World War Z

complexmath wrote:

Some of the scenes in that trailer are fantastic, like the one with the zombies all piling up trying to climb the wall. I'd really like to have seen an attempt at a movie in the format of the book though. I think it could be done quite effectively, but it would come across more as an indie film than the blockbuster the current one looks to be.

What you liked most is what I liked least. I can't quite put my finger on it, but the zombie representation of this movie feels "fake". I know how little sense that last sentence made.

They aren't fast zombies in the book, for one. And I agree that something about zombies in the trailer seems fake. I think it's the complete lack of self awareness they demonstrate--running right off the edge of buildings, etc. Still, I think it's effective specifically because this behavior is so unnatural. People are pretty comfortable with zombie behavior on average, so this introduces just enough originality to create surprising moments.

I think this looks awesome. I can't wait.

Jayhawker wrote:

Brad Pitt does a generally good job of selecting films that transcend the generic blockbuster. I'll grant you that the trailer is targeted to younger and more shallow demographic. But if that was Colin Ferrell, I might be less interested.

Throw in Mireille Enos, and I'm at least going to see what they tried to do.

That's how I see it. Brad Pitt is a capable guy and he can usually deliver a pretty decent movie.

complexmath wrote:

I think it's the complete lack of self awareness they demonstrate--running right off the edge of buildings, etc.

That was in the book too. Seems like one of the few things they didn't change.

I know the WWZ lore states that zombies will blindly follow a living human pretty much forever, pound their arms to stumps trying to beat down a door, etc. I guess the running buildings logically follows, I suppose I just don't remember that part. I guess it's time for a refresher.

I can't remember the details, but there was a part where they were using sounds to lure zombies into falling off a building or into a hole or something.

"Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Slayer" suffered the same fate -- clever and original book, lackluster and predictable film.

Has this statement been made yet?

Why did they buy the movie rights to the book when it is nothing like the book? The trailer looks great and I'm sure I will love the movie (I'm a sucker for zombie-anything) but what was the whole deal in acquiring film rights to Max Brooks' novel?

Strangeblades wrote:

Has this statement been made yet?

Why did they buy the movie rights to the book when it is nothing like the book? The trailer looks great and I'm sure I will love the movie (I'm a sucker for zombie-anything) but what was the whole deal in acquiring film rights to Max Brooks' novel?

Great title of a book that got lots of press.

Jayhawker wrote:
Strangeblades wrote:

Has this statement been made yet?

Why did they buy the movie rights to the book when it is nothing like the book? The trailer looks great and I'm sure I will love the movie (I'm a sucker for zombie-anything) but what was the whole deal in acquiring film rights to Max Brooks' novel?

Great title of a book that got lots of press.

This; WWZ is a straight-up cash grab with nothing but the title in common with what was truly a fantastic novel.

I'd say that if you haven't read it and want to see the movie, read it after. I'll be skipping the movie, partly because I don't think a movie of any length could do it justice as others have said, and I'm not the least bit interested in a movie that has naught to do with the book, save the name.

AnimeJ wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
Strangeblades wrote:

Has this statement been made yet?

Why did they buy the movie rights to the book when it is nothing like the book? The trailer looks great and I'm sure I will love the movie (I'm a sucker for zombie-anything) but what was the whole deal in acquiring film rights to Max Brooks' novel?

Great title of a book that got lots of press.

This; WWZ is a straight-up cash grab with nothing but the title in common with what was truly a fantastic novel.

I'd say that if you haven't read it and want to see the movie, read it after. I'll be skipping the movie, partly because I don't think a movie of any length could do it justice as others have said, and I'm not the least bit interested in a movie that has naught to do with the book, save the name.

Actually it started, like most things i'd like to assume, with the best intentions. The studio has jumped in on this to change it from what it started out to be.

I'm disappointed, but with the realization that it's been clear, for months now, that the movie that people like me were hoping for isn't even close to what we're going to get, and I might as well take this film pure on its own merits, separate from the book, with the only link between the two being the title.

