[gouldfather]

New Brad Pitt film about people getting the rage virus or something. Just saw a trailer.

I think the title only works if you pronounce it the American way so surely they should have changed it for a British market because World War Zed just sounds daft.

[PaleHorse]

The rage virus? It's zombies. Try reading the book. It's a good read.

[stvn758]

World War Zee sounds silly, methinks. More Disney than horror.

[MrPond]

I have mixed feelings about going to see this. Whilst the film does look very good, on the whole I really don't like or enjoy horrible films because I find them very silly. So I don't know whether to give this ago or not...

[Deserana 12]

Just started the book but the film looks to be taking an entirely different direction. Unfortunate cause the book is very interesting and would make a fantastic mini-series/film. Shame this has taken the action-route with running cgi zombies.

[Johnny Clay]

Originally Posted by gouldfather

I think the title only works if you pronounce it the American way so surely they should have changed it for a British market because World War Zed just sounds daft.

Originally Posted by stvn758

World War Zee sounds silly, methinks. More Disney than horror.

It may take a moment - as it did with me - but I think most people will twig that World War Zee is a play on World War Three.

[JCR]

Originally Posted by MrPond

I have mixed feelings about going to see this. Whilst the film does look very good, on the whole I really don't like or enjoy horrible films because I find them very silly. So I don't know whether to give this ago or not...

It's a summer blockbuster and it's likely gonna be a 12A to try to make the most $$$ possible; doubt it'll be that horrible.

[big brother 9]

it certainly looks different to any zombie film ive ever seen, i know they have said its a new take on the zombie movies but will it be a good decision to change our minds on the zombie genre

[newbee]

We wait and see!

[bazzaroo]

I really enjoyed the book but thought at the time that it wouldn't translate to screen easily. To solve this problem they seem to have made a film with the same title but that's about it!

[ppaupy]

A friend of ours did some of the extras make up etc I saw some of them being done...she says the movie is awful,was meant to be in three parts..its now been changed to a solo film with new bits being filmed and added to tie it all up.

[gouldfather]

Originally Posted by ppaupy

A friend of ours did some of the extras make up etc I saw some of them being done...she says the movie is awful,was meant to be in three parts..its now been changed to a solo film with new bits being filmed and added to tie it all up.

Oh that's a shame. As soon as you hear a movie had rewrites and reshoots it is usually terrible.

[Deserana 12]

They shouldn't have taken the World War Z name. It's nothing like it. IMO the book would only work as a mini-series done in a mockumentary style, or maybe a two-part film but I think that would flop.

[Deserana 12]

Originally Posted by gouldfather

Oh that's a shame. As soon as you hear a movie had rewrites and reshoots it is usually terrible.

Brad Pitt also didn't seem to get it. He said there was no "fun" and was too political. That was the book in a nutshell, it took itself seriously. I really don't think this will work if its done in a tongue-in-cheek way.

[stvn758]

Originally Posted by Johnny Clay

It may take a moment - as it did with me - but I think most people will twig that World War Zee is a play on World War Three.

That makes sense, one mystery solved.

[Nolan Deckard]

Originally Posted by Deserana 12

Brad Pitt also didn't seem to get it. He said there was no "fun" and was too political. That was the book in a nutshell, it took itself seriously. I really don't think this will work if its done in a tongue-in-cheek way.

Bingo!

When I read that interview with Pitt I was really annoyed. It completely summed up how mishandled and misguided this project is as an adaptation of the book.

[Johnny Clay]

Originally Posted by Deserana 12

I really don't think this will work if its done in a tongue-in-cheek way.

There's little tongue-in-cheek about the latest trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EC7P5WdUko

Tentatively looking forward to this (if only to see where all the money went), but fear another Battle:LA. - a film awash with trite character arcs and notably cheesier than the trailer suggested.

[Deserana 12]

Originally Posted by Johnny Clay

There's little tongue-in-cheek about the latest trailer:

Maybe not but as you said about Battle LA the trailer and the film maybe a considerably different beast.

But the fact they are changing key pieces of plot from the book and actually toning down the political undertones of the film (something that made the book as unique as it was), doing last minute reshoots, hiring people to do late rewrites all in order to make it a more generic blockbuster doesn't sound like a group of filmmakers and actors trying to make a good film and potentially change the whole genre. More just trudging through it for a paycheck.

Who knows the film may be good but this is what I'm getting so far.

[Straker]

There's a fascinating article on the disastrous genesis and filming of this in the new Vanity Fair. When all the cost overruns, marketing and waste is factored in VF estimate the total to be nearly $500m!!! The last time they covered something like this it was Waterworld.

[Virgil Tracy]

The got Damon Lindeloff in to do some last minute re-writes . they must've been desperate !

[Alrightmate]

Originally Posted by gouldfather

Oh that's a shame. As soon as you hear a movie had rewrites and reshoots it is usually terrible.

Don't all films have rewrites?
I understood that all scripts are rewritten several times.

I don't think that there will be many films, if any at all, that were written once and then that was it they were finished.

[Alrightmate]

Originally Posted by Johnny Clay

There's little tongue-in-cheek about the latest trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EC7P5WdUko

Tentatively looking forward to this (if only to see where all the money went), but fear another Battle:LA. - a film awash with trite character arcs and notably cheesier than the trailer suggested.

Well I think going by that trailer that it looks like it could be really good.

By the same token the worst bit about it is the acting by Brad Pitt. Atrocious acting. If anything that'll probably be the weak link if he's supposed to be carrying this film.

[Virgil Tracy]

Originally Posted by Alrightmate

Don't all films have rewrites?
I understood that all scripts are rewritten several times.

I don't think that there will be many films, if any at all, that were written once and then that was it they were finished.

this re-write was done after they finished shooting , they had an assembly and it wasn't working . They've dumped a whole sequence and done re-shoots .

not unique , its happened on other movies, but ... not a good sign .

Another problem is that they want a PG rating which seems a bit silly for a zombie film .

[theonlyweeman]

I read on a trade website that World War Z is apparently very good. But if it cost $500m Paramount are screwed...

[Johnny Clay]

Originally Posted by Straker

There's a fascinating article on the disastrous genesis and filming of this in the new Vanity Fair. When all the cost overruns, marketing and waste is factored in VF estimate the total to be nearly $500m!!! The last time they covered something like this it was Waterworld.

Cheers. The article's on VF's site and very interesting indeed. Seems as chaotic as rumoured, but with so much footage not being used, it makes you wonder if an alternate version will be in the offing later on.

Originally Posted by Virgil Tracy

The got Damon Lindeloff in to do some last minute re-writes . they must've been desperate !

Desperate indeed if they wanted some clarity brought to the script.

Originally Posted by theonlyweeman

I read on a trade website that World War Z is apparently very good. But if it cost $500m Paramount are screwed...

Nice to hear something good about it, but yes, that is an enormous budget it's got to get back.

Looking at the US release schedule, I see it opens on the same weekend as Monsters University and only a week after Man of Steel (which they seem to have cleared the decks for - nothing much opens with it and only soft-ish openers the week before). A week later and White House Down hits the screens.

It'll be interesting to see how WWZ fairs among all these. Paramount - who already may have problems with Into Darkness - are going to have to ramp up the advertising quite considerably.