Brad Pitt’s ‘WWZ’ opens bigger than expected: was it better than you expected?

World War Z did not win its opening weekend box office. Which is okay, I guess. I’m not sure anyone predicted that it would win the weekend, especially given that Monsters University opened this weekend and Pixar films basically mint money. So Monsters U. won the weekend box office with around $82 million domestic box office. WWZ made $66 million for its domestic opening weekend, which is more than most analysts were predicting. WWZ also made more than $45 million in international markets, so it opened with well over $100 million. Considering WWZ cost the studio more than $200 million to make, it still has a way to go before everyone breaks even, but hey… at least it’s not a box office bomb. The film will make money for the studio. Eventually. Oh, here’s something nice: this was the biggest opening ever for one of Brad’s films.

So, obviously, I went to see WWZ this weekend. I went to a Sunday matinee, my second Sunday matinee in a week! When I went to see Man of Steel, the theater was jam-packed for a lazy Sunday afternoon. But for WWZ, it was half-full. But that was fine. I got a better seat. Would you like my thoughts…?

************** SPOILERS – SPOILERS for World War Z:

First, let me just say that I haven’t read the book. Maybe someday I’ll read the book, but my review of the film is not about whether the film is a good adaptation of the book. I came into the film knowing next to nothing about the story or what the story was supposed to be, and I think that’s the way to enjoy it – don’t expect it to be something it’s not.

So, with that in mind… I was surprised by what a cohesive film it was. No joke. This movie took more than a year to film, with a bunch of start-stop productions and extensive reshoots, and I was expecting to be able to identify “Oh, that’s a reshoot.” I wasn’t able to do that. It’s a cohesive film. Now, there are also some plot holes and there were certain plotlines which were under-explained, but there was nothing too glaring or awful.

Brad was good. He was better when he was on the move, running from zombies, than when he was with his family. I’m sure I’m the only one who thought this, but his daughters were incredibly annoying and whiny. And Mireille Enos looked pissed off most of the time instead of “worried”. Mireille has what I like to call a “natural bitchface”. It’s fine when she’s playing a cop or someone serious and cynical, but it’s not so great when she’s supposed to look worried and vulnerable.

There’s this one actress I want to mention though – an Israeli actress named Daniella Kertesz! She played the IDF soldier Segen, who spends a good chunk of the last half of the movie with Brad. She was awesome!! She was my favorite part, no joke. She had a shaved head, she was emotional, pained, strong and badass. I loved her. Also deserving of special attention: a young child actor named Fabrizio Zacharee Guido (in the film he’s called Tomas). He’s pretty awesome too. Hilariously, Matthew Fox has a cameo in the film only I don’t think anyone told him it was going to be a cameo.

As for the zombies… they were terrifying when they were sneaking up on people, but when you finally get a chance to see one up close, it’s just kind of funny. The “solution” to the problem seemed kind of… I don’t know, they didn’t explain it enough. They talked about “vaccines” but I wanted more details about what went into that. I also would have enjoyed more details about how it seemed like some countries (??) were trying to drop nuclear bombs on the zombies. No one ever said anything about radiation or anything, but there is an actual mushroom cloud in one part of the movie. I also thought it was bizarre that, like, this UN investigator was literally THE ONLY PERSON to think of the solution. Like, there were teams of doctors all over the place and Brad Pitt was the only one to figure it out. Doesn’t the World Health Organization prepare for this kind of situation?!? I demand that the WHO and the CDC be prepared for the zombie apocalypse. Someone needs to War Game this junk.

Lastly – I’m sure the book explains this better, but it really bugged me that no one was in charge in America. There’s a UN guy and an admiral or something ordering people around on a Navy vessel, but what is the chain of command? Where’s the continuity of government? The dude is just like, “The president is dead, the vice president is ‘missing’.” Which means that Biden is a zombie now, which is kind of funny (wrong, but funny!), but there is still a chain of command, damn it! If POTUS and VPOTUS fall, the Speaker of the House becomes POTUS. And then the Senate Pro Tempore. And then Secretary of State, and on and on until you reach the lowly cabinet secretary who isn’t a zombie. What we saw in WWZ amounted to a military junta (coordinating with some UN deputy!) overtaking the republic.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

92 Responses to “Brad Pitt’s ‘WWZ’ opens bigger than expected: was it better than you expected?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Sefa says:

    I’ve only read parts of the book and haven’t seen the movie yet, but really, from the trailer it’s pretty obvious any adaptation from the book is pretty light. It’s really a lot of vignettes from around the world during the onset and during the zombiepocalypse. Still will see it eventually though.

