SimplyScripts Discussion Board
Blog Home - Produced Movie Script Library - TV Scripts - Unproduced Scripts - Contact - Site Map
ScriptSearch
Welcome, Guest.
It is March 29th, 2024, 10:44am
Please login or register.
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login
Please do read the guidelines that govern behavior on the discussion board. It will make for a much more pleasant experience for everyone. A word about SimplyScripts and Censorship


Produced Script Database (Updated!)
One Week Challenge - Who Wrote What and Writers' Choice.


Scripts studios are posting for award consideration

Short Script of the Day | Featured Script of the Month | Featured Short Scripts Available for Production
Submit Your Script

How do I get my film's link and banner here?
All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Forum Login
Username: Create a new Account
Password:     Forgot Password

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board    Reviews    Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  ›  World War Z Moderators: Nixon
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 8 Guests

 Pages: 1, 2 » : All
Recommend Print
  Author    World War Z  (currently 2786 views)
James McClung
Posted: June 29th, 2013, 3:17pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients



Location
Washington, D.C.
Posts
3293
Posts Per Day
0.49
Caught this yesterday. Got back home too late to want to write a review.

I'll skip the intro. Y'all are familiar, I expect. Anyway, not good. Not bad, per se, but definitely not good. It had, surprisingly, none of the excess or glaring incompetence of Man of Steel, which made it a little more bearable but in a way, that's part of the problem.

World War Z has three problems. Doesn't sound so bad but all of them sink what could've easily been an effective albeit not very original film. The first one is simple and, in a way, condemned the film to failure before it was even made: PG13.

Now, I've read Zombie Playground. I wouldn't have thought bloodless zombies could work, ever, but Brett pulled it off (this is the only frame of reference I have, Brett, I'm sure you don't mind ). However, that script was written for a family audience. World War Z, on the other hand, is obviously intended to fit the classic zombie apocalypse mold with perhaps some added realism and a epic mass scale element.

That in mind, the lack of gore throughout the film just kills it. It completely sterilizes the potential for fun, intensity, and realism. Now, I walked into this well aware that it was PG13 but really couldn't have anticipated how profound the impact would be. It was like eating vegan cheese.

As far as I could tell, the zombies didn't even eat people. They just bit them and the people turned into zombies.

The second problem was the zombies. Now, again, I had an idea what to expect. I honestly wasn't too worried about how the zombies would come off as I feel like all zombies look the same nowadays no matter what they're in. Indeed, here, they didn't look all that different from, say, Zombieland or Walking Dead but they toned down the gore and seemed to do away with any colors that looked too "putrid" (e.g. yellow, green, purple, etc.). They didn't look horrible but I definitely had a hard time believing that they were undead. I went through a good chunk of the film thinking they were just infected.

Bland-looking zombies, even by bland-looking zombie standards, is bad but not enough to really ruin the zombies for me. What ruined the zombies here were the sounds they made. Not. Menacing. At. All. They sounded like a cross between spider monkeys and violent hiccuping. I don't know how they came up with the sound effects but they were totally bizarre and distracting. Terrible.

Third problem would be the most resounding problem if it weren't for the PG13: blandness. Just about everything in World War Z is bland. At the very least, I expected Brad Pitt, who I've enjoyed progressively more over the years, to bring some level of badass to his role. No such luck. Completely monotone and expressionless and can barely emote even when he's got a piece of airplane shrapnel in him. I gathered by the end that he was intended to be more of an everyman/loving father-type (which is boring in and of itself) but even in that portrayal, Pitt was by the numbers. It seemed the primary method the film opted to use for communicating the character's love and concern for his family was fiddling with a clunky radio phone that doesn't even work for half the film. Weak.

Other characters, bland and underdeveloped. Dialogue, bland exposition that wasn't even on-the-nose enough to get you worked up or annoyed. At least, you'd feel something then. Tension? Suspense? Uh... no. Action? Shaky cam and bad editing in spades with almost no intensity. They didn't even have good sound effects for the bullets. The plot is dull. Half the film seemed like it was spent either on a ship or a plane and a lot of the time, trips end up being completely pointless and just buying time. The ending was meh and kind of ridiculous.

I sort of enjoyed the sequence in Israel where you see the zombie swarms and zombie stampedes featured in the trailer but... they were featured in the trailer. Most of it takes place in wide shots anyway and it's over in about five minutes. There's a sequence toward the end, which I'll call the "B Wing sequence," which I actually genuinely enjoyed. Twenty minutes or so of some authentic suspense and interesting scenarios. I liked the opening credits too. Totally ripped off Altered States/The Dead Zone but guess what? That's always okay. More films should do it. Other than that, everything felt like it was going through the motions. I guess the film really wasn't trying to reinvent the wheel or anything but they could've at least made a by-the-numbers zombie apocalypse flick with some soul to it.

