Latest Movie News Headlines

Just how bad did things get when filming World War Z?

Apr. 30, 2013by: Alex Maidy

We all know that WORLD WAR Z was a troubled project plagued by delays, reshoots, and animosity between star/producer Brad Pitt and director Marc Forster. Now that we are approaching the release of the film, details of the problems are beginning to come together into a cohesive look at just what went wrong with the film.

The latest issue of Vanity Fair magazine features a cover story about Pitt and the movie's troubled path to theaters. One of the biggest hurdles was the budget that crossed the $200 million mark and what was described as an "incoherent ending" when Paramount executives viewed a cut of the film. It was so bad that they brought in Damon Lindelof to fix it. Lindelof is quoted as saying he gave the studio two options:

Is there material that can be written to make that stuff work better? To have it make sense? To have it have emotional stakes? And plot logic and all that? And Road Two, which I think is the long-shot road, is that everything changes after Brad leaves Israel.” That meant throwing out the entire Russian battle scene—or about 12 minutes of footage—and crafting a new ending. “I didn’t think anyone was going to say, ‘Let’s throw it out and try something else,’ ” Lindelof recalls. “So when I gave them those two roads and they sounded more interested in Road B”—which meant shooting an additional 30 to 40 minutes of the movie—“I was like, ‘To be honest with you, good luck selling that to Paramount.’ ”

Forster and Pitt are swearing up and down that the final version of WORLD WAR Z is the one they wanted all along, but something tells me that is them trying to put a spin on this debacle.  I am definitely intrigued to check out if the movie is any good.  I don't see a PG-13, 3D, zombie movie released in the summer starring one of the biggest stars in the world flopping at the box office, but is there still any potential to turn this into a franchise?  I guess we will find out soon enough.

WORLD WAR Z opens on June 21, 2013.

Source: Vanity Fair

Related Articles

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

2:01AM on 05/02/2013
holy crap this movie is going to be a flop...i mean FLOPPER!
holy crap this movie is going to be a flop...i mean FLOPPER!
Your Reply:



9:26PM on 05/01/2013

You see..while this looks like it could be a good film..

it doesn't look like it would be a good WWZ film. They've altered the zombies and seemingly the story line enough that it makes me wonder why they didn't just do something original instead.

I mean if you need to change the movement and reason for why Zombies are scary to make your movie work, then perhaps you should have used a monster other than zombies as your antagonist, maybe create your own.. Same thing goes for this and any story.

Hollywood, if you can't be faithful to a property,
it doesn't look like it would be a good WWZ film. They've altered the zombies and seemingly the story line enough that it makes me wonder why they didn't just do something original instead.

I mean if you need to change the movement and reason for why Zombies are scary to make your movie work, then perhaps you should have used a monster other than zombies as your antagonist, maybe create your own.. Same thing goes for this and any story.

Hollywood, if you can't be faithful to a property, drop it and create your own. Stop using and abusing intelectual properties in order to get gullible fans to see your film while simultaneously changing anything that made fans like it in the first place.

If you want to make a Superman film but change his suit, power set and origin, (Jon Peters..I'm looking at you!)then you don't want to make a Superman film, you want to use the Superman name to put butts in seats and it will come back to bite you in the ass later.

Yes it's hard to secure funding for a film whose intelectual property is unknown, especially one with a high price tag, we get that...But it's better that it NOT be made than damage the intelectual properties' good name and enrage it's fanbase in order to sell us a ticket.

Think about it.
Your Reply:



+7
2:11PM on 05/01/2013

Just a question

How do you spend 200+ fucking million dollars on a movie and have CGI zombies that look as bad as those in the trailer? Maybe they will tighten it up prior to release, but the CGI shown so far is nothing special at all.
How do you spend 200+ fucking million dollars on a movie and have CGI zombies that look as bad as those in the trailer? Maybe they will tighten it up prior to release, but the CGI shown so far is nothing special at all.
Your Reply:



