World War Z

According to Max Brooks, World War Z became more serious after the experiences of the past years. It used to be just a different, smarter zombie movie with Brad Pitt produced by his company Plan B. The main asset was Pitt's classic hero, the ultimate likable guy, who looks good no matter what, and of course, it's him and no one else who can save humanity... with his cuteness. Today, the sight of a global pandemic is somewhat more chilling. (18/02/2022)

In spite of all the media failures (being over-budget, reshoots), Forster presents a rather unconventional zombie spectacle that works more along the lines of a flamboyant action movie in which a middle-class family and the world around them are drowning. The brilliantly paced direction (supported by good editing) pushes forward a plot vacuum that boils down to the fact that it takes the title and two or three prominent geopolitical allusions from a brilliant book, whilst then treading its own path to get to its roots, i.e., the horror in the lab. However, having a tighter dramatic arc, not limited to alternating the three locations where the protagonist arrives and the undead horde a minute after him, would not have hurt the film. [I want the Battle of Moscow, at least as a bonus on Blu-ray] 3 ½. (29/09/2013)

A passable summer blockbuster that could have done better, but trying to please the viewer’s greed it ended up as a visual one-bite snack with an unclear message. Forster presents the pandemic as Mother Nature’s way of making human trash pay for their sins, forcing them to eat themselves. The title sequence and the dulcet tones of The 2nd Law: Isolated System by Muse, a summing up by an deranged virologist (our greatest hope), this all indicates deeper thought. Then there’s a turn about when in War of the Worlds style we escape from the city (even Rachel is here) to get to a boat and then we travel the world with Brad - when I say the world, I mean basements in Korea, Jerusalem (substituted by Malta) and Britain. The whole thing holds together weirdly and it seemed to me that the storytelling structure had maybe been different (better) in a first version of the screenplay and the initial attack on Pitt’s family was meant to appear in some flashback. You can see that it’s a broken vase broke stuck back together again and it holds, but some of the pieces were newly made to fit some gaping holes. The ending in the lab is the only scene with the genre cliché of terrifying, shuffling zombies, while they are quite successful in changing them in the rest of the movie. These stiffs remind me more of Smith’s colleagues in I Am Legend. On the other hand, some individual scenes are filmed exceptionally well, they are engaging (the 3D really bothers me in dark interiors), and work excellently standing alone. The ideas that the creators pull out of the bag are sometimes very novel and refreshing. The toothless David Morse, the burned general’s tapping finger, the airplane and the laboratory chase. The mainstay of the movie is the conquest of Jerusalem, which takes your breath away. In fact, I liked it, despite all of my objections, but I can’t get rid of the feeling that this could have made a much better movie. It had the material for it... If I had to compare it to the book, I would just sadly agree that this wasn’t good. (30/06/2013)

World War Z should have been very incoherent, it mixes very different approaches to the zombie sub-genre, but in the end it’s a surprisingly good an interesting film. The creative disagreements can be clearly seen (if there is something the film lacks it’s a solid vision), but paradoxically, that may have contributed to an untraditional narrative outcome. World War Z is basically three stories in one linked by the protagonist, and though they are connected, they are also very different in many aspects. The beginning is similar to Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead (the zombie apocalypse begins, the protagonists try get to safety), the middle part is an action-packed search for the origin of the virus, and the last part is a more intimate laboratory horror story. I had some problems with the middle part, though it does have several excellent set pieces, the search for clues as a whole felt very random and haphazard. By the way, the editor must have gone totally bonkers, in some of the action scenes you can’t see anything, and every shot that was at least a little longer was a joy. Thanks God for that quiet, intimate ending. 75 %. PS: If you want to know what the original ending of the film was like, read this article. I think that in this case it’s pointless to blast Lindelof’s rewrite. The version we saw in cinemas is a lot happier than the dark original ending, but even as a horror fan I don’t think that “dark” always equals “better”. That said, I’d love to watch the battle of Moscow, hopefully the studio will release it, at least in BluRay, they filmed it already. (27/06/2013)

A mixture of many incongruous interpretations and approaches to the zombie apocalypse theme. No surprise then that it couldn’t make a single coherent unit if it tried. But surprisingly, each one of these approaches is handled well in itself and so as the sum of many separate subsets it actually works; outstandingly so in the second half Jerusalem→ airplane→ Wales. Too bad about rating worries and so the lack of a darker tone and more gore in the final part. In the scenes where Pitt sinks his crowbar into a zombie’s head, not even Angelina would want to see a close-up of Brad’s face; whenever a drop of blood “threatens", the camera quickly pans up to Pitt’s tortured face. And considering how many times this happens, it’s almost ridiculous. Anyhow, I’m intrigued to see the potential director’s cut, because if I understand correctly, Forster had a vision, Pitt from his position of producer had a completely different one and, in the end, in the spirit of “the strongest dog gets to fuck", the studio slipped in its own version? (26/06/2013)