First trailer for World War Z

Trailer 9 Nov 2012 - 06:06

Brad Pitt stars in the movie take on Max Brooks' World War Z. There will be zombies...

Heading into cinemas next summer is the ambitious attempt to bring Max Brooks' World War Z to the big screen. It's ambitious, because Brooks' zombie apocalypse book isn't one that easily lends itself immediately to a movie. Hence, we're particularly interested in how they've gone about bringing it to the big screen.

For now, we get the first trailer for World War Z, which gives us the first clues as to how the film is shaping up. You can see it below these very words. Marc Forster is the film's director, and it hits cinemas next summer.

See what you make of this, then...

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

That is cool, although it still leaves a lot vague as to what is happening.
Really weird seeing George Square and Glasgow city centre in it as it is so recognisable to people who know it that it really takes you out of the film, maybe if I watch the trailer a few times that'll stop as it would be strange playing spot glasgow while trying to get into the film :-)

Oh dear...

Nah. WAY too much like the "burly brawl" from Matrix 2. You don't need to CGI zombies! They're goddamn people-sized people! Just glue some gore to them and yell "Action!" Idiots!!!

Officially no longer excited.

Ok, i thought this was gonna be an R-Rated Zombie/War crossover movie with Brad Pitt. Excited, but slightly confused. Its a zombie movie, without blood or gore or even any mention of the word "zombie". Even TWD has "walkers" and such. Clearly aiming for a PG-13 audience, which can only hinder the movie as a whole.

Still, very ambitious and i like the premise.

Wife? Kids? WTF! why!! Is it now the law that all film trailers have to have big arooga noises in them?

My first impression is that if I didn't know already that World War Z is about Zombies, that trailer does absolutely nothing to inform me of the fact. Watch the trailer and think about it. Obviously we all now that those masses of writhing bodies are zombies, but if you didn't know that already, and were totally ignorant to the premise of the story, would this trailer explain it to you in any way? Nope.

Here's to hoping it's just a bad trailer and not a bad movie, though I have to admit, my optimism is fading.

Agreed. I know nothing of this film and was wondering why they were shooting everyone...

Arooga, hah! Yes you're right!

"Oh, look what I did on my computer..."

Eugh. Lets just strip out everything that makes the book so good. All th chills, suspense and drama and have FLOCKS OF CGI ZOMIES AND BRAD PITT!!

Gotta say I like the idea of literal waves of zombies - that's pretty neat - but they've missed the point of the book by such a margin it's painful. Pitt will be good in it (he always is) but overall, fans of the book are gonna be very disappointed. Still should've been an HBO series.

So much nonsense hatred for this film about CGI zombies. How about a bit of common sense? How else are the producers supposed to depict MILLIONS of zombies attacking and swarming over humanity? WWZ is an EPIC story, taking in a WORLD WIDE collapse of society due to a zombie outbreak. U think they could show the sheer epic scale of this with a few hundred extras? I think its gonna be something exciting weve never seen before, a TRUE depiction of society going to hell. I think the zombies look truly menacing and look a serious threat. Something lacking from many past zombie movies. Any true Z Head should be super excited for this. It wont be the book VERBATIM coz its unfilmable but it looks like a really exciting take. Plus, Brad Pitt doesnt put his name to rubbish that often.

Looks like they've genericized it, but that was always going to happen to an extent considering how hard to adapt the book is/how much money it's cost. Overall, this looks like a pretty interesting take on zombies and also looks pretty epic. I'll watch this!

The parts where they used CGI look virtually impossible to reproduce using only people. I'm liking the way they only use CGI for the group shots, makes them look like a super-human and dangerous swarm, which of course is what they are.

I'm liking the trailer and looking forward to the movie, and have overcome my opinion that Brad Pitt was mis-cast as he brings a bit of respectability to what otherwise would have been just another zombie movie.

Time will tell.

