Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3hYKPt0uJQ

Royally 'd

Full Length: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md6Dvxdr0AQ

Wo hyper fast zombies! Thats no bueno for the Frazzled Zombie Games!!!

Holy hellfire! That's not a horde, that's a friggin wave of zombies!

C'mon Hollywood, why couldn't we have nice slow zombies?

How do zombies form TIDAL WAVES? How the heck does that work!?

I'll pass, the books are better. I might eventually watch it on the late show some night, but its not worth the price of a theater ticket.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
How do zombies form TIDAL WAVES? How the heck does that work!?

Fell sorcery of a nightmarish variety.

Sooooo....the movie apparently has nothing in common with the book except a title?

Complete and utter downer.

Not going to touch this with a ten foot poll.

The book was done via interviews, slowly unraveling the story for the reader at a pacing that didn't scream action flick.

And yet here we are, surfing zombies.

And Max Brooks' involvement.

Looks like gak.

Why can't everything be the same? I hate anything that expands on an idea, or changes it even remotely. Without seeing it I will know that it is terrible since it isn't something I already know. Certainly I will never let it stand on its own merits to determine its value, just that it isn't a transliteration of another work is enough for me to know that it is the worst thing that has happened ever.

Eh, its a gakky adaption of a gakky book. I can live with that.

It's a "One man to save the world" movie?

I think I'd rather eat New York Clam Chowder.

Hell, if this movie gets above 70% in the Tomatometer (on Rottentomatoes.com), I will film myself eating that tomato filth.

 Ahtman wrote:
Why can't everything be the same? I hate anything that expands on an idea, or changes it even remotely. Without seeing it I will know that it is terrible since it isn't something I already know. Certainly I will never let it stand on its own merits to determine its value, just that it isn't a transliteration of another work is enough for me to know that it is the worst thing that has happened ever.

You were the guy that liked battleship arent you?

 Ahtman wrote:
Why can't everything be the same? I hate anything that expands on an idea, or changes it even remotely. Without seeing it I will know that it is terrible since it isn't something I already know. Certainly I will never let it stand on its own merits to determine its value, just that it isn't a transliteration of another work is enough for me to know that it is the worst thing that has happened ever.

Or you could do what I did, which is not read the book, have no idea about the rest of the film and instead just judge it on the tides (like Return of the King green ghosts) of zombies that look ridiculous and come to the conclusion that it looks like gak and, like steel magnolias or titanic, I never even need to see it to know I'll dislike it.

I might see it if Obama wins.

No need to torture yourself even if it comes to that.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Why can't everything be the same? I hate anything that expands on an idea, or changes it even remotely. Without seeing it I will know that it is terrible since it isn't something I already know. Certainly I will never let it stand on its own merits to determine its value, just that it isn't a transliteration of another work is enough for me to know that it is the worst thing that has happened ever.

Or you could do what I did, which is not read the book, have no idea about the rest of the film and instead just judge it on the tides (like Return of the King green ghosts) of zombies that look ridiculous and come to the conclusion that it looks like gak and, like steel magnolias or titanic, I never even need to see it to know I'll dislike it.

Perhaps you missed it, but my problem isn't in people being discerning in their choice of film, but in the 'it isn't the exact same thing as the source so it must be terrible' line of reasoning I take issue with. Adaptations and reinterpretations are a vital and important part of storytelling. I'm also a little baffled by 'slow zombie means good, fast zombie means bad' attitude. It would depend on the story that is being told I would think; people get to caught up in rigid ideas of fictional things that they lose perspective.

People prefer slow zombies, because there are more good slow zombie movies than good fast zombie movies. Correlation ain't causation, but it sure sometimes can seem like it.

Variation would make sense with the zombie speed though. They'd be fast when fresh, but probably get gradually slower until they reach the shamble state.

In the original Dawn of the Dead (from the 70's), the zombies had varied speed. Most were shambling, but a few, like the zombie kids, could move faster.

Dawn of the Dead was awesome. The remake was an okay movie, but it had none of the feel of the original.