    • Naye in VA says:

      Yea I was telling someone the other day, it’s not like comparing Harry Potter books to the movies. WWZ film and movie are completely different animals, so there is no comparing. I havent seen the movie yet, but from the preview, it appears the only thing they took from the book is the global scale.

      Kaiser, please do read the book, not to judge it against the movie, but because it truly is an awesome read. What Brooks was able to do with the genre, make it touch right at home, because it could have been applied to more than just a zombie apocaplypse. If the movie had been adapted straight from the book it would have probably also been equally amazing. The concept would have been introspective like no zombie movie has since 28 Days Later.

      That being said, I’m sure I’ll still enjoy the heck outta this movie.

      • km says:

        Agreed, nothing whatsoever like the book except for the global scale.
        It was a good zombie movie in general, but I don’t know why BP even bothered naming it WWZ. It was BP does a zombie movie.
        They did try to take a few images from the book, but I found them to be kind of disjointed.
        All in all, it wasn’t bad, but I don’t enjoy going to the theater unless it’s going to be epic, and I wish I’d waited for this to come out on video.

  2. xboxsucks says:

    I really enjoy it, it was fun and entertaining.

    • Shannon says:

      Me too. Highly entertaining and the zombies were great. Totally creepy and gross. And Brad was hot of course :o)

    • Narak says:

      I saw it in 3-D and LOVED it!! Seriously awesome movie – the zombies were fast and scary, the suspense was intense. The only quibble is that the wife was always making the bed. It’s worth seeing on a big screen.

    • Joy says:

      I was shocked at how much I liked it considering the massive amount I shade that has been thrown at it in the media regarding reshoots etc.

    • TC says:

      I loved it as well. Great pacing, story and zombie thrills! It’s a movie I wouldn’t mind watching again in the theater.

  3. lisa2 says:

    Gosh the budget for WWZ was not over 200 million. The budget was 190 million dollars. There are so many creditable sources to quote then the ones that have been trying to sink this film way before it even opened. Paramount, Brad/Marc, Boxoffice mojo and others have the number at 190.. it was 170 until the reshoots.

    And the movie was never projected to beat MU.. Most were speculating that the film would be 3rd or 4th for the weekend. In fact almost everyone was beyond confident that MOS would kill the film. But MOS had a 60+ drop this weekend.

    The movie has been trending on twitter all weekend.

    I really enjoyed the movie and agree about the daughters. But that is how kids are. I give the movie a solid B+ and will be seeing it again so I can see what I missed.

    • abbie246 says:

      For some reason the media has been trashing this movie since the beginning. For instance the claim that it took a year to film which is false. The initial shoot was 4 maybe 5 months with 3 or 4 weeks of reshoots. The funny thing is this isn’t unusual for blockbuster films but the media decided that the movie will bomb. I don’t know if it was just because it was a Brad Pitt movie but the judging and attacks seem like overkill.

      • marie says:

        I think a lot of that comes from it not being like the book and all the turmoil with the filming. I haven’t seen it yet but have plans to this weekend (after payday)

      • Emma - the JP Lover says:

        @Abbie246, who wrote: “For some reason the media has been trashing this movie since the beginning.”

        Yes, I agree, and especially gossip sites. I don’t understand it either, but from the moment the film was announced, it was just ‘on’ with people dissing the film and saying it was a ‘turkey walking.’ Re-writes are not always the kiss of death for a film, and neither are delays (which are most often ‘Studio’ decisions as they move films around like pieces on a chess board).

        I saw “World War Z” Friday evening after work (a 5:15 pm showing) and liked it very much. We, the audience, were certainly engaged. It is a good old-fashioned suspense-thriller. I gripped the arms of my chair more than once. I’ll probably see it again this coming weekend.

        At IMDb, the fan boys are complaining a bit about the lack of blood and ‘brainzz’ (as they called it), but what else could you expect from a PG-13 film?

      • claire says:

        @Marie: Agreed. It all boils down to the book. The book has a lot of protective fans, and once it became obvious the movie would be nothing like the book, the hate started.

        I plan to see it, but definitely will just consider it like any other movie with no inspirational book attached, because it doesn’t seem to have much relation at all.

    • Kim1 says:

      ITA every Pixar film has opened #1 so it was never supposed be #1.But MOS was supposed to be neck to neck with WWZ yet WWZ beat it by $25 million despite playing in less theaters. THAT’S the story

    • lama says:

      “These also are effing expensive zombies. Much has been made of the film’s mega-cost: between $220M-$230M brought down to $200M by tax incentives in locations Scotland, Malta, England, and Hungary, or so the studio claims.”
      http://www.deadline.com/tag/world-war-z/

      Finke, Variety, Forbes Entertainment Weekly and Vanity Fair. Am I missing any?
      All give 200 – 250 as the budget and say it needs 400-500 to make a profit.

