Just watched the movie (yay for DVD rentals!) and I have to say:
WTF?
That movie has literally nothing to do with the book other than taking the basic premise to the exclusion of basically EVERYTHING else that distinguished World War Z from your everyday generic Zombie flick ... really the only thing that's tying the movie to the book is the portrayal of Israel's reaction and even then the movie completely screws it over with Isreal falling (le wut?). Oh wait, the UN HQ being settled on a fleet is accurate too. Yay, second thing that's from the book. Oh, and a very lose cameo of the doctor scene, make that three. That's it.
I have NO idea what the movie's point was now that it ended up being some random Zombie movie that basically had as much common with the book as it simply shares the same title.
What a cheap, borderline fraudulent viewer catch. I am soooo happy right now I didn't spend more than two bucks for the rental ... frankly speaking in itself the movie wasn't even good as a standalone. Plain characters, plain action, little to no eye-pretties to excuse for the nonexistant plot, no closure, hell the movie doesn't even have a proper setting establishment.
What a farce.
Literally the only satisfaction I got is this rant right here.
So, for anyone outthere that didn't watch the movie yet and was eyeing it because, well ... World War Z is in the title: don't.
Read the book again instead.
I was told (even from BSNers here, shows what they know) that the movie was different than the book in key aspects, that it made it's own canon.
That is an understatement bordering on a lie.
I say it again, the ONLY things of the book that are in this movie are the UN fleet, Isreal building walls, the doctor scene making a (changed) cameo and the damn title.
End of rant.
World War Z
Débuté par
Guest_Aotearas_*
, sept. 17 2013 04:47
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 17 septembre 2013 - 05:10
Liamv2
-
- Members
- 19 037 messages
Never read the book and had little interest the movie but thanks for the warning.
#3
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Posté 17 septembre 2013 - 05:37
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
-
- Guests
I kind of saw that coming when they made a main character and casted Brad Pitt as it.
#4
Posté 17 septembre 2013 - 05:51
Ren Roche
-
- Members
- 1 060 messages
Seen it. Pretty much boring and forgettable.
#5
Posté 17 septembre 2013 - 09:48
EarthboundNess
-
- Members
- 3 333 messages
I watched just the trailer and came to the same WTF conclusion.
Did those zombies just pile together to scale a wall? The hell?
Did those zombies just pile together to scale a wall? The hell?
#6
Posté 17 septembre 2013 - 09:53
The Love Runner
-
- Members
- 6 369 messages
It wasn't anything particularly special. I find it funny that they are thinking of making a sequel.
#8
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 05:19
Valdrane78
-
- Members
- 766 messages
I liked it. If you watch any of the special features they tell you, that this movie is not like the book. The book is written from many different perspectives months after the Zombie Wars. The premise of the movie is to "tie up the loose end." the one thing the author didn't do and no one in the book knew how, why or what it was that unified everyone and helped them fight back. this movie is based on that premise, and unwritten part of the book.
Think of it as.........This was what was happening behind the scenes during the entire event. If you look at it from that perspective, it all kind of makes sense.
Think of it as.........This was what was happening behind the scenes during the entire event. If you look at it from that perspective, it all kind of makes sense.
#9
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 05:34
Kaiser Arian XVII
-
- Members
- 17 283 messages
Is it more horrible than Dragon Ball the movie? Every canon was changed in that movie, I didn't even bother to watch it after 20 minutes (from TV).
#10
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 05:48
Fiddles dee dee
-
- Members
- 2 462 messages
mybudgee wrote...
Worst movie of the year easily
What about this excrement?
#11
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:04
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 742 messages
mybudgee wrote...
Worst movie of the year easily
Perhaps you should watch The Host, A Good Day to Die Hard, Planes, and Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters before saying such things. Because, damn.
WWZ is a perfectly watchable and occasionally stimulating zombie-pocalpyse flick that just so happens to have little in common with the source material. I'd much rather watch it than Land of the Dead or Diary of the Dead, for instance.
Modifié par dreamgazer, 18 septembre 2013 - 06:07 .
#12
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:06
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
-
- Guests
Kaiser Arian wrote...
Is it more horrible than Dragon Ball the movie? Every canon was changed in that movie, I didn't even bother to watch it after 20 minutes (from TV).
Might as well toss in The Last Airbender into the pile of crappy adaptations.
Seriously Hollywood, you have FANTASTIC source material. Just follow their scripts. You don't have to use your brains. I know it's difficult for you to use your brains, judging by this crap. Just copy the source material. It's not plagerism man. GAAAH
#13
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:07
HiddenInWar
-
- Members
- 3 134 messages
The book is one of my favorites. The movie, 6/10. At least it wasn't as bad as the Eragon adaption.
#14
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:11
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 742 messages
HiddenInWar wrote...
The book is one of my favorites. The movie, 6/10. At least it wasn't as bad as the Eragon adaption.
I really don't know if they could handle the episodic nature and gritty themes of the book in a way that mainstream audiences would appreciate. Hence why it got caught in development for so long and why the original ending was scrapped.
