World War Z — A Review

Hmmm… World War Z? There was a book? Really?

OK, here’s the thing, as I posted a couple of posts back (“Books to Movies…”), I always worry when a book gets turned into a movie. World War Z is the reason why. Here we had a very successful book, #1 on the charts for a while, which wrote about a “zombie” war in the past tense. The book included several stories, in documentary fashion, surrounding separate (but a little bit connected) incidents which took place during the war. It was a fascinating read and after reading it you ended up with an overall, over-arching understanding of the complete war and what happened during it. Great book. I read it because I heard they were releasing a movie of it and I was interested in zombies so I wanted to read it before the movie came out. Today I saw the movie based on the book…. very, very loosely based.

Don’t read the book.

Wait, let me rephrase that. Read the book… It is really a great book and you would be better off reading it even if you’re just not that into zombies.

Forget everything you read in the book.

That’s better. World War Z, the movie, has virtually nothing to do with the book. Sure, it has some common elements. Zombies, for one. It’s good they got that. There’s some type of infection that makes people undead. It is on a global scale. That is about where the likeness ends. This is a different story. Now that that’s been said, I can give you a better review of World War Z as a standalone movie. If you go to see it, forget the book. This isn’t it.

Within ten minutes World War Z gets right into the thick of things by thrusting you, straight out of the gate, into zombie hordes. These aren’t your average, Night of the Living Dead (read that as the original), slow, lumbering zombies. These are the run faster than you, leap on your head, tear off your face, 28 Days Later style zombies. (If you haven’t seen that movie reference, then apparently you don’t like zombies and you have missed a quintessential zombie movie which changed a lot of common movie perceptions about zombies). The story is basic, very basic,… find where it originated and try to find a way to stop it.

World War Z is good in that it takes what the viewer normally sees in zombie movies and applies it on a larger, global scale. That is great. We normally see masses of undead slowly ganging up on small groups of people who are left over after the zombie apocalypse. Look at the hugely popular Walking Dead series. A great show, but it only shows us a small portion of the United States and doesn’t waver much from there. WWZ takes us out of that comfort zone and thrusts us from Philadelphia, to Korea, to Israel, to England. It really helps to open up some of our previous experiences of the zombie apocalypse. The storyline, though somewhat simple, is well written and shows us a few things we haven’t seen before in a zombie movie (the big wall with zombies climbing over each other to get to the top, which they showed in the trailer). And the main character is played by star actor Brad Pitt. Pitt does very well portraying our savior, traipsing across the planet, looking for a way to stop it all.

The effects are great. Very realistic CGI city destruction, zombie hordes, and zombie deaths. There is also not that much gore. No eyes popping out of heads or blood splattering the walls so even though the zombies may be scary and gross, they are not too graphic for the squeamish in the audience. Not like a true horror film in which we see flesh ripping and heads exploding. This movie is not about the blood factor. Explosions are awesome. There are many times zombies leap out at you making you flinch. The facial traits and motions of the zombies are definitely scary enough to make some cringe.

What WWZ doesn’t give us is something completely new… other than ignoring the original book that is. We’ve seen most of this before, here and there, in other movies. There is not much truly new. The special effects makes it feel fresh. Having a big time actor as part of the movie makes it more visible among the throng of movies and possibly gather a much larger than intended audience. And the international settings make us go, “Whoa, it’s everywhere,” and feel a little more globally connected. But, overall, it’s really not much we haven’t seen before.

Don’t get me wrong. I pretty much liked the movie; I like zombie movies and scary movies just as much as the next person. I even like Brad Pitt and his acting. But I kept feeling there was something missing. The story is overly simplistic, and somewhat rushed. The lead role could have been played by almost anyone and had the movie turn out the same (though it certainly wouldn’t get the same box office pull). And if you’ve seen the trailers for the film, you pretty much know most of the movie and have seen a lot of the ‘cool factor’ scenes. I had higher hopes for this movie, but the high expectations were not met.

If you like zombies… Good! You should go see this film. If you like Brad Pitt… Maybe you should see this. If you don’t like zombies, but like Brad Pitt, I don’t think you’d care much for this movie. Overall, this is a good try to bring zombies into the forefront of motion pictures, to maybe give it more credibility as a genre. But really, it feels more like a movie company attempting to cash in on the recent zombie craze. As mentioned before, I liked this film as a zombie flick, but it’s just not ‘great.’

And I really believe if they stayed more true to the original book, it would make a much more fascinating tale (or a series).

I rate this effort 7.5 out of 10.

 

Books to Movies: Cloud Atlas & Beautiful Creatures

Whenever I hear a new movie is being made based on a book I’ve read I always fear the worst. Books express such a deeper level of feeling and understanding of the characters and stories involved. They can do this because you can basically read the minds of those characters… their thoughts and feelings are laid open for you. You know all the backstories, the past lives.

