When I first saw the trailers for World War Z, I thought, "Seriously? More zombies?" Just when I thought the genre had been done to death. I figured the TV series The Walking Dead pretty much capped it. Can't get much better than that for a zombies-are-taking-over-the-world scenario, not because there is anything about the zombies that hasn't been done before, but because The Walking Dead is a very well scripted survival series with an excellent cast playing well developed characters.
I honestly had not read the novel on which this movie was based, itself a sequel. And I was quite surprised that there was a bidding war over the rights to it. Could it be really that different from everything else? Well, it's not remarkably different. There is nothing particularly unique about these zombies, or in the story. They have their own particular spin, and set of rules. They bite, and that spreads some kind of disease. Seen that before. They're quick. Seen that before too, but I think this is the most tireless I've ever seen them portrayed.
But they aren't technically zombies... That is, you don't have to die first, and they don't seem to be "eating" people, just biting them. It's more like a super-virus with zombie-like characteristics, infecting people extremely fast (within seconds), while they are still alive. Once zombified, the victim exerts energy that would make the world's greatest athletes jealous. They are fast, tireless, feel no pain or emotion, somewhat strong, and really hard to "kill." There is also a way to walk among the zombies without being attacked, which is slightly unique. In some zombie movies you just have to act like a zombie, or disguise yourself with zombie stench, but World War Z introduced its own take.
At any rate, it's a fast-moving plot with several visually spectacular sequences. Brad Pitt carries the film.
As a writer myself, I think the screenplay missed the opportunity to vastly increase tension. They should have kept his family on the brink of danger. Instead, his family was given relative safety. I wouldn't have done that. There is nothing more stressful to a father and husband than to put his children and wife in danger and keep him from helping them. This would have been much more suspenseful and emotionally engaging.
World War Z was a fun movie to watch, and while it didn't "redefine" the subgenre, it moved the needle a little bit by creating EXTREME zombie energy. (These guys are DESPERATE to bite people! They reminded me of a blend of army ant and killer bee behavior.) So it was worth seeing, but I have to wonder why it was worth making? Did the genre really need this? Was it worth the risk for Plan B (Pitt's company) to win the bidding war? Not so sure.
For Pitt's sake I hope it does well enough for him but I would sure like to sunset the zombie subgenre because I'm getting fairly tired of it.
I honestly had not read the novel on which this movie was based, itself a sequel. And I was quite surprised that there was a bidding war over the rights to it. Could it be really that different from everything else? Well, it's not remarkably different. There is nothing particularly unique about these zombies, or in the story. They have their own particular spin, and set of rules. They bite, and that spreads some kind of disease. Seen that before. They're quick. Seen that before too, but I think this is the most tireless I've ever seen them portrayed.
But they aren't technically zombies... That is, you don't have to die first, and they don't seem to be "eating" people, just biting them. It's more like a super-virus with zombie-like characteristics, infecting people extremely fast (within seconds), while they are still alive. Once zombified, the victim exerts energy that would make the world's greatest athletes jealous. They are fast, tireless, feel no pain or emotion, somewhat strong, and really hard to "kill." There is also a way to walk among the zombies without being attacked, which is slightly unique. In some zombie movies you just have to act like a zombie, or disguise yourself with zombie stench, but World War Z introduced its own take.
At any rate, it's a fast-moving plot with several visually spectacular sequences. Brad Pitt carries the film.
As a writer myself, I think the screenplay missed the opportunity to vastly increase tension. They should have kept his family on the brink of danger. Instead, his family was given relative safety. I wouldn't have done that. There is nothing more stressful to a father and husband than to put his children and wife in danger and keep him from helping them. This would have been much more suspenseful and emotionally engaging.
World War Z was a fun movie to watch, and while it didn't "redefine" the subgenre, it moved the needle a little bit by creating EXTREME zombie energy. (These guys are DESPERATE to bite people! They reminded me of a blend of army ant and killer bee behavior.) So it was worth seeing, but I have to wonder why it was worth making? Did the genre really need this? Was it worth the risk for Plan B (Pitt's company) to win the bidding war? Not so sure.
For Pitt's sake I hope it does well enough for him but I would sure like to sunset the zombie subgenre because I'm getting fairly tired of it.