Marc Forster Addresses The Early Controversy Surrounding WORLD WAR Z

The wifey and I agreed to see the movie as long as we chant the same mantra; "any similarity between the book and the film are purely coincidental."

But talk about a movie encountering problems. There's been a lot of effort to un-[frick] things.

Looks like crap compared to the book.
Boring, bland, generic crap.
Such a shame, the book was perfect and they didn't have to change anything to adapt it.

movie looks like trash

There was no way they could have ever turned the book into a movie with it being a faithful adaptation at the same time, would have worked better as a tv series.

This still looks like a bad movie. I'll just wait until the reviews come out.

I knew this movie would turn out great!

This movie looks like crap, just like Quantum of Solace was.

The movie looks fantastic, no slow walking zombie shit to be seen, audiences are gonna love it like the early reviews and fanboys are gonna moan about Zombies not being what they grew up with as usual but all their boycotting aint gonna stop the film being a huge success.

Someone called this generic, he obviously doesn't know the meaning of the word. Zombies film are never made on this scope, they never show the effect of the epidemic on a world scale let alone this rabid and threatening. This is about as un-generic a zombie film as you can get.

@infinitemonkey - you watch too many movies, mate! If ridden in plent of aircraft with doors open. That only happens in pressurized aircraft, which is done when flying above 20,000 feet or so where the air is unbreathable.

For the people saying that the book couldn't have been adapted, I have to question if you actually read the book and understood it, lol.

The movie could have easily followed the same formula.

Brad Pitt could have been interviewing people in the present, and their interviews could have been flashbacks that made up the events of the zombie outbreak.

The first few people could gave given accounts of the very beginning of the outbreak, and their first experiences with the undead.

The middle could have detailed the world falling into chaos, The Battle of Yonkers, and the similar things going on in other countries. Pitt could have been interviewing soldiers during this act...much like the book.

Then act 3 could have shown how the world finally got organized and defeated the zombies. Pitt could have been interviewing members of the militia that swept across the U.S. killing the last zombies.

If they would have done that, it would have been true to the book, and would have told a story of the world being brought to the edge of extinction and then finally uniting to survive.

They could have even broken the different act up into 3 movies and made a trilogy of it, that way, nothing gets left out.

But no, instead they went the cheap action movie route and made Brad Pitt this heroic character that has to race around the world to save the day.

Sorry, but that isn't the WWZ i read.

I'll still see it...that is if the reviews are good. The only good films in theatres is iron man 3 and star trek into darkness.
After Earth failed, Now you see me failed, Great Gatsby is a snooze fest and the Hangover 3 failed.

I loved the book, it was a somewhat fresh approach to the zombie apocalypse theme. Piecing together how the whole thing went down, and showing how the world reacted to the outbreak in retelling the events AFTER the situation was under control again was interesting.

How they made something that looks like "Brad Pitt needs to save the world from running zombies, so that he can be with his family again" out of this source material is beyond me.

Ceejay said this is an un-generic zombie movie, which I guess is more or less right, but for me the problem is that it looks like an utterly generic action movie, who happens to be about zombies.

As much as it hurts me to say it: just based on what I saw from trailers this looks like it has more in common with the Resident Evil movies than with the book which name it uses.