zombie see zombie do doesn't work if the first zombie shouldn't be able to do it anyway, climbing is a complex maneuver and not something a zombie should be able to do, they are Ghouls or a Revenants
so it should be called World War G or World War R
Yeah... or stay calm and wait for the finished product.
Yeah... or stay calm and wait for the finished product.
i don't think they will take out the epic wall climbing "zombie" hive and that is what makes them not zombies, i will probably watch it, but i will say with 99.9% certainty that this will not be a classic and well loved zombie film
just heard it's gonna be PG-13, no wonder the zombies don't look like zombies, if they did it wouldn't get rated PG-13, i am now 99.9999999% certain that this will not be a classic and well loved zombie film
Haven't read the book, but thinking a "fresh" Zombie might be more powerful and still be really fast and able to climb, there wouldn't even need to be teamwork going on.
Zombie sees other Zombies and goes for it.
And that's why you think this pile of crap actually looks good. Expand your mind, go read a book.
Ill watch it in theaters. But honestly, i'm disappointed they aren't going with Max Brooks version of a zombie. But than again i guess Hollywood doesn't consider walking zombies to be action-ie
This film's great - go see it - and the zombies are fantastic. I know 'cos I was on the set in Glasgow, Scotland, when they were filming it. Not as a zombie unfortunately - I was providing medical cover hehe.
Seems strange for people to complain about the authenticity of the zombies... given that zombies are a loosely defined fictional construct.
Plus, come the ZA, I won't be hanging round and pointing & going 'THAT'S not a zombie, it moves too fast'
Seems strange for people to complain about the authenticity of the zombies... given that zombies are a loosely defined fictional construct.
Not really. Zombies have been well defined by their creator - George Romero. TWD is based off Romero's universe; so, it's not that strange that people find fault with it. I certainly don't care for fast zombies. They're dead, damn it! I can understand fresh zombies being quicker, but not crack-head speed!
Also, 28 Days Later was a wonderful horror film about a rage virus. NOT A ZOMBIE VIRUS! It's okay for them to run.
Also, Also ---- my favorite part of the trailer?
"Stay in the car!"
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
"Stay in the..."
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
Jeez! It seems like every other trailer has that damn sound in it now!
This movie should be called 365 Days Later since the zombies are moving like the rage infected from 28 Days Later LOL:p
They behave more like ants. Definitely a group effort here.
Why would they do that? Maybe if someone was hanging some poor soul over the wall as bait might get that reaction. I want to like this movie but the CGI zoombies might be too ridiculous to watch.
Not really. Zombies have been well defined by their creator - George Romero. TWD is based off Romero's universe; so, it's not that strange that people find fault with it. I certainly don't care for fast zombies. They're dead, damn it! I can understand fresh zombies being quicker, but not crack-head speed!
I don't see the problem with changing what is typically seen as a zombie. You are not talking about a creature, such as a lion, suddenly doing something it is incapable of, for example: flying. You are talking about a creature that does not exist: a dead human that is capable of moving around, and has only the desire to eat other living flesh as a motivator. So if the creature doesn't exist, why not have some imagination and fun with it? The dead can't move around anyway, so if they are going to move, why must they shamble? Go at a dead run and work together; it doesn't make any less sense that their brains can perform this function than any other thing you've seen them do in other films. By the way, I haven't read the book, and don't think I'll see the movie till it's free on T.V. in a few years and I'm home sick vegetating one day.
I don't see the problem with changing what is typically seen as a zombie. You are not talking about a creature, such as a lion, suddenly doing something it is incapable of, for example: flying. You are talking about a creature that does not exist: a dead human that is capable of moving around, and has only the desire to eat other living flesh as a motivator. So if the creature doesn't exist, why not have some imagination and fun with it? The dead can't move around anyway, so if they are going to move, why must they shamble? Go at a dead run and work together; it doesn't make any less sense that their brains can perform this function than any other thing you've seen them do in other films. By the way, I haven't read the book, and don't think I'll see the movie till it's free on T.V. in a few years and I'm home sick vegetating one day.
mythology (or what ever the proper word is) is why its important and why there is a problem, look up ghouls and revenant and you will notice that zombies aren't the only mythological creatures that are undead and eat human flesh, if they wanted to create there own monsters they shouldn't have called them zombies, what if they gave them the ability to fly and have laser eyes would they still be zombies to you?
mythology (or what ever the proper word is) is why its important and why there is a problem, look up ghouls and revenant and you will notice that zombies aren't the only mythological creatures that are undead and eat human flesh, if they wanted to create there own monsters they shouldn't have called them zombies, what if they gave them the ability to fly and have laser eyes would they still be zombies to you?
