World War Z - The Movie - The Thread (Don't judge a book by its cover)

[yurieu]

I play l4d2 a lot, and still think this movie is very different to that style. l4d/l4d2 stay with 28days/weeks later, in fact, 28 days later is one of my best movies, together with day of the dead and the crazy captain rhodes. this movie want to introduce something more visual, like im am the legend and the invasion, with nicole kidman.

[Carnivol]

Looks pretty neat if you ask me ...

Besides, not that I've actually read what it's based on or anything, but as far as opening fire right away to bitch about lack of similarities and such ...
Trailers can be ... horrifyingly misleading
Spoiler:

show spoiler

[Darkmoon]

True. Believe it or not, I'd love to give it the benefit of the doubt. But, and this is just from the trailer, they have;

- Made there own main character to star in it. Brad Pitt's character is not in the books.
- Changed the zombies from slow types to fast ones. Just to be clear, the books not only carefully describe the zombies, it ridicules the idea of fast ones and ones that can climb. They're dead, they just can't manage that stuff. These guys? Don't even appear to be dead. They look like rage virus infected. See the scene where Brad Pitt mightily holds the door closed and you can see them pretty clearly...which in turn negates huge chunks of the book, as the virus and outbreak lasts ten years before America can even claim most of it's own landmass is more or less under it's control, let alone the rest of the world (and areas where the zombies freeze get annual attacks when they defrost).
- From what I can see, none of the events shown are in the books (with the possible exception of the 'overwhelm the shanty town' scene, which was there as part of how Africa fell).
- Just to be clear, the book is a series of interviews with survivors on how things happened and why, such as how people became convinced a certain drug would help them survive bites. This, obviously, isn't.

Things it does have in common;
- The black guy will probably become President when the current ones gets munched.
- It's called World War Z.

It would literally be like seeing a trailer for the new Resident Evil reboot...where Alice is trying to stop the Parasol Company led by Alfredo Weskerford from using it's legendary board of wizards to raise a voodoo zombie army to take over the earth. On her spiritual quest to gain the enlightened Parcelus Sword, the only weapon capable of shattering the magic cauldron from which the zombies come, guide by the wise woman Jill Oliveria-Redfield in her spirit form as a cat.

...wow, I actually managed to make the Resident Evil movies even shittier.

But yeah, while trailers can be misleading, they'd have to bring out a whole new trailer saying the old one was part of an in-movie action film to negate the hideous levels of failure present.

[Carnivol]

Well, to be honest, the way you describe the book sounds like something that doesn't really translate well to a movie, unless you do a ... well ... something that's already been done to death with the likes of Super 8, District 9, Cloverfield, Paranormal Activity, REC, etc. (this half-documentary, half-filmed by a person "in the action", half-movie, etc. thing). So they instead try to go for a Steven Spielberg's "War of the Worlds"-ish approach instead, I suppose...

But, really, I think it's too early to judge it based on the trailer (and even if it doesn't "follow the book" it takes its name for, it does at least seem interesting/good so far.)

Just look at the Bridge to Terabithia trailer I linked and compare that to the actual movie and the book it's based on. Pretty solid book adaption, but the trailer is horrifyingly misleading.

[Dracarys]

What if Brad Pitts character/story is one of the recounts of what happened to him, being told to someone else...

[Vito]

You guys should also remember they want to make this into a trilogy.

[Carnivol]

I still wish multiple movies/trilogies/series/whatever would toy around with the concept of letting multiple stories just play out in an overlapping timeline.
Like, welcome to movie two; here's some other shit that was going on during the period of movie one -- also, main character in movie one did this and that ... which kinda saved the day for him, now you should feel like shit 'cause that seriously ruined the day for the cast in movie two! Consequences <3

[Darkmoon]

I am trying to keep an open mind; but it pisses me off when a movie has the title of something I like and barely nods towards the source material. Then again, I was excited when I heard J. Michael Straczynski was writing it and it seeing some of the artwork (back in 2009) so that only adds to the disappointment for me. Now it's being written by the guy who made a mess of Prometheus' script (but did write a decent Avatar: The Last Airbender episode).

