Now THIS is a ZOMBIE WAR !!!!!!!

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -

WORLD WAR Z TRAILER

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=96827

Looks AWESOME !!!!

I'm reading the book currently and it's great.

#2 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

Looks f*cking terrible. Fast CGI zombies is not what the book was even remotely about. What a waste of the licence.

#3 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -

Looks f*cking terrible. Fast CGI zombies is not what the book was even remotely about. What a waste of the licence.

Guybrush_3
That amount of zombies has to be done with CGI. They Director/CGI Director said they are like wild tigers, chasing horses. They can't do the book the same way in a movie, it would be just 2 hours of interviews.
#4 Posted by Hallenbeck77 (14595 posts) -

Between the bad buzz this film has been getting since the beginning of production and the trailer, this doesn't look very reassuring.

#5 Posted by Baranga (14217 posts) -

Looks good, but knowing the troubled production I'm sure it's going to be a disaster.

At least it has some original imagery. I like how they take the concept of a mass of zombies flowing from one location to another and speed it up. It fits the medium better, I suppose.

CGI zombie haters should explain in detail how they would achieve what we see in this trailer with make-up.

#6 Posted by Wanderer5 (25726 posts) -

Eh... And is this not going to have a documentary like setup?

#7 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

Looks f*cking terrible. Fast CGI zombies is not what the book was even remotely about. What a waste of the licence.

FelipeInside

That amount of zombies has to be done with CGI. They Director/CGI Director said they are like wild tigers, chasing horses. They can't do the book the same way in a movie, it would be just 2 hours of interviews.

If you know anything about Max Brooks you know that he hates fast zombies. The book could have been adapted in a way that would work.

#8 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -

Looks good, but knowing the troubled production I'm sure it's going to be a disaster.

At least it has some original imagery. I like how they take the concept of a mass of zombies flowing from one location to another and speed it up. It fits the medium better, I suppose.

CGI zombie haters should explain in detail how they would achieve what we see in this trailer with make-up.

Baranga
I hope they don't change the ending like they did with I AM LEGEND, but knowing Hollywood, they probably will.
#9 Posted by Hallenbeck77 (14595 posts) -
[QUOTE="Baranga"]

Looks good, but knowing the troubled production I'm sure it's going to be a disaster.

At least it has some original imagery. I like how they take the concept of a mass of zombies flowing from one location to another and speed it up. It fits the medium better, I suppose.

CGI zombie haters should explain in detail how they would achieve what we see in this trailer with make-up.

FelipeInside
I hope they don't change the ending like they did with I AM LEGEND, but knowing Hollywood, they probably will.

Part of the problem the production was facing was the fact that the film's third act had to be re-written during filming and re-shoots had to be done. I don't know how the book ends, but I'll bet that it not even close to the source material.
#10 Posted by KiIIyou (27154 posts) -
Do day got machine guns and junk like that?
#11 Posted by Baranga (14217 posts) -

If you know anything about Max Brooks you know that he hates fast zombies. The book could have been adapted in a way that would work.

Guybrush_3

An exclusive image of Max Brooks right now:

dzoajcgppc.gif

The book compares zombies to Siafu ants, who do this.

You should want this movie to be a success. If it is, more big budget zombie flicks will be made.

#12 Posted by Pittfan666 (8534 posts) -
Already a thread on this and fast zombies don't fit into the book at all.
#13 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

If you know anything about Max Brooks you know that he hates fast zombies. The book could have been adapted in a way that would work.

Baranga

An exclusive image of Max Brooks right now:

dzoajcgppc.gif

The book compares zombies to Siafu ants, who do this.

You should want this movie to be a success. If it is, more big budget zombie flicks will be made.

It would have been nice to see a movie that at least kept somewhere close to the source material.

The book also describes them as very slow moving. [spoiler] One of the major parts is the one shot per second firing lines. a line of people firing at one second would be overun in seconds by the zombies shown in that trailer [/spoiler]

#14 Posted by Wasdie (50578 posts) -

I don't care, that looks awesome.

