World War Z

Mrs gojam and I went to the cinema to watch World War Z last night.  We both love a good zombie movie and we were both looking forward to it.

Was it any good ?

It actually wasn’t too bad. I think it suffers from not living up to expectation, they spent $400 million on it and I left the cinema feeling that with that kind of money they could have made a better movie but it’s not as bad as many reviews have said.

We watched it in 3D and I think that was a mistake, we agreed afterwards that we’d have both enjoyed it more in 2D. 3D in films isn’t really as we experience it in life, it’s like a series of flat 2D sections which give the illusion of perspective. There was no classic 3D moment as an object projects out of the screen and the moments that might have been great in 3D were far too fast. The eyes must have time to refocus. At one point what I assume was a zombie leapt out at the screen but it was just a ghostly blur as I could not refocus quickly enough and it was over before I had had the chance to realise what had happened. So, if you are going to watch it, my advice is to do so in 2D, it might actually be better.

Apparently, they spent $200 million refilming the final act as nobody who saw it liked it. The final act was OK but it does make you wonder how bad it must have been before if OK was an improvement.

Anyway, it’s not a bad film though the narrative ending seemed to just fill in what might have been a better conclusion that would have extended the film for half an hour but at least given the viewer some kind of decent closure. I guess after spending $400 million they decided to just get Brad Pitt to talk through the conclusion that might have made a better film.

Worth a watch for zombie fans.


Filed under Personal

8 responses to “World War Z

  1. Pingback: World War Z » Alternative News Network

  2. Mickey1

    3D makes me feel all dizzy and sick
    No not a zombie fan
    May watch it on non 3D TV eventually
    We live 100 mile round trip from a cinema
    We wait for TV
    Unless in glasgow
    Then pay extortionate tickets to watch big screen so I can get triple scoop Ben and jerrys cherry Garcia
    Which is also 100 mile round trip to gt in supermarket anyway
    We live in the Highlands
    Beautiful but ice cream flavours sparse

  3. Surprised you are reviewing such a nasty film.

  4. Perhaps I shouldn’t be though. Perhaps I should be used to it by now.

  5. It looks revolting.

  6. Anon

    The French could make 400 films for the same money. Each infinitely better.

  7. Paul

    Went to see it myself, seemed like conditioning for people to accept killing of masses of civilians who have been “demonised” ie turned into zombies, as the only hope of humanities survival.

    And all of a sudden the UN was in charge of everything… very strange, as everything they organise and do seems to go wrong. It also pushed a non-vaccine as a vaccine, making you ill to protect you, very strange.

    And as zombie films go, people couldn’t actually stop laughing at the zombies in the last main section at the UN facility…again… in Wales. The ones in The Walking Dead, a tv show with a considerably lower budget, were better than these ones.

    All in all it seemed like a propaganda piece that took a very interesting story and destroyed it. Having read the book before myself and knowing what was in it it missed a lot of things that could have been done, like The Battle of Yonkers for example, or the Indian Armies last stand, which was mentioned, but that would have been a heck of a more interesting that what was done on screen.

    Just like many films that get made these days it has missed the mark and sunk into nothing more than another establishment piece, and a poor one at that.

  8. Thomas

    Its better in 2D as the #D eefects were added in post production, it wasnt filmed in 3D which is why you dont have the classic 3D shots such as an arm flying at you etc etc.
    That being said, at 400m dollars it was way over budget, 28 Days Later is an infintely better film that was made on a fraction of the budget.