I was just thinking the same thing. My mate got married in Glasgow in the summer of last year and they were still filming scenes for this film - like you say, you can see George Square sticking out in the background. I don't find it distracting at all though, I kind of think Glasgow works well in the background and I think other Hollywood studios should consider shooting there.

You really want a trailer to give everything away before actually seeing the movie? I hate those kind of trailers.

Looks interesting, though I am way beyond tired of zombies.

Allot of films have come through Glasgow recently, they filmed parts of fast and furious 6 here a few months ago as well as cloud atlas. I like seeing the movies in my town although i did find that trailer a little distracting but its my own fault cause i was down on George sq everyday trying to get a glimpse of some action.

A lot of time for Brad Pitt atm. He's a decent actor.
This looks brill. SOD the berks that poo-poo the CGI: Look a the shots: human tidal waves of zombies, human 'ant towers' of zombies. FFS they're not going to be done for real. The scale of this thing looks brill. I'm very excited. HOPE it strays more towards the 15 barrier though. or at least a VERY extreme '12A'

I like it. I like it a lot.

Glasgow has never looked so good. Reminds me of closing time at the pubs

Oh, heavens to betsy, this looks...

Well, the use of Glasgow's George Square threw me *right* out, I've only been to that fair city twice but it's a rather memorable place.

Also, this book scared the bejesus out of me when I first read it (after hearing that J Michael Strazynski was adapting it) I was hopeful of a 'fake' doco... but this bears no resemblance to what I read.

Will make a decision closer to the time - i.e. what reviewers whose opinions I trust think of it but I'm leaning towards a 'pass' here.

yeah Glasgow's grid system lends itself really well to standing in for a US city. hope more come across

Me too but I get what Andrew is saying, if you don't have a vague idea what WWZ is about you'd not know they are supposed to be Zombies. To be honest I hate the fast moving zombies thing it takes away what zombies are, I've been talking to a few friends at work and they think it adds more suspense until I had them read the Battle of Yonkers then they realise how slow moving traditional zombies can easily overpower the army and how scary that would be. I think they changed one too many things for my liking, BUT! I will still see the movie because perhaps even though they've changed so much it could end up as a movie well worth watching if you treat the book as a separate entity.

I take issue with the notion that World War Z is 'unfilmable' - it
would lend itself PERFECTLY to a mockumentary format - especially as a
TV miniseries. You wouldn't even need to change that much, save for
editing it down and perhaps focusing on a select few of the 'interviews'
such as the soldier and the girl whose family try to escape to Canada.

could be done justice on a relatively small budget, as it would mostly
consist of talking heads with the odd bit of 'found footage' and
'reconstructions'. You wouldn't need big cgi money shots as everything
would be seen from ground level. Just look at what Chronicle achieved.

is absolutely no need to turn it into this PG-13 blend of I Am
Legend/2012/The Day After Tomorrow monstrosity that - from the looks of
it - drops every single aspect of biting satire and chilling horror of
the novel. The idea that audiences wouldn't be able to deal with a
larger, unconventional story and instead need to follow a main character
going on a 'journey' and saving his family and the world (yawn) is
repellent and patronising.

Make this movie - fine - but rename it
and give the rights back to the author so we might one day see a decent
adaptation of the source material.

Yep, the book is a really bleak and nasty satire of pretty much every aspect of our daily lives - as with the best zombie fiction it's much more about society than the zombies themselves. The film looks incredibly generic, and the zombies look clean, fake and unthreatening.

I like the look of this. The tsunami of zombies ("tzuzombi"?) looks like a new spin on the shambling masses.

If my memory of the excellent book is correct (it's been a while), this looks like they've focused mostly on the mass battles in India. Where the miliary was just overwhelmed by numbers as they ran out of bullets and guns over heated.

It won't be a faithful adaptation of the book - the book was really a collection of short vignettes - but it looks like an excellent zombie epic.

One caveat - the CGI zombie hordes should be used sparingly. Use real actors where possible for proper scares.

