Brief Review: The World's End

Hey there Chaos maniacs! Hope that these last days of summer are treating you well. So, Mrs. Chaos and I saw The World's End this weekend- the last of the hysterically funny and very clever "Blood and Ice Cream Trilogy". So, did The World's End live up to the reputation of the previous two entries, or is it a shadow of the others? Let's find out...

I saw Shaun of the Dead on its opening weekend. I had no idea who the cast was (Bill Nighy excepted). I went to see it because it had zombies and looked like fun. The movie was just incredible: it was a great comedy, a brilliant satire, a homage, and quality horror/zombie movie in its own right, all at the same time. It pays homage to all the Romero "Dead" troupes, while having great characters, thrilling/scary set pieces, and characters that you love and relate to.

Then came Hot Fuzz. I was certainly in the pocket of Pegg et al at this point. Again, the movie was fantastic. An interesting (and ridiculous) mystery, great cop humor, and a ton of action make Hot Fuzz a worthy successor to Shaun. Now, I liked Shaun more, but that's because I love the zombie stuff. However, Fuzz was amazingly good, the equal of Shaun in every respect.

So, of course, I had high expectations with The World's End. The movie is indeed very funny, and Pegg and company do a fantastic job. However, it is not as good as the previous two- it is the weakest of the three in a few ways. I do acknowledge that I'll need to see it again to make the final determination (Hot Fuzz has grown in my estimation on repeat viewings).


To sum up the basic plot: Gary King is a frustrated adult who desperately wants to re-create the glory days of his teenage years- he is a study in being a regressive individual. His plan is to get his old friends together and do their infamous "pub crawl"- hitting all the bars in their home town, including the final one, The World's End (which they never made it to as teens). King's friends, however, all feel and act as if they are 40 (which they are)- but they are convinced to go due to King's mischief. Now, back in their old town and ready to drink (despite their misgivings and a lot of personal baggage against King), they find their old town is not what it once was- both literally and figuratively. Up against a mysterious force, the old crew must band together if they are to figure out what is happening and survive to tell about it...

There's a lot of good stuff here. It is no spoiler to tell you that this is a sci-fi/comedy mash-up just as the other two were mash-ups. In this case, it is an alien invasion, and they make a lot of subtle (and not so subtle) references to sci-fi classics like Invasion of the Body Snatchers. It is a very clever premise, and makes for great comedy (and action) fodder. Also great is how The World's End goes along with the previous 2 in terms of theme. Shaun was about growing up, Fuzz was about doing what's right no matter what, while this movie suggests that you need to do both- simply getting a "job, house, family" is not enough. Grow up, yes, but don't lose that youthful idealism, don't lose that moral compass. King's character is all about that youthful passion, but he's stuck in the past in all the wrong ways. His pals, meanwhile, have grown up, but they are bland, dry, and banal. In the course of their epic battle/ pub crawl, these characters are going to have to rediscover their youthful ideals, or else fall pray to... well, I think you get the idea. Further, the actors are really good, with Pegg doing a great job of being both sympathetic and an ass all at the same time. Also, I found Martin Freedman funny as well, with far more offering here than he did in the entirety of The Hobbit, sadly.

The movie is really funny, and the sci-fi plot is imaginative. The problem that I can't ignore though is the ending. See, Shaun and Fuzz had fantastic conclusions. Shuan as the terrifying (and zombie traditional) final, massive zombie assault, while Fuzz had a balls to the walls shoot-out (with bits of shooting, car chases, and pyrotechnics that put action directors to shame). The World's End denouement is... they TALK to the "intelligence" to stop its invasion. The scene isn't that funny at all, and the whole movie just grinds to a halt. It's too bad, as I think that, with a bit of revision, it could have worked. As it stands, it just doesn't have the humor or spark the rest of the movie had. The final 2 minutes of the movie is funny and appropriate (what REALLY happens when you stop an alien invasion? This movie has the right idea, I'm afraid). Sadly, the "final confrontation" falls flat and hurts the film.

So, where does it stand? It is a very funny movie with great ideas and imagination. You would expect nothing less from these guys. However, the final bit goes off the rails, and sucks the life out of the movie. As a result, I'm giving it 3 1/2 out of 4 Marks of Chaos. It is worthy of being alongside Hot Fuzz and Shaun of the Dead, but it is just under those two overall. If you loved Fuzz and Shaun, you do need to see this...

Until Next Time...

Movie Review: World War Z

Hey there Chaos nuts! Old Man Chaos is back with a new post, this time a brief review of the movie World War Z. Yes , I know I want to do a Man of Steel review as well, but I need to see that movie again before I even attempt a review (it has many layers that I need to examine again). However, on the spur of the moment last night- a few buddies of mine and I decided to see World War Z. So, is World War Z a solid entry into the zombie movie pantheon, or is it just an ego booster for Brad Pitt? Let's take a quick look...

Let me start off with a few things- I love zombie movies- they are one of my favorite sub genres, no doubt about it. I love the original Romero "Dead" trilogy (and even Land of the Dead, to be perfectly honest- though his most recent efforts are fairly bad). I have enjoyed the newer movies that have spiced up the genre, like 28 Days Later (but I hated its sequel), and even the Snyder's Dawn of the Dead remake (better than it had any right to be). I would be remiss if I didn't mention my undying (haha) love of Zombieland and Shaun of the Dead. I must also state that I have read the book World War Z, and as a history guy, the method of telling the story via "oral history" is something that historians have been doing for some time, and it was an interesting take.