Prederick wrote:

I'm disappointed, but with the realization that it's been clear, for months now, that the movie that people like me were hoping for isn't even close to what we're going to get, and I might as well take this film pure on its own merits, separate from the book, with the only link between the two being the title.

That's what I will be doing as well. It just boggles my mind that somebody greenlit a deal to buy the rights when they could have just called this Zombie Apocalypse starring Brad Pitt. To a major studio the cache of World War Z, the book, is small potatoes compared to having Brad Pitt in your movie.

The vast majority of movie-going audiences pays zero attention to such books and even less attention to enthusiast websites/mags. And this is not a knock on the average movie-goer. You don't have to be a drooling fan boy (which I am of course) to go see a flick and have a fun time.

AnimeJ wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
Strangeblades wrote:

Has this statement been made yet?

Why did they buy the movie rights to the book when it is nothing like the book? The trailer looks great and I'm sure I will love the movie (I'm a sucker for zombie-anything) but what was the whole deal in acquiring film rights to Max Brooks' novel?

Great title of a book that got lots of press.

This; WWZ is a straight-up cash grab with nothing but the title in common with what was truly a fantastic novel.

I'd say that if you haven't read it and want to see the movie, read it after. I'll be skipping the movie, partly because I don't think a movie of any length could do it justice as others have said, and I'm not the least bit interested in a movie that has naught to do with the book, save the name.

Below is a book-spoiler section. I use book examples to illustrate why the novel, as written, would be a difficult production.

Spoiler:

I've read the book three times (maybe 2.4 times) and loved every page. I also read the hilarious zombie survival handbook. When I first heard about Brad Pitt being interested in this book I was like, really? A collection of stories told by survivors 10 years after the outbreak? One, that's a lot of tales to tell in two to three hours. Two, the book is less about the zombies and more about the reactions of the different peoples around the globe. There is at least one story where the interviewee had no direct contact with zombies. If you are going to have a global disaster your audience is going to want to see it on screen. Plus, you got Brad Pitt. You gotta have him running around and doing action.

Strangeblades wrote:
Spoiler:

I've read the book three times (maybe 2.4 times) and loved every page. I also read the hilarious zombie survival handbook. When I first heard about Brad Pitt being interested in this book I was like, really? A collection of stories told by survivors 10 years after the outbreak? One, that's a lot of tales to tell in two to three hours. Two, the book is less about the zombies and more about the reactions of the different peoples around the globe. There is at least one story where the interviewee had no direct contact with zombies. If you are going to have a global disaster your audience is going to want to see it on screen. Plus, you got Brad Pitt. You gotta have him running around and doing action.

Spoiler:

I'm probably wandering into Cleveland territory here, but for my money, there was no way any major Hollywood studio was going to greenlight a picture that stayed true to the source material, meaning long sections told to the audience by non-white, non-American (and occasionally non-Western) leads. I'm that cynical, and I think they're just as cynical about what does and doesn't work in big-time blockbuster films.

Prederick wrote:
Strangeblades wrote:
Spoiler:

I've read the book three times (maybe 2.4 times) and loved every page. I also read the hilarious zombie survival handbook. When I first heard about Brad Pitt being interested in this book I was like, really? A collection of stories told by survivors 10 years after the outbreak? One, that's a lot of tales to tell in two to three hours. Two, the book is less about the zombies and more about the reactions of the different peoples around the globe. There is at least one story where the interviewee had no direct contact with zombies. If you are going to have a global disaster your audience is going to want to see it on screen. Plus, you got Brad Pitt. You gotta have him running around and doing action.

Spoiler:

I'm probably wandering into Cleveland territory here, but for my money, there was no way any major Hollywood studio was going to greenlight a picture that stayed true to the source material, meaning long sections told to the audience by non-white, non-American (and occasionally non-Western) leads. I'm that cynical, and I think they're just as cynical about what does and doesn't work in big-time blockbuster films.