#15
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:14
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
-
- Guests
It's going to be a trilogy? Wow.
#16
Guest_Aotearas_*
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:15
Guest_Aotearas_*
Guest_Aotearas_*
-
- Guests
Valdrane78 wrote...
I liked it. If you watch any of the special features they tell you, that this movie is not like the book. The book is written from many different perspectives months after the Zombie Wars. The premise of the movie is to "tie up the loose end." the one thing the author didn't do and no one in the book knew how, why or what it was that unified everyone and helped them fight back. this movie is based on that premise, and unwritten part of the book.
Think of it as.........This was what was happening behind the scenes during the entire event. If you look at it from that perspective, it all kind of makes sense.
Yes, because the Doctor visiting a North Korean village instead of a Chinese one and Israel being invaded by the Zombies make perfect sense ... even though it directly contradicts the canon the book established.
Uhum, sure.
#17
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:20
Valdrane78
-
- Members
- 766 messages
Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...
Valdrane78 wrote...
I liked it. If you watch any of the special features they tell you, that this movie is not like the book. The book is written from many different perspectives months after the Zombie Wars. The premise of the movie is to "tie up the loose end." the one thing the author didn't do and no one in the book knew how, why or what it was that unified everyone and helped them fight back. this movie is based on that premise, and unwritten part of the book.
Think of it as.........This was what was happening behind the scenes during the entire event. If you look at it from that perspective, it all kind of makes sense.
Yes, because the Doctor visiting a North Korean village instead of a Chinese one and Israel being invaded by the Zombies make perfect sense ... even though it directly contradicts the canon the book established.
Uhum, sure.
Hey, don't get an attitude with me bub, I'm just relaying what the producers and everyone else said in the special features. You don't like it, that's fine I don't care. I do and I will enjoy watching it again.
#18
Guest_Aotearas_*
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:22
Guest_Aotearas_*
Guest_Aotearas_*
-
- Guests
Valdrane78 wrote...
Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...
Valdrane78 wrote...
I liked it. If you watch any of the special features they tell you, that this movie is not like the book. The book is written from many different perspectives months after the Zombie Wars. The premise of the movie is to "tie up the loose end." the one thing the author didn't do and no one in the book knew how, why or what it was that unified everyone and helped them fight back. this movie is based on that premise, and unwritten part of the book.
Think of it as.........This was what was happening behind the scenes during the entire event. If you look at it from that perspective, it all kind of makes sense.
Yes, because the Doctor visiting a North Korean village instead of a Chinese one and Israel being invaded by the Zombies make perfect sense ... even though it directly contradicts the canon the book established.
Uhum, sure.
Hey, don't get an attitude with me bub, I'm just relaying what the producers and everyone else said in the special features. You don't like it, that's fine I don't care. I do and I will enjoy watching it again.
I don't particularily care if you like the movie or not, that is your prerogative and none of my business. But what you just told me about what they think their movie is about is still bullsh*t, I just openly labeled it as such. Has nothing to do with you.
Modifié par Neofelis Nebulosa, 18 septembre 2013 - 06:22 .
#19
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:27
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 742 messages
"I was expecting to hate, it and I wanted to hate it because it was so different from my book, and yet the fact that it was so different from my book made it easier to watch because I didn't watch my characters and my story get mangled," Brooks says. "So I was just watching somebody else's zombie movie, which was fun and intense."
Many writers dread adaptations despite the attention and additional earnings that may come. "They watch their characters do things they would never do and say things they would never say," Brooks says. "It's infuriating. I never had a 'Gerry Lane-wouldn't-say-that moment because I didn't invent Gerry Lane (the film's main character played by Brad Pitt). In fact, the only character they kept from my book, Jurgen Warmbrunn, the Israeli intelligence analyst, he was actually pretty spot on."
Max Brooks pretty much enjoyed it, despite how different it was. USAToday.
#20
Guest_Aotearas_*
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:40
Guest_Aotearas_*
Guest_Aotearas_*
-
- Guests
dreamgazer wrote...
"I was expecting to hate, it and I wanted to hate it because it was so different from my book, and yet the fact that it was so different from my book made it easier to watch because I didn't watch my characters and my story get mangled," Brooks says. "So I was just watching somebody else's zombie movie, which was fun and intense."
Many writers dread adaptations despite the attention and additional earnings that may come. "They watch their characters do things they would never do and say things they would never say," Brooks says. "It's infuriating. I never had a 'Gerry Lane-wouldn't-say-that moment because I didn't invent Gerry Lane (the film's main character played by Brad Pitt). In fact, the only character they kept from my book, Jurgen Warmbrunn, the Israeli intelligence analyst, he was actually pretty spot on."
Max Brooks pretty much enjoyed it, despite how different it was. USAToday.
And what's he's actually saying right there is: "that's not my book they made into a movie, that's a movie about zombies and they placed a view references of my book in it".