I wouldn't care if it were about trolls, werewolves, or vampires. If it is about a fantasy creature, do whatever you want to it. Maybe I'll be entertained, maybe I will think it's stupid. But no one is making us watch or read these things. If they want to call them zombies, I don't care.
I wouldn't care if it were about trolls, werewolves, or vampires. If it is about a fantasy creature, do whatever you want to it. Maybe I'll be entertained, maybe I will think it's stupid. But no one is making us watch or read these things. If they want to call them zombies, I don't care.
yeah that's cool, but i am just explaining why the big changes from a zombie to a "zoombie" are important to some people, what if it had been called World War W (werewolf) and they obviously weren't werewolfs (they were robots or something), are you saying that wouldn't matter at all to you?
I'm just saying I probably wouldn't care and just wouldn't watch it. I've already seen the worst werewolf on film (Professor Lupin from Harry Potter) was horrible in my opinion. I wouldn't watch any other werewolf movie if that's what they were going to look like from now on. So if they had flying zombies with laser eyes, I would just think it sounds dumb and not watch it. I have way too many real life issues to worry about, I just can't get worked up over something that is easily avoidable. If it matters to other people, that's fine. I didn't say they shouldn't care, I just stated why I don't.
I'm just saying I probably wouldn't care and just wouldn't watch it. I've already seen the worst werewolf on film (Professor Lupin from Harry Potter) was horrible in my opinion. I wouldn't watch any other werewolf movie if that's what they were going to look like from now on. So if they had flying zombies with laser eyes, I would just think it sounds dumb and not watch it. I have way too many real life issues to worry about, I just can't get worked up over something that is easily avoidable. If it matters to other people, that's fine. I didn't say they shouldn't care, I just stated why I don't.
i'm not worked up about it and i wont pay to watch it, i just think it was a waste of an opportunity and money to make a film based on a well know monster and just basically ignore everything that is known about the monster
i'm not worked up about it and i wont pay to watch it, i just think it was a waste of an opportunity and money to make a film based on a well know monster and just basically ignore everything that is known about the monster
Again, I was only stating my personal feelings. I did not say any people were worked up, or were unwillingly going to pay to see the movie. I respect other people's opinions, and I almost never try to convince them to see things my way. I simply came on this thread to see if people that had read the book would recommend it, or might recommend the movie based on the trailers, which I haven't seen.
Again, I was only stating my personal feelings. I did not say any people were worked up, or were unwillingly going to pay to see the movie. I respect other people's opinions, and I almost never try to convince them to see things my way. I simply came on this thread to see if people that had read the book would recommend it, or might recommend the movie based on the trailers, which I haven't seen.
i respect your opinion i and was just stating my person opinion as well, sometimes its hard to make the tone of what i am writing match what i am thinking, so if it came across as me trying to convince you that the film is rubbish and you shouldn't watch it even if you want to or something like that i apologise
As is the case with most others, I think they could have done way better. Of course, I haven't seen it yet and I'm not sure when it comes out so my comment is a bit premature and based entirely on the trailer and my expectations from the book.
I simply came on this thread to see if people that had read the book would recommend it, or might recommend the movie based on the trailers, which I haven't seen.
Whether you watch the movie or not, I definitely recommend reading the book.
It should be noted that most of us who have taken issue with the trailer aren't really upset by the fact that it has running-jumping-climbing-trees zombies in it. We're upset that the movie seems to have completely abandoned everything that made the book interesting and unique - the documentary style, the multiple stories, the world-wide perspective.
This could be a decent movie, I just wish they hadn't insisted on using the World War Z brand in order to get name recognition (wouldn't Brad Pitt be enough, really?) because now we'll probably never see an actual adaptation of the story. If they had just called it something else...
You're right, and I should have made it clear in my post. The modern idea of zombies - as well as Robert Kirkman's zombies - did come from Romero, though.
"Zombie" movies have been around since the 30's with White Zombie being one of the first. (Which is where Rob Zombie got the name for his original band, btw.)
The idea of the walking dead - not The Walking Dead - has been around for a long long time. Zombies were not originally considered cannibalistic, though; that came from Romero.
SOOOOOO, in that regards, the idea of fast moving zoombies is something new and is not viewed positively by me and other purists. However, people are allowed to watch whatever they want. More power to them. (They're wrong, of course! (jk))
mythology (or what ever the proper word is) is why its important and why there is a problem, look up ghouls and revenant and you will notice that zombies aren't the only mythological creatures that are undead and eat human flesh, if they wanted to create there own monsters they shouldn't have called them zombies, what if they gave them the ability to fly and have laser eyes would they still be zombies to you?