Translating these thoughts and feelings doesn’t always work in a fully visual medium. Take, for instance, the Twilight series of books. I loved the books. Then came the first movie, Twilight. It was horrible. Let alone the bad acting, so much was hacked from the book in an apparent attempt to make a cheaper movie (it’s almost a certainty they weren’t sure the series would take off like it did and had a limited budget available). Unfortunately, the movie turned out badly.

On the flipside, The Lord of the Rings series and the newest prequel, The Hobbit, had a major budget and turned out wonderfully. The movies were expertly directed by Peter Jackson, the actors had amazing depth, the locations grandiose, and the script was almost directly from the books. The last film went on to win all 11 of it’s Academy Award nominations. It was a major success and successfully translated the books to film. Even then, any true fan of the books will tell you they prefer the written word over the films.

 

 

This leads me to two new films which make the attempt of moving a book to film: Cloud Atlas and Beautiful Creatures. They recently released on DVD/Blu-ray. What is interesting about these is the fact that I had never read the books. It was an interest in the trailers which sparked my interest in the books. I wanted to read the stories before seeing the movies. I liked the books quite a bit. Cloud Atlas quickly became one of my favorites because it successfully wove a thread throughout time of the same star-crossed lovers. Beautiful Creatures was a Twilight style story, thrilling in its own right. How well did they make the transfer to film? Read on.

 
Cloud Atlas, starring Tom Hanks and Halle Berry, takes us on a journey spanning several generations, but yet following the same two lovers through several reincarnations. The book is wonderfully written with each generation in two acts. The first half of the story of each generation is presented in the first half of the book leading up to a post apocalypse future. the second half of the book then back tracks the second halves of those stories, connecting the dots, and fulfilling the readers’ thirst to know what happens in each portion of the timeline. It’s finished off with a “wrap-up” chapter, further completing the storyline. The movie, instead, takes us “time-jumping” across all the time periods, sometimes in rapid succession. the directors of the Matrix, Andy and Lana Wachowski, present this version. They made a conscious decision to take this tactic. Unfortunately, it seems to fall a little flat when compared to the storytelling of the book. the movie tends to get confusing, even after reading the book, because of all the jumping around between time periods. Many of the characters lose their personalities because the depth isn’t given to them. Don’t get me wrong, the movie is still worth the watch. It’s a valuable story with a wonderful message and very interesting twists. It’s very likable because it’s very different from your average film. It involves all the same actors in every generational story. It’s amazing how they portray different characters in different times and with different makeup treatments to make them fit in with the common folkways of the eras. There is even a very amusing point when Hugo Weaving plays a “Nurse Ratchet” style nursing home attendant. Overall, the movie is good and worth watching, but it still never reaches the pinnacle of the book. I rate it an 8 out of 10.

Where Cloud Atlas becomes somewhat successful with the leap to film, Beautiful Creatures falls sadly short. BC involves a teenage boy who meets the girl of his dreams, literally. He has dreamed of her for months. When she moves into town, he immediately falls for her because there is a connection between the two, their destinies are intertwined. He finds out very quickly that she is a ‘caster’, a witch, for lack of a better term. Her family is full of good and evil members who all have powers. When she reaches her 16th birthday, she will be ‘claimed’ for evil or for good. She apparently has no choice in which way she goes. This is the basis of the story. Read the book to find how it ends, I recommend it. I enjoyed the book almost as much as the Twilight series. It felt a little more raw and unfinished, but still a good story of the supernatural with different twists. As for the film, several liberties are taken with the story. Some of the major characters in the book are now minor characters, and some of the most important scenes are dropped from the movie or become afterthoughts in the director’s story. And other scenes are completely rewritten for the screen and are almost unrecognizable. Many of the ‘caster’ family members are straight up caricatures. It’s disappointing because Jeremy Irons and Emma Thompson play two of the leading characters. I want the film to be so much more because they are fine actors. Unfortunately, it’s not a good vehicle for them. The lead character, Ethan, has a voice and mannerisms that are truly annoying. The lead actress, Alice Englert, appears to be very good, but this movie doesn’t let her shine. To make a long story short, this film could be likable. Maybe, if you haven’t read the book, the film will be something better for you. If you’ve read the book, it is most likely disappointing. I give it 6.5 out of 10.

In the end, the movie is never better than the book. It only saves you reading large chunks of material and the time spent on the written word. Books allow you to completely immerse yourself into a world completely different than your own. If you can, always read the book before seeing the film.

Be aware, some films will still turn out great, even from books, but some just can’t make this leap from page to screen successfully. Take, for example, Harry Potter. The films have been wonderful additions to bring the books to life. We will also see what the future has in store for books to movies. Next month World War Z comes to the big screen. I’m currently in the midst of the book, but I can’t imagine the style it is written in transferring well. The trailer appears to focus on one family whereas the book is a mash-up of many stories.

