#1 Edited by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio

After reading a well written horror novel, there should be certain images, or portraits, that stick in your mind for months, or even years after you finish reading the book. These portraits can all be different from one person to the other. The shoot-out at Yonkers, a blind Japanese man beheading zombies with a Katana, a young girl being shielded from the sight of her parent’s death, etc. Its these scenes that habitually engrain themselves in our heads and create portraits; ones that tie all our emotional responses, towards a novel, together.

What made ‘World War Z’ such an amazingly, stellar horror novel, is that it is, basically, a collection of narratives set in chronological order. And it is these narratives that allows the entire book to be comprised of portraits. The reader was never overburdened with the intense characterization of one person or another. There was no prolonged discourse to a plot that bogged down readers from getting to the next chapter. In fact, there was no linear plot to the story other than the organization of each ‘interview’, so it freed the reader in allowing them more imagination in creating memorable moments (or portraits).

When I had, first, heard that there was to be a movie adaptation of Max Brooks’ horror masterpiece, ‘World War Z’, it may have been the first time in my adult existence that I inadvertently squealed with joy. That joy quickly turned to woe as a screenplay synopsis began to circulate the internet a little over a year ago. When IMDB confirmed my deepest disdain, I began the long emotional trek from “I need to see this” to “’F’ this in the ‘A’”.

The plot for the novel…

“a full fledged world takeover by zombies as a journalist crosses the globe gathering first-hand accounts of how the undead overtook mankind.”

…Sounds pretty awesome, right? Yes it does!

The plot for the movie adaptation…

“a U.N. worker who races against time, traveling the world in an effort to stop an attack of zombies that could destroy humanity once and for all.”

…doesn’t sound bad either, but it’s not the story.

Of course, why would they want to stick to the source material? That would be professional courtesy, and take longer to adapt into a screenplay. And if we know anything about the majority of Hollywood, whatever takes longer in pre-production, costs more money; and that’s just not worth it.

I am an avid fan of most reading genres, and I believe that a book is usually better than its cinematic counterpart, but I understand that there is only so much that can be translated from page to screen; that the ‘plot’ has to be fluid and flexible to the possibility of change. For example; The Game of Thrones series(A song of Ice and Fire), written by George R. Martin (for those who have read it), skipped entire characters and their corresponding storylines to fit a budget and keep the story as simple as they could, without taking the continuity of the novels too far away.

What they did with World Ward Z, is completely change the concept of the story, right down to its fundamentals. It is no longer a grouping of tales that show what mankind would go through in its darkest struggle for survival. What do we have now? A tale about one man with the entire weight of this apocalypse resting solely on his shoulders as he saves humanity. The concept of this story does not sound bad, and actually could stand alone on its own merit…just call it something else, because one thing is for sure, they are not making World War Z , no matter what the title is.

I get it, Brad Pitt is starring as Gerry Lane a UN Official (supposed to be the journalist doing the interviews, but whatever), and he can’t just be in the movie for minute glimpses between stories when we meet the new interviewee. How will we get all the co-eds to come see it?…no, he needs to be in the forefront of every turn and twist in the entire movie. And to make matters worse, in recent online stories, Brad Pitt and Director Marc Forster had a falling out, and won’t even speak to each other; instead, they communicate through intermediaries. This drops my hopes even more, as they have been scheduled for reshoots lasting through September. They may be shooting for a World War Z caliber movie, but it seems like they might get something more along the lines of The Day After Tomorrow.

Will I see this movie? I would like to think that I have the integrity to stand by my libelous bashing and refrain from watching something that desecrates an American Horror masterpiece. But, like most horror fans, I love zombies, and “eat” up every chance I get to watch the undead munch on some brains.

What do you guys think? (please, any and all opinions are welcome)

#2 Posted by CrimsonCake (2735 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm skeptical about Brad Pitt,But who knows?This film might actually manage to stay faithfull to the material even though the plot appears to deviate from it.

Either way,Atleast I know Max Brooks isn't going to turn into Alan Moore after they make this.

#3 Posted by texasdeathmatch (13336 posts) - - Show Bio

Eh, it sounds like its a cursed movie as well. Cursed as in nothing seems to be going right, as production seems to be running into all sorts of problems.

#4 Posted by CrimsonCake (2735 posts) - - Show Bio

@texasdeathmatch said:

Eh, it sounds like its a cursed movie as well. Cursed as in nothing seems to be going right, as production seems to be running into all sorts of problems.

The only way I can see them making it worse is if the Zombies can run.