From what I know of the book, it's actually a recollection of events being reported for the new world government (or something like that) so this movie can fit in just fine.

#15 Posted by Tigerman950 (2417 posts) -

Damn would people stop complaining before the movie comes out? None of you have any idea how good it's gonna be. Give it a rest.

#16 Posted by WolfattheDoor34 (3278 posts) -
looks just stupid enough to watch!! Brad Pitt's looking pretty good though
#18 Posted by SaintLeonidas (26733 posts) -
Oh look the protagonist managed to be the only one with a vehicle and clear road to escape, how convenient.
#19 Posted by gago-gago (9854 posts) -
Looks good to me. I just want to see something new when it comes to zombie movies but I know that's hard to do. I like how the zombies are running like that. It reminds me of I am Legend minus the sunlight weakness. I know I am Legend isn't a zombie movie. I think it's time for "smart" zombies. I'm not sure but it looks like the zombies were working together to climb that wall. I never read the book but I'll Wikipedia it after I watch the film. I just want to see Brad have a similar anguish scene like he did in Seven. Can't wait to see more.
#20 Posted by D3nnyCrane (12058 posts) -
I don't know how the book ends, but I'll bet that it not even close to the source material.Hallenbeck77
[spoiler] From memory - once they turn the tide of the war due to a return to Imperial-style line combat, most of the problem is limited to iced-over areas and under the ocean. Hard to say the book has a "definitive" end thanks to the multi-perspective style, but if I recall rightly, ends with the doctor who observed patient zero still practising medicine [/spoiler] Also can't see the trailer at the moment, but fast zombies are sorta the antithesis to Max Brooks' line of thinking as to what makes this sh*t scary.
#21 Posted by Stevo_the_gamer (43212 posts) -

OMG.

#22 Posted by Hatiko (4578 posts) -

Nobody cries when the Shire isn't attacked but when zombies run fast... everyones a critic.

#23 Posted by WolfattheDoor34 (3278 posts) -

I think it's time for "smart" zombies.gago-gago

yeah, I think we've reached this point. that is the next step. the time is now

#24 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

Nobody cries when the Shire isn't attacked but when zombies run fast... everyones a critic.

Hatiko

No one cried when the shire wasn't attacked, because, while important, it wasn't a integral part of what made LOTR LOTR. (slow zombies are very much an integral part of WWZ) and the movie was already 3 and a half hours long. Adding another section would have made the movie drag on FOREVER.

#25 Posted by metroidfood (11175 posts) -

Damn would people stop complaining before the movie comes out? None of you have any idea how good it's gonna be. Give it a rest.

Tigerman950

I've never tasted dog sh!t but from the way it smells I can tell it would be bad. And this smells like sh!t.

#26 Posted by Hatiko (4578 posts) -

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

Nobody cries when the Shire isn't attacked but when zombies run fast... everyones a critic.

Guybrush_3

No one cried when the shire wasn't attacked, because, while important, it wasn't a integral part of what made LOTR LOTR. (slow zombies are very much an integral part of WWZ) and the movie was already 3 and a half hours long. Adding another section would have made the movie drag on FOREVER.

Okay, but still, this movie looks cool. don't know why they tag random names onto random movies though. Like Battleship trying to tie into the hasbro game, WTF? I'm just glad that we finally get to see a war with the zombies, not "OMG Zombies are here!" Blackout, Narrator:"The military was overwhelmed". Cut to 7 months later and focus on survivors BORING!!!! It would be like if the movie Titanic was like "OH no, we hit an ICEBERG!" cut to everyone in their lifeboats talking about how they escaped the ship and how bad everything is, we don't get to see it though.

#27 Posted by Videodogg (12606 posts) -

I love Zombie movies. This does not look like a zombie movie. It looks like ass.

#28 Posted by norm41x (813 posts) -

I'll probably be laughing at the unintentionally bad zombie tsunamis this film has to offer.

#29 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

Nobody cries when the Shire isn't attacked but when zombies run fast... everyones a critic.

