BookTalk.org

Here's the trailer for the movie due out next summer.

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/world-w ... orld-war-z

Here's the thing.

This looks like a good zombie movie. It looks like it's got all the "world falling into chaos" action that i've always wanted to see in a zombie movie, but which inevitably happens off screen as we focus on people hiding in a dark room, thus saving budget...

But this is not World War Z.

Fine. Make your zombie movie. It even looks pretty good for a zombie movie of your own invention, but this is not World War Z!

Don't use the name and then do something with it that takes off in the other direction and sprints as fast as possible from any likeness to the book! The problem is that this movie will be associated with the book, it will be a good movie, or it will be a bad movie, but either way the image people have in their heads will be this wierd tidal wave of scrambling zombies when they think of Max Brooks' book and that is not at all what his book is about.

Now we won't see a faithful rendition of his book for ten years at a minimum. Enough time has to pass for this movie to fade from people's memory before they will take another stab at it.

It's a shame.

What do you think?

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/world-w ... orld-war-z

Here's the second trailer for WWZ.

This does look like a pretty good zombie movie, but it doesn't work as a WWZ adaptation. This looks like it borrows the world-wide coverage of WWZ, and the hyper-able "zombies" of Stephen King's "Cell".

They don't need to use the name WWZ to do this movie. WWZ doesn't hold the copyright on "world wide disaster involving zombies." if they don't intend to use what's in the book, they shouldn't take the title.

Sigh...

Last week, when attending the Moscow premiere, Pitt himself hinted at a sequel and said there is plenty of material left over from Max Brooks' novel, upon which the movie is based.

Haha!

You mean, like: everything besides the title?