And yeah, I assume this is going to be Brad Pitt telling his tail to the interviewer, to earn it's title.

[Darkmoon]

http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/sci...daptation.html - So Max Brooks is pretty much saying the only similarity is the title. Yay. And I thought I was dissapointed with the new Star Trek movie taking a huge shit on Gene Roddenberry's grave...

[Zombie_X]

I hated the first Star Trek movie as it was nothing like the show. Granted if you haven't seen the show then it's good, but for those of us who have, none of the characters have the same personalities. Spoc is kinda similar but I think they made him too drab.

[Wrathborne]

And I thought I was dissapointed with the new Star Trek movie taking a huge shit on Gene Roddenberry's grave...

I disagree, I don't think it took a huge shit on Genes grave in anyway. In order for me to agree with your statement Michael Bay would have had to write and direct the film and have every actor in it A: French B: Not real actors an C: all about transformers taking over star fleet.

A movie has an incredibly limited timespan to tell a story and thus the story doesn't allow for a lot of the things that the Star Trek series is known for, one being exploration and interaction with alien cultures. The film just took one event that was significant to several of the crew and focused on that.

The characters themselves aren't all the same characters they were due to this being an alternate universe and really...I'm ok with that. There will never been another Gene Roddenberry, or anyone who had his same exact vision, and despite the fact there were some things they could have done better, they did a splendid job and it very much honored Genes work.

If you saw the film and couldn't enjoy it thats too bad, but it wasn't anything near as fuck awful as you say it was. There are so many real examples of beloved stories fucked up into absolute shit that the creators would spin in their grave.

The Resident Evil movies are a good example of "what not too do" but the best example that comes to mind is 'Catwoman'. I know we're just different perspectives here. but 'Star Trek' wasn't 'Catwoman'.

[Darkmoon]

Spoiler:

show spoiler

I admit, I haven't seen Into Darkness, but they did take a nice squat and dump for one simple reason - Khan.

Gene Roddenberry fought tooth and nail to add diversity to his cast. Khan is easily the most famous villain on the show. Most people can't tell you the crazy Klingon Emperor is called Gowron (and looks worrying like an angry poodle when he gets upset) or that Dr Soran was an El-Aurian who finally killed Kirk (Unless you read the books by Shatner, in which case the Borg come and resurect him to make a new Locutus...). But people know Khan.

Khan was so well respected that even after trying to take over the Enterprise, Kirk admired him enough to put him on a planet to try a new life. Khan killed Spock. And Khan was an Indian.

So who does JJ Abrams stick in as one of the most powerful and respected villains in Star Trek history (after deleting said history...thanks JJ)? The pastiest white guy he can find. In other words, he actually managed to remove diversity from Star Trek. Even 'it's an alternative history' doesn't magically turn someone white, especially since they were around before the change to the timeline (which, again, deleted the original continuity by how Trek works...thanks JJ).

So yeah, while I wasn't fond of the reboot to start with, this did piss me off. It's not as though there are no other possible actors around who could have pulled off the role. It feels like a real slap, to do it.

But hey, I'm not the only one pissed off by it;




So yeah. No money for this movie.

[Wrathborne]

You just posted a pretty big spoiler about the film, to make your point Darkmoon. VERY poor form sir -_-

I would have expected this from someone else, but not you. Obviously you don't care about the film, thats fine, but there are plenty here who dont know about this yet. Only reason I do is because some jackass spilled the beans on an early screening review that had 'no spoilers' on it in the comments section of the thread.

Remove the spoiler for the sake of others, this is seriously not cool.

[Darkmoon]

My apologies - my friend saw it yesterday. I assumed it was out. Indeed, it does seem to be out over here - I didn't know it wasn't in the States, since you guys usually have things a fair bit earlier than we do. I've stuck my comments behind a spoiler tag.

[Wrathborne]

Most appreciated, I thought it was out this weekend here too..but I've had a rotten case of food poisoning and have been oblivious to whats going on outside of my room for the most part.