-

Jump to content



Photo
* * * * * 3 votes

World War Z


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#21 of 85 OFFLINE   mattCR

mattCR

    Lead Actor

  • 9,998 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2005
  • Real Name:Matt
  • LocationOverland Park, KS

Posted June 20 2013 - 10:01 PM

I enjoyed it far more than I expected. Did a double feature with bling ring. My quick review would be fairly positive b+

trakt.tv

Ask Me about HTPC! (Threads in HTPC / PMs always responded to)

This signature is povided by MediaBrowser 3 Trakt Plugin: Media Browser 3


#22 of 85 OFFLINE   Todd H

Todd H

    Go Dawgs!

  • 2,050 posts
  • Join Date: May 27 1999
  • Real Name:Todd
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted June 21 2013 - 08:31 AM

There were some cool sequences, but overall I thought it was merely ok. A fairly forgettable flick IMO.


  • Scott McGillivray likes this

#23 of 85 OFFLINE   Quentin

Quentin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,502 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2002
  • Real Name:Quentin H
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted June 21 2013 - 01:20 PM

I didn't expect to like it at all, so a C+ grade is better than I thought I'd give it.  But, it's a pretty capable film.  I don't want to see it again...I won't get it on blu ray...but, I had some fun watching it.

 

I do think the Zombies moved WAY too fast.  But, it's really more of a contagion thriller than a zombie movie.



#24 of 85 OFFLINE   mattCR

mattCR

    Lead Actor

  • 9,998 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2005
  • Real Name:Matt
  • LocationOverland Park, KS

Posted June 21 2013 - 01:56 PM

Forgettable is the right word, still fun. B-

trakt.tv

Ask Me about HTPC! (Threads in HTPC / PMs always responded to)

This signature is povided by MediaBrowser 3 Trakt Plugin: Media Browser 3


#25 of 85 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor

  • 7,129 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted June 21 2013 - 05:44 PM

** (out of 4)

 

All that money spent and they couldn't come up with a story?  It's basically Brad Pitt filling in for James A. Fitzpatrick and doing a TravelTalks episode.  The zombies here were some of the laziest looking I've seen in a while and they certainly weren't scary.  In between Pitt going into various locations, we also get that scene where he must walk somewhere not knowing if a zombie is about to jump out.  These scenes were so poorly directed that there was never a single second where I tensed up or was worried.  And since the world was at risk, did anyone actually feel this?  Even Romero used his mini-budget to give the viewer the feel that something bad was happened and something that could destroy the world as we know it.  Not once did I get that feel watching this thing.

 

I don't know what was wrong with the original 1/3 of the picture but it must have been awful if this finale was considered better.  That final dumb speech reminded me of one Steven Seagal gave years earlier towards the end of the picture.

 

I don't mind a PG-13 horror/action movie as long as you can build tension.  Without the tension you're left with a little kids movie and that's exactly what this felt like.  Most of the death scenes take place off camera and I just kept waiting for Bugs Bunny to show up and offer someone a carrot. 



#26 of 85 OFFLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer

  • 5,291 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted June 21 2013 - 05:51 PM

I actually thought the zombies were terrifically realized and very scary. The clicking teeth and they way they moved,ran and swarmed over their victims.
It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#27 of 85 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,013 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted June 22 2013 - 10:43 AM

I didn't mind it and it wasn't half as bad as the movie sites were saying/hoping it would be. I think people who are into zombies will dig this movie but "forgettable" is an applicable description.

 

I'm kinda bummed that there was basically no gore. I realize that the movie was tremendously expensive and had to be PG-13 and you don't need a bloodbath to make a good movie but you could play this movie with no edits on network television. I mean there's way more gore in an episode of CSI than this. It's a zombie movie, have some blood! :)



#28 of 85 OFFLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer

  • 5,291 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted June 22 2013 - 10:45 AM

I wonder what an R rated version would have been like.

World War Z made an estimated $25 million yesterday on its way to about $65 million this weekend , above projections.
It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#29 of 85 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,013 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted June 22 2013 - 11:04 AM

World War Z made an estimated $25 million yesterday on its way to about $65 million this weekend , above projections.

I can't understand why they expected it to open low. I guess it's because the media was trumpeting its troubled production but even my armchair quarterback ass could tell them that no normal people know or care about that. Zombies are very popular with "the kids today" and Brad Pitt is one of the biggest stars in the world so when you have a movie with Pitt fighting zombies, you're going to get people into theaters on the opening weekend.


Edited by TravisR, June 22 2013 - 11:11 AM.


#30 of 85 OFFLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer

  • 5,291 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted June 22 2013 - 12:03 PM

I can't understand why they expected it to open low. I guess it's because the media was trumpeting its troubled production but even my armchair quarterback ass could tell them that no normal people know or care about that. Zombies are very popular with "the kids today" and Brad Pitt is one of the biggest stars in the world so when you have a movie with Pitt fighting 
zombies, you're going to get people into theaters on the opening weekend.


