World War Z (spoilers) [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

navar100

2013-06-22, 05:23 PM

A nice refreshing new take on the zombie apocalypse. Normally the apocalypse already happened and we watch a group try to survive. Here we see the outbreak, the "Great Panic", as it engulfs cities and the military try to stop it. I know the book covers the gamut of initial outbreak, the panic, the survival mode we're used to seeing, and then the rare conclusion, but this is about the movie only.

The movie also has very few character tropes.

The Hero: Brad Pitt, naturally

Side-Kick: None

Bad-A$$ Chick: The Israeli soldier

The Uncooperative Jerk: None

Cool Guy who gets killed half-way through the movie: The Sergeant at the South Korean refueling post. He gave the impression he would be The Jerk or Evil Bastard Leader at first, but that turned out to be natural military tough guyness. He was helpful.

Catatonic Girl: The daughters, maybe, but more forgiving as they're just kids and are written out of the movie in time before they got annoying. "I want my blanket!"

Secretly Bit: None

The Stupid: None. The UN Scientist was stupid to shoot himself, but that didn't make him The Stupid. He cooperated and listened as best he could and stayed with The Plan. The Plan failed, but it failed on its own sake, not the Scientist which is why he's not The Stupid.

Evil Bastard Leader of Safe Haven Community: None. The Israeli Mossad agent in Jerusalem was very helpful. The W.H.O. facility director was cautious, but it was sincere caution and cooperated fully once he understood the situation in character. U. N. Undersecretary did all he could to help The Hero.

Cannon-Fodder Extra: Thomas' parents who decided to stay in the apartment.

Hopeless

2013-06-23, 06:07 AM

Can I ask how they handled the outbreak?

For example the trailer suggests it originated somewhere In Russia and I was wondering if it spread beyond the continent was it via for example the Eurotunnel or did the zombie's swim the channel?

What about other islands like Hawaii, I noticed the aircraft carrier in the trailer and I was wondering if some land masses remained clear of the problem or whether it was just a matter of time and the accidental or ingnorant transportation of infected that made even the islands maybe even antarctica for example no longer safe?

How does it compare to the book?

Chromascope3D

2013-06-23, 05:09 PM

I just got back from seeing it, and I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised. I don't know what I was expecting, but I was certainly expecting it to be a lot worse.

Also, I couldn't shake the feeling that I'd heard the score somewhere before (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdIDxFTgBJM), but then I looked online and found out that, yes, Muse did directly contribute to it.

Silverraptor

2013-06-23, 06:35 PM

I really liked this movie. Possibly one of the few movies that exceeded my expectations. I really, really liked the twist at the end and how the plot held together (mostly). And, what I loved the most, above all else, was that at the beginning, the military established that they knew they were zombies at the start! Every single zombie apocalypse I've seen shows everyone not even knowing what zombies are at all because the concept wasn't invented in those universes. This movie, they know its a "zombie" like outbreak, and they are trying to stop it. Really refreshing to see the main characters going in knowing what it was.

Also, Spoiler of the ending. Do not click if you haven't watched the movie. You have been warned!
The ending was a typical "Darkest Hour" and "Battle L.A." ending, where the movie was concluded that they found the secret to solving this and it ends with them starting to make a comeback. While I dislike these kind of endings because they normally conclude them in the last 2 minutes of the movie, this ending was pretty good. While true, they end with the zombie outbreak still there, they show that everyone is now fighting back effectively after "The Secret"(TM) was discovered on their best course to fighting the outbreak.

And while I did discover the secret halfway through, I figured it out at the same time Brad Pitt discovered it too; so the movie kept the heroes comprehension with the audience, so that was a great relief as well.

Overall, while it was sometimes hard to tell who was zombie and who was human in the panoramic panic shots, I still give this movie a passing grade. Which is very surprising considering I was going into watching this movie expecting the plot to fail and was only along for the ride with the CGI involved.

navar100

2013-06-23, 06:43 PM

They don't learn where or how it started, though that's what they were trying to do. At first they thought South Korea but a lead led to meeting the Mossad Agent in Israel who learned of it happening in India. Some trailer scenes aren't in the movie. Russia is given very little mention, and no one says "We lost the entire East Coast" of the United Sates, or at least I don't recall that line.

There is a solution to the problem, but it's not the Redeker Plan. It's too much of a spoiler to mention here, but I will say I didn't find it a cop-out. It meets verisimilitude.

Also, there's not a lot of gore. Scary scenes are zombie faces suddenly in your face from the shadows and two scenes of the same zombie chomping its teeth a lot in different situations.

Killer Angel

2013-06-24, 10:41 AM

The Hero: Brad Pitt, naturally

This is the thing that worries me the most; not because of BP, but because of The Hero (TM).
The book got many flaws, but the best thing is that lacks a hero, and I doubt a single hero can save the day in a global outbreak...

Jan Mattys

2013-06-24, 10:47 AM

This is the thing that worries me the most; not because of BP, but because of The Hero (TM).
The book got many flaws, but the best thing is that lacks a hero, and I doubt a single hero can save the day in a global outbreak...

Yeah, that makes me wonder too.

The book is nice, but very fragmented. How did they manage to create a story out of that?
Is the movie a sort of "wartime story" set in the same setting? Or it does manage to get all the heroes of the book somehow together (for example, showing everything as flashbacks)?

The submarine, the indian colonel, the badass pilot who heard the voice of her mother... is it all in the movie?

Feel free to spoiler :D

navar100

2013-06-24, 11:44 AM

Jan Mattys

2013-06-24, 12:07 PM

If you go into the movie expecting to see the book portrayed as a movie, you will be disappointed. You'll get references such as a one-line mention of an organ transplant and the nuclear explosion, but the movie is its own story separate from the book. If anything, the only detailed scene in the movie that has any relation to a story in the book is Israel, though unlike in the book Jerusalem eventually falls.

The movie itself is fine. It's a zombie movie with some, but not a lot, of gore. Come to think of it, I don't recall any scene of zombies eating, maybe just a bite seen from a distance. If you absolutely must, must have gore in your zombie movie, you will hate the movie. If you absolutely must, must have commensurate happenings in the movie follow the book, you will hate the movie. If you just want to see a horror movie that's not campy, you will be entertained.

Thanks. That's what I wanted to know.
And btw: I'm perfectly fine with that. I was just curious about how they handled the book, because frankly it is one of those novels you just cant put on the big screen without a major overhaul.

I'm fine with seeing a movie with the same feel to it, and set in the same timeline as the book.

And I'm quite glad to see you people loved it. Because I think we can freely state that it had a VERY high potential of being a turd of a movie :-)

Killer Angel

2013-06-24, 01:07 PM

If you just want to see a horror movie that's not campy, you will be entertained.

Good to know, I'd like to see a somehow faithful transposition of the book, and I knew this wasn't the case.
But if it's good as a stand-alone movie, then I'll give it a chance. :smallwink:

Axolotl

2013-06-24, 05:16 PM

Just got back from seeing this and I thought it was quite good. I haven't read the book so I don't know how it compares or even if there's any similarity at all beyond the world being attacked by zombies.

It was interesting to see a zombie apocalypse used as the basis for a big budget blockbuster as to the no budget horror flicks they're normally used in. It certainly had scenes that were typical zombie movie fare with a small groups scurrying down tight corridors fending off/fleeing a bunch of zombies but it also had some big set piece moments where we see what it looks like when a city is being overrun, which I don't think has ever really been done by a zombie film before.

Anyway it's pretty entertaining action/horror film although it's far from must see and I'm sure fans of the book will gnash their teeth in disappointment but it doesn't break Brad Pitt's fairly impressive streak of avoiding bad films.

Also can we please have one thread about WWZ which doesn't devolve into a ridiculously in-depth analysis of the Battle of Yonkers? Just this once?

Elm11

2013-06-24, 11:27 PM

Avilan the Grey

2013-06-25, 01:52 AM

I am completely disinterested in this movie. Because:

1. Zombies. I loathe zombie anything. I am so tired of zombies that I think I'll even prefer a movie about sparkling vampires.

2. Brad Pitt. I can't remember a movie with him I actually liked. Well that's a lie, I loved Megamind.

Killer Angel

2013-06-25, 06:11 AM

1. Zombies. I loathe zombie anything.

I can understand that.

I am so tired of zombies that I think I'll even prefer a movie about sparkling vampires.

Now, you're bluffing. :smalltongue:

Avilan the Grey

2013-06-25, 06:13 AM

Now, you're bluffing. :smalltongue:

Naw... I didn't say the Sparkly vampires would SURVIVE... :smallwink:

Primal Fury

2013-06-25, 09:54 AM

I enjoyed the movie quite a bit, though I never read the book so I don't have much to go off of. I REALLY liked the way they did zombie hordes; just a massive wall of human bodies throwing themselves at you.

My favorite scene was when
the zombies invaded Israel, all because some people wouldn't just shut the hell up.
That is exactly what you get. :smallamused:

Killer Angel

2013-06-25, 03:23 PM

Naw... I didn't say the Sparkly vampires would SURVIVE... :smallwink:

:smallbiggrin:
At this point, someone should post some demotivational poster about Twilight and Blade...

HandofShadows

2013-06-25, 03:33 PM

How about a whole page of them? :smallbiggrin:

http://search.cheezburger.com/?q=blade+twilight

Killer Angel

2013-06-25, 04:09 PM

How about a whole page of them? :smallbiggrin:

http://search.cheezburger.com/?q=blade+twilight

Best crossover ever.

Also can we please have one thread about WWZ which doesn't devolve into a ridiculously in-depth analysis of the Battle of Yonkers? Just this once?

I tend to agree... but (just to know) there's a battle of Yonkers also in the movie?

Axolotl

2013-06-25, 04:17 PM

I tend to agree... but (just to know) there's a battle of Yonkers also in the movie?No it not in the film, but it's come up in every discussion of the book I've ever seen and it always derails the thread and never gets resolved. I just hope we can avoid it for once.