#5 Posted by texasdeathmatch (13336 posts) - - Show Bio
@CrimsonCake: Yeah, I'm pretty sure they're sprinters too, haha.
#6 Posted by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio

if they do, in fact, give zombies the ability to run...then they truly are lost. As that completely deviates from the Zombie Survival Guide, which the book is based off.

#7 Posted by CrimsonCake (2735 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerdork said:

if they do, in fact, give zombies the ability to run...then they truly are lost. As that completely deviates from the Zombie Survival Guide, which the book is based off.

I wouldn't mind if they could charge at you for a few seconds but if there anything like the zombies from 28 days later than this movie will fail as an adaptation.

#8 Edited by NlGHTCRAWLER (2894 posts) - - Show Bio

My favorite moment in the book was when the people took over the celebrity reality show house and slaughtered all the movie and music stars. It was amazing.


In response to your blog though, I agree with everything that you have said. This is NOT WWZ. This a another zombie movie that uses the same title in order to conjoin with an already established fan base. I probably won't see it... The camping in Canada thing, The battle of Yonkers, the reality show, etc etc. Brad Pitt can't do all this. It made sense because different people experienced these different things and explained them in flashbacks. I hope this movie falls on it's ass. It most likely won't because it's A.) A big budget zombie flick and B.) Has Brad Pitt in it. Who know though... I Am Legend was fantastic and it only kept some things from the book.

#9 Posted by YourNeighborhoodComicGeek (21357 posts) - - Show Bio


I didn't want this movie to focus on one person. I wanted it to focus on different groups of people by their country.

For example :

A group of people in the U.S

A group of people in China

A group of people in Russia

I want to see a variety and the different impacts on the different cultures/environments/countries. I just don't think one person traveling the globe will have the same effect. Brad Pitt is fine I guess, but I'm a bit skeptical.

"Be water my friend"

#10 Posted by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio

I feel somewhat better, and equally saddened, to know that i am not alone with indecision regarding this movie. My instincts tell me that i should be green with nerd rage, but my tongue and cheek, kitchey side wants to sit back, check my brain, and enjoy another zombie film. But, why did they have to mess with WWZ? If they finish this movie, it will only cement the fact that World War Z, the book, will never be realized on screen. And that is a damn tragedy.

#11 Posted by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio


#12 Posted by danhimself (21320 posts) - - Show Bio

I understand the anger over changing the source material but I don't understand why people are dissing Brad Pitt...dude is an amazing actor

#13 Edited by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio

I am not disparaging Brad Pitt at all, rather, the circumstances of having one person portray the stories of tens of characters. I am a fan of Brad Pitt, I find his movies to be very entertaining, on many levels; I also feel that he has become a bit of a premadonna, and needs to be in spot light more than the true character would allow...And i guarantee, that didn't fly with him. So my problem isn't with Brad Pitt, but Marc Forster for pursuing an actor who would not yield to source material. Especially when the amendments completely turn the story in a direction that does not coincide with nearly anything that was written by Max Brooks. I just don't want another I Am Legend. Good movie, but not the story. All I want is for the producers to rename the movie, because WWZ deserves to be protrayed as close to page for page as can be done.

#14 Posted by Inverno (13757 posts) - - Show Bio

I read on Imdb that Damon Lindenlof is going to write it... so yeah, its probably going to suck nuts.

#15 Posted by weaponx (1600 posts) - - Show Bio

It wasn't that bad, in fact, I liked it and thought it was exciting throughout.

#16 Posted by SavageDragon (2257 posts) - - Show Bio

I liked the book but it doesnt really work for a movie. That being said I still want to see the film.

#17 Posted by k4tzm4n (39714 posts) - - Show Bio

@weaponx said:

It wasn't that bad, in fact, I liked it and thought it was exciting throughout.

I basically agree with this. Some painfully stupid/predictable moments and some atrocious shaky cam during some melees, but overall I was definitely amused.

I'd probably give it a 3-3.5/5.

Moderator Online
#18 Posted by The Stegman (30040 posts) - - Show Bio

It was "meh" with a horrible ending 3/5

#19 Posted by k4tzm4n (39714 posts) - - Show Bio

It was "meh" with a horrible ending 3/5

Wouldn't being only average with a horrible ending give it less than a 3? :P

Moderator Online
#20 Edited by The Stegman (30040 posts) - - Show Bio

@k4tzm4n: ...I liked the scenes at the research facility, or else it would be a 2.

