Structurally speaking, it would have been very difficult to film the novel... Best they could have done would have been to pick 4-5 of the stories and intercut from one to another without having an over-arching plot... The nature of film-making is that you can start out intent on adapting a novel - and pay handsomely for the rights to do so - and end up with something that no-one would have been able to identify as anything other than original.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the film without thinking of it as anything to do with the book... It's just a big budget zombie movie. I just want to see something that matches up to the first ten minutes of Dawn of the Dead (the remake).

I was looking forward to World War Z until the psycho wacka-doo's thought it would be a good idea to turn the Zombies into 100 metre sprinters

now ill wait til DVD

I think it was on the Rooster Teeth podcast, but they made the point that World War Z would make an awesome HBO Miniseries.

Certainly would have been awesomely expensive.

Personally feel the audio version of the book would be hard to top - just for the Rollins monologue.

Man arrested for throwing concrete, blames zombies

By Zachary T. Sampson, Times Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 29, 2013 3:27pm

ST. PETERSBURG — A man repeatedly threw a small piece of concrete at the Hilton St. Petersburg Bayfront hotel early Wednesday morning, saying he was trying to get inside because zombies were chasing him, according to an arrest affidavit.

David Allen Jensen, 41, who has no permanent address, broke the glass outside the hotel on First Street S about 1:30 a.m. with a doughnut-shaped piece of concrete used to protect sprinkler heads, the report states.

Around the same time, security officers nearby reported they saw Jensen trying to open doors to a number of cars. He was able to get into a yellow 1991 Mercedes, the affidavit states.

St. Petersburg police said Jensen admitted to entering the car because he was trying to steal tobacco.

He faces charges of burglary and throwing a deadly missile into a building. He was being held at the Pinellas County Jail Wednesday in lieu of $15,000 bail.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/man-facing-charges-for-throwing-piece-of-concrete-into-hilton-hotel/2123671

World War Z got an amazingly positive review on aintitcoolnews:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/62765

Harry has a tendency to talk up films if the producers are 'looking after' him, but he's been pretty accurate over the last year - looking forward to this one again.

This isn't that strongly related to the topic, but the recent series of GoT has really shown how the hype for TWD is waaaaaay OTT. It looks amateurish in comparison.

I think they are way too different to compare.

TWD has been too afraid to kill off major characters.

They may have killed four majors in the last series (Lori, T-Dog, Andrea and Merle) - but none of them really shocked you. You could see them coming in the storyline... Each of them had nowhere left to go in terms of the continuing plot... They were simply 'annoying woman', 'token black dude', 'annoying woman#2' and 'psycho killer'.

GoT on the other hand gives no warnings and keeps on killing characters. Keeps you on your toes.

Best thing they could do on TWD would be to just kill off half the cast right at the start of the next series - including two out of Rick, Glenn and Daryl. Put everyone off balance right from the off...

See, my one problem with GoT is exactly that, they keep killing off the 'ggod guys'. Can make it hard for me to keep watching. Like seeing your team getting flogged, sometimes you don't wait for full time before turning it off.

1. you can't kill of Rick, the story is and has always been about Rick
2. Glenn cannot be killed off now, read TWD #100, this must happen, plus he needs to father a few kids
3. I believe the world is set to riot if you kill of Daryl, though the fact that he was created for the TV series based on him being too awesome for any of the standard roles I'd rather see a spin off series of Daryl Vs the walking dead with him going around Kung Fu style helping those in need and learning about himself. he's to good a character, like Peter Petreli in Heroes. He'd be awesome on his own but would be cool as fuck as a solitary figure kickin' arse and helping the helpless.

And there's your problem right there. It becomes stale and predictable once you know that certain characters will not, under any circumstances, ever, die.

Imagine how stunning it would be if Rick were killed - you'd be watching, waiting for him to overcome the impossible odds, then he'd fail, and all bets would be off. Same with Daryl and/or Glenn.

If you're going in to TWD expecting the unexpected you will be disappointed. This is not an overly elaborate, multifaceted, epic of story telling, creating a new genre of story telling.

It's the standard story of one mans fight against adversity. those around him will live and die but Rick is central to the story. Daryl is a spin-off waiting to happen and we should be happy to see him go, but Glenn WILL die, like Lori it is central to Ricks story.

I think there is around 6 seasons (and a movie) in the series but no more than that. i feel that any more than that and they'll stagnate. I'm also beginning to think that the Governor is likely to be blended into Negan leader of the Saviors.

I found myself becoming a bit tired of the show during series 3 because that's all it is - one man's story, with a fantastic central performance surrounded by a bunch of cartoon characters. No real shocks in the last series.

It's a question of whether they are re-making the comic book, or making an original tv show.

I know they won't kill off main characters en masse, I know fans would go nuts if certain comic book characters were killed off, but that doesn't stop me believing that the really interesting way to go is for a small sub-set of the characters to be out on their own again (think of the episode with just the 3 of them in town) - with the added ambivalence toward strangers (the highlight of the series, for me, was the hitch-hiker being ignored).