Olinser

2013-06-25, 08:29 PM

The movie was a decent movie, except for one major, idiotic, cliche they HAD to bring in.

Now, I'm not saying that they should have religiously followed the book, but one of the big reasons the book was so popular was because it detailed how ordinary and random people handled essentially the end of the world as they know it. And eventually, humanity bands together, and turns the tide with resilience and teamwork. No sudden cure, just the resilience of humanity to work together to overcome

In the movie they insisted on having the Designated World Hero

Find essentially an 'IWINBUTTON' against the zombies. It was so ****ing stupid, forced, and cliched that I almost just walked out of the theatre in disgust.

So Brad Pitt saves the world. Yeah, that's fantastic.

navar100

2013-06-25, 10:41 PM

I like the "I Win Button". It's about time there's a "cure" of some sort in the Zombie Apocalypse genre. The book's version of victory is fine as well. I'm just glad, for once, the world recovers. I like "The Walking Dead", but it's nice to have something different for a change.

We see the major outbreak instead of it already happened as someone wakes up from a coma (28 Days Later as well). We see cities being overrun instead of it being farm country or some other out of the way place. We see the military taking action instead of abandoned battle fields. We get an ending of the zombies being defeated instead of everyone dies with maybe one or two survivors riding off into the sunset. Also, everyone is cooperative trying to solve the crisis. No jerks. No hardasses for the sake of being a hardass. The movie breaks almost every Zombie Apocalypse trope, I was able to enjoy it more just for that.

Anyway, when they were driving the RV naturally I thought of Dale's from "The Walking Dead". Could have been coincidence. Could have been an in-joke. However, the lab zombie at the W.H.O. facility, not to be confused with the vault chomping teeth zombie, that was Michonne! :smallbiggrin:

Starbuck_II

2013-06-25, 11:15 PM

Secretly Bit: None.

I thought it was going to be Thomas. I mean think back, did anyone actually check over the kid? He could totally have been this.

Metahuman1

2013-06-25, 11:32 PM

And the fact that he wasn't is a redeeming quality of the movie in and of itself.

Now, personally, I dislike that Israel falls (Your seriously telling me that a bunch of things who's attacks consist of bite and then stand there and try to eat it alive or otherwise and don't use weapons were gonna take down a country that has a law making it mandatory for every adult to spend time in the military and prolonged time in the national guard right when you get out of the military and were every citizen of legal age has access to military grade weapons and no shortage of ammo? Really? And why, cause the filmmakers wanted Irony? ) But I did like that there WAS a freaking cure for this thing. I've never liked the idea that once zombies start the only possible option is to kill every one of them one at a time, I was glad that at least THAT notion was treated as being exactly as insane as it is.

Magatsu Izanagi

2013-06-25, 11:39 PM

Movie looks great. I've only seen the trailers so far, and gathered that it's nothing at all like the book. My main gripe is this:

If you're going to build a 50 metre high wall around an entire goddamn city, why can't you give it an overhang?

I mean seriously, what the hell? You've already undertaken a very impressive feat of engineering, so why not go that little bit further and actually make it -useful-? It wouldn't have been that hard, and at an absolute minimum, the zombies would've had to build up to four or five times the numbers in the film to actually start getting over the wall. An overhang means you'd be able to patrol the top, too, so you'd be able to better defend against them.

Just sayin'.
They must have taken a few pages from the movie version of the Starship Troopers Mobile Infantry when they designed that wall. It basically sounds like the outpost on Planet P, only with zombies instead of bugs.

What did they have in terms of defenses? I'm guessing they didn't have any artillery on hand; if they did, I doubt the zombies would have reached the critical mass needed in order to scale the wall, because so many of them would have been pulped many klicks out.

huttj509

2013-06-26, 01:08 AM

But I did like that there WAS a freaking cure for this thing. I've never liked the idea that once zombies start the only possible option is to kill every one of them one at a time, I was glad that at least THAT notion was treated as being exactly as insane as it is.

But there's NOT a cure. Once a zombie? Only solution is to kill. What there was, was a way to get uninfected out of the way so mass attacks could be used. A way to let people attack the zombies without turning as soon as a single bite got through. It wasn't a cure, it wasn't a weapon, it was camouflage.

Camouflage on its own doesn't win a war, but it can sure make it easier to escape and plan ambushes.

MLai

2013-06-26, 03:18 AM

This wasn't a great movie. Worth matinee price only. If the cinema had MoS in 3D, I would have preferred to just watch MoS again (in 3D) rather than this movie.

Things wrong with this movie:

(1) This is not WWZ the book, at all. Not only that, it is not a "global zombie apocalypse that's happening" military-action movie either. If this movie was Independence Day, except zombies... that would have been very cool. But it wasn't. It was a few set pieces that had a flavor of that, for example during the panoramic scenes of certain cities being overrun. But the rest of the movie is your typical "small group of ppl sneaking through enclosed spaces" sequences, that you could watch on Walking Dead or low-budget zombie flicks. The entire movie should have been about military forces busting zombie human waves with WMD! That's the whole point of a WWZ-inspired summer blockbuster!

If I could rewrite this movie, I would have given it 2 fronts like in Independence Day. The Only-One-Man-Can-Stop front, where Will Smith/ Brad Pitt do their hero infiltration thing. And the Total-War front, with the troops against massed aliens/ zombies on the battlefield. This movie only had the Only-One-Man-Can-Stop.

(2) So this movie isn't WWZ, what is it? It's Brad Pitt: The PG-rated Video Game. When the previous poster said "this movie has no gore," what he really meant to say is "this movie has no gore." As in, absolutely none. Not just zombie gore. I mean any type at all. I don't watch zombie movies for the gore, but for god's sake, it's a zombie movie.

The plot feels like you're playing through a video game, from 1 level to the next, interspersed with dumbed-down cutscenes. As Brad Pitt. Not Gerry Lane, the Special Forces Commando or UN Superspy. No, he's Brad Pitt. Tell me anything the character said or did in the movie that makes you think he's an actual character with a special skill/ knowledge set, rather than just a blankly heroic Brad Pitt.

(3) The cure is nonsensical. First the scientists say, "You can't counter them with biological agents, they're already dead it makes them completely immune!" Then Brad Pitt says, "They don't bite terminally sick ppl because the disease needs healthy carriers!" And all the scientists nod. Wait wut.

But let's go with that for a minute. So the cure/ camouflage is to pump yourself with various deadly diseases, but neutered (somehow) so it only tricks the Zeds while you're healthy in reality. And the handwave is "That's how IRL vaccines work." Except it's not. And if your fake-diseases don't make you sick, that means you're not sick, that means the Zeds won't be tricked! How the F does it work?!

(4) No Israel on 10,000 alternate Earths would be letting ppl in while there's a little-understood global zombie epidemic raging just outside its fortress walls. The fact that WWZ Israel is letting busloads of ppl in through checkpoints is hilarious. Oh, and it has an open civilian airport. Wut.

(5) I find it odd how any contact-transmission disease that only takes 10 secs for full infection, can jump across oceans. It should have burned itself out in discrete population centers (cities). I think this is where the book clarifies while the movie leaves you in the dark, because I'm suspecting unmentioned mass Zed migrations out of overrun cities.

(6) There is no "Moscow is a black hole!" In fact this movie has no Moscow. Weird. Maybe in an early draft the movie's finale piece was supposed to be Moscow instead of some nondescript building in a countryside. That would have been cool.

Axolotl

2013-06-26, 05:37 AM

(2) So this movie isn't WWZ, what is it? It's Brad Pitt: The PG-rated Video Game. When the previous poster said "this movie has no gore," what he really meant to say is "this movie has no gore." As in, absolutely none. Not just zombie gore. I mean any type at all. I don't watch zombie movies for the gore, but for god's sake, it's a zombie movie.I think we must have watched different films because I remember quite a bit of gore in the film.

MLai

2013-06-26, 05:57 AM

I think we must have watched different films because I remember quite a bit of gore in the film.
It's a zombie movie which doesn't have a hint of nudity, and it's PG-13... draw your own conclusions.
I'll admit this movie did a pretty good job keeping up the viewer heart rate despite having had an executive order to keep its age rating down at PG-13. But the lack of any splatter gradually becomes noticeable no matter what.

Hopeless

2013-06-26, 06:03 AM

Why do I get the feeling they should have revealed Brad Pitt's character is terminally ill and survived the first wave because his specific illness renders it harmless perhaps even explains why he survives throughout the movie because he's already infected thus being ignored by the zombies' and the virus is actually what's keeping him alive?

MLai

2013-06-26, 07:58 AM

JustSomeGuy

2013-06-26, 08:22 AM

Starbuck_II

2013-06-26, 10:21 AM

Who was the 'hero' in the thing - lo and behold, a former soldier in a building of scientists!

Exactly Brad's character wasn't a nobody. He was a elite forces dude that retired.
I am confused why he didn't go Curb stomping every time a zombie was on the ground in the beginning (can't bite without teeth). But I'll assume he was scared for his family.

BlackDragonKing

2013-06-26, 11:03 AM

Hopeless

2013-06-26, 11:16 AM

This may be the single worst adaptation of a book I have ever seen, but I'm just chiming in on the question of the "camouflage", because that seriously bugs me.

1. It working implies that the Zombies are trying to spread the virus to other humans rather than devour all living beings nearby with the spread being a convenient side-effect. Would that mean that the zombies completely ignore dogs and cats and stuff because it's a virus for humans?

Did anyone see lots of dead animals and was this mentioned in the book version?

2. If the Zombies are indeed dead, and they have to be for the headshot-only policy to work on any sort of level, why does it matter if their host is healthy? They will die almost instantly from the infection anyway and cancer and smallpox won't stop you from going to bite healthy people.

