I also liked it. Maybe it helped that I haven’t read the book.
I will echo the sentiment that the first half of the movie, or so, is the best part. It might just be my personal bias, because I’m a sucker for fiction about societal breakdown. Overall I liked it. I didn’t follow any of the production, so I had no idea there was supposed to be an epic battle in Moscow. It is kind of disappointing to hear it was cut.
I like it, not loved it, but liked it. It has very little to do with the book, did the book have enough name recognition to help sell tickets, or did the film start off as something that resembled the book?
I have the same complaints as the other few people that have liked it, but it’s decent.
So, none of the ‘questionable’ things that happen in all the countries? The whatever plan in South Africa? None of that stuff?
Sigh. I’m not big into horror writing, and as prose WWZ isn’t high art, but it is fun as hell as a read.
The movie has a certain tone, fast paced summer thriller, and so does not contain the very grim elements of the WWZ book. The Redeker Plan(S Africa) and the story of the family going up north being two examples of material that would not have fit in this movie. If they ever decide to go more the horror route with the sequel then I bet they’ll find a way to work that kind of stuff in there.
Liked the movie well enough to be glad I saw it. Pitt was excellent as always as was most of the rest of the cast. Very disjointed narrative. Loved the “Ravenholm” feeling of the scenes at the W.H.O… That was where the new zombies worked the best IMHO.
Since my chances of seeing this at the theater are almost nil, I went ahead and spoiled the heck out of the movie for myself. All I can say is, it would need to be a stunning visual epic to undo the damage done by the terrible, terrible plot. I always enjoy Brad Pitt but this reads like absolute dreck.
Biggest ever opening for Brad Pitt. $66 million.
Came in second to Monsters U.
Not great. Watchable, but that was about it.
The last zombie’s chattering at Mr. Pitt through the glass had the audience tittering. Bad sign when the audience is giggling and your zombie movie is trying to play things straight.
I wanted WWZ but got The Day After Tomorrow: Zombies
I was laughing at that zombie too, but I thought he was awesome - one of my favorite parts of the movie.
I thought the movie was okay overall. It starts out as a disaster flick and becomes a zombie movie in the last act. Something felt wrong about having a PG-13 zombie movie and the overuse of CGI was obscene. Even though the scenes at the WHO were the best of the movie, I thought it felt more like a middle act than an actual climax. It just kind of fast forwards to a “To Be Continued” when I felt there was potential for a much more interesting and dramatic resolution in his trial of the “vaccine.”
I loved the book. I thought the movie was good.
I also liked the movie and give it 7/10. It needed another 30 minutes in my opinion. I also read and like the book as well.
On the 7-9 scale, 7 is “fairly bad.”
I believe he meant that in the fullest Chickian sense.
This is by far the biggest copout of the movie. I was really anticipating that what Pitt’s character had in mind was to use the terminal illness as a way to sneak into a heavily zombie-dense area to find Patient Zero or some other viable vaccine/cure/thing, because it clearly wasn’t a viable mass production solution to the problem but a dying Pitt navigating through the carnage of a zombie infestation would have been dramatic, tense, and cool. Instead we get a tiny fraction of that in his exit from the WHO B Wing (not even any visible signs of sickness), and then boop, he’s cured and they’ve somehow mass produced this into a “camouflage vaccine” that they’re distributing to everyone as a harmless way to make them invisible to zombies, which is patently ridiculous and makes no logical sense even given the suspension of disbelief required to support the zombies in the first place. Oh, and it’s the end of the movie and the hero and his family are all totally fine. Okay. Sure.
I liked most of the rest of the movie in that I felt the individual scenes were well shot, tense, nicely acted for the most part, and gave a general sense of things falling apart that I really appreciate in an apocalyptic scenario. The plotting was pretty bad, though, and there were occasional “c’mon, really?” moments like the plane crash that Pitt and (gorgeous) Israeli girl survive just fine, or the fall of Jerusalem just -happening- to happen as Pitt’s there at the wall, etc. And like I say above, that ending. Fuck that ending.
World War Z needs a fake documentary, though. It’s clearly the way to handle the material. Not a summer blockbuster action movie.
Saw it this weekend; enjoyed it, but it felt like three very different movies stitched together into one Frankensteinian monstrosity. The first act could’ve come from any world-gone-MAD! disaster flick: something terrible happens, social order breaks down, people scramble to survive, etc.; it could’ve just as easily been the alien invasion from “War of The Worlds” or the super-flu from “Contagion.” The second act was an extended (and ultimately superfluous) globe-trotting McGuffin hunt crossed with a monster movie like “Aliens” or “Starship Troopers;” teeming hordes of sprinting monsters overwhelm defenses & charge thru weapons fire, decimating humanity through sheer momentum. The final act is the only one which feels like a true zombie flick: small band of survivors, barricaded against zombie horde, forced to forage for supplies (or in this case to test a potential cure); mandatory stealth sequence with inevitable screw-ups, etc.
I found each act enjoyable on its own, but taken as a whole it made for a . . . disjointed narrative. But whatever - I had fun, despite the eye-rolling final 5 minutes, which is all that matters for my $6.50.
Where the hell are movies $6.50 instead of $18?
Minnesota, for one. At least at some theaters during matinee/Monday through Thursday. If I had to pay $18 for a movie ticket I would stay home - I’d be able to buy the damn thing on Bluray for half that.
Where the hell are Blurays $9 instead of $30?
Desslock, we obviously live in the wrong cities.
-TomA Blu-Ray in Denmark costs 40 bucks.
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Sorry, I couldn’t resist.