Marked for humiliating failure, WWZ is surprisingly good

June 14, 2013
Craig Mathieson
Scrutiny be damned - Marc Forster says his zombie flick World War Z is worth seeing.

Every year, as the financial stakes become higher and the predictions of box-office disaster more strident, the cinema's blockbuster season gets underway with one film marked for humiliating failure. In 2012 it was John Carter, Andrew Stanton's epic Martian adventure, and this year it is World War Z, the story of a global zombie apocalypse, starring Brad Pitt.

There's just one problem: the finished World War Z is a very good film.

''I suppose the good thing is that having got so much bad press … people go in to see it with low expectations,'' admits the movie's director, Marc Forster, with a hearty laugh. ''I really believed in the film and I believed that it was a good film. But I didn't know how the public or the press would respond because you just never know.''


Last hope: Brad Pitt shouldered the weight of public perception surrounding the delayed and prematurely maligned film.

The scrutiny of World War Z is not entirely without cause. The film kept only an outline of Max Brooks' 2006 bestseller, while shooting the adaptation proved to be expensive and difficult, with rumours - which Forster now dismisses - that a peeved Brad Pitt stopped talking to Forster and confirmed reports that the movie's final act was junked, with a new ending written and filmed as the release date was pushed back.

''Brad is written about a lot. If it was any other actor, the movie wouldn't have had such strong exposure before it was even finished,'' notes Forster, who was in Sydney for the movie's Australian premiere.

''To be honest the production went smoothly. Yes, it's a big movie with lots of elements, but we finished shooting at the exact amount of days I was given. The main thing we did was change the ending, which made everyone go, 'Oh, they're in trouble'.''

The revised finale, a tensely contained set-piece at a research facility, brings World War Z back to the intimate setting in which it begins, with former United Nations field investigator Gerry Lane (Pitt) and his wife and daughters being caught up in the global pandemic that has zombies running down their victims and infecting them in seconds.

''The final stuff was a huge battle sequence in Moscow that was really big and loud, and when I saw it I said to the studio, 'We need something personal and simple','' Forster says. ''Instead of spending all this money on trying to get the battle scene right, let's spend it on a really simple ending that connects with Brad's character.''

While the film still has epic, digitally composed scenes, such as swarms of zombies overrunning Philadelphia or besieging Jerusalem, making Pitt's Gerry Lane a concerned family man instead of a muscle-studded warrior provides an emotional spine that recalls the 43-year-old German-Swiss filmmaker's earlier works, including 2001's Monster's Ball and 2006's Stranger than Fiction, rather than his recent blockbusters, such as 2008's middling Bond outing, Quantum of Solace.

''Most of my other movies are more reflective and I feel like that is more me,'' Forster says. ''If you look at the usual blockbusters coming out of Hollywood, they have this final big ending and I felt like after the scenes in Israel, which are so big, we didn't need that any more. But studios are more afraid. They don't want to take risks and World War Z was a big risk.''

The insurance against risk is a movie star famous globally, of which Brad Pitt is one of the few remaining. Forster's movie comments on the fragility of society and the politics of catastrophe, but it's Pitt on the poster and in close-up, adding to the strength of his recent performances in The Tree of Life and Moneyball.

''Making Brad an Everyman was important, and I've always liked Three Days of the Condor, where Robert Redford was also a reluctant hero who fell into the plot,'' Forster says. ''To keep the film real was the most important thing - the more real the film is, the more frightening it will be for the audience.''

World War Z opens on Thursday.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/movies/marked-for-humiliating-failure-wwz-is-surprisingly-good-20130613-2o6fu.html#ixzz2WB9oOKai

reading the World war Z book at the moment, i bought it as an impulse buy to pass the time on the plane trip from Indonesia. The book is pretty good so far some of the stories are better than others. The American solution to dealing with the zombies is hilarious and so true (i mean if it were to happen) The last Zombie movie i saw was the George Romero's Dawn of the dead. A fatastic movie if you can look past how dated the movie feels.

What was this exactly? I think it was the Conkers battle right? I'm not too sure.

I thought the book was OK, some of the chapters were a bit slow and boring, while others were good fun. I really liked the depiction of the heartless governments killing civilians to save others, such as the Ukraine and South Africa. That was probably the highlight of the book for me.

off the top of my head it was i think a drug company representative taking advantage of south africas interpretation of the the plague "African rabies" and manufacturing a drug for treating what everyone thought was rabies. Everyone was living in peace thinking that they have been inoculated of a strain of rabies. They were just selling to cure peoples fears, It really was American capitalism at its worst. and American government representatives were praising the newly named drug called Phalanx for calming people down.

i found it amusing anyway

looking at the book now it was page 68; Vostok Station: Antartica

Did anyone catch Dead Snow on SBS 2 on Saturday night? classic Zombie Comedy

Though not a traditional Zombie Movie due to the Undead in this being more similar to a Draugr (an undead creature from Norse mythology, ) so the Zombies have regular control of their bodies and some basic intelligence from when they were alive, but otherwise the standard movie laws are kept in place.
Worth watching as the soundtrack is awesome, there are some stellar death scenes and it's about Nazi zombies!!!!!