All in all, I want to say it is what it is but honestly, these guys had a big budget, an epic scale, and one of the best and most solid leading men around. WTF happened here?

EDIT: I realize my last post was in the "Why You Hatin'" thread. I guess sometimes you can't resist.



Revision History (1 edits)
James McClung  -  June 29th, 2013, 3:56pm
Logged
Private Message
Grandma Bear
Posted: June 29th, 2013, 4:58pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Swamp...
Posts
7961
Posts Per Day
1.36
I haven't seen it, because I just don't have the time, but my daughter and her husband saw it earlier this week and they liked it enough that they're going to see it again tonight.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 1 - 27
Elmer
Posted: June 29th, 2013, 5:49pm Report to Moderator
New



Posts
212
Posts Per Day
0.03
Caught an early showing of this a few days ago and enjoyed myself. Nothing to write home about but not a bad film. It was fun and enjoyable. I was disappointed, as it seems to have had the potential to do on a much larger scale what "I Am Legend" die. It could've been a much more emotional experience had it developed the characters a little better.

I've never read the book, but I've heard it isn't particularly faithful to the source. As a stand alone film, though, it's decent.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 2 - 27
Scar Tissue Films
Posted: June 30th, 2013, 8:29am Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3382
Posts Per Day
0.63
It's a PG version of 28 weeks later.

That's all there is to say really. It was enjoyable enough.

Considering the source material, it's underwhelming. I didn't think the book was particularly great...but it's unique selling point was the intense "realism" and large parts of it were genuinely inventive.

This is just a by the numbers zombie flick, but without the gore.

There's one particular aspect of the book that I can't believe never made it to the film....

Was always going to be difficult to adapt a book without a story...it could have been done in a series perhaps.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 3 - 27
wonkavite
Posted: June 30th, 2013, 9:16am Report to Moderator
Guest User



Hey Rick -

What was the scene/aspect that got cut out?  (Never read the book or saw the movie, but I'm a little curious about both...)

Cheers,

-J
Logged
e-mail Reply: 4 - 27
bert
Posted: June 30th, 2013, 10:40am Report to Moderator
Administrator


Buy the ticket, take the ride

Location
That's me in the corner
Posts
4232
Posts Per Day
0.61

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films
Considering the source material, it's underwhelming. I didn't think the book was particularly great...but it's unique selling point was the intense "realism" and large parts of it were genuinely inventive.


The only way the book could have been properly captured is as a documentary, with photographs and "re-enactments" and interviews with the "survivors".  Maybe even a little "captured" footage from cell phones, as long as they did not overdo it.

That would have been darn compelling, as the book contained much social and political commentary buried in its pages to bolster its version of how things might have "really" gone down.

The current WWZ seems a huge lost upportunity for something really unique in this genre, and I will not waste a trip to the theatre on it.  Like that matters, but still.  This could have been such a fascinating effort at a fraction of the cost -- and (probably) a huge, willing cast of "known" names out there to simply sit in a room and tell their "story" -- instead of blowing the whole wad (why?) on Brad Pitt.

Anybody read the book and seen the film?  Are there any links between the two at all?  Looking at the trailers, I see nothing.


Hey, it's my tiny, little IMDb!

Revision History (1 edits)
bert  -  June 30th, 2013, 10:54am
Logged
Private Message Reply: 5 - 27
the goose
Posted: June 30th, 2013, 12:35pm Report to Moderator
New


Yippie-kay-ay.

Location
London
Posts
297
Posts Per Day
0.04
Is there anything of the book at all in this?

I'm weighing up going to see it - however, I have heard from dubious sources (who haven't even read the book) that there's very little relation.

I'm not one of those types who will go on the warpath if something strays from its original source, but it would be great if this captures some of Max Brooks' deadpan humour and the strange, surreal-realism that he somehow brings to both this and the 'Zombie Survival Guide'.


"We don't make movies for critics, since they don't pay to see them anyhow."

-- Charles Bronson.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 6 - 27
Scar Tissue Films
Posted: June 30th, 2013, 2:14pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3382
Posts Per Day
0.63
@Bert and Goose...no, there is nothing of the book in it.


MINOR SPOILERS:


It's just a generic "find the cure" zombie flick.


BOOK SPOILERS FOR JANET:

The film is totally unrelated to the book. The book was written as a documentary after the event...it was people from different countries recounting events that happened.

One character recurs...though you aren't aware of it till later. This is the guy who comes up with the plan to save the world...which is essentially to deliberately abandon all citizens and get the military together in one place to give them the ability to hold a last stand.

It's such a scary moment, and a climactic highlight, that I would have built the film around it.