2:58PM on 05/01/2013
I know right, like didn't they take any advice from I Am Legend
I know right, like didn't they take any advice from I Am Legend
12:16PM on 05/01/2013
The only reason I'll go see this film is to find out if it's as bad as I think it's going to be
The only reason I'll go see this film is to find out if it's as bad as I think it's going to be
Your Reply:



8:36AM on 05/01/2013
I really want to give this movie a chance but the CGI feels over the top and takes away from any realism. I get that they want the zombie threat to seem massively scary and toppling over each other to get to their prey makes sense, but on the scale they are going it just feels stupid. Like watching the ants in Indy 4.
I'm not sold on this film at all and it is mostly due to the CGI looking so stupid and excessive.
I really want to give this movie a chance but the CGI feels over the top and takes away from any realism. I get that they want the zombie threat to seem massively scary and toppling over each other to get to their prey makes sense, but on the scale they are going it just feels stupid. Like watching the ants in Indy 4.
I'm not sold on this film at all and it is mostly due to the CGI looking so stupid and excessive.
Your Reply:



8:32AM on 05/01/2013
Considering this movie never intended to follow the book, they should have never named it World War Z. But oh thats right, you wouldn't be able to get more asses in the seats if you didn't. Well done Hollywood for fucking up another project that was basically laid out in a novel for you.
Considering this movie never intended to follow the book, they should have never named it World War Z. But oh thats right, you wouldn't be able to get more asses in the seats if you didn't. Well done Hollywood for fucking up another project that was basically laid out in a novel for you.
Your Reply:



8:18AM on 05/01/2013
Once zombie movies get this expensive, surely everyone involved knows there's gonna be a major risk of not making back your investment. Nailing Brad Pitt to the concept doesn't guarantee success. A lot of high profile people must've seen something in this adaptation for it to have ever been greenlit. Hopefully something of that will translate into the finished product. It's an odd one though.
Once zombie movies get this expensive, surely everyone involved knows there's gonna be a major risk of not making back your investment. Nailing Brad Pitt to the concept doesn't guarantee success. A lot of high profile people must've seen something in this adaptation for it to have ever been greenlit. Hopefully something of that will translate into the finished product. It's an odd one though.
Your Reply:



8:03AM on 05/01/2013
After seing the EPIC 15' they shown us, a few week ago, I can't see how it could be PG-13, and I'm ready to give this film a chance.
Beside, I'll always give the guy who gave us NEVERLAND a chance !
After seing the EPIC 15' they shown us, a few week ago, I can't see how it could be PG-13, and I'm ready to give this film a chance.
Beside, I'll always give the guy who gave us NEVERLAND a chance !
Your Reply:



6:42AM on 05/01/2013
Honestly, I would rather they just adapted the book properly and done news reports, found footage, testimony, interviews, etc. Would have probably been a more unique way of doing a movie. The CGI looks pretty bad too. I don't think it's going to happen, but I could totally see this flick bombing and becoming a Wild Wild West or Ishtar-like meme following a poor opening weekend. People would be defending it on the web saying "It's NOT a flop!" even if it was. Jury's out, I'll be there for sure,
Honestly, I would rather they just adapted the book properly and done news reports, found footage, testimony, interviews, etc. Would have probably been a more unique way of doing a movie. The CGI looks pretty bad too. I don't think it's going to happen, but I could totally see this flick bombing and becoming a Wild Wild West or Ishtar-like meme following a poor opening weekend. People would be defending it on the web saying "It's NOT a flop!" even if it was. Jury's out, I'll be there for sure, but time's gonna tell on this one.
Your Reply:



+5
3:16AM on 05/01/2013
Looks like a turd, is a turd. The more we hear about it the more turd it becomes. Horrible trailers too.
Looks like a turd, is a turd. The more we hear about it the more turd it becomes. Horrible trailers too.
Your Reply:



3:14AM on 05/01/2013
If I recall the book correctly, the reader knows how it will end from page one, because it's about events that had happened already... so how do you screw that up?
If I recall the book correctly, the reader knows how it will end from page one, because it's about events that had happened already... so how do you screw that up?
Your Reply:



+16
1:39AM on 05/01/2013
I am confused, how do you screw up an ending when it is already given to you in a book. I mean really it is literally already done for you.
I am confused, how do you screw up an ending when it is already given to you in a book. I mean really it is literally already done for you.
Your Reply:



2:09PM on 05/01/2013
My feeling is that they are, or at least were, trying to put off the victory over the Z army because they wanted to turn this into a franchise. So they wanted an ending, but not finality.
My feeling is that they are, or at least were, trying to put off the victory over the Z army because they wanted to turn this into a franchise. So they wanted an ending, but not finality.
10:24PM on 04/30/2013
Maybe this is just one of those projects that wasn't really meant to get off the ground.
Maybe this is just one of those projects that wasn't really meant to get off the ground.
Your Reply:



9:44PM on 04/30/2013
Lost me at Pg-13. Pg-13 I watch AMC for, I go to the theater for R zombie action
Lost me at Pg-13. Pg-13 I watch AMC for, I go to the theater for R zombie action
Your Reply:



8:31PM on 04/30/2013

My only problem...

And i keep saying it, is the CGI it just looks like I am legend CGI and that shit.
And i keep saying it, is the CGI it just looks like I am legend CGI and that shit.
Your Reply:



7:19PM on 04/30/2013
I think the trailers look entertaining even though the film isn't staying true to its source material (I've never read the books, so I can't tell. But from what I've read from other users on this site that's the case).

But from all the controversy and the huge budget I don't see this film doing that well. Unless Pitt and Forster were actually able to make a entertaining film.
I think the trailers look entertaining even though the film isn't staying true to its source material (I've never read the books, so I can't tell. But from what I've read from other users on this site that's the case).

But from all the controversy and the huge budget I don't see this film doing that well. Unless Pitt and Forster were actually able to make a entertaining film.
Your Reply:



6:36PM on 04/30/2013

Can we just get real for a sec?

What we should really be worried about is the choosing of "roads." He gave them a Road One (and/or Road A) option and then a Road Two option and in the end they chose Road B. That literally wasn't even an option. Pretty fucking suspect Damon. What aren't you telling us? What's the true ending here?
What we should really be worried about is the choosing of "roads." He gave them a Road One (and/or Road A) option and then a Road Two option and in the end they chose Road B. That literally wasn't even an option. Pretty fucking suspect Damon. What aren't you telling us? What's the true ending here?
Your Reply:



-15
5:52PM on 04/30/2013
Looking forward to this one, it'll be good to see some actual challenging zombies for a change, not just waddlers who come at you 1 mile per hour.
Looking forward to this one, it'll be good to see some actual challenging zombies for a change, not just waddlers who come at you 1 mile per hour.
Your Reply:



5:29PM on 04/30/2013
Why is Lindelof suddenly the go to guy for rewriting scripts? He has yet to write anything good. He must have some great connections.

Combine Lindelof with Forster and you get a film that I could care less about. Combine that with gravity defying zombies, bad CGI, complete abandonment of the source material, and a neutered PG-13 rating, then you get a film that just pisses me off.
Why is Lindelof suddenly the go to guy for rewriting scripts? He has yet to write anything good. He must have some great connections.

Combine Lindelof with Forster and you get a film that I could care less about. Combine that with gravity defying zombies, bad CGI, complete abandonment of the source material, and a neutered PG-13 rating, then you get a film that just pisses me off.
Your Reply:



4:46AM on 05/01/2013
Well said.
Well said.
+18
5:20PM on 04/30/2013

Why Marc Forrester?

He made Quantum of Solace a boring mess. Which as Casino Royale and Skyfall have proven is really hard to do with the Craig/Bond series.

Also, what the hell is Pitt's character supposed to be in this? an SF guy? A virologist? An SF virologist? why is he the only man that can save the world? Obviously, if you have read the book, this makes little sense. I'm not saying it has to be a direct translation, but it makes no sense that one guy is the key to it all. One of the major points of the
He made Quantum of Solace a boring mess. Which as Casino Royale and Skyfall have proven is really hard to do with the Craig/Bond series.