Sequel coming out next year.

World War Z
World War Z earns sequel after gobbling up global box office

Ben Child
guardian.co.uk, Monday 24 June 2013 20.02 AEST

Brad Pitt zombie apocalypse movie World War Z, which has been mired in bad press and was predicted to be one of the year's biggest turkeys, is to get a shock sequel after storming the global box office at the weekend, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

World War Z
Production year: 2013
Countries: Rest of the world, USA
Cert (UK): 15
Runtime: 116 mins
Directors: Marc Forster
Cast: Brad Pitt, David Morse, James Badge Dale, Matthew Fox, Mireille Enos
More on this film
Director Marc Forster's loose adaptation of the Max Brooks novel about the aftermath of a worldwide zombie pandemic took a highly impressive $118.8m (£77.3m). While it opened at No 2 in the US behind Pixar animated prequel Monsters University, the film's $66m (£43m) haul in the world's most profitable territory was the best for an original live-action movie there since Avatar. Studio Paramount said the film was now certain to get a followup.

Pitt, 49, has been ever-present with partner Angelina Jolie at premieres and screenings for the movie across the world, and the film's success highlights his continuing star power. World War Z has also benefited from decent reviews, though the Guardian's Peter Bradshaw labelled it a "bloated and boring zombie action thriller that's been in production for so long I think I remember first hearing about it in the playground at primary school".

Such comments allude to the extensive rewrite – reportedly of the entire 40-minute third act – undertaken by Lost creator Damon Lindelof after World War Z had wrapped for the first time last year. A Vanity Fair feature published in May suggested that Pitt and director Marc Forster were refusing to talk to each other on set by the end of production, and hinted at an amateurish approach that saw the film's budget balloon to a reported $400m. It is now widely accepted that the true figure is closer to $200m, though World War Z will still need to continue its impressive box-office run at some pace to have a hope of recovering its costs.

Pitt, who plays a UN worker torn between protecting his family and finding a cure for the zombie infection, hinted at a sequel during the film's Moscow premiere last week. "There is enough [material] to mine from the book," he said. "We could barely get a fraction of the book in [this movie]. So we'll see. We'll see."

• This article was amended on 24 June 2013, as it included the wrong figure for UKP converted from USD in World War Z's box office returns. It has now been corrected.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/jun/24/world-war-z-sequel-brad-pitt?

Woudn't mind a sequel actually - I just don't know which direction they'll take

Pitt has stated that there's a lot of stuff in the book that he'd like to see on the screen - I suspect the survivors will fight to take the world back from the zombies so we may have the Todd Wainio and shot down pilot stuff going on.

I'd seriously LOVE to see a World War Z movie that was actually about the War itself, rather than running around the edges of it.

Surprised how far this thread had slipped down...

So here's this.

[youtube]Dxg27QsaIEY[/youtube]

Looking good.

EDIT

Have to wake up early to sneak one past Benjamin

Edited by fredsta: 21/7/2013 02:23:04 AM

Watched Shaun of the Dead last night again. Quality.

You have to wake up before you go to bed, mate. ;)

Looks great, but still another 3 months.

Finally managed to finish watching S3 of TWD last night. I'm not going to spoiler as it's been so long.

Absolutely loved it. The events of this season were so much better than the headache of finding Sophia in S2.

Them feels when Merle turned

They could have made Glenn/Maggie's proposal much more tear-jerking if they wanted to. The mrs was pretty let down they didn't.

Fxxxing sick of Carl. FFS I spent the whole season hating on Andrea, and wanted her to die, but Carl has officially taken over (it also helps that Andrea died lol) as my most frustrating character. It's like the director has said "see how annoying the Lori character was ALL THE TIME? Try and be like her".

I've been hating on Carol since S1, but I'm quite enjoying her now. No idea why.

Governor is a fxxxing nutcase. Still think when casting they just said "let's get a cheap version of Liam Neeson" though :lol:

I've been under the impression (like most people) that there was no way they could kill off Rick, Darryl or Glenn for some time, but I can see them killing off Glenn no worries now TBH. Something about his replacement power-struggle when Rick isn't around, he's just spent the best part of a season whinging about shit, and it would be the ultimate cut-throat to do it now he's engaged. Still think there would be riots for Rick or Darryl though.

Loved the ep with Morgan. He acted brilliantly IMO. Hope they go back for him.

Them weapons the governor used for the last charge on the prison <3<3<3<3<3

No idea where they're going to take the show from here. It'll get hugely stale if they stay in the prison for much longer though.

This coming season you should see Carl become a Daryl clone, his kill or be killed attitude is important for his future role with the Saviours, Glenn and Maggie should stay the distance to pop out a few kids before ep 100 of the comic series, so another season and a half with yet another future jump.

mid season hiatus should be the Governor's return and final assault on the prison and sending Rick and the gang to Alexandria which is the next logical time jump and leading to ep 100 of the comics.

Did anyone see the similarities between Hershel's god mode shotgun and the Governors Automatic assault rifle?