Hatiko

No one cried when the shire wasn't attacked, because, while important, it wasn't a integral part of what made LOTR LOTR. (slow zombies are very much an integral part of WWZ) and the movie was already 3 and a half hours long. Adding another section would have made the movie drag on FOREVER.

Okay, but still, this movie looks cool. don't know why they tag random names onto random movies though. Like Battleship trying to tie into the hasbro game, WTF? I'm just glad that we finally get to see a war with the zombies, not "OMG Zombies are here!" Blackout, Narrator:"The military was overwhelmed". Cut to 7 months later and focus on survivors BORING!!!! It would be like if the movie Titanic was like "OH no, we hit an ICEBERG!" cut to everyone in their lifeboats talking about how they escaped the ship and how bad everything is, we don't get to see it though.

It could very easily start as an interview and cut to the scenes they are describing. It's really not that hard.

#30 Posted by Hatiko (4578 posts) -

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

No one cried when the shire wasn't attacked, because, while important, it wasn't a integral part of what made LOTR LOTR. (slow zombies are very much an integral part of WWZ) and the movie was already 3 and a half hours long. Adding another section would have made the movie drag on FOREVER.

Guybrush_3

Okay, but still, this movie looks cool. don't know why they tag random names onto random movies though. Like Battleship trying to tie into the hasbro game, WTF? I'm just glad that we finally get to see a war with the zombies, not "OMG Zombies are here!" Blackout, Narrator:"The military was overwhelmed". Cut to 7 months later and focus on survivors BORING!!!! It would be like if the movie Titanic was like "OH no, we hit an ICEBERG!" cut to everyone in their lifeboats talking about how they escaped the ship and how bad everything is, we don't get to see it though.

It could very easily start as an interview and cut to the scenes they are describing. It's really not that hard.

But then we know who survives, which ruins it. Apparently it's not going to be a truthful adaptation to the book. And it isn;t going to change. So as hard as it might be see after seeing the title "World War Z", We're gonna have to realize it isn;t going to be like the book. Doesn;t mean that you have to like that though.

#31 Posted by Stevo_the_gamer (43212 posts) -
On the topic of World War Z, has anyone listened to the Audiobook? It's quite impressive.
#32 Posted by dave123321 (34360 posts) -
So very disappointed
#33 Posted by Bloodseeker23 (8338 posts) -
Brad Pitt is in it, his fanbase alone will make it a blockbuster movie.
#34 Posted by Stevo_the_gamer (43212 posts) -

So very disappointeddave123321
gtfo128583969030606726.jpg

#35 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

Looks f*cking terrible. Fast CGI zombies is not what the book was even remotely about. What a waste of the licence.

Guybrush_3

That amount of zombies has to be done with CGI. They Director/CGI Director said they are like wild tigers, chasing horses. They can't do the book the same way in a movie, it would be just 2 hours of interviews.

If you know anything about Max Brooks you know that he hates fast zombies. The book could have been adapted in a way that would work.

Depends on what book you read. In various parts of the Survival Guide by Max he explains that you need to move fast because Zombies can run after you.
#36 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

No one cried when the shire wasn't attacked, because, while important, it wasn't a integral part of what made LOTR LOTR. (slow zombies are very much an integral part of WWZ) and the movie was already 3 and a half hours long. Adding another section would have made the movie drag on FOREVER.

Guybrush_3

Okay, but still, this movie looks cool. don't know why they tag random names onto random movies though. Like Battleship trying to tie into the hasbro game, WTF? I'm just glad that we finally get to see a war with the zombies, not "OMG Zombies are here!" Blackout, Narrator:"The military was overwhelmed". Cut to 7 months later and focus on survivors BORING!!!! It would be like if the movie Titanic was like "OH no, we hit an ICEBERG!" cut to everyone in their lifeboats talking about how they escaped the ship and how bad everything is, we don't get to see it though.

It could very easily start as an interview and cut to the scenes they are describing. It's really not that hard.

Have u seen the movie? How do you know it doesn't start as Brad Pitt narrating the past?