There are no zombies in the Walking Dead remember... they are walkers or biters or whatever people have called them. Imagine a world where the ZA actually happened... there would be no debate about 'hmm, well, strictly speaking these are ghouls, not zombies"... everyone would just call them zombies at the end of the day, no matter how upset Romero purists got about it!
In fact, "ghouls" sums up what we think of as zombies pretty well - the mythological voodoo zombie wasn't flesh-eating. The ghoulie apocalypse doesn't sound as good though - and where I come from means something entirely different!
How about we shut up about "Zombie Lore", and go back to the basics?
Yes, these zombies are idiotically made, but not because of classic zombie stories. It is because this movie is based on the book, the zombies Brooks wrote about were walkers. It was even gone into detail on why they can't run.
For fucks sake, stop talking out of your asses.
I do have to say; if they would release this as another generic zombie movie it just might be watchable. All they are doing right now is using a big name for box office numbers, not following shit from the source material. This is the reason I hate it.
Whoever asked about World War Z book vs movie? Always go with the book, imo. However, in this case, I think the title is this only thing the two have in common. I just started reading it, and so far there is no running or wall climbing. (Good read, so far.)
The word "zombie" is in Kirkman's comics. Somewhere inside the prison, one of the characters mentions them.
What about Teenage, Sparkly Zombie Vampires in Love? We'd make millions!!!
I checked, but I don't appear to be talking out of my ass. I may need a second opinion, though.
Jeez! Everyone is getting so worked up about this. Calm down, everyone! Come back from the ledge.
There is no such thing as the zombie apocalypse, and - I'm going out on a limb here, but there never will be one. It's fiction. You can do whatever you like.
Points:
1 - Some people - like me - will never appreciate the fast zombies. Deal with it and move on. Doesn't mean the movies are bad. I enjoyed the remake of Dawn of the Dead, for example. It just means that we prefer our zombies slow and lumbering. It's the slow, constant threat of death where you have to constantly be moving that we enjoy.
2 - To anyone who likes zoombies: Enjoy!! You'll probably really like the move WWZ, probably not the book though.
I'll watch it, but I won't expect anything big.
Really, it's Brad Pitt and a bunch of Kids. It will be "and they lived happily ever after"-style. Nothing like TWD where anybody can and will die.
Comments
Yeah... or stay calm and wait for the finished product.
i don't think they will take out the epic wall climbing "zombie" hive and that is what makes them not zombies, i will probably watch it, but i will say with 99.9% certainty that this will not be a classic and well loved zombie film
I'll give it a chance.
just heard it's gonna be PG-13, no wonder the zombies don't look like zombies, if they did it wouldn't get rated PG-13, i am now 99.9999999% certain that this will not be a classic and well loved zombie film
And that's why you think this pile of crap actually looks good. Expand your mind, go read a book.
I would also appreciate if you stopped putting words into my mouth.
Lmfao, when I watched it for the first time I though it was another movie about the end of the world.
it should be the i am legend prequel lol
ROFL
I am totally using that from now on to refer to any fast zombies.....
Seems strange for people to complain about the authenticity of the zombies... given that zombies are a loosely defined fictional construct.
Plus, come the ZA, I won't be hanging round and pointing & going 'THAT'S not a zombie, it moves too fast'
Not really. Zombies have been well defined by their creator - George Romero. TWD is based off Romero's universe; so, it's not that strange that people find fault with it. I certainly don't care for fast zombies. They're dead, damn it! I can understand fresh zombies being quicker, but not crack-head speed!
Also, 28 Days Later was a wonderful horror film about a rage virus. NOT A ZOMBIE VIRUS! It's okay for them to run.
Also, Also ---- my favorite part of the trailer?
"Stay in the car!"
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
"Stay in the..."
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!
Jeez! It seems like every other trailer has that damn sound in it now!
They behave more like ants. Definitely a group effort here.
Why would they do that? Maybe if someone was hanging some poor soul over the wall as bait might get that reaction. I want to like this movie but the CGI zoombies might be too ridiculous to watch.
Romero didn't "create" zombies.
He did create what people around here are talking about when they say "zombies"
He created the undead cannibal that can only be killed by a headshot and the whole idea of the zombie apocalypse.
The "Hungry Dead" arch-type? No.