I know complaining about realism in a trailer for a Zombie film is kind of stupid, but the Zombie Tsunami stuff is just not possible, large groups of people don't move that way, even in the grip of mindless rage they can't defy gravity and swarm over a tumbling bus. Showing a few fall from the pyramid is not enough. This is just a gimmick, like bullet time in the Matrix although less effective.

I was looking forward to this film for the fall of society as this genre exclusively focuses on the aftermath rather than the apocalypse itself.

and you got that from a 1:30 clip! looks good IMO. Won't judge until i actually see the film.

Looks pretty interesting, but is obviously not the book as it is not following that format, which covered BOTH the zombie apocalypse AND the fight back. This seems to be a plot showing Pitt on a mission searching for a cure in Israel (?), the soldiers look like they are wearing IDF gear and in the book, along with South Africa , Israel was one of the nations that manged to secure its population behind walls.

With THE WALKING DEAD breaking ratings all over the globe, what would be the point in turning WWZ into a 'Mockumentary' Tom? We already have an outstanding zombie drama series, why would we want another right now? Maybe if WD finished then Plan B could pitch WWZ to be the next TV series but with WD's popularity its unlikely that will ever happen. I think there is EVERY need to turn this movie into a PG-13 to give it a chance for a return. Its a risk from Plan B to adapt this book for the screen so they have to give it every chance. It's a smart move. I think its a bit naive for you to compare it to I Am Legend / 2012 / Day after Tomorrow. All you have seen is a trailer. Let me ask you something? How else are the gonna do MILLIONS of zombies. U have to do the apocalypse justice coz WWZ is epic in scale so there is no other way to do it and make it the spectacle it deserves to be. As for the lack of satire, horror, etc? How do you know it wont touch these bases? Again, all you've seen is a trailer. IMO this is gonna be like nothing we have see before. The tidal wave of zombies, scrambling like ant to climb the wall, rolling the bus over... WOW. Zombies that carry a real threat of menace and power. I understand ur concerns but come on man, have a little optimism!

Do you really think there's room for two ongoing zombie TV shows...?

You get an upvote for the use of the word "tzuzombi".

A 'mockumentary' and a 'drama' series are totally different propositions, perhaps you misunderstood. And in any case I'm not sure I buy your point about already having one zombie series and not needing another. Is the same true of gangster/crime dramas, or fantasy? To quote Alan Partridge: "People like them, let's make more of them".

You also missed my point about making WWZ as a low-ish budget feature - if you did that, you wouldn't NEED to recoup an insane amount of money, hence you wouldn't NEED to cast A list stars and you wouldn't NEED to completely neuter/sanitise the whole thing by making it PG-13. Who is going to pay to see a PG-13, bloodless zombie apocalypse? You might lose some of the spectacle, sure (but as I said a lot can be achieved with found footage on a shoestring budget - look at Chronicle), but you could also remain far truer to the spirit of the book - a key part of the appeal of which is it's a savage, sharp indictment of humanity and Western society - think any of this will remain in this watered down excuse for an adaptation? Of course it won't - it'll be about an everyman trying to save his family.

"I think its a bit naive for you to compare it to I Am Legend / 2012 / Day after Tomorrow. All you have seen is a trailer."

A trailer that LOOKS EXACTLY LIKE the films I mentioned, from the atrocious dialogue to the emphasis on unconvincing, antiseptic looking scenes of cgi destruction.

"The tidal wave of zombies, scrambling like ant to climb the wall,
rolling the bus over... WOW. Zombies that carry a real threat of menace and power."

See, to me it just looks totally, totally fake and unconvincing. A single non-cgi shambling zombie looks more tangible and threatening. The scenes on the rooftop also look totally fake and obviously greenscreened. The zombies themselves don't even look like zombies, which is a very strange design choice. I'm aware that trailers often feature unfinished vfx, but still, can't imagine those scenes looking much better in the final film. The whole thing has a plasticy feel that lacks any grit or tension whatsoever.


