World War Z (films, theater, disturbing, character)

[northnut]

Originally Posted by TRosa

Well that went a lot faster than I expected. Agree with Felix C, the latter part seemed rushed through, I thought they were just gearing up. Sigh. To me, not the movie for Brad Pitt to display his acting talents, I was way too distracted by his looks. Normally, I can see the character he's playing, this time, all I could see is how beautiful the man is. Sorry just me, I know, but there you have it.

There were a good number of, extremely, tense moments that had me holding my breath, literally took my breath away, but over all, it felt void of something maybe like another half hour or so.

I wasn't blown away by the movie, it wasn't the big Z I hoped for, but it was decent enough.

LOL, he is HOT in that movie. Just hot.

This film has been getting better than average reviews in what I've read so far which totally surprises me. I just assumed with all the production problems that this would've turned out to be a holy mess.

[noid_1985]

Movie kinda reminded me of I Am Legend

[lfsr1544]

Movie was average to me considering all the hype. Nothing like the book. Movie was sort of left open ended so I'm wondering if they'll be setting this up for a sequel? I felt it needed a bit more horror and suspense. I didn't really feel the family were in constant danger. Not sure if they were going for action thriller or horror or what? And as others mentioned I felt the movie started off well with some build up and then it was very hurried to close. 28 days later was a far better interesting story on screen. Not the worst but considering a $300 million + budget it could have been much better.

[Felix C]

Originally Posted by northnut

LOL, he is HOT in that movie. Just hot.

This film has been getting better than average reviews in what I've read so far which totally surprises me. I just assumed with all the production problems that this would've turned out to be a holy mess.

The first I heard of production issues was yesterday at Imdb.com after submitting a review.

Apparently the film proper after the a/c wreck in Wales would be as noted here: (footage already done too)

Here's How 'World War Z' Originally Ended Before the Reshoots | Movie News | Movies.com

[TRosa]

Originally Posted by lfsr1544

Movie was average to me considering all the hype. Nothing like the book. Movie was sort of left open ended so I'm wondering if they'll be setting this up for a sequel? I felt it needed a bit more horror and suspense. I didn't really feel the family were in constant danger. Not sure if they were going for action thriller or horror or what? And as others mentioned I felt the movie started off well with some build up and then it was very hurried to close. 28 days later was a far better interesting story on screen. Not the worst but considering a $300 million + budget it could have been much better.

It did seem as if in some of Brad's final wordings there was the idea of a sequel being planted in our minds and then earlier today, I was reading about the original ending and according to how that ending went down there was most definitely an intent of a sequel to come about.

Honestly, I'd likely see it on DVD if it happened and only to ogle BP it just wasn't that intriguing.

[Dane_in_LA]

Action/horror with no gore is hard to pull off, but I think it worked. Don't expect the book - the book, while good, is pretty much impossible to convert into a 90-120 min utes movie, anyway.

When you know that a different ending was grafted on, you can sorta tell.

I am putting spoiler tags around a few comments:

Spoiler

I liked that it didn't fall into the Michael Bay trap of going from big action scene to bigger action scene to hugely giganto-action-explodorama scene - the 3rd act got to be small-scale claustrophobic tension scene instead.

The off-hand comments along the lines off "Boston has gone dark", not even meriting a reaction.

The cliche "quirky genius" character dying (stupidly) minutes after his introduction was a nice touch. No one (except Pitt) is safe.

There were a couple of nice jump scares that worked - and the tempo of frantic scenes interspersed with uneasy calm worked for me. Nowhere safe, always look over your shoulder, keep moving.

The cold-hearted bastard in command had perhaps 8 lines - but his character shone through.

Not Oscar material, but fairly well-crafted entertainment.

And in the interest of full disclosure I should say that I am, very remotely, connected to the production.

[Social Democrat]

I thought it was a fun, entertaining popcorn movie and enjoyed!

[D. Scott]

Originally Posted by TRosa

It did seem as if in some of Brad's final wordings there was the idea of a sequel being planted in our minds and then earlier today, I was reading about the original ending and according to how that ending went down there was most definitely an intent of a sequel to come about.

Honestly, I'd likely see it on DVD if it happened and only to ogle BP it just wasn't that intriguing.

The film gets kudos for having a realistic ending. It was not a happy one but gave some hope.

[Aspe4]

I give World War Z the movie a C rating. It was average. There's no way to stay faithful to the book in a 109 minute movie. The source material was better suited for a TV show on HBO. All this movie did was license the name World War Z, it had very little relation to the book, which was great.

[dizzybint]

Some of Glasgow while filming..