Given the brief glimpses from the trailer staying out of sight and remaining undetected sounds a better strategy than just shooting them and hoping every shot is either a head shot or effective enough to slow the rest down which is a no...

3. "Predators avoid sick prey". OK, just going to point this out, but predators have higher brain functions. Zombies are a sack of teeth on legs carrying a virus around. Zombies don't think, Viruses don't have brains, so what exactly is doing the cognition required to distinguish "healthy" from "not-healthy"? :smallconfused:

How can they tell them apart and more importantly why would they avoid them?

I'm more inclined to believe certain illnesses might actually counter the virus but that still requires the victim to survive the original zombie attack and somehow evade them afterwards.

Oh and even more importantly avoid being shot by the regular military or whatever else is armed and gunning at anyone they suspect of having been turned into a zombie and with your immune victim bearing evidence of having been bit I suspect we might see a repeat of what happened at the end of that Night of the living dead movie... I hope I got the name right!

navar100

2013-06-26, 11:24 AM

I thought it was going to be Thomas. I mean think back, did anyone actually check over the kid? He could totally have been this.

The Script rules out the possibility of a Secretly Bit since you become a zombie 12 seconds after infection. However, I did think for a moment the Israeli soldier would turn on the airplane despite her hand being chopped off. She wouldn't be Secretly Bit since the Hero already knew. Obviously she was in pain from the amputation, but it turned out that's all it was.

huttj509

2013-06-26, 12:27 PM

Oh and even more importantly avoid being shot by the regular military or whatever else is armed and gunning at anyone they suspect of having been turned into a zombie and with your immune victim bearing evidence of having been bit I suspect we might see a repeat of what happened at the end of that Night of the living dead movie... I hope I got the name right!

They're not immune to turning from getting bit.

The vaccinated don't get bit.

The vaccinated are still in danger from the diseases, it's just that they picked diseases with long term durations so that they could cure once people were out of the need for the stealth.

And responding to another poster...if nudity = gore you need to see a doctor. Like, yesterday.

Raimun

2013-06-26, 07:45 PM

Whoa. I'm really looking forward to this.

I just hope they release it here for the big screen...

MLai

2013-06-27, 05:41 AM

The vaccinated are still in danger from the diseases, it's just that they picked diseases with long term durations so that they could cure once people were out of the need for the stealth.
Even assuming the camouflage works as advertised, that doesn't make much sense either. Those diseases that they were bantering about are not stuff you can pump into yourself, and then later just take some penicillin and forget about it. You'd be too sick to get out of bed, not to mention contagious to other ppl.
And even if somehow they had some super-science that neutered the pathogens they decided on using... if it's neutered and you don't get truly sick, then why would zombies avoid you?

And responding to another poster...if nudity = gore you need to see a doctor. Like, yesterday.
I was simply letting you know that it has neither nudity nor gore, since those are commonly found in summer horror movies.

Killer Angel

2013-06-27, 05:59 AM

Did anyone see lots of dead animals and was this mentioned in the book version?

given that the film has (basically) just the title in common with the book, I'd say that we should avoid comparisons...

SmartAlec

2013-06-27, 06:06 AM

Some characters and events were from the book, at least. But yes, maybe the thread title should be changed to Brad Pitt's Zombie Adventure.

Darth Credence

2013-06-27, 09:19 AM

I haven't read the book, so I have no basis for comparison. But the movie by itself is probably my favorite zombie movie of all time.

I was really enjoying the movie prior to them getting to the boat. It may have been a bit convenient that they discovered the 12 seconds time, but I could have seen him coming up with a close approximation even without an exact timer. I loved it when he stood over the edge of the roof counting down seconds to see if getting blood in his mouth did anything. And when the homeless guy on the street was passed by, I figured that would be a key, and I was thinking later that it would be the opposite of his movement is life statement and they would only go to noise or movement, so I'm glad it didn't turn out to be that simple.

The movie really sealed it for me when they started to use the term zombie, and it was clear that zombie lore existed in universe. So many zombie shows have no one having any clue, and that just doesn't make sense.

As to how the camouflage works, I thought it was fairly clear. Whatever pathogen is causing the zombies is not interested in having the zombies feed - it is just interested in creating more hosts for itself. So the zombies are not trying to eat people, just bite and pass on the infection. This also explains why it spreads so rapidly through cities - the zombies don't stop to feed, just bite and move on. The virus will only take hold in a healthy human host, either because those with other diseases have an immune system running high that might throw off the infection, or whatever other diseases people have may just compete with the zombie bug and the zombie bug knows it won't win. I would guess they can detect by smell whether someone will make a good host or not, and they pass by those that won't because creating new hosts is their only reason for existing. I would assume they would defend themselves if they were attacked, but not go after people that cannot be hosts for more of the bug. If the argument against that is that the infection can't think and infected would just bite anyone, then I would say this movie is not for you. There are things you do have to accept in the movie, and as a zombie movie goes I think it is a lot better than really any other explanation I have heard for zombies.

No gore - I thought there was a perfectly fine amount of gore. I don't go to a movie needing gore, or wanting there to be none. I go hoping for an entertaining show. At no point did I feel thrown out of the story because the gore level was inappropriately high or low, so whether they kept it toned down to maintain PG-13 or not meant nothing to me.

Infections spreading - it is noted that the initial infections took much longer to turn. Measured in minutes rather than seconds in South Korea, and that was not the starting place. It may have been measured in hours or days rather than minutes where it started, which would allow for exposed people to spread throughout the world.

Overhang on the wall in Jerusalem, and how Jerusalem was overrun - How many instances of zombie lore show zombies piling up like that to get over a wall? They built the wall because the 10th man decided to believe in zombies, but I don't know of any zombie lore that would make you think that they would work that way, So just building it high was what they went for. Once zombies were over the wall, even with everyone able to shoot, it is something that expands exponentially. There were a whole bunch of refugees right there, attracting the zombies. Once they were bit, they start to move out and attack more. Hard to contain, even with a ton of armed people. And it happens fast enough that people can't exactly go to the armory and get weapons in time.

Bhu

2013-06-27, 04:18 PM

why do all sci fi survival type films need to be about a group of clueless nobodies, why can't we see how the badass elite special force types deal with it? It would be much more believable and waaay more exiting to watch than some convoluted junk about how a bunch of desk clerks/high schoolers manage to outsurvive people trained and experienced in how to escape, evade, fight and subsit out in nowhere.

Know why predator 1 was better than all the other predator films? Clue: elite special forces, not city cops, scientists, schoolies or criminals. Why were the marines in aliens the default reaction? Because they get stuff done (when not hampered by plot idiocy - 500rd sentry guns? Shady corporation shadyness?? An officer on a strategic par with the aforementioned highschoolers??? Let's not go on though!). Who was the 'hero' in the thing - lo and behold, a former soldier in a building of scientists!

Because they fall in the horror genre. Mainstream hollywood films tend to embrace one of two large groups of horror fans, atmospheric or special effects, and most americans by far belong in the second category. Special Effects fans are believed to watch films to see spfx push the boundaries on what can be depicted and remain realistic. They then tend to subdivide into slasher fans, monster fans, torture porn fans, and other stuff. Survival horror can fall into either category, but given the violence and gore they generally fall into spfx more than atmospheric.

Film studio execs generally want to keep the budget small, and move the pace along so the PC's can be offed, that way the audience gets the maximum number of death scenes in the shortest amount of time, and it increases the studios profits (in theory). The easiest way to do this is lazy writing, in other words by handing all of the PC's the idiot ball.

Chromascope3D

2013-06-27, 06:18 PM

So, I had no idea that Max Brooks (The author of the book) was the son of Mel Brooks. It just blew my mind.

Bob_the_Mighty

2013-06-27, 07:13 PM

Overhang on the wall in Jerusalem, and how Jerusalem was overrun - How many instances of zombie lore show zombies piling up like that to get over a wall? They built the wall because the 10th man decided to believe in zombies, but I don't know of any zombie lore that would make you think that they would work that way, So just building it high was what they went for. Once zombies were over the wall, even with everyone able to shoot, it is something that expands exponentially. There were a whole bunch of refugees right there, attracting the zombies. Once they were bit, they start to move out and attack more. Hard to contain, even with a ton of armed people. And it happens fast enough that people can't exactly go to the armory and get weapons in time.The biggest problem I had with that part was that nobody noticed it happening. They had military patrols and choppers flying around everywhere and at no point did anybody seem them swarming the wall in large enough number to create a pile high enough that they could get over the wall?

Moglorosh

2013-06-28, 07:52 AM

3. "Predators avoid sick prey". OK, just going to point this out, but predators have higher brain functions. Zombies are a sack of teeth on legs carrying a virus around. Zombies don't think, Viruses don't have brains, so what exactly is doing the cognition required to distinguish "healthy" from "not-healthy"? :smallconfused:

Brain function doesn't matter because the quote is idiotic. Predators specifically target sick prey because they're the easier kill.

Darth Credence

2013-06-28, 09:03 AM

The biggest problem I had with that part was that nobody noticed it happening. They had military patrols and choppers flying around everywhere and at no point did anybody seem them swarming the wall in large enough number to create a pile high enough that they could get over the wall?

Yeah, I've got no argument for that. They should have seen it. I'm not sure what they could have done even if they had seen it, and it may have even worked better if they had seen it but just couldn't stop it in time.

BlackDragonKing

2013-06-28, 12:21 PM

Brain function doesn't matter because the quote is idiotic. Predators specifically target sick prey because they're the easier kill.

This is also a good point. Komodo Dragons can make an entire strategy out of wounding their target and then just stalking it until the wound's infection makes it too weak to run or fight.

Once more, I really don't see how the Zombies can discriminate targets; viruses aren't smart, and Zombies can't think.

Infect human > See another human
if (healthy) {
Bite;
}
else (sick) {
Ignore;
}

Is a bit overcomplicated for an entity that has the cognitive abilities of a brick, particularly since the diseases are not visible to the naked eye, ear, or nose and the Zombie has no other way of observing its prey.