Also, what the hell is Pitt's character supposed to be in this? an SF guy? A virologist? An SF virologist? why is he the only man that can save the world? Obviously, if you have read the book, this makes little sense. I'm not saying it has to be a direct translation, but it makes no sense that one guy is the key to it all. One of the major points of the novel is the way humanity coalesced to defeat the Zombie hordes.
Your Reply:



10:43PM on 04/30/2013
Also, 200 FUCKING MILLION DOLLARS?!
Also, 200 FUCKING MILLION DOLLARS?!
+11
5:07PM on 04/30/2013
"Lindelof" and "fix" don't make sense together. If there is a master of crafting incoherent garbage, it's Lindelof.
"Lindelof" and "fix" don't make sense together. If there is a master of crafting incoherent garbage, it's Lindelof.
Your Reply:



+14
4:24PM on 04/30/2013
Ant Zombies...
Ant Zombies...
Your Reply:



+7
4:13PM on 04/30/2013
This has bad written all over it. The trailers seem interesting, and I want this to be good, but with all this set trouble and the lackluster reception to what's been shown already, all signs point to this being bad. I'll probably see it, but I have low expectations.
This has bad written all over it. The trailers seem interesting, and I want this to be good, but with all this set trouble and the lackluster reception to what's been shown already, all signs point to this being bad. I'll probably see it, but I have low expectations.
Your Reply:



+5
4:06PM on 04/30/2013
I not only see this movie flopping, but I see it belly-flopping from the 30 ft. high dive board. It smells like it's going to be one of the (if not *the*) worst movies of the year.
I not only see this movie flopping, but I see it belly-flopping from the 30 ft. high dive board. It smells like it's going to be one of the (if not *the*) worst movies of the year.
Your Reply:



+20
4:06PM on 04/30/2013

Here's an idea.

Lindelof should have had them scrap the whole thing, and convince Brad to sell the rights to HBO or Showtime, and make a mini series more faithful to the book, and have it compete against Walking Dead on Sunday nights.
Lindelof should have had them scrap the whole thing, and convince Brad to sell the rights to HBO or Showtime, and make a mini series more faithful to the book, and have it compete against Walking Dead on Sunday nights.
Your Reply:



4:30PM on 04/30/2013
Couldn't be done for the amount of money the show would need unlike WALKING DEAD.
Couldn't be done for the amount of money the show would need unlike WALKING DEAD.
+44
4:03PM on 04/30/2013
The powers that be deemed the original cut as having an incoherent ending. And they're instinct tells them to get Damon Lindelof?!
The powers that be deemed the original cut as having an incoherent ending. And they're instinct tells them to get Damon Lindelof?!
Your Reply:



4:07PM on 04/30/2013
Haha! That was my first thought too. What?!
Haha! That was my first thought too. What?!
4:23PM on 04/30/2013
Exactly! Oh our movie has a bunch of stuff that deadends, leads nowhere, and makes no sense. Who can we call to fix it?

Just tell people it is all a character study and the plot/story didn't matter. Worked all the other times right?
Exactly! Oh our movie has a bunch of stuff that deadends, leads nowhere, and makes no sense. Who can we call to fix it?

Just tell people it is all a character study and the plot/story didn't matter. Worked all the other times right?
7:43PM on 04/30/2013
I wouldn't let that asshole fill in a Highlights magazine for me.
I wouldn't let that asshole fill in a Highlights magazine for me.
4:03PM on 04/30/2013
Didn't Pitt campaign to get Foster in the director's chair? Did he not see Green Lantern or Quantum of Solace? Dude has no one to blame but himself.
Didn't Pitt campaign to get Foster in the director's chair? Did he not see Green Lantern or Quantum of Solace? Dude has no one to blame but himself.
Your Reply:



4:08PM on 04/30/2013
What does the "Green Lantern" got to do with any of this? Not a Marc Foster film.
What does the "Green Lantern" got to do with any of this? Not a Marc Foster film.
4:11PM on 04/30/2013
My mistake.
My mistake.
5:15PM on 04/30/2013
Quantum of Solace sucked though, you are correct.
Quantum of Solace sucked though, you are correct.