World War Z (starring Brad Pitt)

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I sorta liked Into Darkness. It was good, up until the end. Then it lost me. So I find it decent. But not good.

I really didn't like Man of Steel at all, didn't like WWZ, really hated GI-JOE, Hangover III was pointless, After Earth....haha....this summer frustrated me so much. It's too crowded.

What was wrong with the end of Darkness?



I really don't get why you say this when people were getting attacked left and right.

Zombies were jumping on people and they were destroying cities. Pretty much everyone in Israel dies. The soldiers that were helping with the fuel of the airplane die, the family that helped them,
You make it sound like no one got hurt at all and there was no sense of danger when people did get hurt and killed every time the zombies showed up.

Lots of people dying doesn't necessarily mean the audience cares. For me, the most intense scenes weren't the ones you mention, they were when they had to sneak past all the dormant zombies in the overun wing. Had me on the edge of my seat.
 
Last edited:
I have to admit, I really wasnt expecting...

...the Neurologist to die so quickly, and by tripping on to his own gun too. Felt like they were saying, who needs the smart guy, action guy can still do it.

That being said, I still had fun watching it, I'm probably more forgiving though since I get to go to the movies so rarely.
 
What wasn't wrong with the end to Into Darkness? They just flopped a scene from a much better movie, and pasted it awkwardly into the film. Zero tension.
 
What was wrong with the end of Darkness?





Just because lots of people dieLots of people dying doesn't necessarily mean the audience cares. For me, the most intense scenes weren't the ones you mention, they were when they had to sneak past all the dormant zombies in the overun wing. Had me on the edge of my seat.

yeah it's okay to say that the audience didn't care about anybody. That's fine.

But Celtic is saying the movie was safe and that "There wasn't a moment where I felt like anyone was in danger"

but that is not true because the zombies did attack people. They did kill people, it wasn't all safe .

You know what movie was really really safe, like completely 100 percent safe as far as the characters go? Zombieland

Zombieland had 4 characters and absolutely nothing happens to them. You know they are going to make it and you know they are not going to be harmed. You could say it doesn't could because it is a comedy, but those zombies did eat people and the movie had some gore. So the zombies in Zombieland are true real zombies, but the movie is a comedy and no one dies from them ever.


So, Zombieland is actually a movie that to me feels very Hollywood in a way because no one really dies. Actually come to think of it, in Zombieland, who dies? you see some flashbacks and zombies attacking people, but I don't think anyone in that movie dies from a zombie attack.

My point is, You can have real zombies that are dead and eat people and are rotting, and you still don't have a real zombie movie. I guess it all depends on whether you can accept some things or not.
People accepted funny movies about zombies, so I guess one PG 13 movies with no gore it's not that bad either.
 
Well, if you've never seen anything Star Trek before, or know the basics, I guess.



Anyway, the reason why the film felt safe is, the 5 main characters, Pitt and The Family never were in actual danger. Pitt always did everything perfectly, so I couldn't see him messing up any time soon, the family was relocated to a fairly safe place....so I mean, I don't know. That was it.
 
Well, if you've never seen anything Star Trek before, or know the basics, I guess.

Again, I try to take movies on their own merits.

Yes it borrowed from the original series and flipped the "Kahn!!!" thing, but it felt genuine to me. I loved it.


So when Darkness got to the end are you literally sitting there rolling your eyes going: " ", and then badmouthing the movie the whole way home? You must be a joy to go to the cinema with.
 
But seriously. That scene sucked. There's no way I could've taken that shoe-horned homage seriously at all. It in no way felt natural, or emotionally engaging. It felt forced. Very forced. Movie could've benefited from not stealing scenes from other movies.
 
You must be a total bore to engage with when it comes to cinema.

Oh wait.

What's that supposed to mean? Because I don't hate 90% of movies I'm somehow some dimwitted numbskull who cant carry on a conversation about film?

How did you get so jaded at such a young age?
 
But seriously. That scene sucked. There's no way I could've taken that shoe-horned homage seriously at all. It in no way felt natural, or emotionally engaging. It felt forced. Very forced. Movie could've benefited from not stealing scenes from other movies.

I just need to check in here... you do realize that what you are saying is an opinion right?
 
That's what the internet is for. Anyone who says other wise is a liar.

:lol

Seriously, stop taking this **** so seriously. I backed out of the argument, now you want to deconstruct me.

My passion is movies. I like discussing movies. Good movies, bad movies. It's all fun. All the time. And I love it. Few people I know in real life give a **** about movies. Which is fine. Hence why I come here.

You can talk about movies as if they were something important. But at the end of the day, it's just for ****s and giggles.

But thankfully, the internet is easily accessible, so I can ***** about movies where ever I want. Yey for internets!
 
Back
Top