Infect human > see warm body > YUM YUM EATING TIME works. A thought process complex enough to decide that somebody is too sick to be a good Zombie is really goddamn stupid. :smallconfused:

Darth Credence

2013-06-28, 02:29 PM

Once more, I really don't see how the Zombies can discriminate targets; viruses aren't smart, and Zombies can't think.

Infect human > See another human
if (healthy) {
Bite;
}
else (sick) {
Ignore;
}

Is a bit overcomplicated for an entity that has the cognitive abilities of a brick, particularly since the diseases are not visible to the naked eye, ear, or nose and the Zombie has no other way of observing its prey.

Infect human > see warm body > YUM YUM EATING TIME works. A thought process complex enough to decide that somebody is too sick to be a good Zombie is really goddamn stupid. :smallconfused:

I really don't think the zombies are interested in eating - it gains the organism nothing, as something eaten is not going to be a host for more of the zombie bug (while some said it was viral in the movie, others said it couldn't be). Comparisons to hunters looking for food, therefor, don't matter. They want hosts that will be most likely to be able to further spread the bug, which probably means ones that are in the best shape. Maybe the diseases they avoid are ones that specifically make the host less ambulatory, or would interfere with the bug controlling the host.

So really it is more - detect host that can support the bug -> bite, move on to next possible host.

I also think they are detecting diseases by smell. I've read that dogs can be trained to detect some diseases by smell, and while I don't know how accurate that is, I know that just because we can't smell it doesn't mean it can't be smelled.

Silverraptor

2013-06-30, 10:41 AM

I'd like to point out that the movie did clarify at the beginning that they had no idea what exactly the zombie bug was. You kind of have to accept that you're not going to completely understand what makes it tick when your watching a movie like that.

huttj509

2013-07-01, 12:09 AM

Killer Angel

2013-07-01, 06:06 AM

I figure it's like the fungus stuff that can make ants climb high into trees to spread the spores more easily, or the worms that alter them to be eaten by birds to spread it.

There's some nightmare inducing stuff in nature when it comes to parasites affecting the minds of the hosts. It's not outside the realm of moviescience to have it need someone not in particularly poor health, and able to detect what it needs.

Yeah, but given how quickly the infection is spreading, to make such a distinction seems... worthless, if not counterproductive.
A flying worm, doesn't need to alter its appearance.

Avilan the Grey

2013-07-01, 08:07 AM

I figure it's like the fungus stuff that can make ants climb high into trees to spread the spores more easily, or the worms that alter them to be eaten by birds to spread it.

There's some nightmare inducing stuff in nature when it comes to parasites affecting the minds of the hosts. It's not outside the realm of moviescience to have it need someone not in particularly poor health, and able to detect what it needs.

Oh I agree. And I am a little surprised nobody has done the "brain altering fungii" horror movie yet. I saw my first documentary where it was mentioned when I was arond 12 and had nightmares for days.

My favorite parasite, however, is the one that takes the place of a fish's tongue. LOOKS really creepy, but is far less horrible than the fungus above.

navar100

2013-07-01, 12:06 PM

Brain function doesn't matter because the quote is idiotic. Predators specifically target sick prey because they're the easier kill.

But corpses rising from the dead to roam the earth chasing, biting, and eating the living makes perfect sense.

zlefin

2013-07-01, 02:11 PM

the dead rising makes more sense than them being able to beat a modern military using melee attacks :)

Bhu

2013-07-01, 03:19 PM

Oh I agree. And I am a little surprised nobody has done the "brain altering fungii" horror movie yet. I saw my first documentary where it was mentioned when I was arond 12 and had nightmares for days.

My favorite parasite, however, is the one that takes the place of a fish's tongue. LOOKS really creepy, but is far less horrible than the fungus above.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1713476/

Avilan the Grey

2013-07-02, 01:24 AM

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1713476/

I assume this is supposed to be the fungii thing? None of the reviews spell it out.

Bhu

2013-07-02, 01:24 PM

its the tongue parasite taken to absurd levels

Avilan the Grey

2013-07-02, 02:15 PM

Ah :smallbiggrin:

Spuddles

2013-07-02, 02:30 PM

Watching a play through of 'The Last of Us' was more entertaining, and had MUCH better characters and writing, than 'World War Z'.

WWZ was kinda tedious.

Killer Angel

2013-07-02, 03:09 PM

Watching a play through of 'The Last of Us' was more entertaining, and had MUCH better characters and writing, than 'World War Z'.

Many videogames got a very solid writing, and you're talking about a largely awarded title.
It's not a surprise, really.

Spuddles

2013-07-02, 03:37 PM

I just wish, instead of spending all that money on Brad Pitt, the producers had spent more money on writing.

Oh well.

Cikomyr

2013-07-02, 06:24 PM

I had lots of fun, to be honest. The action and scare was good. Spoony says that any piece of entertainment is allowed to do ONE scare jump, and that movie uses it perfectly.

The rest is good tension. I love how they actually build up the tension in stealth scenes, and ACTUALLY SUCCEED. Too often I see a tension built up just for them to fail at the last ****ing second. This movie does not do that; they sneaked past the zombies with success.

Biggest facepalm for me was the fall of Jerusalem. I don't know.. there was something so... cliche about it. I don't see why it was important to see it fall just as Brad Pitt got there. Bit of a contrivance for an action scene, really.

Everything else seemed to flow naturally, and organically. I'm glad I've seen it and I will recommend it to my girlfriend.

The Glyphstone

2013-07-02, 07:42 PM

I just wish, instead of spending all that money on Brad Pitt, the producers had spent more money on writing.

Oh well.

You wanted Brad Pitt to spend less money on himself?:smallbiggrin:

ShadowFireLance

2013-07-02, 09:50 PM

[QUOTE=Cikomyr;15543762]I had lots of fun, to be honest. The action and scare was good. Spoony says that any piece of entertainment is allowed to do ONE scare jump, and that movie uses it perfectly.

The rest is good tension. I love how they actually build up the tension in stealth scenes, and ACTUALLY SUCCEED. Too often I see a tension built up just for them to fail at the last ****ing second. This movie does not do that; they sneaked past the zombies with success.

Biggest facepalm for me was the fall of Jerusalem. I don't know.. there was something so... cliche about it. I don't see why it was important to see it fall just as Brad Pitt got there. Bit of a contrivance for an action scene, really.

Everything else seemed to flow naturally, and organically. I'm glad I've seen it and I will recommend it to my girlfriend.[/QUOTE

This is pretty good discription, just got back from seeing it, I actually liked the Fall of Jerusalem, I think it was pretty cool myself.

On a side note, This is what Zombies SHOULD be, not shambling stuff, but literally Scary as heck Zombies.

Cikomyr

2013-07-03, 05:40 AM

This is pretty good discription, just got back from seeing it, I actually liked the Fall of Jerusalem, I think it was pretty cool myself.

On a side note, This is what Zombies SHOULD be, not shambling stuff, but literally Scary as heck Zombies.

The fall of Jerusalem itself was not something that bugged me; except the obvious fact that the Israelis did not seemed to have any contingency plans. Come on people, you ever hear of LAYERED DEFENSES?

It's the fact that it happened just as Brad Pitt was visiting the area. It's was just... too contrived.

If we had seen it as part of a side-documentary.. then maybe. But Jerusalem falls just as we get there? That's waaaay too cliche for my taste. The "safe haven that falls within minutes of us getting there because they thought they were imperveous" is something that always bugged me.

Spuddles

2013-07-03, 05:43 AM

On a side note, This is what Zombies SHOULD be, not shambling stuff, but literally Scary as heck Zombies.

Honest question- what was the last big screen non-parody zombie movie with slow zombies? Land of the Dead?

Killer Angel

2013-07-03, 06:09 AM

Cikomyr

2013-07-03, 06:31 AM

They even didn't bother about monitoring the perimeter. They built the wall and forgot about it. :smallsigh:

Yhea.. that too.

Same problems the Tollans had in SG1. They think one massive layer of defense is sufficient to ensure your eternal protection, never actually considering any strategies beyond ONE BIG LINE OF DEFENSE.

Compartmentalize the city; so that only one area can fall to the infection at a time.
Distraction techniques; try to draw the largest mobs of zombies away from your defense with sounds. (the speaker-helicopter from Apocalypse Now would be perfect).

And that's just two measures off the top of my head I can imagine. It's more about intelligent defense behavior than just crafty defense building.

Spuddles

2013-07-03, 06:33 AM

It's more about intelligent defense behavior than just crafty defense building.

Eh, it's more about a big budget action sequences. It felt contrived because it was contrived.

People's behavior in zombie movies is never that great. That's what made WWZ the book so good- people got smart. In so many horror movies, protagonists don't necessarily get smarter, they just get more badass.

Cikomyr

2013-07-03, 06:40 AM

Oh man. I just read on TVTropes how this movie was plagued by a thousand problems while filming..

All things considered, it's a miracle it ended up as good at it currently is.

Spuddles

2013-07-03, 07:31 AM

Oh man. I just read on TVTropes how this movie was plagued by a thousand problems while filming..

All things considered, it's a miracle it ended up as good at it currently is.

The whole Russia rewrite is pretty crazy.

Brad Pitt has kinda weird taste in movies.

Cikomyr

2013-07-03, 07:47 AM

The whole Russia rewrite is pretty crazy.

Brad Pitt has kinda weird taste in movies.

I personally think taking out the Russia part was a good idea. The argument was that it just conflicted with the character established and developped for Gerry's character. Having him go rambo at the zombies would have.. clashed with the themes previously established.

Even if the current climax was of a lesser scale, my personal take is that it probably fitted better the theme of the movie. It's about small steps. Personal achievements, taken together.