Spoiler:

I agree. I also believe Hollywood does what works and that means exactly what you've said. Sure, there are breakout films that do the exact opposite but when you put down $100 million or more you don't gamble. You do what works or what you think works.

muttonchop wrote:

I can't remember the details, but there was a part where they were using sounds to lure zombies into falling off a building or into a hole or something.

Spoiler:

It was when they were clearing the cities in their country wide sweep. They'd set up in one building, making as much noise on the roof as they could. The zombies in the nearby buildings would get to the roof and walk off it. There was another part (where they blew up the bridges/mountain passes in India) where the zombies horde kept walking towards the guy and falling down the cliff.

Climbing on piles of other zeds to get over obstacles was in the book as well, but the piles weren't that high and certainly weren't that narrow.

Stengah wrote:
muttonchop wrote:

I can't remember the details, but there was a part where they were using sounds to lure zombies into falling off a building or into a hole or something.

Spoiler:

It was when they were clearing the cities in their country wide sweep. They'd set up in one building, making as much noise on the roof as they could. The zombies in the nearby buildings would get to the roof and walk off it. There was another part (where they blew up the bridges/mountain passes in India) where the zombies horde kept walking towards the guy and falling down the cliff.

Climbing on piles of other zeds to get over obstacles was in the book as well, but the piles weren't that high and certainly weren't that narrow.

Spoiler:

Discovered by the K-9 teams used by the US when a dog ran to the top of another building and barking until all of the zombies started going off the roof. Also discovered by the Japanese kid when he was using his bedsheet rope and the zed went over the railing to try to get at him, grasping at him as he was falling however many stories.

Zombie pile was scary and certainly suggested in the book at least once or twice... but I think it was only ever like dead zombies. I don't remember them coordinating a living pile, as they were all supposedly almost entirely unaware of each others existance other than to follow one's moans to find prey.

Jucofett wrote:

We don’t go to Ravenholm for a reason people!

Raveholm's not scary. It's a playground.

Hobbes2099 wrote:
complexmath wrote:

Some of the scenes in that trailer are fantastic, like the one with the zombies all piling up trying to climb the wall. I'd really like to have seen an attempt at a movie in the format of the book though. I think it could be done quite effectively, but it would come across more as an indie film than the blockbuster the current one looks to be.

What you liked most is what I liked least. I can't quite put my finger on it, but the zombie representation of this movie feels "fake". I know how little sense that last sentence made.

I think one of the things that the "fast zombie" phenomenon does is evoke some real primal reactions about being chased by a large and hostile group of people. But the "swarm" behavior that we're seeing now goes into the uncanny valley in a bad way. Instead of a bunch of hostile people trying to chase you down and hurt you, it's this big quivering wave of faces falling over each other.

kazooka wrote:
Hobbes2099 wrote:
complexmath wrote:

Some of the scenes in that trailer are fantastic, like the one with the zombies all piling up trying to climb the wall. I'd really like to have seen an attempt at a movie in the format of the book though. I think it could be done quite effectively, but it would come across more as an indie film than the blockbuster the current one looks to be.

What you liked most is what I liked least. I can't quite put my finger on it, but the zombie representation of this movie feels "fake". I know how little sense that last sentence made.

I think one of the things that the "fast zombie" phenomenon does is evoke some real primal reactions about being chased by a large and hostile group of people. But the "swarm" behavior that we're seeing now goes into the uncanny valley in a bad way. Instead of a bunch of hostile people trying to chase you down and hurt you, it's this big quivering wave of faces falling over each other.

Yeah when it comes to zombie stuff, they have all the advantages so slow zombies give the humans a chance. No way humans make it if they are this fast. (Although in the movie I'm sure they'll pull some sh*t out of their a**..

As an aside, I was reading a zombie book the other day (I read them a lot) and it started out again with the normal population left wondering as city after city blinks out and borders close with no govt response and people sit in their houses wondering what was causing it. I thought "man would that happen in real life?" and was satisfied with a resounding no (in my head). People are attuned to zombies now. Look at the bath salts, the 1st thing people thought about were zombies. So, no one worry, no pandemic will happen on this generation's watch!

karmajay wrote:
kazooka wrote:
Hobbes2099 wrote:
complexmath wrote:

Some of the scenes in that trailer are fantastic, like the one with the zombies all piling up trying to climb the wall. I'd really like to have seen an attempt at a movie in the format of the book though. I think it could be done quite effectively, but it would come across more as an indie film than the blockbuster the current one looks to be.