So where does that leave World War Z? Well, for sure, it bears just about zero resemblance to the book- I knew the book would be virtually impossible to put to film, but this doesn't even really try. Further, the movie isn't that traditional zombie movie- not only do these zombies move fast, they are different in several key ways. That said, World War Z is indeed a really entertaining, at times thoughtful, and an interesting and unique take on the zombie genre. They have mixed zombies with a Hollywood action blockbuster- and its a great mixture. I'd like to quickly highlight some of the really great aspects of this film, but I caution you about spoilers:





1- The Scope and Scale- first off, this is how Romero and others undoubtedly envisioned the zombie apocalypse. Put simply, it is EVERYWHERE. No part of the globe is unaffected. In Romero's movies, this was only hinted at or discussed- and while that ratcheted up the dread and despair, you never saw it. The Dawn remake showed some news clips, but that was about it. Only Zombieland showed various parts of America gone, but the focus was tightly on the 4 heroes. In WWZ, they show it- the scale of the carnage is incredible. Society seems to break down in about 10 minutes- panic, hysteria, each man for himself, looting, murder, explosions, you name it... They show it happening all over the world, and not just in video/news clips/montage. Brad Pitt's Gerry Lane actually witnesses a lot of it. There were certain moments that were breathtaking in showing the scope and scale of this- I loved it!

2- The Zombie Plague- these zombies (and the term IS used in the movie) are quite different from previous incarnations. On their own, without stimuli, the zombies are quite familiar to us- slow moving, drooling, (they say "dormant"). But, if the zombies become stimulated (sound often attracts them), they begin to run and attack. Their only biological imperative- bite the non-infected in order to pass on the plague. So, they don't eat people as such- the virus just wants to spread to other viable hosts- an interesting twist. Further, as more and more zombies are about and attacking, they seem to hit a critical mass- they become so fast, vicious- like a virus or like hordes of ants- they simply overwhelm everything in their path, like a tidal wave. Not just people, but entire cities are engulfed by them. The bigger shots of the zombie horde are CG, but the close up ones are real, so don't sweat that too much. The concepts behind them and how they are put on the film is different from the usual zombies, but I liked it for this movie- I hope that other movies also experiment with their zombie approaches.

3- The Action Set Pieces- this movie is more of an action/thriller than the traditional horror movie, and as such has action set pieces. Think of it as say Die Hard or The Bourne Identity but with zombies. For example, Gerry and his family trying to survive first in Philly and then in Jersey have the traditional zombie beats, but it also is very fast paced (less dread, more running)- can they get to the copter in time? Later, when Gerry goes to Israel, all hell brakes loose and the zombies begin to flood the city- it is race against time to escape (I must say that the Israel attack is very startling and compelling on film- it is the main set piece of the movie and it is excellent). Of course, I would be remiss if I didn't mention the "Zombies on a Plane" sequence. When I saw this hinted at in the trailer, I scoffed at it, thinking it looked silly. Boy was I wrong. It was a very well handled scene and very intense- I loved that bit, as it turns out. Like I said, great action here.

4- Brad Pitt's Performance- the character of Gerry Lane is quite boring, and that is simply great. He's a UN bureaucrat, that's it- not a soldier, not a superhero; he's an average guy; only that he has been "lucky" to have served the UN in war-torn countries in the past and has shown an uncanny ability to survive in such environments. When we meet him here he has quit that job, as it had taken a toll on him and his family. When zombie hell breaks loose, Gerry has the skills to survive, albeit just barely. When he and his family are rescued by the military, they want him to work for them, and he refuses- they have to basically blackmail him in order to get him to go back out there. Pitt plays the role of the reluctant hero very well- he's modest, average, just slightly skilled, and he is scared. Pitt plays it very well; he avoids any flash or scenery-chewing. The role and movie becomes that much more believable as a result.

5- Political Commentary- under the surface, there is a bit of a political undercurrent at play in WWZ, in the best zombie tradition. In this case, the nations of the world really aren't coming together to fight the zombie plague. Indeed, they seem to have taken a "go it alone" posture, to the detriment of the whole world (a nuke even goes off at one point- which nation does this you never find out, making it that much more unsettling). The movie gets into how places like North Korea, Israel, India, the US, Europe, and Russia have all tried and pretty much failed) to deal with the menace. Forget international cooperation; forget fighting for humanity. Nope- each country seems to be trying to hold its own, and they can't quite get their acts together. One can't help but believe that this indeed would be the case if such an even truly happened, and it makes the movie that much more bleak. Which is great.

6- The Ending- although there seems to be a strong hope at the closing of the movie, humanity's survival is not guaranteed. Indeed, Pitt's narration makes it clear that humanity has a shot at survival and nothing more; it is a fragile chance at best. So, while it isn't the haunting and bleak ending of say Night of the Living Dead (or either Dawn of the Deads), it doesn't have the mandatory  Hollywood Happy Ending either, and I appreciate that.

Now, there are problems with WWZ to be sure. First, there are several coincidences that are just too convenient (those planes were ready to leave Israel a bit too quickly). Some of the actions taken by the characters strain credulity. There is a total lack of gore- no a movie doesn't need gore, but a zombie movie should have a lot more than this (will there be a harder cut on DVD? I'm not sure, actually, as they were making a action movie here). Some of the supporting players are just fine, like the Israeli soldier, while others, like the WHO doctors, are actually pretty stupid or annoying- this sometimes detracts from the movie.

World War Z gets a lot right, more than I thought it would going into it (rumors of it being a bad production, re-shoots, etc.). It is a new twist on the zombie genre, and it feels fresh and interesting again. It does have some problems, of course, but what movie doesn't? As far as zombie movies go, I don't know what will ever touch the Romero Trilogy, but World War Z was a really strong entry into the zombie cannon. I give it 3 Marks of Chaos out of four.

Until next time...