Read the books, see the movies, and you make the judgement.

Star Trek: Into Awesomeness!

Yes, it’s a cheesy title. Yes, I’ve been away for a long time. Yes, I’m back, I think. But the newest exploration into the universe of Star Trek, subtitled Into Darkness, is well worth coming out of nowhere to give it a full review. Star trek: Into Darkness is large enough to title it EPIC!

Star Trek: Into Darkness

After the very able and stellar reboot of the Star Trek series last year by director J.J. Abrams, it was a question of how good could a tired, old genre get? Where could it go from there? Well, the resounding answer is up, up, and UP! The second installment of the newest Star Trek era is an amazing flick of action, jubilation, and even sadness. Yet there is so much I can’t say because it would spoil the film for those who haven’t yet ventured out to take in the new worlds. (Shhhh…. there are secrets!) I’ll try not to spoil any of the twists and turns, but it’s so hard… the movie just makes you want to yell them out! Just let it be known: Star trek: Into Darkness will make you gasp, laugh, grin, and cry all at the same time.

I must also mention the writing team here. Even though I mention Abrams many times, he has not written the screenplays. he only plays in the world they create  The team from the first movie is back, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. Together they made a great first film with great characters and scenes. This time they are joined by Damon Lindelof who also wrote for the TV series LOST, and the films Prometheus and the new World War Z. Together this team is phenomenal!

Starting from the very action-packed opening scene, you learn more about the characters of the new Abrams Trek world. There are some old traits from the original Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock, the resident Vulcan first officer. (Kirk was originally played by William Shatner in the series and movies and now very aptly played by Chris Pine in the reboot, and Spock is now played by Zachary Quinto, the psycho killer from the TV series Heroes, the original was Leonard Nimoy.) I can’t say enough about Quinto’s performance. He IS Spock for one thing. His portrayal goes so much deeper than one could hope from a Vulcan, but remember, he is half human too. Their reinvention of these characters is more than just an homage to the originals, it’s a wonderful exploration of more than just the surface of them. They bring more of the inner tensions to the surface for everyone to see. There is even the typical comic relief between the two as we’ve seen before, but with new twists (remember, Spock is dating the human Uhura which is just ripe for poking fun at. PS. Uhura is played by Zoe Saldana.). Their inner tensions and feelings become ripped wide open as this movie moves on.

But the film goes far beyond these characters. There is a new threat, played by Benedict Cumberbatch. His portrayal is just plain chilling. I was very impressed by Cumberbatch in the British series Sherlock, which I highly suggest for everyone to see, but here, he turns the somewhat cold and calculating, but still human, Sherlock Holmes into a much darker and deeper antithesis to Kirk and Spock. He plays it  so well, even then, you can’t tell whose side he’s on for there are many enemies to pick and choose from in this universe. I would love to tell you more… even go into a scene by scene description, but it would be a spoiler for many. Just rest assured, you won’t be disappointed.

This film is action packed,  much like the first. You rarely get moment’s rest and there would barely be time to get to the restroom and back before something else major happens. Make sure you “go” before you go to the movie. You don’t want to miss anything. there is more than enough happening on the ground and in space to keep any fan of science fiction thrilled. The fight scenes are spectacular and the space battles amazing. Not too much of a spoiler, Abrams even briefly introduces the Klingons in this installment, and they are somewhat different than the original. (I found this personally interesting when reflecting on the development of Klingons over the years. The original TV series had them as just regular humans with Mongolian style mustaches. LOL! Then the original movie series introduced the menacing ridges on the head and sharp teeth.)

Abrams also gives us some background from the histories of Kirk and Spock. This movie still takes place in the time period before we meet the crew of the Enterprise on its five year mission to explore the universe. That’s what makes some of the writers’ choices so unusual, amazing, and thrilling to the original fans of the series. Remember, the first Abrams’ Star Trek disrupted the timeline of the original so things happen differently in this timeline. There are many instances where you discover how Kirk, Spock and the others develop into the characters they are to become. It’s a fantastic voyage to watch and follow.

The overview? Well, the film comes out nothing short of amazing. It definitely leaves you wanting to walk right into the next theater and find out what happens next. So much happens, yet you are left just wondering what is next… and how can they top this? Indeed, it will be hard for the writers and Abrams to plot the next course. there is so much inter-weaved into Into Darkness to satisfy not only the true Star Trek fan, but the newest members of that growing group put under the spell by the first film of this series. This film is very satisfying. I rate Star Trek: Into Darkness a 9.5 out of 10! And that’s only because a perfect ten would include me in it. 🙂