World War Z: Hopelessly Silly, Wildly Fun

For as much as I love the grounded, raw, humanity-centric tone of especially the first few seasons of AMC's The Walking Dead, a part of me recognizes that the zombie genre is founded on a pretty silly idea. And though it's refreshing to see even fantasy get treated with a level of respect and sincerity, I can't lie when I say that the conversely and unapologetically bombastic approach of World War Z wasn't at least a little bit refreshing. Now, that's not to say that this movie is an entirely insincere and humorous deconstruction of the genre, but it does make it very clear very early on that its approach is going to be that of out with the meticulous and occasionally meditative self-seriousness and tragedy that we've come to associate with post-apocalyptic movies, and in with the high-octane and action-packed grandeur. Adjectives that would accurately describe World War Z would mostly land somewhere in the region of "absolutely insane," and while that's not always a good thing, neither is it entirely detrimental to the movie, either. This movie is far from a masterpiece, but I found myself liking it more than I thought I would, and I want to talk a little bit today about why.

Directed by Marc Foster, World War Z, a (very) loose 2013 adaptation of Max Brooks's 2006 novel of the same name, follows Gerry Lane, a former UN investigator who must embark on a globe-trotting adventure to find a cure for a mysterious illness that is turning people into quick-moving and feral zombies with a ravenous thirst for human blood.

For as excessive as it can be, the groundwork of World War Z is simple and patient enough, and we see Gerry and his family interacting with each other at the beginning, which establishes some level of deeper-than-superficial emotional involvement. On the level of craft, the editing of the movie is very good, and I want to give praise to Roger Barton and Matt Chessé, the people behind stitching this movie together for their obvious grasp of their job. There are some surprisingly creative editing decisions to be found here that I recognized as unscripted, spur-of-the-moment choices, choices that frankly add a lot to the movie while occasionally capturing an effective emotional beat - the sheer panic that would come with a situation such as the one presented here. World War Z effectively captures the freneticism that a zombie apocalypse would inevitably entail, and I want to give it praise for doing so.

As for the story that the movie is adapting, I have to admit that I haven't read the book. Apparently, Foster and Co. play extremely fast and loose with the source material, so maybe I would have been better off reading the book before I wrote this review. But remember, I'm a movie critic and not a book critic, and I'm going to work with what I have - take my comments about the novel as you will. The pacing of World War Z is extremely frenetic and definitely too quick for its own good. I get that the movie is trying to sustain a sense of urgency, but it unfortunately doesn't ever let us sit and really take in the fact that the world is, you know, ending. The plot beats rarely seem to build on what came before and seem more like a quick-moving and relatively impatient subsequent series of events than anything else.

But for as much as its quick pace can burn it, I appreciate World War Z for understanding and taking into account the fact that the very premise of a zombie apocalypse is sort of absurd. And so, it lets itself have a little bit (read: a lot) of chaotic fun with the concept. It even lets its characters say the word zombie, to give you an idea of what kind of movie this is. What's more, the movie's relative deficiency in building a big picture with its narrative keeps it interesting and endlessly bombastic by necessity. There's really no other zombie movie like it out there, for better and for worse.

And that said, for all of its pulp and excess, the movie does contain a couple of strikingly effective moments that made me stop and sit up to pay attention because of their ability to cut through all the noise, if only for a moment. And then we're thrown back into the fact that World War Z is just trying to bite off way more than it can actually chew. It's cramming enough story to supplement an entire season of television into a runtime of less than two hours, and if you ask me, the movie's trying to accomplish way too much with its plot, so much that it can sometimes seem to lose itself in its own grandeur, though it never entirely does.

World War Z is incredibly silly. It takes the popular concept of the zombie apocalypse and mixes it with what can only be described as a cinematic sugar high to give us a not-entirely-airtight but gloriously inglorious zombie flick. It's about as faithful to its source material as a Vegas showgirl to her husband, and not once does it apologize, neither for its lack of faithfulness nor its completely unsubtle rampage through its runtime. I'd be quick to entirely dismiss this movie if it weren't for its excellent editing, consistent air of intrigue, and amazingly pulse-pounding and all-but-nonstop action sequences that threaten to but never completely take away from solid performances to boot. While far from perfect, I like this movie, and I appreciate its relatively alternate vision of the apocalypse. Not everything has to be serious art. Sometimes, I want to watch a thoughtful drama where the moral and philosophical weight of the movie pervades every frame. And other times, I find myself satisfied with a bombastic and loud action movie made by people who get a giddy, simple sense of pleasure out of allowing themselves to recognize that zombies are inherently cool.

Sometimes, that's enough.

World War Z - 6/10

Revelation 21:1-5