Gerry was a bit badass, but he didn't came off to me as ye awesome supersoldier. And I'm actually fine with that. He had awareness, his head on his shoulder, knew how to handle himself in dangerous situation. But he wasn't freakkin' Captain America.

MLai

2013-07-04, 04:41 AM

Thanks for the direct to the filming problems. Wow.

I've always hated the last act (the WHO building), and have always felt a drastic shift in tone (that I did not like) between that act and the previous world-shaking big set pieces. Now I know why.

I did not like the "scaling back" of the movie with the WHO building act. I watched World War Z because I wanted to see a zombie war, which the first 2/3 of the movie largely delivered. I felt the WHO building act was basically a lesser version of something I could have watched on The Walking Dead. That scene honestly did not come remotely close to the best TWD scenes. I always wondered why the movie didn't take advantage of itself being a summer blockbuster, and just do a "Rambo vs zombies" final act which is what I paid to see.

dehro

2013-07-04, 09:38 AM

I came at this movie after having watched a rather spectacular trailer and not having read the book.

it was entertaining and well crafted, visually impressive and very well paced.

it was also a big ol' pile of idiot balls rolling all over the screen.

the most obvious plot blunders I can come up with off the top of my head:

only one scientist on the world-saving vital mission to find a cure for a virus?? no back-up, no support team? only 5-6 men to protect said scientist as he's headed towards the epicenter of a zombie outbreak? seriously, what has brad pitt's character to do with finding a cure for a disease? what does he bring to the rescue team that others can't do in his stead other than plot armour? why was that huge aircraft empty of anything even remotely useful like a science/medic kit, another 100 men with flamethrowers.. or a tank? in fact, why was there not a single tank in the entire movie? squeaking bicycles??
how is it that the oh so many islands that are equiped with hospitals and airports didn't get sealed off and used as save havens (yeah..ok, nova scotia..but hey.. madagascar, england, the canaries, hawaii, australia, indonesia etc etc completely forgotten or unexplicably run over in a matter of hours despite being very hard to get to for a brainless walking corpse?? pull the other one..)
comunications that break down in a matter of hours despite there not having been worldwide nuclear fallout or other similarly incapacitating catastrophes?

the biggest one though..the one that really takes the cake:

a ****ing worldwide counter for the casualties!!!!!!!!!!!

they can't reach most of the civilized world and comunications are at best difficult if not outright impossible on a non military level..yet somehow they manage to keep track of just how many people have turned into zombies at any given moment.
there are plenty more acts of plot driven stupidity on the part of the characters..but this one isn't plot directed or anything..it's just plain idiotic.

Axolotl

2013-07-04, 01:11 PM

seriously, what has brad pitt's character to do with finding a cure for a disease? what does he bring to the rescue team that others can't do in his stead other than plot armour?They say in the film. His job is to track the infections back to the source. They make a big deal about how great he is at investigating stuff.

why was that huge aircraft empty of anything even remotely useful like a science/medic kit, another 100 men with flamethrowers.. or a tank?
The hell is a science kit? Flamethrowers would be less than useless and while I'm sure some military nut can correct me but I really would not expect many aircraft carriers to have tanks on them. Not saying they don't but it strikes me as a bizarre thing to complain about not being there.

dehro

2013-07-04, 04:31 PM

They say in the film. His job is to track the infections back to the source. They make a big deal about how great he is at investigating stuff.
yeah..they say so..but what we get to see is nothing more than very simple common sense..if he had been so great he'd have hijacked the "lucky" soldier fromt he get go because he should have picked up straight away that the others claimed that for unclear reasons he was spared. if he's an super good detective..would that not be worth investigating at least as much as running off to Israel turned out to be?

The hell is a science kit? Flamethrowers would be less than useless and while I'm sure some military nut can correct me but I really would not expect many aircraft carriers to have tanks on them. Not saying they don't but it strikes me as a bizarre thing to complain about not being there.
dunno, anything that could be used to investigate a virus, I would say.. if you were sent to investigate a place where a virus has broken out and you don't know if you'll find a lab ready for you, wouldn't you try to take as much equipment you'll need with you to examine blood samples, isolate a virus or whatever else you'd need to do? for all we can see the science guy didn't even have a siringe on him.
the point of complaining about the lack of tanks, flametrowers or whatnot wasn't in terms of what can or cannot be carried with a military supply aircraft. the point of my objection was that it's stupid to send a grand total of 6 men and 1 scientist in no man's land and expect them to survive without giving them the very best equipment you can give them. a tank would have worked quite nicely to keep out of the reach of zombies...what with not having windows they can headbut through and being seal-able from the inside. you don't like tanks? fair enough.. they could have given them some other means of transportation..or..as I said, more men in support. anything would have been better than the couple of guns they got.
sending 6 men with minimal to totally inadequate equipment on a mission that is pretty much a last resort to save humanity is beyond moronic...especially when you've got a big ol' empty aircraft that actually CAN carry more than 6 men..especially if said mission starts from a fully equipped aircraft carrier that must be able to field all sorts of resources.

Killer Angel

2013-07-05, 06:14 AM

only one scientist on the world-saving vital mission to find a cure for a virus?? no back-up, no support team? only 5-6 men to protect said scientist as he's headed towards the epicenter of a zombie outbreak?

Clearly, there were many similar missions on stage, but they didn't tell Brad Pitt, to keep the morale high. :smalltongue:

Spuddles

2013-07-05, 08:27 AM

Silverraptor

2013-07-07, 12:24 PM

The fall of Jerusalem itself was not something that bugged me; except the obvious fact that the Israelis did not seemed to have any contingency plans. Come on people, you ever hear of LAYERED DEFENSES?

It's the fact that it happened just as Brad Pitt was visiting the area. It's was just... too contrived.

If we had seen it as part of a side-documentary.. then maybe. But Jerusalem falls just as we get there? That's waaaay too cliche for my taste. The "safe haven that falls within minutes of us getting there because they thought they were imperveous" is something that always bugged me.

My Dad brought that up too during that scene. Layered defense would've been the most practical thing to do, especially since they put the suspended fences above head height along the walkways to block off the zombies dropping down from the building above, so a layered defense would've been great.

I actually really liked the symbolism the fall of Jerusalem portrayed, even if they could have done it in a less cliché way. I liked that, despite all of humanity's weapons and technology, you can't hold back "Nature" as they classified this disease at the beginning. It especially went with the symbolism of fighting nature with nature at the end.

yeah..they say so..but what we get to see is nothing more than very simple common sense..if he had been so great he'd have hijacked the "lucky" soldier fromt he get go because he should have picked up straight away that the others claimed that for unclear reasons he was spared. if he's an super good detective..would that not be worth investigating at least as much as running off to Israel turned out to be?

dunno, anything that could be used to investigate a virus, I would say.. if you were sent to investigate a place where a virus has broken out and you don't know if you'll find a lab ready for you, wouldn't you try to take as much equipment you'll need with you to examine blood samples, isolate a virus or whatever else you'd need to do? for all we can see the science guy didn't even have a siringe on him.
the point of complaining about the lack of tanks, flametrowers or whatnot wasn't in terms of what can or cannot be carried with a military supply aircraft. the point of my objection was that it's stupid to send a grand total of 6 men and 1 scientist in no man's land and expect them to survive without giving them the very best equipment you can give them. a tank would have worked quite nicely to keep out of the reach of zombies...what with not having windows they can headbut through and being seal-able from the inside. you don't like tanks? fair enough.. they could have given them some other means of transportation..or..as I said, more men in support. anything would have been better than the couple of guns they got.
sending 6 men with minimal to totally inadequate equipment on a mission that is pretty much a last resort to save humanity is beyond moronic...especially when you've got a big ol' empty aircraft that actually CAN carry more than 6 men..especially if said mission starts from a fully equipped aircraft carrier that must be able to field all sorts of resources.

Well, considering how they lost the east coast and the disease was spreading rapidly, those guys and the scientist were probably all they had on hand at the moment. You're assuming that the military had all their resources and personnel to choose from, but its quite clear that they were taken completely from surprise. I got the vibe that a lot of the stuff and people they wanted were cut off and completely over run by the point that Brad Pitt arrived on the ship.

dehro

2013-07-07, 03:37 PM

Well, considering how they lost the east coast and the disease was spreading rapidly, those guys and the scientist were probably all they had on hand at the moment. You're assuming that the military had all their resources and personnel to choose from, but its quite clear that they were taken completely from surprise. I got the vibe that a lot of the stuff and people they wanted were cut off and completely over run by the point that Brad Pitt arrived on the ship.

no..I'm assuming that the carrier battle group they set off from was not compromised because it was already at sea, as most battle groups tend to be, and therefore should have been able to field a few more guns and most likely a few more eggheads too..at least more than just the one.
Field medics, a hazmat suit and so on must have been available.
They were sending people away on other ships, cruise ships and what have you on account of having too many people aboard. Surely they must have found a few more people who know how to use a microscope and a scalpel?

The movie did give the impression that they didn't have all the resources they wanted, yes..but whoever wrote that scene seems to have forgotten they were sitting on a ship that has a crew of several thousand people, some of which must have been doctors and scientists...and that's without looking into what the other ships part of the group could field.

btw, I had no idea who the author of the book was, lol.. it does make me want to read the zombie survival guide, something which I have always procrastinated but did mean to do.

Mutant Sheep

2013-07-07, 05:10 PM

His name is Max Brooks, and as has been pointed out in this thread, his zombie physics still don't work. Fun read though. The audiobook has Mark Hamill.:smallbiggrin:

Silverraptor

2013-07-07, 05:34 PM

no..I'm assuming that the carrier battle group they set off from was not compromised because it was already at sea, as most battle groups tend to be, and therefore should have been able to field a few more guns and most likely a few more eggheads too..at least more than just the one.
Field medics, a hazmat suit and so on must have been available.
They were sending people away on other ships, cruise ships and what have you on account of having too many people aboard. Surely they must have found a few more people who know how to use a microscope and a scalpel?