World War Z?? hahahahhahahhahahhahhahahhahaah NO :(

Well you know the old saying, "Tired of zombies, tired of..."

I'm happy to break with tradition and I think the film would have been completely different if they had been slow-walkers - I think they were going for a high velocity intensive kind of vibe for the film which you just cant get with slow-walkers and although it can be highly effective (e.g. Walking Dead), it might not work for the type of movie they want.

Not having read the book, I don't know if its too far removed from the original or not (I really must read that book!) but whilst I knew it was about zombies, had no idea about the general plot and even if I hadn't have known it was zombies I would have come away from the trailer thinking "Wow, I want to know more" which is kind of the purpose of trailers.

Dude, who's gonna watch a mockumentary series about zombies when u got The Walking Dead? Fan boys only and, seeing as Plan B paid a small fortune for the rights to WWZ, u aint gonna see anything like that anytime soon. Thats why the WWZ movie has gone the way it has. Its basic Hollywood ecomonics pal. That's why none of your preferred ideas stack up. Spoken like a true fan boy. See me, i take it all into account and i think what they are doing with the adaptation looks fantastic. Ur quick to say all these elements u love from the book so much arent gonna be included? How do you know that? U've see one trailer. ONE TRAILER! Suddenly you know everything that the films gonna do wrong? Dont be so silly pal. Also, how would you have them do a movie as EPIC in scale as WWZ? Millions of zombies swarming over humanity. CGI is THE ONLY WAY to represent the scale this movie aludes to. Think it thru. Who knows what we will end up with but were gonna get a zombie movie that is a TRUE APOCALYPSE on screen. Not Romero's vision (Romero is lord!) but, for the first time, a zombie apocalypse on a TRULY GLOBAL SCALE. That has to be exciting you on some level!

You should read the book its awesome, the zombies are not really slow in the book. They range on speed depending on freshness, a fresh zombie can manage a jog or fast walk where as a old decaying zombie is what you'll see in the more traditional zombie movie. Which is why I am disappointed with the switch to zombies that run because they are just not zombies really. But I am glad that the movie is making you want to pick up the book.

Having just watched this trailer i can now safely say after viewing 2 minutes of footage that this movie will be dreadful and completely unfaithful to the book. I can determine all this after watching 2 minutes of footage. I can see into the future and can determine that anything is gonna be awful just by looking at it for 2 minutes. I am that smart and know everything and know it all in 2 minutes. ;) JEEZ! Some people on this site should have a word with themselves.

I have no issue with the cgi element, its just a bit of a downer to see the heart of an amazing indepth novel tore out and waved in our faces. It may well be a superb stand alone action movie but why waste the licence on a pg rated effects showreel? :(

Uhh...that's got to be the most boring way to interpret the book. A waterfall of people is the only thing remotely unsettling in that trailer. Take something like Patient Zero, which reads like a movie, and throw Pitt at that one. WWZ should be must less of an action movie than this trailer makes it look like, imo.

Never read the book, so to my virgin (heh) eyes this looks like a great action movie. War of the Worlds-ish (in a good way). I love the zombie "wave" instead of the lumbering imbeciles in Walking Dead (both are good, though. Where's Carl?). Plus, Mireille Enos!

Movies based on books don't always have to be faithful to the source material. But! I totally get it when a story/book you love is made into a movie that doesn't measure up. It's hard to be a fan sometimes.

I am a huge fan of the source material (bought it in soft back read it twice... then re bought in hardback to read again!!) and this is definitely NOTHING like what I read and loved.....that said this looks like a very different take on the world wide zombie outbreak film (the sheer scale looks, dare I say it, quite epic!) and the way the zombies look like swarms of insects is really quite disturbing (love the bit with them knocking over the bus and crawling on top of each other at some dam)....Even though I now know that it won't be anything like the book except for the title (really they should rename the film...although world war Z is such a cool title) I am still quite excited about this one :)

Can't lie, looks amazing, but it does seem to be lacking in the whole satire department

I hope this wont be another I am Legend! And I also hope there's no 3D bolt on! Man 3D sucks!!

