Comments on: Does ‘World War Z’ Need To Make $400 Million To Break Even? Vanity Fair Looks At The Runaway Brad Pitt Zombie Movie

By: Adam Scott Thompson

Adam Scott Thompson — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

I got more of a Alan J. Pakula vibe from the book than a Michael Bay "stuff explodes and shit" vibe. Oh well. When I heard Brad Pitt was attached I thought "Contagion," but with zombies. I guess the studio was going for "John McClane, Zombie Hunter."

By: Xian

Xian — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

Can you just imagine if an indi-producer/director like George A. Romero had to put up with this shit at the time of filming 1978's "Dawn of the Dead"? (He did in fact have to put up with a lot of bullshit on "Day of the Dead" including budget issues directly related to it's X- or "unrated" violence and a host of other issues that were mainly producer-oriented).

"Gee, George, we'd like to see only PG-rated violence, no beheadings, no dismemberment, no chewing, no bloodshed at all if you can swing it." "Gee, George, your ending doesn't work… Too dark, nobody really gets away in a triumphant way, the zombies kinda win… how depressing is that, George? Can you reshoot it so that Fran meets up with her family at the end for the birth of her baby, and maybe Peter can meet up with that "brother" of his… whaddya say, George?"

Needless to say, "World War Z" is a lost opportunity to film a fantastic book by Max Brooks… it could have had a 70s political-thriller flavor to it, and instead they opted to shoot Michael Bay styled crap with a Spielbergian saccharine sweet ending. I'll be avoiding this one when it's out.

By: Gittes

Gittes — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

The J. Michael Straczynski drafts are utter crap, just a complete void. Don't believe his lies.

By: Gittes

Gittes — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

The J. Michael Straczynski drafts are utter crap, just a complete void. Don't believe his lies.

By: dan

dan — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

$200M production budget plus $50-60 marketing means closer to $500M to break even

By: dan

dan — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

One more thing. "Paramount must be annoyed."
If Paramount is annoyed then why did they let VF speak to Adam Goodman, President, Paramount Film Group and Marc Evans. President of Production, Paramount Film Group?
They must have had Brad Grey's approval to talk to VF.

By: Denise

Denise — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

"Our movie is in trouble! Let's call the guy from Lost. I heard he rewrote Prometheus and it is great!" said a Paramount source.

Geeeeeez. I'll be surprised it turns out to be decent.

By: PHILLIPS_WAS_RIGHT

PHILLIPS_WAS_RIGHT — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

Let's say it actually costs 200M, then add 100M in WW marketing and you've got 300M sunk into this. Man of Steel opens the week before and White House Down opens the week after. This has disaster written all over it. Overseas grosses need to be insane to salvage this thing.

By: PHILLIPS_WAS_RIGHT

PHILLIPS_WAS_RIGHT — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

By: fanboyzero

fanboyzero — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

Looks like Spielberg's War of the Worlds.

By: V G

V G — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

Let me get this straight— they threw out Straczynski's scrypt– they threw out the source material and they don't want to offend China by including a pivotal part of the original story….yeah.. I think I will just buy the book.

By: Sax

Sax — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

Stellar reporting!

By: Donella

Donella — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

No wonder Max Brooks distanced himself. Sounds like a real cluster.

By: Malcolm

Malcolm — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

The real reason for the remake is that the producers did not want to offend China.

All references to China being the source of the zombie plague had to be removed from the film. This changes the whole idea of the book.

Hollywood made a bad decision by trying to suck up to China.

By: Malcolm

Malcolm — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

The real reason for the remake is that the producers did not want to offend China.

All references to China being the source of the zombie plague had to be removed from the film. This changes the whole idea of the book.

Hollywood made a bad decision by trying to suck up to China.

By: Malcolm

Malcolm — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

The real reason for the remake is that the producers did not want to offend China.

All references to China being the source of the zombie plague had to be removed from the film. This changes the whole idea of the book.

Hollywood made a bad decision by trying to suck up to China.

By: Sad Rockstar

Sad Rockstar — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

This is going to be a shitty ass movie. Ill wait until it arrives on netflix.

By: Jeff Mclachlan

Jeff Mclachlan — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

I don't hold up much hope for this being any good (and I anticipate the Mark Forster will be in director jail for a LONG time after it comes out), but I think with international it might be able to crack $400 million. Just.

By: Dr.Movie

Dr.Movie — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

Well if the budget is really $400 Million they need to make by far more to break even!
Marketing, distribution etc etc gets added to the bill so for breaking even, it has to be by far more.
And btw there are other movies with a "real" budget of $400 Million.

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:03:36 +0000

"Evidently, Marc Forster was looking to redeem himself in the action-franchise realm after the critically despised".

Actually it didn't receive bad reviews. Reviews weren't great, but they weren't negative.

Audiences didn't like it as much though.