The movie did give the impression that they didn't have all the resources they wanted, yes..but whoever wrote that scene seems to have forgotten they were sitting on a ship that has a crew of several thousand people, some of which must have been doctors and scientists...and that's without looking into what the other ships part of the group could field.

btw, I had no idea who the author of the book was, lol.. it does make me want to read the zombie survival guide, something which I have always procrastinated but did mean to do.

A battlecarrier crew with the logistical nightmare of the entire Atlantic ocean if not the whole world. Remember, the zombie thing isn't taking a backseat while Brad Pitt does his thing. They need to build camps for refugees. They need to provide security. They need to have search and rescue crews on standby and coordinate any amount of manpower to any place that calls out for help. Those tanks and army of men you were asking, they were needed there for the many missions of operations that were to come, if not already happening.

Besides, Brad Pitt's task force was an active reconisance force. They were tasked to find to source of the zombie bug, hence the small security force around 1 scientist. That scientist was to find the source, grab samples, and haul ass back. They wanted to have a team of scientists at the carrier group to analyze the samples in a "Relatively" controlled environment with original samples. In the mean time they were probably at work analyzing the samples they currently have. They were not going to be setting up a forward base for field study on the virus because of the logistics involved with setting it up, which would be the only reason to send more than 1 scientist on an active reconisance mission.

Not to mention how long it would take to send a whole army. They needed a strike team to get in and out while attracting as little attention as possible. The number of zombies that showed up would've been many times worse if multiple planes and tanks arrived on that air strip. Besides, the taskforce was headed to the other side of the world of South Korea. They were at bingo fuel when they got to the airstrip and needed to refuel even with all that "empty space". Every additional soldier or scientist they brought would've required that much more gear, ammo, equipment, and food to be packed onto that plane, which with that much extra weight would not get there unless there was a place to refuel in-transit, which seemed highly unlikely given the current world condition. That small taskforce, with the mission it was designed for was, in my opinion, highly appropriate given the circumstances.

Was it ideal? No, as evident that most of the taskforce died including the scientist accidentally shooting himself. But based on what they knew (or little) at the time, I felt that was an appropriate force they sent at the time.

dehro

2013-07-07, 05:58 PM

Not to mention how long it would take to send a whole army.
again, I'm not saying "send a whole army".. I'm saying why send a pretty much empty aircraft and not load a few dozen more men?
To send a grand total of 7 unequipped men, with only one of them having a clue as to what to look for, on the vital mission that is supposed to find a solution to the wiping out of humanity, is a bit ..underwhelming. With the data they had, they should have anticipated that whoever they sent risked being lathered in zombies, because that zombies were swarming everywhere like ants was pretty much the only thing they knew about them...which is what happened the second they landed.
I guess it makes more sense in the book.. in the movie it looks pretty silly.

as for the re-fuelling issue..meh.. I'm not buying it. the whole thing simply seemed contrived and plot driven rather than common sense driven.

Silverraptor

2013-07-07, 07:40 PM

The men weren't unequipped, but alright.

Also, I believe multiple people said the book has very little relationship to the movie. So be prepared to be reading a different story altogether.

Sabeki

2013-07-07, 07:52 PM

Why do people keep calling the virus a cure? It's not a cure, it's camoflouge. They outright say it in the movie.

Magatsu Izanagi

2013-07-07, 11:04 PM

I actually really liked the symbolism the fall of Jerusalem portrayed, even if they could have done it in a less cliché way. I liked that, despite all of humanity's weapons and technology, you can't hold back "Nature" as they classified this disease at the beginning. It especially went with the symbolism of fighting nature with nature at the end.
Apparently, neither Max Brooks nor the writers of this film knew about the Battle of Verdun. Artillery inflicted the majority of casualties in that battle, and the bombardments were so thorough that the French are still digging up bits and pieces of people nearly a century after the battle ended. The ossuary at Douaumont has the remains of over 130,000 French and German soldiers who could not be positively identified, and there are at least that many soldiers whose remains have yet to be recovered from the battlefield.

In the end, the fall of Jersualem is more a triumph of authorial fiat over common sense than anything to do with nature versus technology as you've chosen to frame it.

Killer Angel

2013-07-08, 06:16 AM

Apparently, neither Max Brooks nor the writers of this film knew about the Battle of Verdun. Artillery inflicted the majority of casualties in that battle,

To be fair, Brooks gave an explanation of the reasons why modern artillery didn't work as expected.
I also believe that Brooks has some (superficial) knowledge of war history: the lack of ammo at (that certain battle that I won't name :smalltongue:) happened also in RL battles, and so on.

In the end, the explanation cannot stand (we can make it more reasonable with someting like "this is a fantasy setting and zombies are impervious to some type of damage") and the military debacle on world wide scale is hard to believe, but at least he tried and the book remains a fun read.

Magatsu Izanagi

2013-07-08, 11:37 AM

To be fair, Brooks gave an explanation of the reasons why modern artillery didn't work as expected.
I also believe that Brooks has some (superficial) knowledge of war history: the lack of ammo at (that certain battle that I won't name :smalltongue:) happened also in RL battles, and so on.
Too bad those explanations are complete bunk to anyone who knows how artillery works. The fundamentals haven't changed much, if at all, between World War I and today. Overpressure can and will tear a person (or zombie, for that matter) apart just as effectively as fragmentation.

Simply put, Max Brooks fails both biology and physics forever. As much as I hate to use TV Tropes terminology, it's the most succinct way to describe things.

mangosta71

2013-07-08, 12:46 PM

There was a lot wrong with this movie. The UN scientist guy was totally the Idiot. That long spiel about how it had to be a virus? See, the thing about viruses is that they require living hosts. If the cellular processes that the virus depends upon for propagation stop, the virus stops spreading. He also had no idea how evolution works.

I'd like to know how something with an incubation time of 12 seconds got off the landmass it started on. No way that someone that had been zombified could get onto a boat or plane if they turn that quickly.

As for a cure, if you act quickly enough, cutting off a hand also makes you immune after you've been bitten. I thought infecting everyone with meningitis was kind of extreme, since that one soldier in Korea was immune due to having an injured leg. (Speaking of which, cute Israeli soldier girl should have been immune/invisible the whole time they were in the B Wing.) Also, as long as you're invisible, why not waltz through the research center slaughtering every zombie in the place? And why the hell would you put your crowbar down entirely just to punch in a keypad combination that you only need one thumb to operate? And how did they expect cute Israeli soldier girl to effectively wield a bat or a fire ax with one hand?

In Jerusalem, how did the helicopter patrols not see the zombies piling up against the walls? (For that matter, how did crowd noise awaken them if the helicopters didn't?) Where were all the patrols along the walls (Israel is renowned for paranoia) that should have seen the massive piles and called in air strikes (napalm would have been hellaciously effective in that situation)?

As for the small team they sent, yeah, that was pretty stupid. The carrier itself wouldn't have any tanks on it, but the marine landing ship that was shown to be in the battlegroup should have some heavy vehicles aboard. Also, flamethrowers were shown to be effective in the movie (the defense of that apartment complex-looking building in...Moscow I think it was?) - after all, the zombies need muscles to move, so completely destroying muscle tissue via extreme burnination would at least stop the buggers unless the cause was actually some sort of magical curse. Also, a C-130 making it all the way from the Atlantic to Korea without having to refuel? How did they launch that thing from a carrier? For that matter, how the **** did they land it there in the first place? Not to mention, a C-130 with Navy markings?

Another thing that annoyed me was every scientist failing every dexterity check ever. Trying to run? Slip and shoot yourself! Trying to sneak through a corridor? Bash your crowbar into a file cabinet! Trying to move over broken glass quietly? Just stomp on that ****!

Cikomyr

2013-07-08, 01:01 PM

As for a cure, if you act quickly enough, cutting off a hand also makes you immune after you've been bitten. I thought infecting everyone with meningitis was kind of extreme, since that one soldier in Korea was immune due to having an injured leg. (Speaking of which, cute Israeli soldier girl should have been immune/invisible the whole time they were in the B Wing.) Also, as long as you're invisible, why not waltz through the research center slaughtering every zombie in the place? And why the hell would you put your crowbar down entirely just to punch in a keypad combination that you only need one thumb to operate? And how did they expect cute Israeli soldier girl to effectively wield a bat or a fire ax with one hand?

I can actually answer to that. It was shown that the camouflage only worked for initial contact with the zombies. If they had no reason to believe you were a valid prey.

However, if you move or actually show yourself to be alive and well, then the zombies come down on your ass. After all, the first time we see the camouflage in effect, we also see its limit: the zombie tried to attack him as soon as it realized he was alive

Barsoom

2013-07-08, 01:06 PM

The Uncooperative Jerk: None

The Stupid: None. The UN Scientist was stupid to shoot himself, but that didn't make him The Stupid. He cooperated and listened as best he could and stayed with The Plan. The Plan failed, but it failed on its own sake, not the Scientist which is why he's not The Stupid.

Evil Bastard Leader of Safe Haven Community: None. The Israeli Mossad agent in Jerusalem was very helpful. The W.H.O. facility director was cautious, but it was sincere caution and cooperated fully once he understood the situation in character. U. N. Undersecretary did all he could to help The Hero.It's actually quite encouraging that they did away with those tropes. It always struck me as lazy writing to put Uncooperative Jerks or Stupids in these type of films. I mean, what, having the hero deal with the IMPENDING DEMISE OF ALL MANKIND is not dramatic enough for you? You need to 'spice it up' with him encountering some artificially-constructed additional difficulties? Yeah, like that's gonna make us sympathize with him more...

The Day After Tomorrow and 2012, I'm looking at you.

