world war z

[michaelgb]

seen it earlier, piece of piss, dont waste your money.

 

[Chumpy]

Ta.

E.g.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816711/

 

[Jezzer]

I really enjoyed the book and, while I know the film bears little resemblance to it, I will still watch the film... In terms of Box Office, it's had a very strong opening weekend. Critically, it's had a fairly warm reception. Besides, I quite enjoy summer blockbuster nonsense.

 

[michaelgb]

Yeah I heard the book is good,,

The film has little glimpses of what am interesting film it could have been, which is even more annoying.

 

[sonichit]

seen it earlier, piece of piss, dont waste your money.

noooooono

 

[michaelgb]

noooooono

You liked it?

 

[sonichit]

You liked it?

no not seen it yet is it that bad? so many bad films this last year must be to do with the cuts

 

[michaelgb]

I'd give it 3 out of 10,,

Danny Boyles 28 days later is far superior,,,

 

[nick dartmoor]

That's a shame, I really wanted this to be good. I'll probably see it anyway.

 

[sonichit]

I'd give it 3 out of 10,, Danny Boyles 28 days later is far superior,,,

wow that's bad

I very much enjoyed 28 days later and what a soundtrack

 

[sonichit]

oh well lets hope Elysium and oblivion are top dollar

 

[nick dartmoor]

Elysium should be excellent, I reckon.

 

[Jezzer]

Some of my colleagues went to see it last night. They all really enjoyed it! They said it was more of a thriller than a horror - with some moments of real suspense.

 

[nick dartmoor]

I saw it last night, and I really enjoyed it. I thought it was a much more intelligent film than any other zombie flick I've seen. It was coming in more from a global pandemic/eco parable kind of direction. It relied more on a constantly sustained sense of suspense, than gratuitous flesh-eating, which let's face it, we've seen before, many times. It was beautifully shot, showing off its collossal budget, and the acting was, whilst not in any way oscar-winning, completely fine - no weaknesses. I was honestly riveted from start to finish.

I think the luke-warm reception probably has more to do with the fact that it was Brad Pitt's project, cost an inordinate amount, and had such well-publicised problems (re-writes etc), and that it deviated a lot from the book, which is always guaranteed to raise the hackles of the purists. I think a lot of reviewers decided in advance that they were going to rubbish it, or get hung up on comparing it to other films/the book, etc, rather than just approaching it with an open mind, and taking it for what it is. It's not really a 'horror' film, but a very dark and interesting work nonetheless, not particularly following in the foosteps of any other zombie films. And yes, I loved 28 days later, but I don't see appreciation of the two as mutually incompatible. I don't know that I'm especially easily pleased, but I was totally entertained, and geniunely left the cinema feeling jumpy.

 

[browellm]

Nice summary Nick, I'll have some of that.

 

[Jezzer]

^

Wot he said. I'll watch this and soon.

 

[browellm]

Hahaa, this made me chuckle. I suppose I should warn of possible spoilers if like me you haven't seen the film yet.

[video=youtube_share;I2cS5Fv5xIQ]

BWAAAS

 

[Guest]

hahaa, this made me chuckle. I suppose i should warn of possible spoilers if like me you haven't seen the film yet.[video=youtube_share;i2cs5fv5xiq]http://youtu.be/i2cs5fv5xiq

bwaaas

lols:d

 

[luckysim0n]

The book was a really good read and imo an impossible book to film for your everyday audience to much shifting around

The film was ok loved the Jerusalem scene and would love to watch again on a nice av setup