A different perspective on the zombie genre that works!

Rating: 8/10 (3 November 2013)

When I saw this movie was coming out, I didn't really want to see it because I felt I had enough of big blockbuster zombie movies for one lifetime, but when I finally did get to see it I found it really different from other zombie movies out there. There were several differences in the movie "World War Z", differences that sets the film apart from others such as "Dawn of the Dead", "Resident Evil" and the classic that started it all, "Night of the Living Dead." "World War Z"stars Brad Pitt as a United Nation hotshot (Gerry Lane) who is living with his family when the zombie outbreak begins in the heart of Philadelphia. Utter chaos ensues as the living dead take over and begin to turn frightened humans into an exponentially growing hoard of the walking dead. Due to his prowess and skills learned through years with the U.N, Gerry gets his family to safety and then embarks on a journey to find the cause of the virus and stop the pandemic. "WWZ" stands out among all of the other zombie movies because the film is not about surviving the zombie apocalypse and the degradation of society once every human is fighting for their own survival. "WWZ" takes the audience on a journey of attempting to understand how a pandemic of this magnitude is possible in the present, and begs not the "What do we do from here?" question, but "Where did this come from, how can we stop it?" making the plot of "WWZ" extremely intriguing. In most zombie films, the only way to deal with living dead is to completely destroy all brain activity in the ghoul, whether it be from a shotgun shell to the head, decapitation, or severing the spinal cord. "WWZ" however, uses a scientific/detective- like search for a cure or vaccine to undead virus and in the end uses an ingenious way to fool zombies into not attacking living flesh. In this way, "WWZ" brilliantly flips the art of avoiding zombies on its head. But, a lot of people out there criticize this movie because it had nothing to do with Max Brook's book with the same title. In "World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War", Max Brooks writes of several tales, happening all around the world, interwoven with each other as society tries to survive the living dead. There is no solid plot line, no connection of stories with each other and no real beginning or end- a great fiction read. The intentions of the film "WWZ" were to provide a plot and center on one character and the journey through the pandemic. One cannot compare the two, or criticize for their lack of similarity because they are two different pieces of work. "WWZ" was not an attempt to adapt the book, merely using the book as a guideline and for the name, which in itself sparked major interest. In the end, the movie "World War Z" gives a refreshing take on the zombie genre and may lead to possibilities that have not yet been explored. Simple twists to the zombie apocalypse framework of hundreds of movies before, creates a different, highly profitable and more relatable horror movie reaching a higher number of movie watchers than ever before. The film should not be discounted because of its name and relation to a fiction novel, but should be viewed on its own as the instant classic and welcomed addiction to any zombie movie collection. See it!