#21 Posted by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio

@weaponx: : @k4tzm4n: It doesnt surprise me that the movie turned out to be entertaining. It had a huge budget with established actors...and zombies. But my problem with the film does not stem from its quality, but its source. This movie could have literally been named anything, and they chose to take World War Z, for no other reason than to attract an already established fan-base and pinch a few more dollars pre-production. I know that i am singing the same old song that every die-hard fan sings in regards to the butchering of their passion (books and movies are mine), but this is a story (or group of stories) that could have brought the Zombie genre up to a new level of respect in the eyes of the average viewer; thus kickstarting more projects revolving around the Undead (and i mean well made projects).

I liked the book but it doesnt really work for a movie. That being said I still want to see the film.

I agree with you, it would not work as a movie. But, it would work wonderfully as a 10-15 episode mini-series on HBO or Starz. Yes, it would require an enormous budget, and take a while to finish filming; but, in the wake of The Walking Dead, the show would attract a large fan-base and make a killing. Not to mention give all of the narratives the time needed to tell the complete story. Just imagine the actors they could get to cameo in those roles. It would be an instant classic, and further the legitimization of the genre itself.

#22 Edited by SpideyIvyDaredevilFan26 (6708 posts) - - Show Bio

It's a PG-13 ZOMBIE MOVIE. What do you think?!

#23 Posted by BaneStrokeLoboGrundyBatArrow (1462 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerdork: as soon as I saw brad Pitt I was like,

"This is going to be nothing like the book."

#24 Edited by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio

@spideyivydaredevilfan26: It wasnt rated when i wrote this blog. But, yes, its just as bad as making a PG-13 Max Payne movie.

@banestrokelobogrundybatarrow Yeah, i was dissapointed with the cast. As soon as i saw him casted last April or May, i knew it wouldn't be like the book either. Brad Pitt is too much of a diva to play a character that relegates themself to the background.

I just feel so bad for Max Brooks; it was his first time in Hollywood, and the Producers must have just walked all over him. The poor guy never had a chance to tell the story he wrote.

#25 Edited by Nova`Prime` (4172 posts) - - Show Bio

I just have to ask, what did you expect a movie starring Brad Pitt to be? A faith adaptation of the source material? Have you learned nothing from watching hollywood adaptations. They can barely get historical events right in some movies.

And don't feel to bad for Max, he is the son of hollywood legend Mal, I am sure he'll have plenty of chances to make bad movies. ;)

#26 Posted by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio

@nova_prime_: You obviously didn't read the blog, or at least thoroughly enough. Because you are just restating my points. And, no, i never had the idea that they would have stuck with the source material: but, this movie literally just took the title to snag some extra capital before a script surfaced. There are no similarities between the book and the movie, except for there being zombies...but, even they weren't true to the book at all. I can't think of a deviation from source material, this acute, happening before (I'm sure there has been instances though). As for Max making bad movies...I can't say what he'll do in the future. But, I'm inclined to agree with you.

#27 Posted by SideburnGuru (1364 posts) - - Show Bio

Zombie waves.

Whoever came up with that idea, literally needs beat up to no end. That was the stupidest thing I think I have ever seen this whole year. Zombie waves.

Zombie waves. Waves. Waves of people. Waves.


#28 Posted by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio
#29 Edited by SideburnGuru (1364 posts) - - Show Bio
@nerdork said:

@sideburnguru: yeah...wtf is up with that.

Sorry about not replying. I would have loved to discuss this, but apparently my notifications aren't even working. That's great. I sure do love this new system.


That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen for a very long time. I saw the movie, and while I thought it was entertaining? This sh*t was just as stupid as it looks.

And this isn't the only time it happens. It happens ALOT. It looks stupid, EVERYTIME it happens on the big sreen. It looks incredibly fake, and just ridiculous.

#30 Edited by nerdork (4055 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: The more I talk about it with people, the less I want to watch the movie. I do enjoy cheeky action/horror films, and I can usually get past misused source material; but, I have to draw the line somewhere. Zombie waves....and here I thought zombies were incorruptible, on screen.

My notifications aren't working either. I'm not digging having to check the threads I post on repeatedly, just to see if somewhere cares about what I said. Lol...RAWR!!

#31 Edited by BadVoodoo (386 posts) - - Show Bio

"The Blockbuster of the Summer" ohhh man... The thing is, the more people that see this movie, the more hollywood thinks its ok to make garbage zombie movies. I love the zombie genre, but i hate what hollywood does to them. We never, not once pre-2000 had a great zombie movie that focused on the survival aspect instead of the zombie horror.

They don't seem to understand that we love zombies for the unique situation they create,

Can't go outside

Scavenge for depleting resources

Creatures are everywhere, and if just one of them bites you you are infested

Dammit i love zombies. They need to be treated right. I wish people would follow in the footsteps of Dead State