      • Kim1 says:

        Well Paramount,USA Today,Time,box-office mojo,The Hollywood Reporter etc says Production Budget was 190 including the. $20 million for reshoots.Its interesting that all the sources you quoted also said the movie was awful and wouldn’t perform well before seeing including Finke

      • Kim1 says:

        Last week the Guardian reported the cost was $400M today they say close to $200.They was tons of lies reported about the film.Well it is still tending on twitter for fourth day and there are plans for a sequel.

      • Sandy says:

        Finke and Vanity Fair, these were the two that proclaimed WWZ would bomb. What a joke? I think Boxofficemojo is much more reliable than the others. I loved WWZ saw it twice.When I went yesterday most were sold outs. My show was completely full.

        Thanks Lama, ready to spread hate as always

      • Emma - the JP Lover says:

        @Lama …

        The best places to check a film’s budget are places which do nothing ‘but’ track film budgets. In my opinion, the best two are ‘Boxofficemojo’ and ‘Boxofficeguru.’ Just add dot com to visit each site.

      • Ben says:

        “Finke and Vanity Fair, these were the two that proclaimed WWZ would bomb. What a joke?”

        Sorry but how is this suggestion a joke? A lot of you take this entirely too personally, and are frankly a bit too giddy after just the opening weekend. Too suggest it will bomb is not outlandish, and opening weekends don’t ultimately determine a movie’s success, overall gross does.

        Fact is WWZ needs to make at least $550-$600 mil JUST to break even (190 cost, 100 marketing, studio takes 55% domestic, 45% foreign gross, so if average to 50% it needs to make 600 to break even). It’s a long way off being a success, and could indeed bomb.

      • TC says:

        It’s not impossible for WWZ to make a profit. The film cost $190M. Therefore it needs $380M to break even, not $550-600M. If the film continues to perform strongly through it’s second weekend (and the studio believes it can, as word of mouth has been positive), domestically the film could gross $170M through its domestic run. The international markets could see as much as $340M, as Brad’s an international star and the film has already been over-performing in all of the 25 foreign markets that have released it (and that only accounts for about 30% of the foreign marketplace). Therefore, the film has the potential to gross $510M worldwide.

      • Ben says:

        “It’s not impossible for WWZ to make a profit. The film cost $190M. Therefore it needs $380M to break even, not $550-600M”

        Nope, try again. You haven’t included marketing costs which probably total around $100 mil (also $190 is a low estimate for how much the film ultimately cost). So it would need to gross $600 mil. As far as studio talk, yeah um, they would say that. WWZ is operating in a crowded summer market and won’t even be released in China, a huge loss to its earning potential.

        And as far as word of mouth the first suggestion when you search WWZ on twitter is “world war z sucks”, and I know a lot of people who didn’t feel it was worth the price of a 3D ticket, so don’t hold your breath as far as it turning a profit goes.

      • Moni says:

        @Ben actually Marketing costs will be covered by DVD sales, VOD, and rentals, so not to worry. Looking at twitter a majority of people think the movie was good. If it sucked it would have dropped a lot like the Purge did from Friday to Saturday but you can see the numbers are consistent. Also if you want audience rating go check it out on Rotton tomatoes where 86% of the audience liked the film. As far as the international market WWZ is having no problems holding its own. In Korea it did BETTER than MOS and was on par with Inception. It also did amazing in Australia. Try again

      • TC says:

        Thanks Moni. I was just about to add that marketing has it’s own budget. When a studio talks about covering its cost or breaking even, it’s the production cost they’re referring to. Not the marketing costs which has its own budget.

        And it’s your right to think the film sucks, but as Moni said, most of the word-of-mouth for WWZ has been very positive and this was clearly proven with the opening weekend box office. This movie will also do very well internationally where I believe a bulk of the revenue will be made. Brad’s an international star as is Jolie and their films ALWAYS perform well internationally.

    • Bridget says:

      It isnt that the media is trashing this movie just for the sake of having something to trash. It also goes beyond the troubled production. WWZ is considered to be a genre changing book, and its fans are PASSIONATE. And Pitt changed almost everything about the book that people loved, even down to makng them ‘fast’ zombies vs ‘slow’ zombies. This wad the movie that couldnt just be ‘fine’ because the book really was that big of a deal. So its more that people were incredibly disappointed that they just turned it into another Zombie movie.

