After years of fighting aliens, Hollywood’s latest obsession is taking on zombies. Movie-goers have taken well to films based on these ‘creatures’ and so we have World War Z giving us another massive dose of the undead.
Alfred Hitchcock gave us mind-blowing finales at Mount Rushmore and the Statue of Liberty. Brad Pitt gives us his own climax in a chemical laboratory just outside Cardiff. On a slightly overcast day. He's the producer-star of this bloated and boring zombie action thriller that's been in production for so long.
The first problem you encounter with World War Z, is how to pronounce the damn thing. Should the last letter be said "zee", to sound like"three", or "zed", to sound like "dead", or"zzz", to sound like the audience?
Whichever phoneme you plump for, the Z stands for zombie, and the film contains, on a rough estimate, hundreds of thousands of them. It is based on a novel by Max Brooks, son of the filmmaker and humorist Mel, and it follows Gerry Lane (Pitt), a flaxen-haired former United Nations action man who is recalled to the line of duty when a mysterious pandemic turns citizens of various countries into walking, chomping corpses.
The initial panic on the streets of Philadelphia is thrilling, as is the fall of Jerusalem to the undead horde and an air borne sequence that might easily have been called Zombies on a Plane.But the film is horrifyingly feeble when it comes to characterization. All we know about Pitt’s Gerry is that he loves his family, but no one has given this hero any exceptional qualities. The same goes for the other characters: as uninteresting a lot as I’ve seen in a disaster movie.
Disappointingly, the final product is much more conventional than the book. Brook’s purpose was to satirise the bungling of government, the excesses of survivals at all costs and the dangers of corporate power. He took a particularly cynical stance on George W Bush’s ‘shock and awe’ tactics in Iraq; like Muslim extremists. But these zombies are too obsessed with slaughter to be shocked or awed.
In the book, the zombie virus spreads from China via refugees and an illicit trade in human organs. Pakistan and Iran destroy each other in a nuclear dispute over border controls, while Cuba becomes the world’s most thriving economy. The people at Paramount evidently think all this political stuff is too difficult for a cinema audience. Maybe they’re also nervous about how it might go down in China,Pakistan and Iran.
So they’ve played safe, cut it all out and turned the story into a one-man triumph for an American UN operative blessed with movie-star looks. World War Z isn’t terrible. Parts are impressive and exciting. But the incredibly long distance it falls short of its source material means it is a wasted opportunity.
Will it bump Man Of Steel from the top of the box office? Not a chance. But it’s a good enough,somewhat clever in parts zombie flick (that actually uses the word zombie) that for some reason has Matthew Fox in it in a role that will make you go, was that Matthew Fox and is so why is Matthew Fox in this? He does almost nothing by the way. He’s barely in it! Less than Party Of Five minutes. You could even say that he’s LOST among the rest of the supporting cast. Not to mention the way he…Speed Racer…no…that doesn’t work. Honestly I’m just trying to pad this out cause I’ve run out of stuff to say and this feels a little short.
So World War Z. Its okay and you should probably see it or not see it. And I firmly stand by that conviction! Missing this would never make you regretful by an ounce in your weekend plan.
More Details On:(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md6Dvxdr0AQ
No comments:
Post a Comment