What you liked most is what I liked least. I can't quite put my finger on it, but the zombie representation of this movie feels "fake". I know how little sense that last sentence made.

I think one of the things that the "fast zombie" phenomenon does is evoke some real primal reactions about being chased by a large and hostile group of people. But the "swarm" behavior that we're seeing now goes into the uncanny valley in a bad way. Instead of a bunch of hostile people trying to chase you down and hurt you, it's this big quivering wave of faces falling over each other.

Yeah when it comes to zombie stuff, they have all the advantages so slow zombies give the humans a chance. No way humans make it if they are this fast. (Although in the movie I'm sure they'll pull some sh*t out of their a**..

How do you figure?

Humans have tool use, tactics, the ability to use terrain to their advantage, and the ability to coordinate and communicate with one another. All they would need is a bulldozer and a Jersey wall.

karmajay wrote:

As an aside, I was reading a zombie book the other day (I read them a lot) and it started out again with the normal population left wondering as city after city blinks out and borders close with no govt response and people sit in their houses wondering what was causing it. I thought "man would that happen in real life?" and was satisfied with a resounding no (in my head). People are attuned to zombies now. Look at the bath salts, the 1st thing people thought about were zombies. So, no one worry, no pandemic will happen on this generation's watch! :)

Spoiler:

IMAGE(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/outbreak.png)

I think that's one of the only places left to go with the genre, a Zombie outbreak in a world already quite familiar with the zombie trope.

Prederick wrote:

I think that's one of the only places left to go with the genre, a Zombie outbreak in a world already quite familiar with the zombie trope.

Try 'Feed'.

LtWarhound wrote:
Prederick wrote:

I think that's one of the only places left to go with the genre, a Zombie outbreak in a world already quite familiar with the zombie trope.

Try 'Feed'.

Or, you know, Shaun of the Dead.

Everyone panics for a couple of hours, then realizes that the zombies aren't really much of a threat if you keep your head, so they start using them as cheap labor and entertainment.

To me zombie behaviour or whatever is of secondary interest. My favourite stuff is seeing the humans freak the F out and coming to grips with the impossibility of their situation. That's why I love the Walking Dead so much. Seeing the response of what's left of civilization.

Paleocon wrote:
karmajay wrote:
kazooka wrote:
Hobbes2099 wrote:
complexmath wrote:

Some of the scenes in that trailer are fantastic, like the one with the zombies all piling up trying to climb the wall. I'd really like to have seen an attempt at a movie in the format of the book though. I think it could be done quite effectively, but it would come across more as an indie film than the blockbuster the current one looks to be.

What you liked most is what I liked least. I can't quite put my finger on it, but the zombie representation of this movie feels "fake". I know how little sense that last sentence made.

I think one of the things that the "fast zombie" phenomenon does is evoke some real primal reactions about being chased by a large and hostile group of people. But the "swarm" behavior that we're seeing now goes into the uncanny valley in a bad way. Instead of a bunch of hostile people trying to chase you down and hurt you, it's this big quivering wave of faces falling over each other.

Yeah when it comes to zombie stuff, they have all the advantages so slow zombies give the humans a chance. No way humans make it if they are this fast. (Although in the movie I'm sure they'll pull some sh*t out of their a**..

How do you figure?

Humans have tool use, tactics, the ability to use terrain to their advantage, and the ability to coordinate and communicate with one another. All they would need is a bulldozer and a Jersey wall.

That's great when you have time and a trained force. With fast zombies an urban population is turned quickly before much can get down and now you have a million fast zombies running every where. A lot of tactics are made to discourage or stop a force when in actually this force would have to be utterly destroyed while they are running around full speed like in that clip.