    • Ben says:

      @Moni Rotten Tomatoes? The same Rotten Tomatoes that deemed a review of the film that included the word “failure” in the title fresh? I don’t take that site remotely seriously, but hey, do you. As far as the word of mouth aspect, what I have heard has not been positive hence why I’m not fussed about seeing it, especially not in 3D (and I never said it sucked, was referring to twitter search function that lists most popular searches of any term. WWZ sucks was first). Also comparing a PG13 movie to The Purge, why?

      How does marketing having a seperate budget alter the fact the studio has to recoup costs, the majority of which are garnered by gross? The home video market is not as robust as it was a few years ago (thanks Netflix), and DVD sales rarely match ticket sales hence why we’re seeing more higher 3D ticket prices (even for films where 3D makes no sense), in order to bridge this gap. Nothing said here will change the fact that WWZ has to compete in a crowded summer market. The fact it opened better than the movies you mentioned is superfluous, as again opening weekend does not determine the ultimate success of a movie financially. Also studio profits from the international market are significantly lower than domestic, so consider that also.

      And thanks for the concern, but the only people worried are Brad Pitt/Paramount. You would know that if you’d been paying any attention to their behaviour.

      • Moni says:

        Um I used purge as an example of bad word of mouth causing a movie to drop significantly each day. From Friday to Sunday The percentage drop was very small and that is because word of mouth has been good. Rotten tomatoe allows audience members to rate how they liked the film it has nothing to do with reviews genius. Sorry but everyone knows that films make the bulk of their money overseas Fact. The ony reason studios have big budget films is because they know they can make a huge profit abroad. if not for the overseas market a majority of movies would be consided a flop. Sorry Ben WWZ is a success and will make more than enough profit

  4. Daz London says:

    I love how this article got all tea party at the end. The sneaky UN are just waiting for the next zombie apocalypse to take over america 🙂

  5. Esmom says:

    I mostly enjoyed the movie (have not read the book either) — I thought Brad was good as well as the Israeli soldier lady — but there was something unintentionally funny about the zombies to me…I couldn’t stop thinking of Michael Jackson’s Thriller.

    I had read or heard an interview with Brad at some point where he said he chose this movie as a project to enjoy/share with his son Maddox, and I could see that. Yes there were zombies, which a tween kid would love, but there was also a strong family message that seemed at bit unusual for this type of movie.

    As for M Enos, I agree that she has a natural bitchface but I also thought she was supposed to be a bit pissed off about Gerry being pulled out of retirement.

    And I THOUGHT I saw Matthew Fox, but it was such a brief appearance I couldn’t be sure. Was he the guy escorting the family to the helicopter?

    • lisa2 says:

      Yes Matthew had a much larger role in the old ending. He was not a good guy. I saw an article that outlined the old ending and to me they made the right decision.

      The movie hit a much larger audience. Everyone has not read the book; but some will after seeing the film.

      regarding Thriller…Brad said they made a Thriller tribute thing with the extras.. I’ll have to find that article.

      I hope they put it on the dvd.

      • Esmom says:

        Oh wow, I’d love to see the Thriller tribute. Sounds genius!

      • Lucrezia says:

        Ooh, what was the original ending going to be? Can you remember? (Or find the link?)

        I’ve actually been wondering, but all I’ve read has been “it was rewritten”, without giving any details.

      • Esmom says:

        @Lucrezia, The Vanity Fair article, “Brad’s War,” gets into the difference between the two endings. Seems the original one was some kind of epic battle, which they decided was too out of character for Pitt’s family man character.

      • Lucrezia says:

        Thanks Esmom 🙂

        Reading between the lines, that article answered a few questions I had about the “solution” (which isn’t how it works in the book). The human-shields in Russia sounds like they’d always had that new mechanic in mind (if not “always”, then at least pre-Lindelhof). I guess they needed something like that to balance the fast-zombie mechanic.

    • Adrien says:

      Yes, that was Matthew Fox. They reshoot the final act cutting the scenes Matthew were in.
      @lisa2, I hope they show the original ending on the dvd.

      • mslewis says:

        It’s probably a guarantee they will show the original ending on the DVD. It would be a great selling point.

    • dj says:

      I thought that was Matthew Fox too! Validation. Thanks.

  6. Willa says:

    Hate to say it, but the kids annoyed me too.

