Ok, so the fact Brad Pitt's in it isn't necessarily a bad thing. He was in "Fight Club" and "Oceans 11", and those were both good. But the issue is that World War Z doesn't focus on a single person. It's a multiple view point account of every aspect of a global zombie pandemic, from first infection to near-recovery.
In my mind, the only way to do it justice would be to do it as a docudrama, like "District 9", or the BBC's "Supervolcano". Because that's what the book is! It's not a single focus action novel following the life of one particular aid-worker, it's every possible view on the events of the pandemic, and that's what makes it interesting. That's what makes it unique. Without that, it is another generic zombie book.
And without that, it will be another generic zombie film.
I like your idea of the docudrama, but I can see why the film makers decided not to do it that way. Plus the book is made up of several interwoven stories, so it isn't entirely innappropriate for the film to follow a single thread. I am worried about Max Brooks not being involved in the script, but I'm willing to wait and see the film (or at least a trailer) before I start judging it.
@Plasma Man - I guess, but the thing that makes the book interesting is that it covers every possible angle. From government bunkers in South Africa to castles in Europe, from trapped geeks in Japan to the suburbs of America. By making it like a normal zombie film, you get rid of that.
I guess I won't really be happy with it with whatever they do, but they could have atleast tried.
@James - I know, right? They got the perfect mix of theatrical and documentative.
Haha, yeh, probably.
One can only imagine Max Brooks has spent all his money on hookers, and thus is forced to turn to Hollywood.
I guess I won't really be happy with it with whatever they do, but they could have atleast tried.
@James - I know, right? They got the perfect mix of theatrical and documentative.
Haha, yeh, probably.