World War Z Trailer

[LiamKerrington]

Is not Shia LaBeouf's whole existence based on CGI? He acts just like a Muppet puppet.

Believe it or not: Any computer producing CGI and worth its circuitry would simply deny to process something that would look like Shia LeBeouf. It is as simple as that.

[YetAnotherBloodyCheek]

@Liam: Even some of the Transformer characters seemed more human to me than Shia.

But, do not be afraid: he confirmed that he is done with Hollywood. Shia's upcoming film.

[Raven]

..... I think I just threw up in my mouth....

[LiamKerrington]

..... I think I just threw up in my mouth....

^ this ^

[Witch_Doctor]

Out of curiosity, if the movie ends up being entertaining (I'm not saying a cinematic masterpiece, but entertaining), but completely untrue to the source material except for the broadest possible margins, could you still enjoy it? Or would you view it as utter and complete BETRAYAL! and demand your time and money back?

I can enjoy an entertaining story for the simple fact of it being entertaining. Star Wars had annoying science but it's among my favorites.

[Witch_Doctor]

Hi WD, did not Lucas and Spielberg team up for Indiana Jones 4? That was such a bad movie and it used so massively CGI that it almost made me leave the cinema. Oh, the good old days, when Indy killed evil nazis in hand-to-hand combat are long gone - sorry, got to stop weeping.

I'm not sure, haven't seen any of the Indiana Jones films. If the CGI was bad then it must have been Lucas' fault for simply touching it.

[fredrum]

I'm not sure, haven't seen any of the Indiana Jones films. If the CGI was bad then it must have been Lucas' fault for simply touching it.

Do yourself a favor and watch Raiders of the Lost Ark, if not all three of the original movies. Temple of Doom and The Last Crusade are decent movies, Raiders is fantastic. Its a combination of Spielberg and Lucas at the top of their games and the result is nothing less that a great movie. It doesn't have to rely on nonstop over the top action (although the action scenes are pretty incredible-especially the chase scene through the desert) and instead tells an entertaining story with characters you actually somewhat care about and doesn't assume that you are a brain dead moron with zero attention span.
On top of that, the three original Indiana Jones movies have become another one of those things that have been so ingrained into pop culture that you're almost missing out if you haven't seen them.


That being said, stay away from Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Stay far, far away. Unless you're some kind of cinematic masochist.....

[Osiris]

Might be entertaining.

[fridginators]

I watched it and kept waiting for the part where I actually see the zombies. There's like that one part on the rooftop, but that's about it. It seems much more like a disaster movie - I mean the trailer is disaster movie trailer 101 really. The hordes of zombies were just literally hordes - they might as well have been escaping from a virus than the walking dead. I guess in part the purpose is to highlight the 'world war' part of it - the literally unending hordes, but it comes off as just completely dehumanising the entire story, which is what WWZ set out exactly to do the opposite of.

I'm not saying they had to reproduce the book, and I'd be annoyed if they did. But honestly, the book's premise is not hard to fulfill - it is essentially a pre-written television script already. Many great films have been written in flash back - Casablanca, Citizen Kane anyone? This film could've been great. The book is good but in reality it is simply a script; as a film it could have really been fantastic. And instead, what, we have disaster film 101? I assume Brad Pitt is simply a re-written Todd Wainio? What about all the other characters, all the other elements? Okay, don't include the French tunnels and the Australian astronaut, nobody gives a fuck about those elements, I agree. But the beginning? The Chinese doctors? The Cuban organ trade? The American safe-house for the rich overrun by the poor? (By the way, that includes a reference to characters I assume are Bill Maher and Ann Coulter who end up fucking before they presumably die). The mentally insane Redeker? Come on man, there's so much good shit. I assume there will still at least be SOME of it but jesus, it doesn't look like it. The whole point of the book was the universality of the problem, and an extensive social critique about how we ignore social issues - the whole thing could essentially be an allegory for climate change. This film doesn't look like it will keep any of that.

That said, I'll go and I'll probably enjoy it as much as I enjoyed Taken 2. Okay but not great.

[YetAnotherBloodyCheek]

Most certainly nowadays, the producers are reluctant to consider the typical audience not to bright enough to request more than a CGI orgy.