By the way, Bert, my understand was that Brad Pitt himself bought the rights to the book...hence he's in it. He's the Producer.

Revision History (4 edits; 1 reasons shown)
Scar Tissue Films  -  June 30th, 2013, 3:43pm
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 7 - 27
bert
Posted: June 30th, 2013, 2:47pm Report to Moderator
Administrator


Buy the ticket, take the ride

Location
That's me in the corner
Posts
4232
Posts Per Day
0.61

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films
...the guy who comes up with the plan to save the world...I would have built the film around it.


We are of the same mind, Rick.


Quoted from Scar Tissue Films
Brad Pitt himself bought the rights to the book...hence he's in it. He's the Producer.


Screw him, then.  I'll bet he didn't even read the darn thing.  He's not getting my 10 bucks...like he cares haha.



Hey, it's my tiny, little IMDb!
Logged
Private Message Reply: 8 - 27
the goose
Posted: July 3rd, 2013, 3:35pm Report to Moderator
New


Yippie-kay-ay.

Location
London
Posts
297
Posts Per Day
0.04
Okay, so as discussed the book would have been difficult to translate to film directly - unless it was a sort of documentary type mini-series. So I cast all preconceptions from the book aside and went to see this earlier, with my father in town - who is not keen on horror films at all.

--- spoilers ---

I know I'm very positive when reviewing something in general, but I can't say I left the cinema too disappointed. The opening reminded me somewhat of the Cruise edition of 'War of the Worlds', however I preferred this intro. The whole scenes in the superstore were very frantic - although I did wonder why they bothered trying to force themselves on Brad's wife in that whole situation? Did seem a bit contrived, but the scene where the cop just ran straight past him was great.

After that things tick along in a slightly predictable fashion, and yes there is a lack of gore but I was prepared to look past that as I knew it was going to be like that. The scenes in Jerusalem were so frantic, it really did take some good directing to pull some of those scenes off and it did leave me marvelling at cgi slightly - for the way they constructed the whole thing.

All spoilers aside it's worth a watch, doesn't offer anything too original - but I'm sure it was never meant to revitalise a whole genre or win an oscar. It keeps you on the edge of your seat and it'll keep cinema tills rattling.


"We don't make movies for critics, since they don't pay to see them anyhow."

-- Charles Bronson.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 9 - 27
Mr. Blonde
Posted: July 3rd, 2013, 6:37pm Report to Moderator
Administrator


What good are choices if they're all bad?

Location
Nowhere special.
Posts
3064
Posts Per Day
0.57
CONTINUED SPOILERS:


Quoted from Scar Tissue Films
One character recurs...though you aren't aware of it till later. This is the guy who comes up with the plan to save the world...which is essentially to deliberately abandon all citizens and get the military together in one place to give them the ability to hold a last stand.

It's such a scary moment, and a climactic highlight, that I would have built the film around it.


Ah, talking to good ol' Mr. R in the pokey. That was my favorite story in the book, when Max is talking to him. Although, the plan is slightly different than you make it sound. The idea was to attract survivors to a "safe zone" as bait THEN kill the ensuing zombies with a large military force.

Although, re-reading your post, now I think you're talking about the General reflecting on "The Battle". Think I confused myself by overthinking it.

END SPOILERS.

Hasn't anybody here read Straczynski's original draft of WWZ? Seems like no one has. Odd.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 10 - 27
sniper
Posted: July 11th, 2013, 1:55am Report to Moderator
Old Timer


My UZI Weighs A Ton

Location
Northern Hemisphere
Posts
2249
Posts Per Day
0.48

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films
@Bert and Goose...no, there is nothing of the book in it.

I don't agree with that, Rick.

While certainly watered down, showed in glimpses here and there, there are plenty of the scenes from the book in it - they are just set differently, occur in the present and have Brad Pitt in them. Obviously the entire third act is new stuff.

And I'm glad they did it that way, watching an faithful addaptation of the book would have been a cinematic borefest, just talking heads going on and on and on (read the Straczynski drafts).

While certain a family friendly zombie flick with a surprisingly low amount of blood spatter, all in all I thought it was a entertaining movie. Not bad, not great. I'd probably watch it again.



Down in the hole / Jesus tries to crack a smile / Beneath another shovel load
Logged
Private Message Reply: 11 - 27
KevinLenihan
Posted: September 2nd, 2013, 3:44pm Report to Moderator
Been Around


Posts
528
Posts Per Day
0.13
Simply excellent. It's what an action thriller should be. I probably tend to be a hard movie reviewer. I don't suffer foolish plots very well. This is just plain well done.