    • Migdalia says:

      When aren’t kids annoying in movies?? Daddy day care being the exception IMO, lol

    • DTX says:

      Ha ha! Me too! They just froze up and started screaming for their blankies or whatever. DH & I laughed and said how lucky we are to have boys b/c we would’ve been all like “forget your stupid blankie and stay focused unless you want to die!” I probably wouldn’t be as tough on daughters, but I still would’ve snapped at these girls! Geez! They were so frustrating slowing everybody down! They were a bit too old to act that helpless and stupid.

      Ooooh! And when wifey’s phone call caused a sh/tstorm! Holy cow! All his girls were a bit annoying come to think of it…but not the badass soldier girl! I loved her!

  7. Eleonor says:

    I am not going to see the movie, but Jeeeez when did Brad morphe into Kid Rock?

    • Jennifer says:

      Smelly Brad, Smelly Brad,
      What are they feeding you?
      Smelly Brad, Smelly Brad,…

      • Mia says:

        Wow….grow up Jennifer A.

        By the way Brad has been around many fans/media the past 3-3 weeks. No one mentioned he smells! People often say he smells very nice FYI.

  8. Ai says:

    I was pleasantly surprised too. I agree that the less you know or expect the better. I like that it was well paced and at times, good suspense. I also agree about the lady that played his wife – miscast. The girls were ok. The Israeli female soldier stole the scenes she was in – she was excellent. I couldn’t recognize the Maddox cameo. I also agree about that they could explain just a bit more but I hear if things remain good, there’s a possibility of a sequel.

  9. GoodCapon says:

    I thought it was a good, solid film. I say this not having read the book.

    I’ve also read some comments on other websites where the film was almost “10% book content, 90% made up stuff”. Perhaps that is where all the criticisms are coming from.

    • Lucrezia says:

      I liked the movie for what it was, but 10% book is honestly an exaggeration.

      The only things the same are the title and the fact that Israel is the first country to react due to the fact “the job of the 10th Israeli agent is to disagree with the others”. (Okay, they both have zombies, but the mechanics are totally different. Twilight didn’t need to buy the rights to Dracula just to have “vampires”.)

      I’d have been happier if the movie had lost that Israeli “10th agent” line and called itself something different, thus leaving the option for someone else to make an actual WWZ movie. I’d still have gone to see Brad Pitt vs Zombies, whatever it was called.

      • km says:

        Yes! This is exactly how I feel. Will we ever get the real WWZ?
        Not to say this is bad, but I want some epic four hour WWZ that is true to the book.

  10. Fran says:

    I was pleasantly surprised by this movie.
    I’m a fervid zombie fan and love Brooks’s books, so I wasn’t expecting much after I had seen the trailers.

    I thought the movie looked like it had been cut in various points to stay within the 3 hrs limit and as a result of this, lots of plot parts were under-developed. What happened to the Spanish family in the flat? How did the kid escape?

    I though Pitt was going to provide more of a sociological/political study of humanity facing apocalypse (Thought I read an interview where he mentions this), but there was none of that.

    Overall though I thought it was a good blockbuster, funny at times and realistic in others.

    • theredone says:

      The Mom and Dad of the Spanish family were bitten by zombies…you see the Dad running after Brad Pitt on the roof.

      My husband and I read the book (fantastic book) but this had nothing in common with it other than the name (which has been said). I don’t handle zombie movies well (thank you 28 days Later) but in the book the zombies are slow moving so I thought I could deal with this…nope, nightmares.

      On it’s own it’s a good movie.

    • Esmom says:

      Actually the movie was well under 3 hours, just over 2 I think. I was surprised at how short it was actually…I think they could have added a bit more for continuity in some parts and it still would not have been too long. Minor quibble, though.

    • Ali says:

      The movie was just shy of 2 hrs.

      Tomas ran because his parents were turned into zombies. They show his father chasing after the family as they ran for the helicopter.

      I think the social and political messages were there, but they were subtle and took a backseat to the action and suspense.

  11. dj says:

    I read the book and it was barely an idea that the movie ran with. There was no central Brad Pitt character with a family. There was sometimes an interviewer getting first person stories from all different nationalities, soldiers from certain Battles, survivors in Russian villages, etc. All after the fact survivor stories mostly. I had no idea how the movie would connect these accounts into a movie but Brad Pitt and the young woman Israeli soldier was awesome. She has a serious buzz cut and was a bad ass. Loved her. Brad’s character was good too. Family man, not too much of a bad ass but seriously brave at the end. I did not think it went all “Die Hard” or anything like that. I went with my sisters and we all really liked the movie. I recommend it.

