There's already been a lot said about the film adaptation of
Max Brooks' celebrated zombie novel, which centred around a series of
interviews from around the world, conducted by one man, in which the disparate
experiences of survivors were recounted (from the initial outbreak in China
to the infamous Battle of Yonkers), and not a lot of what has been said
about it thus far has been all that good.
First there was news of the plot getting a total overhaul –
yes, it would be difficult to translate a series of interviews into a narrative
film, but initial news would suggest there's been large scale changes. Then
there was the inevitable news that a costly flick such as this would be, *sigh*, rated PG-13, and then the news that the shambling corpses of the book were getting replaced
with runners – and by the looks of the trailers, they're not just runners – the
term “zombie tsunami” has been bandied about in comment feeds across the
Internet. There was also the news that significant re-shoots were required to
re-work the third act – rumours abound that it was tens-of-millions of dollars
(some rumours going as high as a surely-implausible $100 million) worth
of re-shoots. The suggestion was that they were going far beyond the usual
level of re-shoots required for a big budget movie … suffice to say, this sort of news doesn't
bode well for fans of the novel.
So let's take a look at the recently released trailer.
Click "READ MORE" for the analysis and a shed load of screenshots...
This was never going to be a problem, it's exactly what big
budgets are for. Streets filled with fleeing people, cities around the world
exploding amid warfare and panic, fighter jets soaring overhead, a collection
of war ships out-at-sea housing survivors – no, scale was never going to be an
issue here.
Being that this is directed by Marc Forster, whose Quantum
of Solace featured dreadfully over-shaky camera work during action scenes,
I do wonder if we'll be getting yet more of that outside of the wide money
shots of cityscapes crumbling. I really hope that won't be the case, but the
sequence in the traffic jam with the rubbish lorry features the same sort of
wobbly camera work that just gets annoying very quickly in most films.
A WORLD CRUMBLES:
Glimpses of the projected losses to mankind on a computer
screen, and the military saving artefacts that form the basis of our societies
(such as the Constitution of the United States), suggest we'll get
plenty of tasty shots of society falling – again, this isn't a hard thing to
achieve – such ideas and images are potent and immediately inspire fear,
confusion, drama, panic and out-right horror.
PITT & FAMILY:
As said, the focus of the original novel was never really
about the interviewer – rather, the interviewees – and this would be
problematic for translating into a film, but the age-old family set-up does
feel a bit off-the-shelf in order to inject some personal drama.
That said, there was a lot of fuss kicked up in some quarters about Brad Pitt
starring in the movie – I don't understand the hatred – the man's a very good
actor indeed (just look at The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward
Robert Ford … yes, any chance to shoe-horn that flick into a blog post,
because it was a bloody good film). Pitt's casting was never a problem for
me at all, and I imagine he'll do as good a job as he can with the material to
hand which, admittedly, his Plan B production company are producing.
UNDEAD INTENT:
The main cause for concern though is all the changes, as
previously mentioned, but perhaps most specifically the total about-face
regarding the zombies themselves – the very cause of the collapse of mankind in
the novel. Here they unfortunately resemble the pish CGI monsters seen in the
Will Smith vehicle I Am Legend – another big budget adaptation that
threw the source text straight out the window. IAL was decent for the
first half, but as soon as the idiotic CGI beasties reared their ugly heads,
the movie itself flew right out the window after the largely ignored Richard Matheson
novel.
Here the digital effects artists have been working overtime
and, by the sounds of it, putting a lot of effort into crafting the modus
operandi of their monsters … but from the shots we've seen in this trailer,
it's been a completely misguided attempt to 'find something new'. Those
behind the effects may believe that zombie fans have 'seen everything before',
but that statement illustrates the ignorance at work behind the scenes. AMC's The
Walking Dead has shown exactly how fresh new ground can be broken in the
zombie genre (thanks to Robert Kirkman's long-running, ground-breaking series of comics), as well as distinctly illustrating exactly how you make shambling
zombies work in a post-28 Days Later world. Today, the laziest solution
seems to be the preferred path – the fact that the makers of the soul-less Dawn
of the Dead 2004 remake thought Danny Boyle's film featured zombies
perfectly sums up the laziness that the zombie genre is all-too-often forced to endure by Hollywood – that ill-informed copy-catting has extended to various other
zombie-themed projects since (Dead Set and Zombieland
being two such examples – despite both projects being very enjoyable in spite
of their generally uneducated approach to flesh eating undead ghouls).
One thing to make clear though, is that 28 Days Later
never featured zombies, as confirmed by both Danny Boyle and Alex
Garland: the infected are living human beings (who have at no point died and
come back from the dead) afflicted with the “Rage Virus” - besides, zombies
don't starve to death after a month for crying out loud!
Circling back to the “zombie tsunami” approach, you
can't help but cringe at the look of it – these creatures seem to have been
gifted with superhuman powers and the ability to form columns/mounds to climb over
giant walls … it's hard to know where to start regarding this, so I'll just
leave it at my gut reaction – it looks bloody awful, with iffy animation, dodgy
CGI texturing, and such an over-powerful enemy would surely render the epic
Battle of Yonkers from the novel as a total wipe-out in a couple of minutes.
LAZINESS:
As a particular nitpick in this trailer – where the hell
does the rubbish lorry come from? It wipes out the police officer on his
motorbike – why did nobody hear it coming, how did it fit down a gap barely big
enough for a motorcycle, did it or did it not smash through a dozen other
vehicles, and if it did how did it have enough speed and momentum to pull that
off (including taking out the police officer at great speed)? See the pictures below. The concern here
is that this piece of action smacks of laziness, and it links in with the
aforementioned lack of consideration in regards to the zombies – if they can't
be bothered to set-up a scene like this in a manner that appropriately makes
enough physical sense, what else are they just tossing out there regardless of
reason?
To claim that such things don't matter would in itself
illustrate the apparent lack of respect for the genre that this trailer seems
to suggest. Small and easy tweaks to that moment would have improved it, and
given it a better sense of reality – instead we've got a super-powered dump
truck to go along with the super-powered creatures, which we're not really sure
if they're zombies or not.
IN SUMMARY:
Will I watch this? Of course I will, but I won't be
splashing out good money to see it at the cinema – this has “rental or Sky
Movies” written all over it at best. The hope for a respectful translation
of Brooks' source material was shot down long ago, along with the hope for
proper shambling zombies (as were successfully utilised in the book).
While the scale is impressive, that was never going to be a problem for this
sort of production, instead it's the apparent disrespect for the zombie genre –
or at best, an apparent piss-poor-education in the genre – that flags up the
biggest and most persistent worries for fans.
There is little else that can be gleaned from this trailer
though, as it's mostly all about introducing a family and a bunch of money
shots.
Finally, there's been a lot of negativity surrounding this
flick during it's problem-filled journey to the silver screen, but the final
judgement can't be passed until it has been viewed – of course – but where
there's smoke, you're usually going to find fire. Set nerd-brows to
furrowed-with-decided-concern.
No comments:
Post a Comment