The UHF of the film world.
Latest news

Christopher Webster [Celluloid 06.24.13] post apocalyptic zombies horror action thriller

After World War Z's record-breaking weekend ($112 million is the biggest opener for Brad Pitt. That's a record, right?), Paramount has begun actively developing a sequel to the film. Seems like a no-brainer.

Reviews for the film have been generally positive with only some grumbles from hardcore Max Brooks fans. I can't voice an opinion yet as I am seeing the film tomorrow and am doing my best to avoid most reviews.

I know there was some question as to whether the film would do well following news of behind-the-scenes drama, but by the time that third trailer came out, I knew WWZ was destined to win at the box office. General audience only care about what's on the screen and what was there was looking mighty tight.

The tentpole earned $66 million in North America, the best opening for an original live-action tentpole since Avatar, and $45.8 million from its first 25 foreign markets.

Via: THR

You might also like


waold war z (9 years ago) Reply

it was a good movie, except it should been more action wise, the cgi effects were cool but i kept noticing one thing : not a single close ups of the Zombie lasted more than a second and a half...zobie have stories too lol


Fantimette (9 years ago) Reply

I loved it , so glad it did well after all the production gossip and drama- its supposed to be a smart zombie movie ...more then just action sequences... And it delivered ...that said , It's been a while since I actually got scared in a movie and this one hooked me from the start


donc48 (9 years ago) Reply

I have to admit I was surprised. The movie had a plot and went right into the action without much preamble. They gave you just enough in the beginning and things rose from there. I figured there would be a sequel just how the move ended. BTW Waold War Z proof read your posts before you hit add comment.


jesusolmo (9 years ago) Reply

If You Want Well-Mannered Zombies You’ve Got to Start ’Em Young:


chuck (9 years ago) Reply

Sequel? Meh.
OK this may get spoilery.
I knew what I was getting into. I'd read all the press so I wasn't expecting an adaptation of the book but come on. There's only one character from the book and a small bit of dialogue. They changed major elements of the infection. One of my biggest problems with the film was the twelve second bite to infection time. There was no 'slow burn' infections. The longest turn over times mentioned were five to ten minutes. Then the UN director mentions that air travel played a major role in spreading the infection. How does this work? Do infected zombies buy tickets? Do you get bit at the airport, jump on a plane at the last minute and start biting folks before the plane clears the runway?
How did no one else in the entire world notice that the dead were ignoring people with terminal illnesses. That was weak.
I liked the Israeli response in the book but the movie has Israel walling in Jerusalem as well. That would never happen in a million years!
Plot holes and illogic aside, it just wasn't a very good movie. It was a bunch of tired crap we've already seen many times before. Thanks a lot Brad Pitt. You can keep your sequel.


Rev Wright (9 years ago) Reply

A toned down movie made for Pitt's kids, that felt like a TV show by the end. double meh


gagoonies (9 years ago) Reply

I highly recommend everyone download the audio book for world war z.

It is very good.


j.j. (9 years ago) Reply

Chuck - very good points, sir!

Leave a comment