Let's address the haters right from start. World War Z is completely bloodless, and that's ok. In fact, if I was able to choose between this film, and the same exact thing with buckets of gore, I would choose this...all...day...long. It's scarier and smarter for it. Characters on screen even go so far as to laugh at the implication of "zombies." The film is about an efficient virus, actively engaged in natural selection as it spreads from person to person, its only goal being global contamination. Eating brains and gnashing into jugulars is not appropriate or warranted in a film like this, I don't care what Max Brooks's book says, and I commend the filmmakers for not turning this into another forgettable gore-soaked fanboy fantasy to be forgotten the next day.
I have two general requirements for a good time in a movie theatre, seeing something I've never seen before, and if that's not possible, seeing the familiar done with great skill, both as far as content and execution are concerned. A blockbuster, PG-13, zombie apocalypse film starring Brad Pitt, containing roughly five set pieces, and scenes of massive CGI crowds pouring through the streets, and climbing over each other into giant pyramids, fits that bill perfectly, as does the realization that director Marc Forster bested both Zack Snyder and Danny Boyle at the whole animated zombie thing.
World War Z is about a deadly global outbreak of a mysterious virus that turns its victims into rabid creatures with only one purpose, to infect as many people as possible. Brad Pitt plays Gerry Lane, an ex-United Nations investigator who uses nepotism, through relationships with active government agents, to effect an evacuation for himself and his family safely to an aircraft carrier, only to be persuaded to head a globe-trotting hunt for a cure when he is threatened with being kicked back into the war zone for being non-essential to operations. It's an effective set-up, as it simultaneously creates empathy for Lane, and addresses the current social hot button of government privilege. What follows is a series of set pieces, from Korea to Israel to Wales, as Pitt battles ferocious hordes of the infected, picking up one piece of the puzzle at each destination of how to best fight them.
Pitt is probably the best I've ever seen him here. His face is anything but a blank stare, and especially towards the end, when director Forster runs head-first into the notion that the film is a one-man-against-the-world narrative construct, by stripping away the dialogue and presenting Pitt all alone in a building full of zombies, his stare through the glass at a contorting "zombie" speaking volumes of love for his family, duty to the world, and terror as a human being. There isn't much in the way of exposition, and many critics have pointed to this as a fatal flaw, giving the audience no reason to really care about Gerry Lane. But I disagree. World War Z's narrative flow is painted in broad strokes, carried by the aforementioned emotions, and the initial set-up is more than enough. Far better-acclaimed films have gotten by on less, that finding out what Lane's favorite breakfast cereal is, or learning about specific horrors from his past would just be a distraction from the film's rhythm (I hate that damn scene in Gremlins when Phoebe Cates talks about Christmas past - I tune out completely); and plus, it's all right there on Pitt's face, and in his actions when he saves the soldier in Israel.
Director Marc Forster's contributions lie in the details. This is the first time I haven't thought fast-moving zombies were lame. There's something about Forster's infected hordes; they actually seem to be infected, possessed by something that makes them relentless, almost super-human, and far more terrifying than previous films where they just seemed like actors running, enhanced with jump cuts and the kind of hyper-real cinematography used by Janusz Kaminski during the Normandy invasion in Saving Private Ryan. Forster favors kinetic, disorienting action for sure, but he uses it in short bursts, as punctuation in a film beautifully paced, at just the right times, separated by intense, loaded conversations between characters, all in different parts of the world, and always seeming to be one step ahead of the audience. In other words, just when you start to decipher what Lane and the locals are saying, and put it all together, Forster lets the horror in. World War Z is so skillfully crafted it joins the ranks of films with similar undulating rhythms of build-up and release that I could watch over and over again, like Back To The Future and The Shawshank Redemption. It's not going to win Forster any awards, but if this were my film, I'd much rather have someone tell me they've seen my film twenty times than have a statue on my desk.
Another beautiful touch is an early scene as Lane's running to safety with his family, and his daughter's talking "subway" bear is activated and begins to count to twelve, and Forster uses it so Lane can learn exactly how long it takes for someone to turn once they've been bitten. It's exciting as hell, and smartly returned to later on, in another scene where decision and action on the part of Lane builds his character far more than exposition could.
Much has been written about World War Z's troubled production history, going over budget and having its ending re-written. From what's on screen you can't even tell, except for an obviously decimated role for Matthew Fox, who isn't even named, isn't given any dialogue that can be heard above the crowd, and doesn't even show his entire face at any point. That's ok by me; I saw enough of him in Alex Cross to last a lifetime. And speaking of the reshot ending; I loved it, for the reasons stated above. Most films save the biggest set piece for the end. The end of World War Z embraces cinema over story, a Splinter Cell-style stealth maneuver where how things happen is far more exciting than what is happening; it's naive to dismiss it as anti-climactic, to mistake intentional defiance from the norm for poor structure. The end of the film positions it right back where it started, squarely in the realm of character.
World War Z is the best summer action blockbuster I've seen so far in 2013. It's the only one I've wanted to experience again, immediately upon leaving the theater. I'm glad Paramount has green-lit a sequel. I'm sorry the haters couldn't enjoy the ride. World War Z is one of the greatest contributions to the zombie canon ever filmed. It's an action movie first and foremost, borrowing genre tropes to give audiences a spectacle unlike anything seen before, and I couldn't have asked for much more than that.
No comments:
Post a Comment