Brad Pitt's return to guy flicks is well intended but it does not live up to the high expectations associated with a Pitt film, nor does it do justice to the film's source material.
World War Z, based on the bestselling novel of the same name by Max Brooks, follows former U.N. employee Gerry Lane as he scours the globe in search of the cure for a zombie plague.
The story perhaps had good intentions and big ambitions during initial drafts but I suppose due to rewrites and editing, this was lost. There was nothing overly special with it but it was not by any means a bad movie. The effects and acting were good, and the plot was fine. For a movie where the main plot point is to search the globe for patient zero and discover the cure to save humanity, one would think there would be some sense of urgency; however, this was not conveyed. The urgency in each situation was there, but for the overall film it seemed he was merely doing his normal, day-to-day job.
One issue that has resonated with me is Matthew Fox. As a fan of Lost, I was excited to see him in the movie, but his role is very small, useless, and that of a nameless actor. Perhaps originally he had more of a role and ended up being cut. Fox could have been cut to seem like a cameo appearance or cut altogether but he ended up as nameless "Parajumper." Hopefully DVD extras or a sequel will flesh out this awkwardly placed actor.
For a zombie movie the director, Marc Forster, played it far too safe. There was very little in terms of gore, blood and violence, which made for a disappointing horror and zombie movie. The previews also gave the impression that World War Z was an action movie but all action is shown in the preview, which could be disappointing for action movie fans.
Like many similar movies, we are expected to suspend reality that the hero can face so many obstacles and come out the other side while many sidekicks are lost; this is no different. I am okay with this though, I enjoy the ridiculousness of it anyways. The children in this movie though should have gotten him killed right off the bat, further cementing the idea to drop the kids in the event of zombie apocalypse. They were overly annoying and needy, even for children.
Now, in comparison to the book, of which I am a huge fan, it is even more of a let down. The book is an amazing novel that examines both the brutality and compassion of humanity in times of war. It examines different people from all over the world before, during and after the "Zombie War." It is more than just another zombie book. Perhaps due to time constraints, budgets, editing or any other number of reasons, the core of the story is lost. The idea of a U.N. investigator travelling the world and the recounts of Israel are the only aspects of the film that resemble the source material. Hopefully Forster is given the opportunity to make the trilogy he imagined and attempt to redeem himself, but due to the problems with the first movie, this seems unlikely.
Although this review may seem like I disliked the movie, I actually found it to be quite enjoyable. I am simply very disappointed that the filmmakers made another race against the clock movie, even though it had so much potential to be thought-provoking and original. If only Danny Boyle was behind it; we could have had one of the greatest zombie movie ever created.
World War Z was my biggest let down of the year so far. After a great weekend that included Man of Steel and This Is The End, I would suggest passing on it in favor of these more enjoyable movies. I would suggest seeing it at some point as it is a good movie, but it does not need to be on the big screen or in 3D.
From the blog: tilfilmdouspart.blogspot.com