Sith_Happens

2013-07-08, 03:57 PM

It's actually quite encouraging that they did away with those tropes. It always struck me as lazy writing to put Uncooperative Jerks or Stupids in these type of films. I mean, what, having the hero deal with the IMPENDING DEMISE OF ALL MANKIND is not dramatic enough for you? You need to 'spice it up' with him encountering some artificially-constructed additional difficulties? Yeah, like that's gonna make us sympathize with him more...

The Day After Tomorrow and 2012, I'm looking at you.

The open secret about most disaster stories is that the Man vs. Nature conflict is just the background to set up/trigger the Man vs. Man conflicts. As in, the story is less about "how do people solve the problem" and more about "how do people deal with being in a disaster situation."

The thing separating World War Z from most zombie movies can be summed up as treating the zombies as the antagonists rather than as a terrain obstacle.

Killer Angel

2013-07-08, 04:01 PM

Too bad those explanations are complete bunk to anyone who knows how artillery works. The fundamentals haven't changed much, if at all, between World War I and today. Overpressure can and will tear a person (or zombie, for that matter) apart just as effectively as fragmentation.

As I've said, he gave an explanation, BUT the explanation failed.
The best thing in the book (which makes it still worth reading) is the psychological part, 'bout human reactions.

Olinser

2013-07-08, 04:13 PM

My basic point is very simple:

I would have had a lot more patience for this movie if it were called "Zombie Apocalypse" or something rather than 'World War Z'.

As a zombie movie, it isn't bad. But the only thing it really shares with the book is the name and the fact there happen to be zombies.

There was so much they could have done with the book. And they went in a totally irrelevant direction with it, and had to have Brad Pitt save the world.

dehro

2013-07-08, 04:27 PM

How did they launch that thing from a carrier? For that matter, how the **** did they land it there in the first place? Not to mention, a C-130 with Navy markings?
clearly they have watched the same JAG episode I watched, where such at hing happened (albeit under extreme circumstances).

but yeah.. thanks for highlighting the many many flaws that my initial rant left behind.

Magatsu Izanagi

2013-07-08, 11:58 PM

To be completely fair, launching a C-130 Hercules off an aircraft carrier has been done before. In late 1963, a Marine Corps KC-130 made 29 touch-and-go landings, 21 unarrested full-stop landings, and 21 unassisted takeoffs on the USS Forrestal at a number of different weights. While these tests were successful, the concept was deemed too risky for routine operations, leading to the adoption of smaller aircraft for the carrier onboard delivery role. The Hercules still holds the record for the largest and heaviest aircraft to land on an aircraft carrier.

On another note, the KC-130 used for the tests is on display at the National Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, Florida if anyone here wants to see it for themselves.

Sabeki

2013-07-09, 12:03 AM

Speaking of the incubation period, how did the zom get on the plane in Isreal in the first place?

Killer Angel

2013-07-09, 06:09 AM

Starbuck_II

2013-07-09, 10:48 AM

Speaking of the incubation period, how did the zom get on the plane in Isreal in the first place?

He crawled up the poop chute of the toilet. I mean, they have to release that waste somewhere, don't they?

Jan Mattys

2013-07-09, 11:43 AM

Not to mention, a C-130 with Navy markings?

Now, while I agree with many of your points, I just HAD to chime in to say that I found the above hilariously nitpicky.

Sorry.

Killer Angel

2013-07-11, 06:44 AM

Honest question- what was the last big screen non-parody zombie movie with slow zombies? Land of the Dead?

I suppose that TV series like The Walking Dead don't count...

(BTW, i like TWD, but it requires a massive suspension of disbelief, at least from me)

Cikomyr

2013-07-11, 07:14 AM

I suppose that TV series like The Walking Dead don't count...

(BTW, i like TWD, but it requires a massive suspension of disbelief, at least from me)

Kind of agree with you about it requiring SoD, but eh. It's still a good show, in my opinion.

But he did said "big budget film"

Sith_Happens

2013-07-11, 12:16 PM

The zombies in TWD can actually get up to a half decent jogging speed when they want to.

Cikomyr

2013-07-11, 12:54 PM

The zombies in TWD can actually get up to a half decent jogging speed when they want to.

True. And just like with any zombies, the really dangerous part is that they never slow down. They would outpace most humans on the long run, and when they catch up, the human is out of breath to properly defend itself.

It's always been my opinion that when dealing with zombies, find spear-like weapons, a nice defensive positions and just jab them through the eyes or mouth. The jabbing movement is less dangerous in a tight environment (where you don't want to injure your fellow survivors) and you spend much, much less energy for every zombie kill than if you go slashing at their head.

Slashing or bludgeoning, really.

Killer Angel

2013-07-11, 01:14 PM

The zombies in TWD can actually get up to a half decent jogging speed when they want to.

well, they start with a low pace, then they speed up. So, they're in the middle of the 2 cathegories... but i think they're more of the slow type.

It's still a good show, in my opinion.

Absolutely yes

But he did said "big budget film"

eh, I know; but we must discuss something, after all... :smallwink:

Bob_the_Mighty

2013-07-11, 09:41 PM

However, if you move or actually show yourself to be alive and well, then the zombies come down on your ass. After all, the first time we see the camouflage in effect, we also see its limit: the zombie tried to attack him as soon as it realized he was aliveThe kid in Jerusalem actually attacked the mob of zombies with a cricket paddle. After it bounced off of a zombie and out of his hands on his first swing, they kept ignoring him. He just curled up into a fetal position while they parted around him.

Cikomyr

2013-07-12, 03:31 AM

The kid in Jerusalem actually attacked the mob of zombies with a cricket paddle. After it bounced off of a zombie and out of his hands on his first swing, they kept ignoring him. He just curled up into a fetal position while they parted around him.

Because he was genuinely weak, as opposed to just using a virus to appear weak?

Darth Credence

2013-07-12, 09:48 AM

I'd like to know how something with an incubation time of 12 seconds got off the landmass it started on. No way that someone that had been zombified could get onto a boat or plane if they turn that quickly.
That is the time it takes to turn by the time we see it in the movie. It specifically states that the zombies that they saw at the Korean base took around 10 minutes to turn, and implied that the first one in Korea was longer than that. And since Korea wasn't the origination, it is most likely that the initial incubation period was measured in hours or days.

As for a cure, if you act quickly enough, cutting off a hand also makes you immune after you've been bitten. I thought infecting everyone with meningitis was kind of extreme, since that one soldier in Korea was immune due to having an injured leg. (Speaking of which, cute Israeli soldier girl should have been immune/invisible the whole time they were in the B Wing.)
What makes you think cutting off the hand would make someone camouflaged (not immune - just hidden)? The soldier in Korea didn't have an injured leg - he had a disease that one of the symptoms was difficulty walking. The fact that the Israeli soldier was not camouflaged indicates that it cannot just be an injury, it has to be a terminal disease.

mangosta71

2013-07-13, 11:01 AM

That is the time it takes to turn by the time we see it in the movie. It specifically states that the zombies that they saw at the Korean base took around 10 minutes to turn, and implied that the first one in Korea was longer than that. And since Korea wasn't the origination, it is most likely that the initial incubation period was measured in hours or days.
That is not how biological agents work. If they said that it took longer for the first people to turn simply because nobody else had contracted it before, they were wrong.

What makes you think cutting off the hand would make someone camouflaged (not immune - just hidden)? The soldier in Korea didn't have an injured leg - he had a disease that one of the symptoms was difficulty walking. The fact that the Israeli soldier was not camouflaged indicates that it cannot just be an injury, it has to be a terminal disease.
My immunity-due-to-hand-cut-off theory is based on the fact that she didn't turn into a zombie. As for not being camouflaged, how do we know? She was never onscreen alone after that, so the zombies could well have been chasing the others and her presence was entirely incidental.

Darth Credence

2013-07-14, 12:16 AM

That is not how biological agents work. If they said that it took longer for the first people to turn simply because nobody else had contracted it before, they were wrong.
Yeah, they also don't work by turning people into zombies. If you accept there is a zombie bug (not a virus, again according to the movie), then it seems a lot easier to accept that the incubation time has gotten shorter.

My immunity-due-to-hand-cut-off theory is based on the fact that she didn't turn into a zombie. As for not being camouflaged, how do we know? She was never onscreen alone after that, so the zombies could well have been chasing the others and her presence was entirely incidental.

She didn't turn into a zombie because the hand was cut off before the bug spread to the rest of her. If she was bit again, all indications were that she would still turn. I guess you could argue that she was camouflaged, and I don't remember every scene well enough to refute it, but it wouldn't make sense in the context of the movie. Everyone else was clearly left alone, and there were no signs she was ignored. They tended to be fairly heavy handed with who was being ignored, so I think the movie would have shown her clearly camouflaged if that was the case.

Forum Explorer

2013-07-14, 12:49 AM

Dude, I seriously recommend the book! It goes into great deal explaining just how things like that can happen, but ultimately how human survives the zombie war.

If you like zombies and geopolitics, it's hard to beat WWZ.

Well...

Too bad those explanations are complete bunk to anyone who knows how artillery works. The fundamentals haven't changed much, if at all, between World War I and today. Overpressure can and will tear a person (or zombie, for that matter) apart just as effectively as fragmentation.

Simply put, Max Brooks fails both biology and physics forever. As much as I hate to use TV Tropes terminology, it's the most succinct way to describe things.

Exactly this. The way the zombies are described makes it clear that there was no way they should have been able to get out of China let alone get world wide. His failure in biology and how weapons work is frustrating to read at times.

warty goblin

2013-07-14, 01:12 AM

Saw it. Liked it. The tense parts were tense, the big action bits were fun, and didn't drag on endlessly and so managed to keep up momentum. Even better they changed in tone and flavor from setpiece to setpiece.

