World War Z
2/4
Starring: Brad Pitt, Mirelle Enos, Daniella Kertesz, Fana Mokoena, Sterling Jerins, Abigail Hargrove
Rated PG-13 for Intense Frightening Zombie Sequences, Violence and Disturbing Images
Movies as troubled as "World War Z" are typically disastrous. "Gigli," "Supernova," the list goes on. Hollywood's latest zombie movie, based on Max Brooks' bestselling novel, is surprisingly not the disaster I was expecting. It's not perfect, and I don't recommend it. But compared to drek like "Pacific Rim" and "The Purge," it's decent entertainment.
Gerry Lane (Pitt) is a former investigator for the UN, but is now a husband to his wife Karin (Enos) and father to his daughters Constance (Jerins) and Rachel (Hargrove). His life seems idyllic but then he and his family hit disaster. Zombies are running amok but fortunately, Gerry and his family escape, but Gerry's former co-worker, Thierry Umutoni (Mokoena), sends him back into the field to find out where the disease started so they can find a cure.
As a zombie movie, the film is adequate. As an adaptation of the book, it's a failure. I might be more kind to the fact that nothing from the book has made it into the movie (Hollywood's love of brand names at its best) if it was more than passably entertaining. But it isn't. There are some intense scenes, particularly at the beginning, but that's about it.
When I heard that Hollywood was going to turn Brooks' faux-biography into a movie, I was curious about how they would implement it, but I was wary of the result. The challenge with the film is that the story is essentially a narrator interviewing survivors about their stories during the Zombie War. It's not inherently cinematic, especially since it means a lack of a consistent character throughout the film. It would essentially be a few short films with a connecting thread. Kind of like the video game "Halo: ODST," I guess. But Hollywood is not known for taking risks, especially when big budgets are involved. Therefore we have something relatively safe, and as a result of screenwriting decisions, generic.
The film could have been different had they settled on a character different from Gerry Lane. What made the book so involving is that few of the characters were anyone in charge of anything. They were normal people who were involved in very narrow and specific situations. The scope, which involves Gerry being on an aircraft carrier, and in Korea, Wales and Israel, is too big. And Gerry also has a way with fighting. He's more like Jason Bourne rather than a normal guy who doesn't know what to do with a gun. As a result, any vulnerability he could have had that might have made us wonder if he'd get out of a situation alive goes right out the window. There's no real sense that he's in any danger. He always knows what to do and how to do it.
To be fair, Brad Pitt gives a nice performance. He's low-key, but not so much that he gets drowned out by the special effects. Mirelle Enos, who is a regular on the TV show "The Killing," is effective, but she has nothing to do. Daniella Kertesz is also good as Gerry's sidekick but she has nothing to do either.
Marc Foster began his career as with primarily dramatic films. I haven't seen "Monster's Ball," which put him on the map, but I did see "Finding Neverland" and "The Kite Runner." He directs Oscar-bait movies, not action thrillers. "Quantum of Solace," which rivals "Die Another Day" as the worst Bond movie ever made, was ruined by him shaking the camera frenetically. Although it's not as incomprehensible as his Bond entry, the plot doesn't make much sense and he does shake the camera too much.
Finally, there's my beef about the PG-13 rating. Zombie movies are like slasher movies. By design, they need to be intense and gory ("Warm Bodies" is an exception because it's more a romantic comedy than a horror movie). But with the big budget Paramount clearly didn't want to alienate the teen crowd with an R rating. While it is intense, it lacks the punch that an R rating would give it, and there are scenes were it becomes painfully obvious that this is a PG-13 only by orders from the studio.
If you insist on seeing it, wait for Blu Ray. Otherwise, just read the book.
Starring: Brad Pitt, Mirelle Enos, Daniella Kertesz, Fana Mokoena, Sterling Jerins, Abigail Hargrove
Rated PG-13 for Intense Frightening Zombie Sequences, Violence and Disturbing Images
Movies as troubled as "World War Z" are typically disastrous. "Gigli," "Supernova," the list goes on. Hollywood's latest zombie movie, based on Max Brooks' bestselling novel, is surprisingly not the disaster I was expecting. It's not perfect, and I don't recommend it. But compared to drek like "Pacific Rim" and "The Purge," it's decent entertainment.
Gerry Lane (Pitt) is a former investigator for the UN, but is now a husband to his wife Karin (Enos) and father to his daughters Constance (Jerins) and Rachel (Hargrove). His life seems idyllic but then he and his family hit disaster. Zombies are running amok but fortunately, Gerry and his family escape, but Gerry's former co-worker, Thierry Umutoni (Mokoena), sends him back into the field to find out where the disease started so they can find a cure.
As a zombie movie, the film is adequate. As an adaptation of the book, it's a failure. I might be more kind to the fact that nothing from the book has made it into the movie (Hollywood's love of brand names at its best) if it was more than passably entertaining. But it isn't. There are some intense scenes, particularly at the beginning, but that's about it.
When I heard that Hollywood was going to turn Brooks' faux-biography into a movie, I was curious about how they would implement it, but I was wary of the result. The challenge with the film is that the story is essentially a narrator interviewing survivors about their stories during the Zombie War. It's not inherently cinematic, especially since it means a lack of a consistent character throughout the film. It would essentially be a few short films with a connecting thread. Kind of like the video game "Halo: ODST," I guess. But Hollywood is not known for taking risks, especially when big budgets are involved. Therefore we have something relatively safe, and as a result of screenwriting decisions, generic.
The film could have been different had they settled on a character different from Gerry Lane. What made the book so involving is that few of the characters were anyone in charge of anything. They were normal people who were involved in very narrow and specific situations. The scope, which involves Gerry being on an aircraft carrier, and in Korea, Wales and Israel, is too big. And Gerry also has a way with fighting. He's more like Jason Bourne rather than a normal guy who doesn't know what to do with a gun. As a result, any vulnerability he could have had that might have made us wonder if he'd get out of a situation alive goes right out the window. There's no real sense that he's in any danger. He always knows what to do and how to do it.
To be fair, Brad Pitt gives a nice performance. He's low-key, but not so much that he gets drowned out by the special effects. Mirelle Enos, who is a regular on the TV show "The Killing," is effective, but she has nothing to do. Daniella Kertesz is also good as Gerry's sidekick but she has nothing to do either.
Marc Foster began his career as with primarily dramatic films. I haven't seen "Monster's Ball," which put him on the map, but I did see "Finding Neverland" and "The Kite Runner." He directs Oscar-bait movies, not action thrillers. "Quantum of Solace," which rivals "Die Another Day" as the worst Bond movie ever made, was ruined by him shaking the camera frenetically. Although it's not as incomprehensible as his Bond entry, the plot doesn't make much sense and he does shake the camera too much.
Finally, there's my beef about the PG-13 rating. Zombie movies are like slasher movies. By design, they need to be intense and gory ("Warm Bodies" is an exception because it's more a romantic comedy than a horror movie). But with the big budget Paramount clearly didn't want to alienate the teen crowd with an R rating. While it is intense, it lacks the punch that an R rating would give it, and there are scenes were it becomes painfully obvious that this is a PG-13 only by orders from the studio.
If you insist on seeing it, wait for Blu Ray. Otherwise, just read the book.
Comments
Post a Comment