Yes it does look moke like a "strategic" plague movie (Outbreak,Contagion, etc) than the usual up close and "tactical" zombie movie. Thus a lower rating can be excused as a film of zombies chomping on victims which would include babies and children does not appeal - re the scene in Walking Dead second series when T-Dog looks in a car and sees a ripped and bloody child seat - very disturbing.

Yup as they would be quite distinct from each other.

Yes, yes we did. If you have read the book, you'd see what we mean.

Yeah, although they could've saved a ton of cash and just filmed match day between Celtic and Rangers.

The real annoyance is the wasted potential if it pans out as that trailer suggests. There was no reason why they could not do a portmanteau style movie touching on a handful of the interviews in the book (The Battle of Yonkers, the downed pilot to name two). I know it's now a longtime ago, but it worked for The Twilight Zone Movie.

Am I the only person who thinks that the movie will be good AND has read and enjoyed the book? Not only would a 'mockumentary' be difficult to film ( Even more so if done on TV due to the reduced budget ) but it would be near impossible to successfully mass market.
Not only that but i see no indication from the one trailer we have so far that this film will not follow the larger scale that the book portrayed. Yes it doesn't have the vignette style and focuses on one character but this character is a UN researcher similar to the one in the books foreword , if not the same one , who could easily explore some of the books major plot points by visiting them as they are happening rather than after the fact as he did in the book. Overall I'm optimistic and cant understand why after only one trailer people are decrying the movie adaptation as a betrayal.

rather disappointed. i see zombies running and lunging like animals at some points (yes i'm damned sure those weren't innocent people lunging onto other people from cars). i could be ok if they were a little faster than the george a romero zombies but flat out running? cmon did the people making this even read the damned book? i know the rage type zombies are more likely to happen but CMON! this is a huge disappointment in my books. imma watch for the sake of hoping for at least a decent film but from the eyes of a max brooks fan. . .no. . .what are they gunna do about the zombie survival guide? "what you reading?" "zombie survival guide" "oh yeah? lemme read that. . . .psh toss this out. aint gunna help you in the real world buddy" v.v

To me, this is a textbook example of how not to make a trailer.

I've never read the book, don't know what it's about, and for someone like me the trailer appears to give away the first half of the movie. Brad and family get trapped in city, they struggle to get away, they get away and he leaves them to go off and fight zombies. Maybe there are plot twists galore, or maybe this is all wrapped up in the first 15 mins, but even so there' a big chunk of tension eliminated right there.

The trailer also makes me doubt this movie brings anything else to the genre except the usual 'lots of them, few of us' scenario. We've had what feels like a zombie, or variant of, movie a year for the past decade, and if they want to get me to a cinema to see this I want to know there's a fresh slant (running fast, swarming, isn't enough in my book).

Willy I don't think I will fall into line with your Hollywood/economics wisdom. Plus everyone please lose the CAPS unless they are really necessary. Here 's the deal, if you read the book and you watch the trailer a basic assumption you might come to is that the movie is nothing like the book. The articles for the past year and the press release from Paramount said as much.

As for the book being impossible to film I completely disagree with you. It is possible to put together a winning movie (especially if the whole trilogy thing from Pitt is to be believed) from the best stories in the book. That is the whole point of adapting it to film, this trailer and all of the prior news does not indicate anything of consequence was adapted.

Instead I am left imagining that the "Battle of Yonkers" in the movie is going to remind me of the Matrix fight with the Agent Smith clones. Not a problem if that's what yanks your chain. I don't mind CGI but this trailer takes it to Starship Trooper bug infestation levels that to me are unnecessary.

Walking Dead and World War Z, two completely different beasts (err zombies). My family watches Walking Dead despite a lot of season 2 stupidity and other flaws. I would eagerly watch a mini-series based upon Max Brooks' book as well. Two different stories, one without Sophie missing for a year and a day which is always a good thing.