I agree Travis.
It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#31 of 85 OFFLINE   mattCR

mattCR

    Lead Actor

  • 9,998 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2005
  • Real Name:Matt
  • LocationOverland Park, KS

Posted June 22 2013 - 12:14 PM

I wonder what an R rated version would have been like.

World War Z made an estimated $25 million yesterday on its way to about $65 million this weekend , above projections.


The reasons why expectation was low were tons of reshoot a and a budget that went over $220m. The only film near it with a budget that high is 'The Lone Ranger'.

trakt.tv

Ask Me about HTPC! (Threads in HTPC / PMs always responded to)

This signature is povided by MediaBrowser 3 Trakt Plugin: Media Browser 3


#32 of 85 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,013 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted June 22 2013 - 02:40 PM

The reasons why expectation was low were tons of reshoot a and a budget that went over $220m.

I understand that but most regular audience members don't know or care about the business side of movies (ignorance must truly be bliss). The movie could be the biggest piece of crap of all time but if it's got Brad Pitt fighting zombies, it's still going to have a big opening weekend. The second weekend might be a disaster but the first is golden.



#33 of 85 ONLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator

  • 24,651 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted June 22 2013 - 03:22 PM

Saw it today and loved it and I'm not into the whole zombie craze.


  • Tim Glover likes this

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#34 of 85 OFFLINE   Lou Sytsma

Lou Sytsma

    Producer

  • 5,265 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 1998

Posted June 22 2013 - 04:44 PM

World War Z could have be way more gory but its restrained approach worked well. Fun popcorn flick with a strong third act.


  • Tim Glover likes this
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.

#35 of 85 OFFLINE   Rhett_Y

Rhett_Y

    Screenwriter

  • 1,256 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2001

Posted June 23 2013 - 11:32 AM

I actually really liked this one. It was fun, it kept me interested from the start. I actually like how he jumped around from place to place. I do wish they would have shown more of the gore though, but then again that really isn't what this movie is about. I can see them releasinga  DVD/BRD that is uncut and shows a little more blood and what have you. Either way I really liked this movie.

 

I really liked the way "they" moved, climbed and had absolutly no issues with jumping off buildings etc. Loved that!!!

 

I give it a solid "B".


Edited by Rhett_Y, June 23 2013 - 11:33 AM.

My DVD Collection

#36 of 85 OFFLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer

  • 5,291 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted June 23 2013 - 02:31 PM

From deadlinehollywood:

Hollywood (and just about everybody else) thought Paramount’s opening of 3D World War Z (3,607 theaters), co-financed with Skydance Productions in association with Hemisphere Media Capital and GK Films, would flop. Instead, the zombie epic epidemic based on Max Brooks’ plague novel stunned with a $112M worldwide total. Its $66M domestic cume is the the biggest opening for an original live action film since Avatar, according to Paramount. And its $46M international cume represents 25 markets which is only about 30% of the foreign marketplace. Top performers were Korea with $10.3M, UK with $7.1M, and Australia $5.5M.

Placing a much bigger-than-expected #2, pic received a ‘B+’ CinemaScore from U.S. audiences which helped word of mouth so it overperformed with $25.0M Friday and $22.6M Saturday. It even grossed a decent $3.6M in 2,600 screens for Thursday 8 PM previews and midnight late shows. That has Paramount’s moguls giddy with relief after all that pre-release bad buzz for producer and star Brad Pitt an his Plan B banner – especially since the studio claims statistics show only one original live action movie a year opens at $50+M. (“Franchises open bigger but originals play to better multiples as people start discovering them,” one exec tells me.) Paramount actually issued a press release to say this weekend’s opening is the biggest of Brad’s career – but I say not when 2005′s Mr And Mrs Smith ($50.3M) debut is adjusted for inflation and the 2D vs 3D ticket price. Pic also benefitted from a spot-on marketing plan savvy enough to book in advance 2 spots promoting Friday’s official debut during Thursday’s big Miami-San Antonio NBA final game. That became the 2nd most watched series end in pro basketball history.


It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#37 of 85 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor

  • 7,129 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted June 23 2013 - 02:46 PM

If the budget of this was way over $250 million then I'm not sure why the studios are so happy with $65.  I'm going to guess that it drops at least 50% next weekend so it appears it's still going to be a very big money loser (and especially if you go by the logic where Warner said they lost money on Harry Potter).



#38 of 85 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,013 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted June 23 2013 - 02:53 PM

^ Keep in mind that Brad Pitt is huge international money as well.



#39 of 85 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor

  • 7,129 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted June 23 2013 - 04:18 PM

No doubt.  I'm the type that believes very few movies actually "lose money" but if studios are going to claim that stuff like Harry Potter can't make a profit then the $65 million for this thing and its budget really doesn't seem all that good. 



#40 of 85 OFFLINE   Tim Glover

Tim Glover

    Lead Actor

  • 7,661 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 12 1999
  • Real Name:Tim Glover

Posted June 23 2013 - 05:39 PM

I loved it as well. Like Robert said, not a big-time Zombie fan but this film really worked for me. I think part of why it did was because it dialed way down the gore.

Cast was very good. Was intense & I was captivated. Well done.
  • Robert Crawford likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users