I prefer good zombie movies, regardless of whether they are slow or fast. There really isn't enough here for me to tell if this is good or bad yet. Having massive numbers of zombies on screen seems really cool, and something not really shown in this manner before. On the other hand the whole 'only one man to save the world' made me /sadface a bit. Still Brad Pitt hasn't made a generic, standard action flick in some time, and I doubt this will break that. We also have to recognize that it may be marketed badly as well. I'm curious to see what the actual trailer shows, but I don't feel to strongly one way or another about it at this point.

As for the people that read the books, as I understand it, this is supposed to just be another story set in the same world i.e. it is just another chapter, not a retelling.

 Ahtman wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Why can't everything be the same? I hate anything that expands on an idea, or changes it even remotely. Without seeing it I will know that it is terrible since it isn't something I already know. Certainly I will never let it stand on its own merits to determine its value, just that it isn't a transliteration of another work is enough for me to know that it is the worst thing that has happened ever.

Or you could do what I did, which is not read the book, have no idea about the rest of the film and instead just judge it on the tides (like Return of the King green ghosts) of zombies that look ridiculous and come to the conclusion that it looks like gak and, like steel magnolias or titanic, I never even need to see it to know I'll dislike it.

Perhaps you missed it, but my problem isn't in people being discerning in their choice of film, but in the 'it isn't the exact same thing as the source so it must be terrible' line of reasoning I take issue with. Adaptations and reinterpretations are a vital and important part of storytelling. I'm also a little baffled by 'slow zombie means good, fast zombie means bad' attitude. It would depend on the story that is being told I would think; people get to caught up in rigid ideas of fictional things that they lose perspective.

Well, that I can agree with. It does make better sense to wait and see more, then again, this was a thread about a linked trailer and people will make their decision at this time based on the available info. I personally like fast zombies and loved 28 days later. I just saw those 'waves' of zombies and was reminded of the waves of the deadmen of dunharrow, which looked overkill back then (and they were supposed to move like that as incorporeal not rotting corpses).

For others, especially those who've read the books and liked them, the rumours about the changes were very negatively received and this trailer seems to directly confirm their fears about the setting and theme, not just a reimagine or change of direction but an entire reworking.

 n0t_u wrote:
No need to torture yourself even if it comes to that.

Then I'll go watch a Howard the Duck, Zardoz, White Chicks, and Pluto Nash marathon.

 WarOne wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
No need to torture yourself even if it comes to that.

Then I'll go watch a Howard the Duck, Zardoz, White Chicks, and Pluto Nash marathon.

Zardoz is one of my favorite movies.

/totallysrs

 WarOne wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
No need to torture yourself even if it comes to that.

Then I'll go watch a Howard the Duck, Zardoz, White Chicks, and Pluto Nash marathon.

I would take any of these over another zombie or vampire movie. Played out can't even describe it anymore.

 WarOne wrote:
I might see it if Obama wins.

I hope you enjoy the movie

Man.... that looked awful.

What? NO! No, no, just no. This isn't World War Z.

 Ahtman wrote:
I prefer good zombie movies, regardless of whether they are slow or fast. There really isn't enough here for me to tell if this is good or bad yet. Having massive numbers of zombies on screen seems really cool, and something not really shown in this manner before. On the other hand the whole 'only one man to save the world' made me /sadface a bit. Still Brad Pitt hasn't made a generic, standard action flick in some time, and I doubt this will break that. We also have to recognize that it may be marketed badly as well. I'm curious to see what the actual trailer shows, but I don't feel to strongly one way or another about it at this point.

As for the people that read the books, as I understand it, this is supposed to just be another story set in the same world i.e. it is just another chapter, not a retelling.

Then call it something else. Add a tag line, something like "based in the world of World War Z". The only thing this has to do with the book is it's supposedly part of the same war. Basically none of the events from the book are really represented and the ultra fast zombies completely clash with half the stories from the original book (particularly key events like Hope.) It's not an adaptation or a director's vision of the book, it's a completely different story hoping to drive sales by gluing the name on the front of it.