Not a very endearing thing to say about what's officially marketed as an adaption.
And as I've said, the movie as standalone is bad:
No character establishment (we know he's Gerry, from the UN and went to dangerous places, that's it), other characters are bland and solely used to advance the action along with various asspulls (from where did his wife have the training on how to react during such catastrophies and why did she have flares with her?), no story establishment as the whole thing simply happens (one moment they drive to whereever like normal, next moment explosions (why explosions???) and Zombies).
I give it to the movie that from then on, it didn't make much blatant technical mistakes (other than completely messing up with the WWZ canon), but neither did it go to be an original movie with its own ideas ... it's a generic Zombie movie. No social criticism, no decent horror to enjoy, nothing, just Zombies.
The whole movie is about as mindless as the antagonist.
#21
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 01:56
Naughty Bear
-
- Members
- 5 209 messages
World War Z film was ****, typical American save the day/world. Yet to save the world, you have to give someone a terminal disease. The ****, so we all die anyway?
Modifié par Naughty Bear, 18 septembre 2013 - 01:57 .
#22
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 04:05
Addai
-
- Members
- 25 850 messages
The movie was your typical summer action flick. I didn't expect much and it was mildly entertaining, so no complaints from me.
I've only read a few chapters of the book, but that book in its episodic form was never going to make a movie. The movie shares with it the book's conceit of people fighting back and actually making gains against a zombie apocalypse- as opposed to stumbling around trying to outlive the walking dead- and the quirks in how different cultures and governments respond to a crisis.
I've only read a few chapters of the book, but that book in its episodic form was never going to make a movie. The movie shares with it the book's conceit of people fighting back and actually making gains against a zombie apocalypse- as opposed to stumbling around trying to outlive the walking dead- and the quirks in how different cultures and governments respond to a crisis.
#23
Guest_Aotearas_*
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 06:58
Guest_Aotearas_*
Guest_Aotearas_*
-
- Guests
Addai67 wrote...
The movie was your typical summer action flick. I didn't expect much and it was mildly entertaining, so no complaints from me.
I've only read a few chapters of the book, but that book in its episodic form was never going to make a movie. The movie shares with it the book's conceit of people fighting back and actually making gains against a zombie apocalypse- as opposed to stumbling around trying to outlive the walking dead- and the quirks in how different cultures and governments respond to a crisis.
Actually, the narrative form of the book would make for pretty easy movie adaptations with a few tricks.
Pulp Fiction is an episodic movie narrative too after all.
But the movie doesn't even try.
I could also get behind an outward perspective (like they say they did) if it only orientated itself on the established canon. Which, by the way isn't really hard because all those episodic interviews in the book do NOT have a set timeline other than "panic phase/fight back phase/clean-up phase", which makes for a pretty loose frame to work with to string up your movie's narrative in a consistent line.
The obvious choice I'd have made would have been following more than a single character, say one investigator type (like the movie character), one soldier type (to illustrate stuff like Battle of Yonkers or the reclamation of the american continent) and one survivor type.
Then switch between those three perspectives whenever the loose canon timeline warrants a change of perspective and violá.
But as it stands, that movie was just a quick money grab to milk off World War Z.
#24
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 10:50
Lord_Valandil
-
- Members
- 2 837 messages
dreamgazer wrote...
mybudgee wrote...
Worst movie of the year easily
Perhaps you should watch The Host, A Good Day to Die Hard, Planes, and Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters before saying such things. Because, damn.
WWZ is a perfectly watchable and occasionally stimulating zombie-pocalpyse flick that just so happens to have little in common with the source material. I'd much rather watch it than Land of the Dead or Diary of the Dead, for instance.
Witch Hunters was funny (for me, at least), not meant to be taken seriously.
WWZ...was a turd. More like, Brad Pitt's World Tour, featuring a military plane with a fuel tank that gets filled in seconds and lame CGI zombies looking like monkeys that ate too much sugar.
Don't even get me started on the Pepsi ad
#25
Guest_Aotearas_*
Posté 18 septembre 2013 - 10:53
Guest_Aotearas_*
Guest_Aotearas_*
-
- Guests
Lord_Valandil wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
mybudgee wrote...
Worst movie of the year easily
Perhaps you should watch The Host, A Good Day to Die Hard, Planes, and Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters before saying such things. Because, damn.
WWZ is a perfectly watchable and occasionally stimulating zombie-pocalpyse flick that just so happens to have little in common with the source material. I'd much rather watch it than Land of the Dead or Diary of the Dead, for instance.
Witch Hunters was funny (for me, at least), not meant to be taken seriously.
WWZ...was a turd. More like, Brad Pitt's World Tour, featuring a military plane with a fuel tank that gets filled in seconds and lame CGI zombies looking like monkeys that ate too much sugar.
Don't even get me started on the Pepsi ad
I actually liked that part. It was the one moment where the movie dropped all pretenses at trying to be serious. The absurdity of such blatant product placement made for better entertainment than the rest of movie altogether.