  12. Fiesty Readhead says:

    i am not sure what movie the reviewers that give it a thumbs up saw, but the movie i saw stunk. acting: terrible; cgi: terrible. believability: terrible. stupid storylines. i just did not like it at all. Why brad pitt jumped on the zombie train so late is puzzleing. it has been done so well before to do it, and not do it well, is strange. 28 days later was so much better for so much less money.

    • Kate says:

      @Fiesty Readhead

      I haven’t read the book, and agree with most of your criticisms, in particular the believability of some scenes.

      Also agree with others that the Segen character was great; the family scenes were weak; and the zombies were at times almost laughable.

      My main complaint, though, is with Brad Pitt’s acting. This is the first movie I’ve seen where he didn’t – to me, just to me – display enough energy or charisma to pull off his role. Compared to, say, Kurt Russell in ‘The Thing,’ or Matt Damon in ‘Contagion.’

      Overall I give it a thumbs down, but would still recommend WWZ to anyone interested in seeing a sometimes entertaining summer zombie movie.

      • mayamae says:

        I don’t think anyone can match up to Kurt Russell in The Thing – I adore him in that role. I think it’s hard to seperate celebrities from characters in horror films, maybe that’s why they often cast unknowns?

      • TC says:

        With regard to your comment on Brad’s character showing lack of energy or charisma in the role, I’d have to respectfully disagree. Brad’s not playing a comic book superhero or a Bruce Willis or Vin Diesel character with a bulging physique and snappy one-liners. He’s a regular Joe; a former UN investigator who left his job after ruffling some feathers only to be pulled back in against his will. He’s the “reluctant hero” in the film. He didn’t want the job in the first place, but didn’t really have a choice in the matter. I believe from that aspect, you better understand his character’s state of mind and demeanor in the film.

      • Lucrezia says:

        I’m with TC on this one.

        I was fully expecting a hero character (because it’s Brad Pitt!) … so the fact he managed to tone that right down and simply play a believable “everyman” character was brilliant acting.

  13. serena says:

    I’m happy for him, I hope it’ll do much better than this.

  14. Lucrezia says:

    I’ve read the book, and seen the movie. So to address Kaiser’s questions …

    a) Solution/vaccine. Flat-out doesn’t happen in the book. So all that weirdness (how it works and why Brad Pitt is the only one to think of it), is down to the screenwriters.

    b) Mushroom clouds. Iran nukes Pakistan. The book explains that you’d think it’d be India/Pakistan, but there are already redundant systems in place to avoid war between those two countries. When Iran tries to close its borders to Pakistani refugees, the situation rapidly escalates because there aren’t diplomatic systems in place. (Also, plot-wise, writing a Iran/Pakistan war is a way to limit oil reserves post-apocalypse.)

    c) Zombie president. POTUS doesn’t get infected in the book. The US politicians consider cancelling the elections, and the POTUS does a bit of a “Democracy! Rah-rah!” speech saying that they have to have elections or America as they know it is lost anyway. I think the movie probably killed off the POTUS and VP so that it didn’t come off too American-centric. Good choice, imo. I think that if you’ve already got Brad Pitt saving the day, adding an intact US government would’ve run the risk of coming off all Independence Day .

  15. Ruyana says:

    I saw the movie and enjoyed it thoroughly. Haven’t read the book, so had nothing to compare it to. Movie scared the bejeebers out of me though.

  16. Dawn says:

    Everyone I know who saw this movie absolutely loved it. And so I plan on seeing it. No snark from me about Brad ever because I like him lots.

  17. Anne says:

    I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the ending, which was awful! I didn’t mind the movie–it was kind of a fun, action movie on an epic scale (for zombies) and, yes, the Israeli actress (or actress playing the Israeli soldier, I’m not sure of her nationality)was really great. But the movie just sort of…stops. No explanation, no sense of closure, no hint of how the future unfolds. I was sitting there going ‘where’s the rest of the movie!?’ So, not bad movie–very lame ending, IMO.

    • KIMMY says:

      There was no closure because sequels are coming. The studios confirmed this after a strong opening weekend box office.

  18. Migdalia says:

    People that’s what sequels are for….the ending was that way to leave a door open for the sequel which they have been planning since before the release. Now that the numbers look good I’m sure it’ll be full steam ahead.

  19. floretta50 says:

    This movie had so many criticism I thought it was going to be a disaster. People go and see it, I was shocked and pleasantly surprised the movie is just as Brad Pitt says, riveting, fast moving,things happening all the time, it is good for a large demographic audience, teenagers, grown-ups even kids this is the summer’s block buster movie. I am perplexed, why did it get such bad press? The movie is so entertaining especially for summer viewing.