And complaining about biology and military tactics in a zombie movie? Really folks? This is like setting your hair on fire, then complaining about being bald. The dumbness in these areas is just the ante for the genre, it's what you pay to get in the door.

mangosta71

2013-07-15, 10:12 AM

Yeah, they also don't work by turning people into zombies. If you accept there is a zombie bug (not a virus, again according to the movie), then it seems a lot easier to accept that the incubation time has gotten shorter.
They never said what it was. I seem to recall The Idiot saying that it was a virus before he killed himself via sheer stupidity, but the female scientist at the WHO facility said it wasn't. Of course, given that every other word out of The Idiot's mouth was ridiculously nonsensical, stupid bull****, I suppose it's not really reasonable to put stock in anything he said before he increased the average IQ of the world's population by an order of magnitude.

However, it was explicitly a biological agent, and there is precedent for such an agent in nature. Neither bacteria nor virus, but fungus. We have discovered fungi in the rain forest that, in essence, zombify certain species of insects. But again, it doesn't have a nonsensical rampup time - the incubation is (statistically) the same in all members of the species that get infected.

navar100

2013-07-15, 11:59 AM

They never said what it was. I seem to recall The Idiot saying that it was a virus before he killed himself via sheer stupidity, but the female scientist at the WHO facility said it wasn't. Of course, given that every other word out of The Idiot's mouth was ridiculously nonsensical, stupid bull****, I suppose it's not really reasonable to put stock in anything he said before he increased the average IQ of the world's population by an order of magnitude.

That includes the zombie population.

:smallbiggrin:

Cikomyr

2013-07-15, 12:21 PM

They never said what it was. I seem to recall The Idiot saying that it was a virus before he killed himself via sheer stupidity, but the female scientist at the WHO facility said it wasn't. Of course, given that every other word out of The Idiot's mouth was ridiculously nonsensical, stupid bull****, I suppose it's not really reasonable to put stock in anything he said before he increased the average IQ of the world's population by an order of magnitude.

You don't know how IQ works, eh? :smallbiggrin:

At the worst, his death reduces the IQ rating of the the population. But the average will remain the same.

mangosta71

2013-07-15, 01:44 PM

Yes, I know that the system is based on 100 being the average, and that any shift in average global intelligence also shifts the spectrum so that 100 will always be the average. So, technically, an individual with a 120 rating before his death would be reduced to ~80 afterward.

I was making a snide comment because, DAMN, that dude was stupid, and figured it would be understood without all the pedantic qualifying.

warty goblin

2013-07-15, 01:53 PM

I was making a snide comment because, DAMN, that dude was stupid, and figured it would be understood without all the pedantic qualifying.

You have posted here before, right?

mangosta71

2013-07-15, 01:55 PM

Yeah. You'd think I'd know better by now.

Seharvepernfan

2013-07-15, 03:26 PM

I think I'm going to keep this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15624722&postcount=118) forever.

navar100

2013-07-15, 05:56 PM

Yeah. You'd think I'd know better by now.

PAW tends to be more important than PAI around here. :smallamused:

Post As Written, Post As Intended

Eric Tolle

2013-07-15, 06:14 PM

The fall of Jerusalem itself was not something that bugged me; except the obvious fact that the Israelis did not seemed to have any contingency plans. Come on people, you ever hear of LAYERED DEFENSES?

Well these ARE* the peaceful Israelis we're taking about here;* it's not like they'll have had any recent military experience...

Only one scientist on the world-saving vital mission to find a cure for a virus?? no back-up, no support team? only 5-6 men to protect said scientist as he's headed towards the epicenter of a zombie outbreak?

Ah, see there you run into the number one logistical problem militaries face: time and time again it has been shown that it doesn't matter how large your military force is, you will only be able to spare a maximum of 12 people to go on it. In fact, the more important the mission, the fewer people will be available. It doesn't matter if your military is a thousand people or a million, you'll be stuck with a handful of people.

The natural question is, if that's the case, why not make that small group a band of highly competent special forces? Well that's the other component of the Conservation of Competence; the vitally critical mission will only succeed because of the presence of some goofball who doesn't belong therein the first place. Highly competent soldiers will be useless- you need someone just tagging along to do the job. Modern militaries have learned to game the system a bit, which is why that scientist was probably actually a dentist disguised as a scientist, the soldiers were all taken off K.P. or sanitation duty, and at least one of them was probably a mailman stuffed in a uniform. The military can't predict which goofball will save the day, but they can try to make sure there's as many people on the team as possible have no business being there.

Sith_Happens

2013-07-16, 12:09 AM

Ah, see there you run into the number one logistical problem militaries face: time and time again it has been shown that it doesn't matter how large your military force is, you will only be able to spare a maximum of 12 people to go on it. In fact, the more important the mission, the fewer people will be available. It doesn't matter if your military is a thousand people or a million, you'll be stuck with a handful of people.

The natural question is, if that's the case, why not make that small group a band of highly competent special forces? Well that's the other component of the Conservation of Competence; the vitally critical mission will only succeed because of the presence of some goofball who doesn't belong therein the first place. Highly competent soldiers will be useless- you need someone just tagging along to do the job. Modern militaries have learned to game the system a bit, which is why that scientist was probably actually a dentist disguised as a scientist, the soldiers were all taken off K.P. or sanitation duty, and at least one of them was probably a mailman stuffed in a uniform. The military can't predict which goofball will save the day, but they can try to make sure there's as many people on the team as possible have no business being there.

This is beautiful. All of it.

Killer Angel

2013-07-16, 05:58 AM

The natural question is, if that's the case, why not make that small group a band of highly competent special forces? Well that's the other component of the Conservation of Competence; the vitally critical mission will only succeed because of the presence of some goofball who doesn't belong therein the first place. Highly competent soldiers will be useless- you need someone just tagging along to do the job. Modern militaries have learned to game the system a bit, which is why that scientist was probably actually a dentist disguised as a scientist, the soldiers were all taken off K.P. or sanitation duty, and at least one of them was probably a mailman stuffed in a uniform. The military can't predict which goofball will save the day, but they can try to make sure there's as many people on the team as possible have no business being there.

So, the "terminal disease" that gives camouflage, is a simple toothache? :smalltongue:
I like your theory!

navar100

2013-07-16, 12:07 PM

So, the "terminal disease" that gives camouflage, is a simple toothache? :smalltongue:
I like your theory!

Of course! What zombie wants a new recruit who can't bite?

Killer Angel

2013-07-17, 06:10 AM

Of course! What zombie wants a new recruit who can't bite?

Yeah. With some retrospective, it was crystal clear! Throw away your dentures. :smallbiggrin:

Silverraptor

2013-07-17, 02:19 PM

Yeah. With some retrospective, it was crystal clear! Throw away your dentures. :smallbiggrin:

Its what North Korea in the movie did in 24 hours.:smallbiggrin:

Tyndmyr

2013-07-19, 04:28 PM

There is a solution to the problem, but it's not the Redeker Plan. It's too much of a spoiler to mention here, but I will say I didn't find it a cop-out. It meets verisimilitude.

The only thing the book and movie have in common is that they are named World War Z.

That said, I liked the zombie swarming visuals...it made zombies actually have some threat again, because really, at this point, shamblers just don't make a very credible threat. Especially to any military force.

Still....I'd have punted a baby to get to see the battle of younkers or equivalent. Yes, I know it's horribly unrealistic. Still, a full on, extended grind with a full military force vs an endless horde would be glorious.

The miracle cure was a little bit disappointing. It strikes me as unconvincing, because full on, no crap invisibility to zombies would be discovered by accident in city 1. Any city is bound to have a bunch of people that would fill the requirement. What, did they just all kill themselves after the zombies passed them up? It could have been an interesting idea, but it felt tacked on, with no thought to how that would have changed the preceding events. I can handle the technobabble, because hey...that's life with movies, but at least think about the ramifications of your twist.

Also, disliked the wife. A little too helpless and teary eyed for my tastes. I know, I know, 90% of women in zombie movies always just break down into tears and become utterly useless, but it grates after a while. Can't we have another role for women besides the helpless victim and the badass?

It is just odd that the trailer doesn't match up well with the movie. Not terribly good, not terribly bad, but just strange.

Exactly Brad's character wasn't a nobody. He was a elite forces dude that retired.
I am confused why he didn't go Curb stomping every time a zombie was on the ground in the beginning (can't bite without teeth). But I'll assume he was scared for his family.

Not special forces. Humanitarian used to bad situations. I know, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

Oh, minor annoying point...they used a freaking C-130 to go to korea. Why all the empty room on the plane? It's not like you need a ton of soldiers on the ships guys, fill that sucker up. Send spare scientists or whatever. You literally have too many mouths to feed, use force when making expeditions. Now, being a horror movie, you could obviously have most of them die off, but at least start out the movie with people not being dumb.

Also, him leaving the crowbar outside the room seemed a little obvious. As soon as he did that, I knew a zombie would show up. It's a VERY specific use of the idiot ball that comes up a lot in zombie movies.

Fall of Jerusalem also seemed obvious. Seriously, singing does this, but not, yknow, a helicopter? Those aren't made of magical silence. Now, it looked cool, absolutely, but the reason for it seemed stupid.

Seriously, there is a need for action movies to get at least one military person to just point out all the inaccuracies. A lot of the time, they're just pointless, and can be fixed easily without really altering the plot at all, but yeah, I also had the "A navy c-130 on a carrier?" moment, and it just pulls you out of the movie.

It's always been my opinion that when dealing with zombies, find spear-like weapons, a nice defensive positions and just jab them through the eyes or mouth. The jabbing movement is less dangerous in a tight environment (where you don't want to injure your fellow survivors) and you spend much, much less energy for every zombie kill than if you go slashing at their head.

Slashing or bludgeoning, really.

Eh, if you're in the US, seriously, don't worry about it. In the unlikely event of zombies, lock yourself in, it'll sort itself out in a week. It's a country where we have almost a gun for every person. People like me will crack open a soda on a rooftop and just enjoy the resulting hours of target practice.

Now, I don't hate the movie...it had many good points too, but also some niggling bits. Here's hoping we see future movies that take the good parts, and leave the Brad Pitty parts.