It might be more accurate to say he defined the modern arch-type. The same way Bram Stoker defined the "modern" vampire.
mythology (or what ever the proper word is) is why its important and why there is a problem, look up ghouls and revenant and you will notice that zombies aren't the only mythological creatures that are undead and eat human flesh, if they wanted to create there own monsters they shouldn't have called them zombies, what if they gave them the ability to fly and have laser eyes would they still be zombies to you?
I wouldn't care if it were about trolls, werewolves, or vampires. If it is about a fantasy creature, do whatever you want to it. Maybe I'll be entertained, maybe I will think it's stupid. But no one is making us watch or read these things. If they want to call them zombies, I don't care.
yeah that's cool, but i am just explaining why the big changes from a zombie to a "zoombie" are important to some people, what if it had been called World War W (werewolf) and they obviously weren't werewolfs (they were robots or something), are you saying that wouldn't matter at all to you?
i'm not worked up about it and i wont pay to watch it, i just think it was a waste of an opportunity and money to make a film based on a well know monster and just basically ignore everything that is known about the monster
Again, I was only stating my personal feelings. I did not say any people were worked up, or were unwillingly going to pay to see the movie. I respect other people's opinions, and I almost never try to convince them to see things my way. I simply came on this thread to see if people that had read the book would recommend it, or might recommend the movie based on the trailers, which I haven't seen.
i respect your opinion i and was just stating my person opinion as well, sometimes its hard to make the tone of what i am writing match what i am thinking, so if it came across as me trying to convince you that the film is rubbish and you shouldn't watch it even if you want to or something like that i apologise
Whether you watch the movie or not, I definitely recommend reading the book.
This could be a decent movie, I just wish they hadn't insisted on using the World War Z brand in order to get name recognition (wouldn't Brad Pitt be enough, really?) because now we'll probably never see an actual adaptation of the story. If they had just called it something else...
You're right, and I should have made it clear in my post. The modern idea of zombies - as well as Robert Kirkman's zombies - did come from Romero, though.
"Zombie" movies have been around since the 30's with White Zombie being one of the first. (Which is where Rob Zombie got the name for his original band, btw.)
The idea of the walking dead - not The Walking Dead - has been around for a long long time. Zombies were not originally considered cannibalistic, though; that came from Romero.
SOOOOOO, in that regards, the idea of fast moving zoombies is something new and is not viewed positively by me and other purists. However, people are allowed to watch whatever they want. More power to them. (They're wrong, of course!
There are no zombies in the Walking Dead remember... they are walkers or biters or whatever people have called them. Imagine a world where the ZA actually happened... there would be no debate about 'hmm, well, strictly speaking these are ghouls, not zombies"... everyone would just call them zombies at the end of the day, no matter how upset Romero purists got about it!
In fact, "ghouls" sums up what we think of as zombies pretty well - the mythological voodoo zombie wasn't flesh-eating. The ghoulie apocalypse doesn't sound as good though - and where I come from means something entirely different!
Yes, these zombies are idiotically made, but not because of classic zombie stories. It is because this movie is based on the book, the zombies Brooks wrote about were walkers. It was even gone into detail on why they can't run.
For fucks sake, stop talking out of your asses.
I do have to say; if they would release this as another generic zombie movie it just might be watchable. All they are doing right now is using a big name for box office numbers, not following shit from the source material. This is the reason I hate it.
A little slow on the uptake buddy.
I Am Legend. (Omega Man was better story-wise).
The word "zombie" is in Kirkman's comics. Somewhere inside the prison, one of the characters mentions them.
What about Teenage, Sparkly Zombie Vampires in Love? We'd make millions!!!
I checked, but I don't appear to be talking out of my ass. I may need a second opinion, though.
Jeez! Everyone is getting so worked up about this. Calm down, everyone! Come back from the ledge.
There is no such thing as the zombie apocalypse, and - I'm going out on a limb here, but there never will be one. It's fiction. You can do whatever you like.
Points:
1 - Some people - like me - will never appreciate the fast zombies. Deal with it and move on. Doesn't mean the movies are bad. I enjoyed the remake of Dawn of the Dead, for example. It just means that we prefer our zombies slow and lumbering. It's the slow, constant threat of death where you have to constantly be moving that we enjoy.
2 - To anyone who likes zoombies: Enjoy!! You'll probably really like the move WWZ, probably not the book though.
Now, let's all hug and go look for Clementine!
Really, it's Brad Pitt and a bunch of Kids. It will be "and they lived happily ever after"-style. Nothing like TWD where anybody can and will die.