012
254
0
0
Nope, I'm sorry.

I was willing to accept the movie up to the point where the zombies defied physics and climbed anthill-style over a gigantic concrete wall. Suspension of disbelief can only go so far and mine most certainly ran out at that point. As such I turned it off with many feelings of disgust lingering.

Damn this movie.

Sleekit said:
btw guys...there is an audio book of World War Z...and its supposed to be really, really good...

check out the cast list...

seriously.
I fucking love the audio book. The new version released in 2013 is supposedly unabridged in contrary to the 2007 version and it's 12 hours long. And, since I didn't know they made a longer version until just now, I feel a bit daft...
 

PedroSteckecilo

Mexican Fugitive
Feb 7, 2008
6,732
0
0
I dunno... the logic in the film broke down too often for me.

The Zombie Climbing Scene in Isreal was cool... but are we to assume that in a chaotic refugee camp NOBODY has made enough noise to attract the zombies before? Did the massive horde waiting just outside the walls wait until Brad Pitt got there to flood over?

Same thing on the plane to Cardiff, it takes 12 seconds for the zombie infection to take hold (established in the movie) and nobody on a crowded ass plane during a 6 hour flight walked past that zombie holding closet? Nobody? It waited until they were specifically over the exact country they needed to be in to spring out on an unsuspecting passer by and force the plane to crash?

Other than that if you ignore the connection to the book it was a pretty fun watch.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
This movie was so dreadfully boring after the initial scene, and even then it was a sign of things to come from the movie.

If there's one thing I hate about people's complaints about these kind of movies, it's that "Oh these characters are so stupid, why didn't they blah blah blah and yada yada yada", and my response is that it's because that's what that CHARACTER would do. Yeah, in a lot of these zombie/apocalypse movies, people fuck up and make the wrong decisions because they're PEOPLE. Flawed, normal human people that are trying to figure out what to do in incredibly fucked up situations. Everything they knew about life is completely gone, so maybe their rational thinking JUSSST bit be off a tad bit, you know what I mean? If all we did was follow around the ultra-competent, cool-under-pressure, I-make-every-right-decision-almost-as-if-I-read-ahead-in-the-script guy, that would make for a bad, boring character....

Hmmm...

This movie just Brad Pitt playing generic Brad Pitt doing a buncha Brad Pitt things where every good thing that could possibly happen to him conveniently falls right into his lap, and the conflict of the movie is tied up in a nice easy bow. There's NOTHING to his character. What little we had with his relationship with family gets undercut when they're unceremoniously kicked out of the movie, stuck on that damn boat doing a whole lotta nothing. Even some minimalist character development showing how life is for them on the boat or something would at least give them SOME purpose and humanity. But other than some cliche Wuvvy Duvvy phone conversations between Pitt & the wife, there ain't shit going on with these characters. I don't care how much action you have (which honestly isn't even all that impressive on its own either), if you don't have good or at least decent characters, I'm going to mentally check out of your story. That's the #1 killer of any movie, especially in zombie movies.

Speaking of which, this and other "action zombie movies" miss the entire point OF the zombie genre to begin with, another thing that irks me when people complain about zombie movies. The speed of the zombies DOES NOT MATTER; what matters is that they're SOOOOO goddamn many of them that they're nigh impossible to escape from. Most zombie stories are ultimately tales of inevitability; that no matter how hard you try, they're GOING to overwhelm you and get you sooner or later. The zombies are a force of nature that you just can't beat. As the famous Walking Dead quote goes, "Don't you get it? We ARE the walking dead! WE are the walking dead.? But at least 28 Days Later and the 2005 Dawn of the Dead got that much right with their unhappy/ambiguous endings; in WWZ everyone lives happily ever after as there's just...nothing to chew on about any of what we just saw.

Generic boring action movie is generic and boring.
 

Mr.Evil

New member
Jul 17, 2014
19
0
0
Despite being a big fan of the World War Z book, I did try to judge the movie on its own merits. And... I felt nothing. Seriously, it just wasn't that good. Too many clichés, too many CGI swarms that looked too fake, too many questionable character moments. I know that disaster films aren't considered to be all that smart, but zombie flicks? Stuff like Night of the Living Dead, 28 Days Later, and Shawn of the Dead demonstrate that you can make good smart zombie flicks and don't have to settle for lesser creatures such as this movie. As for disaster flicks... well...

But what irritates me more than the movie's piss-poor attention to the book is the fact that THIS is going to be the de facto movie version of World War Z for the foreseeable future. I suppose it's always possible that someone will make a TV series or a new adaptation down the road (in fact, I'd bet money on it, considering how Hollywood hates taking risks these days), but it just sucks to all get out that a lot of people's idea of World War Z will be this generic disaster movie with zombies in it. The book was a lot more than just zombies - it's too bad that all Hollywood sees is dollar signs... as usual.
 

Deadcyde

New member
Jan 11, 2011
187
0
0
it's a passable movie if you think of it as "brad pitt and zombies"

but it's certainly no world war z
 

gamegod25

New member
Jul 10, 2008
863
0
0
Sorry but no, you couldn't be more wrong in my opinion. Taking the name out it is still a boring action movie that happens to have zombies in it. There is no horror or terror because you have no reason to care about anyone or anything. Pitt survives his own stupidity though plot immunity BS and his family is taken out of the equasion early so there is no danger to them. There are so many stupid things in it I could go on for days. It shats on the book in favor of wanking off Brad Pitt's ego with this stupid and dull load of garbage. How you could derive any entertainment from it is beyond me.
 

Deadcyde

New member
Jan 11, 2011
187
0
0
c'mon, you have to give some fantastic leeway. The zombies themselves were physically impossibru
 

lukesparow

New member
Jan 20, 2014
63
0
0
I still cannot get over the scene where the Zombies all climbed the wall because of all the noise people within the wall were making.
It was just so stupid!

If you've got yourself a walled-off city in a post-apocalyptic setting you better damn well make sure you've got things regulated within!
But no, let's just start making some noise! It's not like the zombies, who're exclusively attracted to specifically that will try and get us!