#37 Posted by dave123321 (34360 posts) -

[QUOTE="dave123321"]So very disappointedStevo_the_gamer

gtfo128583969030606726.jpg

Put in a good word to the ranger team for me
#38 Posted by supa_badman (16659 posts) -

This trailer has managed to concern me more than the trailer in the thread a couple of days ago

#39 Posted by chrisrooR (9027 posts) -
Looks terrible.
#40 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -

This trailer has managed to concern me more than the trailer in the thread a couple of days ago

supa_badman
Looks terrible.chrisrooR
Honestly people, really? It's a Zombie Flick for Christ's Sake, it's not going for the Oscar. It just needs to be fun and intense, and that trailer is.
#41 Posted by chrisrooR (9027 posts) -
[QUOTE="supa_badman"]

This trailer has managed to concern me more than the trailer in the thread a couple of days ago

FelipeInside
Looks terrible.chrisrooR
Honestly people, really? It's a Zombie Flick for Christ's Sake, it's not going for the Oscar. It just needs to be fun and intense, and that trailer is.

I just dislike the emotions displayed by Pitt, looks sorta forced. The CGI zombies also take away from any semblance of realism the movie was going for imo.
#42 Posted by gago-gago (9854 posts) -
Zombies aren't real so what realism were people expecting? :P
#43 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -
[QUOTE="chrisrooR"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="supa_badman"]
Looks terrible.chrisrooR
Honestly people, really? It's a Zombie Flick for Christ's Sake, it's not going for the Oscar. It just needs to be fun and intense, and that trailer is.

I just dislike the emotions displayed by Pitt, looks sorta forced. The CGI zombies also take away from any semblance of realism the movie was going for imo.

The CGI Zombies are a must to produce those kind of zombies, you can't do that with human extras. CGI gets better each day anyway, I just tend to forget about it and try to immerse it as real. Brad Pitt is an awesome actor, you can't tell from a trailer but this movie isn't about so much acting either. It's action.
#44 Posted by supa_badman (16659 posts) -
[QUOTE="supa_badman"]

This trailer has managed to concern me more than the trailer in the thread a couple of days ago

FelipeInside
Looks terrible.chrisrooR
Honestly people, really?

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but read the book and learn why all of us are disappointed You are objectively wrong
#45 Posted by chrisrooR (9027 posts) -
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="chrisrooR"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] Honestly people, really? It's a Zombie Flick for Christ's Sake, it's not going for the Oscar. It just needs to be fun and intense, and that trailer is.

I just dislike the emotions displayed by Pitt, looks sorta forced. The CGI zombies also take away from any semblance of realism the movie was going for imo.

The CGI Zombies are a must to produce those kind of zombies, you can't do that with human extras. CGI gets better each day anyway, I just tend to forget about it and try to immerse it as real. Brad Pitt is an awesome actor, you can't tell from a trailer but this movie isn't about so much acting either. It's action.

He's been awesome in other stuff, though this is entirely subjective. From what I saw in the trailer, it just didn't look good to me.
#46 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -
[QUOTE="supa_badman"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="supa_badman"]
Looks terrible.chrisrooR
Honestly people, really?

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but read the book and learn why all of us are disappointed You are objectively wrong

FYI, if you had cared to read all the topic, I've read the book.
#47 Posted by hippiesanta (9984 posts) -
as long it's a zombie movie .... I'm in .... despite that it's starr brad pitt .... most overated actor
#48 Posted by FelipeInside (26177 posts) -
as long it's a zombie movie .... I'm in .... despite that it's starr brad pitt .... most overated actorhippiesanta
Most over-rated actor? Dude, he's an awesome actor that can tackle almost any role. Forget about his looks and stuff, he's really good.
#49 Posted by PandaTrueno86 (1611 posts) -

This is my honest opinion: My expectations are VERY low (I own and read the novel), but I got a feeling I'll end up watching it one way or another through either my own money or someone else's money.

#50 Posted by Pffrbt (6596 posts) -

They can't do the book the same way in a movie, it would be just 2 hours of interviews.FelipeInside

I don't see how they couldn't do that. It'd be very interesting.