That being said, regardless of how little the movie relates, I'll probably go see it (unless it gets terrible reviews). Hopefully it's at least a good apocalyptic thriller/action movie on its own.
[M] World War Z - Page 10
Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
Choo
United States126 Posts
That being said, regardless of how little the movie relates, I'll probably go see it (unless it gets terrible reviews). Hopefully it's at least a good apocalyptic thriller/action movie on its own. | ||
EienShinwa
United States655 Posts
| ||
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
One of the things that comes up in the WWZ book is that military training instructs you to aim for the center of mass, because landing headshots is more difficult (among other reasons). The military got fucked for the first few months/years because they couldn't figure it out for the longest time. It's not like Zombies walk around with big red targets on their heads, if you didn't know the stories and watch the movies about them, you'd likely not figure it out just by looking at them either. | ||
ElMeanYo
United States1032 Posts
On November 10 2012 06:01 D10 wrote: Still, do you agree with me that even Max Brooks zombies would be easily eliminated by whatever remained for lets say.. the US military forces. Yes, I do agree, and in fact this does happen eventually in the book. What is left of US forces gets their shit together and organizes a nation-wide extermination of the zombies. Only after adjusting their tactics does this become possible and they take some serious lumps at the beginning, stubbornly sticking to modern combat tactics (see Battle of Yonkers). By that point though, probably 90% of the US is overrun and its a matter of reclaiming the country. It's not just told from the US perspective either. Every country handles it differently and in the end the entire global and political landscape changes. Some countries just cease to exist, others adapt and survive... even thrive. This global perspective and how it is told is what makes the book so good. Read the book man, its a treat if you like this kind of stuff! | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36362 Posts
On November 10 2012 06:01 D10 wrote: Still, do you agree with me that even Max Brooks zombies would be easily eliminated by whatever remained for lets say.. the US military forces. It's all explained quite well in the books, I thought this too before reading it. Basically the infection spreads realistically, most of the world doesn't even believe the virus exists until it's relatively widespread, and even then the government tries to cover it up to stop mass panic. The issue with "fighting" the zombies is that there really isn't anything to fight. You're fighting ghosts and tiny infections. It'd be a logistical nightmare, having to inspect all potentially infected people. Brooks also explains through placebo drugs, fake infections, organ transplants, and the natural delay between bite and full blown infection, it's very difficult to fully eradicate the virus even in a localized area. To have a large scale military battle, it would mean the outbreak has already reached a point where it is taking over a large percentage of the country. In Brooks' universe the issue is not that our weapons couldn't kill the zombies, obviously fighter jets and nukes can kill zombies. It's that you can't properly distinguish infected from uninfected. The manpower required to do this as well as to redistribute the US to a wartime economy/production (think of all the accountants, lawyers, etc who are useless in a zombie war) make the country entirely unprepared for it. Imagine if a zombie outbreak happened today, a lot of people would simply not believe it's occurring until they saw actual evidence of it. Misinformation, denial, etc would be much more likely than everyone boarding up their homes and buying weapons. Nobody would believe it, and the way its portrayed in WWZ the book makes it quite believable. TLDR; You're never going to find a place to nuke because most of the time, a city is 20% infected and the 80% healthy humans are running for their lives. | ||
dUTtrOACh
Canada2339 Posts
| ||
Sanctimonius
United Kingdom861 Posts
I'll tell you, Brad. It's a cheap cash-in. As others have said in this thread, the book was great. It was very original and a completely believable look at how the world would react to a zombie outbreak (and asks that question we all dread - are we prepared?! Are we!? Ahem...). This....well, it might be a good zombie film, and I give it credit for looking at the problem in a larger scale than we are used to. Think about the zombie films you've seen, most are centred on one location - a mall, a house, a farm, whatever. This film looks like it is trying to look at something like this in a truly global scale, although obviously this isn't particularly original, since we've had the book and games like Resident Evil explore this numerous times. What annoys me in particular is the use of the name World War Z. Why use the name, and say it's based on the book, when you approach the subject in a completely different way? When you create a narrative and focus it on one person when the book was so successful in avoiding that? I loved the documentary feel of the outbreak and subsequent changes it wrought on humanity. I was looking forward to something similar in this film - imagine it being survivor interviews, found footage, people discussing the merits and drawbacks of what was done and what they can do for the future. Gah. Missed opportunity here. | ||
