Enjoy what? A below-average film that destroys a perfectly good book and tries to make it a blockbuster hit?

good movie saw it yesterday 7.5/10

5/10

Loved the newish take on zombies. I say newish because they are similar to the 28 days later "infected" just in a more supped up way.

7/10 overall cuz the story lacked something.

They just tried not to lose their shirts on this one I'm afraid, there were so many storyboard, and editing issues that this movie almost failed before it was released.

I will agree it's kind of below average (although it had its moments, being a pg13 zombie movie that still created suspense without having to rely on gore) I'm going to have to completely disagree with the bold. The original content is still intact, and I can't for the life of me understand why people insist on comparing source material to new content. I think it would be pretty sad if the director failed to create his own vision from the source, and just fell back on the original content. The movie is its own vehicle, people need to let go..

This post was edited by TrouNce on Jun 24 2013 06:36pm

Hey man how's things! been a while since you posted much here - I haven't seen this movie yet

Original content in tact? So does this film detail the timeline/origin of the infected? The book is brilliantly told imo jumping from location to location detailing the spread... and while I agree that a director needs to make a movie with its own vehicle I can't help but feel that his movie simply uses the title "world war z"
And almost nothing else

Judging from the trailers an early reviews it seems to be centered on one character. An American grafted in to save humanity?

This post was edited by WelSh on Jun 27 2013 05:04am

The reasoning behind the bold is not comparing but more why can't a director recreate what the book represented...an oral representation of 'war' and the perspectives of those that were directly effected. This (for me) could be made into an excellent film without it being made into a "hollywood blockbuster". Creating his own vision and take on a great book is wonderful, but there was no real point in doing so in the beginning.

This post was edited by pLaguE_89 on Jun 27 2013 05:26am

I'm not sure what the original idea was, but it seems like the movie was messed up at some point, and they had to cut a lot and fix it. Maybe during that process the majority of story board related to the book was removed. My point wasn't that the movie was "Good" but rather the movie stands alone from the book, and even though it's based on the book, it's not a personal attack on fans of the book just because it's not what they expected.



HEY! I'm doing great man! I'm in a NEW relationship and it's difficult to keep up with you guys when it comes to movies and shit now lol. Once I've been with this girl a bit longer I'll be back to watching and posting.

Uhm... This movie has almost Nothing to do with the book, it has the title and the same overall universe. What I meant was, we should treat them as individual projects, and not as a series. The book hasn't been "ruined" and neither has the story arch. The book is great, and the movie (for what it is) is not that bad.

cool cool good to hear man
ill check this out soon enough, open minded etc

5/10

was disapointing