Nothing revolutionary to add to the zombie genre

Rating: 6/10 (20 June 2013)

When I first saw the trailer for World War Z (WWZ for short, naturally) I wasn't too impressed. First, yet *another* zombie movie and second the CGI looked very shoddy. Plus I had heard that the movie had been plagued by production issues, numerous rewrites and whatnot.
Fast forward to a couple weeks ago and for some reason I became interested in seeing it. I think I remember reading an article saying early reviews were positive. Shows how easily I'm swayed. Or it could just be that I love movies and I'll watch anything (can't say I'll always pay for them though)
The positive scores on rotten tomatoes sealed it for me so I went today after work.
I was just about getting over the headache that Man of Steel gave me so I wasn't looking forward to the 3D. Surprisingly, the 3D was well done. Zack Snyder needs to get in touch with Marc Forster for some tips on properly post converting.
Aside from the 3D, there was nothing revolutionary to add to the zombie genre except maybe showing that a zombie movie can be done without copious amounts of blood and gore and still be quite entertaining. The CGI wasn't an issue like I thought it might be.
Am I the only person who thinks Brad Pitt is a bad actor? He's not Channing Tatum level but he can't hold a candle to say DiCaprio in my opinion.
WWZ is a decent 2 hours at the cinema. I'm not sure I need to see it again when it's on blu-ray/TV, too many other movies to see.