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
But that's probably wishful thinking. Also doesn't make up for the fast zombies. | ||
JKM
Denmark419 Posts
| ||
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
On November 10 2012 06:26 JKM wrote: Good thing they made the zombies fast! One of the big things I have never bought in zombie fiction is how slow zombies could ever make society collapse. It's just too easy to form multiple well-defended positions against them, even if outnumbered heavily. Even if the virus (or whatever it is) happened around the globe at the same time, military force would very quickly beat it into the ground whereever they went. If they should fail at that, they could form fortified positions and kill anything coming their way weathering the most chaotic parts out. (still doesnt explain why tanks are never employed in numbers to defend positions and clean out areas. Read the book. All is explained. | ||
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
| ||
LOLingBuddha
Netherlands697 Posts
I am easily satisfied with many movies, i dont compare them to books, i dont compare them to sequels, i just sit watch and enjoy the movies for what they are, i dont watch sci fi movies and sit there to pick apart all the scientific inaccuracies. I feel there are TONS of movies that i really like that most people would vomit over | ||
tonight
United States11130 Posts
| ||
BlackPaladin
United States9316 Posts
On November 10 2012 05:44 FlyingToilet wrote: If the zombies are so fast how will the film portray fat infected, not as fast with stubby feet since they never get exhausted? They drive around on solar battery powered scooters. | ||
ElMeanYo
United States1032 Posts
On November 10 2012 06:33 LOLingBuddha wrote: I am easily satisfied with many movies, i dont compare them to books, i dont compare them to sequels, i just sit watch and enjoy the movies for what they are, i dont watch sci fi movies and sit there to pick apart all the scientific inaccuracies. I'm like you... usually I don't care too much that movies are close to the books. But WWZ is an exception because it is just so damn good. I've read the book 5 times now, (its become a Halloween tradition :-), and it still gives me the heeby-jeebies. The thought that they may have caved to some suit in a studio office whos never read the book and says 'we cant sell shambling zombies' is a wasted opportunity to do a great book justice. | ||
Glenn313
United States475 Posts
| ||
ElMeanYo
United States1032 Posts
On November 10 2012 06:27 D10 wrote: OK you guys sold me, im gonna read the book Good to hear. Come back to this thread when you are done and let us know what you think. | ||
metbull
United States404 Posts
This looks bad. Real Bad. Matrix Revolutions bad. | ||
Dfgj
Singapore5922 Posts
On November 10 2012 06:26 JKM wrote: Good thing they made the zombies fast! One of the big things I have never bought in zombie fiction is how slow zombies could ever make society collapse. It's just too easy to form multiple well-defended positions against them, even if outnumbered heavily. Even if the virus (or whatever it is) happened around the globe at the same time, military force would very quickly beat it into the ground whereever they went. If they should fail at that, they could form fortified positions and kill anything coming their way weathering the most chaotic parts out. (still doesnt explain why tanks are never employed in numbers to defend positions and clean out areas. You're working under the colossal assumption that society is militarized and targets are all marked, a direct us-vs-them confrontation. This is unrealistic. What actually would happen is far more like any disease outbreak - it would be spread around before anyone even started dying from it, and it would take time for news to get around/be believed, all the while people don't understand what is going on and are spreading it even before becoming full-blown zombies. | ||
LoLAdriankat
United States4307 Posts
I know this doesn't seem like the book, but I think they could still explore some concepts from the book like the changing dynamic in the workforce and such (in the trailer, the government said they needed Brad Pitt's character for something, after all). | ||
| ||