  20. Lucrezia says:

    My basic opinion: absolutely nothing like the book, but decent as a Brad Pitt vs Zombies action movie.

    I really liked what they did with Israel in the movie. The book plot wouldn’t have worked given movie zombie mechanics, but what they did instead worked really well. I also liked the NK teeth thing.

    What I didn’t like was the number of plot-holes in the last third. The solution isn’t great logic, but they set it up reasonably, so I’m willing to give it a dubious pass. However, the idea that Brad Pitt is the only one who figured it out makes absolutely no sense.

    Why were the Welsh guys initially so grumpy? They were acting guilty as hell, for no apparent reason. And Brad Pitt suddenly decided to be uber-mysterious, again, for no real reason. That whole scene was odd.

    It also drove me crazy that they couldn’t communicate with him in that lab-room. For starters, that room would’ve had a phone. Otherwise, what are the scientists supposed to do when they accidently drop a test-tube full of smallpox? Wander out of the containment lab and use the phone outside to call for help? No. But let’s say it’s a ridiculously badly designed lab. There’s still so many ways to signal. How about ringing that outside phone in Morse code pattern? (Is the lab sound-proof?) Switch the lights on and off? Move the camera up/down? Surely there was some way to signal.

    • the original bellaluna says:

      I like what you’re saying. MOST of those labs are equipped with their own special ventilation systems, and “speakers” are a part the whole uniform.

  21. jessiebes says:

    Ohh can’t wait to see this. Zombie films can be really predictable but some have additional layers, which I love:
    Shawn of the Dead
    Zombieland
    Warm bodies

    Also Brad Pitt is a very good actor, so I can’t wait to see him. Don’t like the long hair on him too much though. Just my personal preference.

  22. strah says:

    I saw WWZ yesterday with my family and we all loved it.
    One of the best new movies I’ve watched in a very long time.

  23. MissNostalgia says:

    I read the book and the movie does not bear as much as a passing resemblance to it. However, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and it stands IMO on its own merit. Best BP film that I have ever seen!

  24. lucy2 says:

    Not interested in this film, but glad it wasn’t a huge bomb, the box office for this summer is looking good so far.
    I’ll be curious to see if this holds on and turns a profit, or drops off quickly. I’m surprised how well MOS is holding up – reviews weren’t great, but it’s almost $400 mil worldwide.

  25. Madpoe says:

    It must be good, I wasn’t able to get tickets to a few theaters this weekend!
    I really want to see it! Pitt + Zombies? C’mon!!

  26. mslewis says:

    I haven’t seen the movie yet but I know it’s not at all like the book. That would have been impossible to do unless the movie was six hours long. From what I understand, the only thing about the movie that is in the book would be the zombies and the title. That’s okay with me. I’m looking forward to seeing it and I’m really happy it’s doing so well at the BO.

    P.S.: For those who haven’t read it, the book is fabulous. It’s just so interesting the way it’s written. Max Brooks is a very good writer.

  27. Bohemia says:

    i cant wait to see it…:)

  28. the original bellaluna says:

    I am SO SICK of 3D! It gives me migraines and make me nauseous. Which is why I no longer see movies in theatre.

    • Janet says:

      I’m trying to decide whether to go see this movie in 2-D or 3-D. I’m leaning toward the former.

    • Lucrezia says:

      I saw it in 2D. I didn’t even realise it was available in 3D. (One of my friends always pre-buys the tickets for our whole group, and apparently 2D was simply all that was available at the time we wanted to attend.)

      It doesn’t strike me as something where I’ve missed out on any snazzy 3D effects. With something like Avengers or Star Trek you can design a arty shot just to show off your 3D effects … and not have that “arty” style stand out as odd if you watch it in 2D. WWZ was far more gritty/realistic, so I think “framed purely for 3D” shots would’ve really stood out …and I didn’t notice any.

      I could be wrong of course, but I don’t think you’d miss much by choosing 2D.

  29. Maggie says:

    Who uses more fillers? Brad or Madonna? Moon faces!

    • Cameron says:

      I dont think Brad had fillers. Brad looks like he gained a few lbs. He’s still Hawt…Watching the videos at the Premieres, he has the sexiest walks.. He has that Black Man Swagger.

  30. BB says:

    I LOVE Brad Pitt….but WWZ was a terrible zombie movie!! I expected so much more but I hated it. Why…why did they even have to have the wife and kids? They only got on my nerves and served no purpose at all. It could have been SO much better. The zombies were awful….not like zombies at all but more like homeless people. I think The Walking Dead has some of us zombie fans spoiled! I expected more….this was nothing more than another action film with some whiny a$$ kids and wife like all the others.