Why don't some feel that way? I've read James McClung's review, and I think the issue is one of expectations in something that has become it's own genre. James is probably a big fan of zombie movies, and there are certain things that maybe come with zombie movies that a connoisseur might expect: blood and guts, gallows humor...not sure what else. I'm not knocking James at all, I always enjoy his reviews. I think this just didn't meet his expectations as a zombie-phile.

But if you look at this film for what it is, you might experience it differently. This is a high octane action thriller about an apocalyptic plague. Zombies are never really believable in film...I mean we're talking about the living dead, a existential contradiction...but this story makes things believable enough that one can easily buy into things.

And you have the type of scenes that big budgets allow, not normally present in zombie flicks, but which really are essential to creating an apocalyptic experience. Such as the opening attack in Philly and the siege of Jerusalem. They are essential for creating the experience of a falling civilization.

A solid level of mystery is created about the origin of the plague, which even if that doesn't fully pay off, it still draws us further into the story.

There were symbolic touches too. Such as when the Pitt family takes refuge in a ghetto apartment in Newark, representing cities that already live in post-apocalyptic conditions surrounded by violence. Also the image of Jerusalem, besieged and surrounded by mindlessness and hatred...whose walls are finally breached when Arabs and Jews, each trying to outdo each other in loud prayer, disastrously draw the creatures with their noise.

Pitt does a masterful job; the tension seldom lets up, and the intrigue compels us forward to a sufficiently satisfying conclusion.

There are many, many touches I appreciated as a writer. The scene where Pitt saves the Israeli soldier by cutting her hand off; the zombies on the plane(over the top, but very effective); the Hispanic family in the apartment; when Pitt thinks he might be infected, and stands on the ledge of the building waiting to jump so he doesn't kill his family; the wife kicking the zombie trying to get in the car(instead of just playing the victim); the daughter finding the rifle for daddy; telling the young Harvard doctor to keep his finger off the trigger, then paying that off...just off the top of my head.

If Hollywood did more movies like this, it would see it's poor numbers turn around. There's no ideological preaching in this movie. There's no 'if we only listened' Matt Damon type moment to annoy half the audience. This is Hollywood putting its best foot forward for pure entertainment value.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 12 - 27
James McClung
Posted: September 2nd, 2013, 7:38pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients



Location
Washington, D.C.
Posts
3293
Posts Per Day
0.49

Quoted from KevinLenihan
Why don't some feel that way? I've read James McClung's review, and I think the issue is one of expectations in something that has become it's own genre. James is probably a big fan of zombie movies, and there are certain things that maybe come with zombie movies that a connoisseur might expect: blood and guts, gallows humor...not sure what else. I'm not knocking James at all, I always enjoy his reviews. I think this just didn't meet his expectations as a zombie-phile.


I agree, more or less. I think expectations carry a lot of weight when it comes to movie-watching, perhaps more than anything else. I think a lot of the films I've enjoyed in the past came from a place of either low or zero expectations. That's not across the board by any means but certainly not out of the ordinary. I think it's extremely important to have the "right" (or at least fair) expectations. I think one enjoys a lot more films that way and in a way that allows a given film to do what it's supposed to.

You're right that I'm a big fan of old school, R-rated, horror-centric zombie movies. Whether I like it or not, World War Z wasn't made for me. I went to see it with a friend who'd read the graphic novel. I'd have never seen it on my own.

Still, I didn't want to have a lousy time at the movies and went in doing my best to keep in mind who the film was for and put aside my reservations, of which there were many. I think even with adjusted, cautious expectations, the film let me down (with the exception of the last 30 minutes). It's possible that I indeed failed to keep my reservations in check but I think it's more likely that the film was just flat out mediocre and many of the people who liked it were prepared to settle from the getgo.

Either way, I won't be making the same mistake again. If the next zombie movie doesn't feel right from the start, I'm not going to touch it. Would rather watch Day of the Dead. Cheaper that way.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 13 - 27
KevinLenihan
Posted: September 2nd, 2013, 7:57pm Report to Moderator
Been Around


Posts
528
Posts Per Day
0.13
I think the approach for World War Z is to not treat it like a zombie movie. Treat it like an action thriller. Zombie films are usually horror, wouldn't you say? This is most definitely not horror.

It's basically similar to Spielburg's War of the Worlds, a running adventure through the apocalypse.

Most of the movies I see are bad enough that you're stuck being satisfied if some part of it was decent. For example, Prometheus was very disappointing with the various plot holes and flat characters, but it had enough entertainment value that it's probably worth the $10.

I found that World War Z delivered as an action thriller much more than most of it's big budget peers.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 14 - 27
 Pages: 1, 2 » : All
Recommend Print

Locked Board Board Index    Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  [ previous | next ] Switch to:
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login

Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post polls
You may not post attachments
HTML is on
Blah Code is on
Smilies are on


Powered by E-Blah Platinum 9.71B © 2001-2006