Summation. I respect your opinion but disagree on a bunch of levels. You can have this movie, but I want my own based upon the book whose title was stolen by Plan B.

I agree. Personally I think they probably dropped the whole dead eating the living for the PG13, maybe it will just be suggested. Instead I expect it will be something along the lines of 28 days later with a passing of the infection being the main goal.

There was no way to have a thousand Agent Smiths in the Matrix II either, so they used CGI and it looked TERRIBLE. And it still does.

I see your point that there's no way to film the swarm with real people
in make-up, but I'm saying that the computers STILL can't do it ,
and it looks stupid.

So we're both right, but this movie's gonna look
like a bargain video game.

The CGI looks really bad, which is worrying considering most companies spend more time on the trailer than anything else. Hard to tell which CGI person is meant to be a Zombie and which one is meant to be human. I pressume the 'tidal waves of CGI' are meant to be zombies? :s

Although the book was rather seperate in terms of story telling it could have worked well as a movie, even if it adapted a more 'documentary style' form. Maybe have the main character travelling around the world by boat or by walking or stuff like that so we see the destruction the zombies and mass panic caused and we can then see the people it effected. Meanwhile the main character can be suffering from an emotional trauma and flashback to his experiences while also getting the experiences of those he meets, told in flashbacks also.

CGI is suspect and once again a freaking apocalypse movie with FREAKING CHILDREN...enough with the kids in serious movies...wonder if they save a dog in this one too...why do tv shows like Game of Thrones get great child actors but movies always find annoying duds?? Sixth Sense, Super 8, Little Miss Sunshine are a few examples to the contrary

The zombie waves told me everything I needed to know about this movie. Faithful adaptation it is not. Hopefully it's at least a decent movie though.

You should really check out the book. With regards to the slow vs fast zombie thing, the Dawn of the Dead remake, 28 days later.. I loved those movies. It didn't bother me. With WWZ it's different as in the book they emphasize so strongly that slow and shambling is a hell of a lot more dangerous than what you would think.

Probably the biggest moment that fans of the book are waiting for is The Battle of Yonkers, when the US military makes a stand against the hordes shambling out of New York city. I don't want to ruin it for you, but the fact that the zombies are slow makes it a HELL of a lot more effective as a story.

As to the trailer thing.. I dunno, a zombie movie is one of those movies that it bears emphasizing what it's about. I'm not saying give away details, but at least let people know that it's a zombie movie.

A TV adaptation of WWZ would have to be a miniseries like Band of Brothers, not an ongoing. And conceptually it would be totally different to The Walking Dead.

It would have been incredibly easy to write a script based on 4 or 5 of the 'survivor' interviews (a civilian, a soldier, a merc, a government official, say) from the book. You could rewrite/combine a few together, and have the various interviewees showing up in each other's stories to tie it all together and give it more of a sense of narrative and continuity.

The studio released the synopsis for the film years ago - it was clear at that point that it would drastically deviate from the book - the fact that the film has a protagonist (the Brad Pitt character), who isn't even a character in the book, should tell you everything you need to know.

Also, the fact that they couldn't even find a single memorable piece of dialogue for the trailer suggests the script is really weak.

You don't have to 'mass' market something if it didn't cost an obscene amount of money like this film did in the first place ($180m + God knows how much more on marketing). You could make a successful, faithful adaptation on a quarter of that, and it'd only need to be a modest hit to turn a profit.

Mummy. Daddy. Cute Kid. Yawn. Yawn . Yawn .

In terms of the ways the zombies appear in the film - would it be fair to say that there's room for them to physically deteriorate over the course of what may be a trilogy. The scenes in New York for example all look like they're early in the film, perhaps there's a shift from 28 Days style to Romero as their bodies break down...

I don't care... I could use a double dose of Zombie TV action either way.

Sponsored Links