    • Esmom says:

      Agree that it was unusual in that they really played up the family connection. He was even father-like with the Israeli soldier. I saw it as a nod to Brad’s own status as a family man now.

      But I don’t mind, and am trying to look at the emotional angle as a refreshing change from mindless killing.

    • LL2 says:

      Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I think that showing the family was a way of giving us insight into Brad’s character and what he valued most. I loved it and the family aspect and Brad, of course, is what actually got me interested in this movie. Zombies are not really my thing.

  31. Virgilia Coriolanus says:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2347612/Angelina-Jolie-suits-urges-world-leaders-combat-warzone-rape-impassioned-appeal-U-N-Security-Council.html

    Did anyone see this? Great work, I can’t believe warzone rape was never even considered to be a war crime until now. Did anyone ever see In the Land of Blood and Honey? I did; it was very good and very depressing.

  32. Josephina says:

    I have to skip reading halof of the posts because I have not seen it yet and don’t want the fun spoiled for me.

    The budget for WWZ ended at $190 million which includes $20 million of reshoots.

    Brad was smart enough to take his marketing strategy directly to the crowd instead of relying just on talk shows and unfavorable write-ups. He has visited several cities in the U.S. and abroad —- and it has worked well for him. He is an A++ Lister, watch the other actors try to copy this marketing tactic (See Johnny Depp and the Lone Ranger.)

    An opening weekend box office return of $100 million ( $66 million for U.S. plus overseas) for the man Brad IS a good start.

  33. LL2 says:

    Brad has been my guy ever since my teenage years so of course I had to support him this weekend despite the negative press. I’m so glad I did, I really enjoyed the movie. I know the movie will do really well and exceed all the haters’ expectations. I’m so proud of Brad. He is coming into his own and I’ve enjoyed watching him over the years as he has matured and evolved into the man he is today. I wish him and Angie the very best!

  34. Jenn says:

    He needs to cut his hair. He looks like an ugly bearded woman. Ick.

    • Lauren says:

      Brad looks exhausted and bloated, but i still love him. His looks are fading , but his commitment to his family makes him infinitely handsome to me.

  35. Andrew says:

    I personally thought the movie was meh, but not a disaster. For people who are confused with budget, just look on boxofficemojo. Also, there’s a ton of movie competition this summer so don’t be surprised if it doesn’t reach 150 million domestically. It’ll do decent worldwide. Anyway, I liked brad Pitt, the girls were annoying but they weren’t in the entire movie thankfully, I liked the bald chick, and I thought some of it was silly. Wish I could have been more involved with the characters but of well, it was decent enough.

  36. The Old KC says:

    Kaiser, your review was awesome!!! My favorite line: “Somebody better War Games this junk.” As someone with a festering (sorry, bad choice of words) zombie phobia, I’d like to second that! We need President Obama to appoint a Special US Ambassador of Anti-Zombie Warfare and Biochemical Engineering.

  37. Jt says:

    Hope I look as good as Brad does when I’m his age. Thought the film was excellent. Typically, I find myself disappointed with the lack of common sense that one or more characters have in a horror movie (especially zombie flicks), using stupidity as a tool to propel the plot. Didn’t see that this time. Never found myself upset with any character for being unrealistically idiotic so as to create drama (a scenario present in horror films ad infinitum). I was pleased by that.
    I didn’t mind the wife and kids as much as most, but now that I can see they were simply a plot device. I think their presence made the film more intense, especially the first half hour.
    I was glad they skipped any sort of ” rescue the fam” at the end. And I thought the ending where he simply walked past the zombies to safety was very refreshing and satisfying. I always think a sign of a good movie is wishing it didn’t have to end (and I didn’t want it to), but they did a good job here.

    I would see it again in the theater. I think it will do all right.

  38. Ash says:

    I know the reviewer hasnt read the book but i highly recommend everyone does. I dont read books in general but i was harrassed by my room mate to do so until i finally picked it up one night and i couldnt stop until the morning.

    Having said that, a group of us who did go see the film were disappointed. The book basically dedicates each chapter to a completely different place or protagonist to bring to life a collective understanding of a zombie war on a global scale. It covers the geo-political, local, and intimate effects of such a disaster. And it is engrossing. The film at best might have taken 2 pages out of the book (and im not exagerrating) and then created a one protagonist story that bears no resemblance to the book. Eventually i came to the conclusion that i would have enjoyed this film had it not been called world war z based on the book. The book is in another league, and i highly recommend those liked the film to read it. It would be a great way to compliment your experience.