User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 946 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jun 24, 2013
    For those who DIDN'T read the book: Go ahead, watch it, give money to a genre that I enjoy.
    For those who DID read the book: Go read the book again, you'll only be sitting in your own anger at the theater. WWZ The Movie is nothing like the book. The movie and the book have exactly 2 things in common: the title and the patient zero hypothesis.
  2. Jun 24, 2013
  3. Jun 21, 2013
    So far removed from the original story by Max Brooks that it shouldn't even share the same name, so far from it in fact that i had to try and dissociate it from the book and appreciate it as the movie itself. Standing on its own this movie is a mediocre zombie film with some reasonable acting and effects, but with virtually no story and many stupid and massive plot holes. How could they of possibly spent £130 million on this movie? its ridiculous.

    Overall im very disappointed by this film, being looking forwards to it for ages as im a big fan of the book. I would definitely suggest staying away from this film if you are fan of max brooks or just a zombie movie fan in general.
  4. Jun 21, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie is driven by a poorly defined, convoluted plot, mixed in with some semi cool action scenes and scenery. The zombies are cool for a while but become laughably goofy upon closer examination near the end of the film. I never read the books however I consider myself a zombie movie fanatic and this movie simply cannot be related with given the absolutely rediculous amount of luck brad pitt survives on(plane crash and aimless trek afterwards.... wtf.) Most of the characters that seem important are in the movie for 5 minutes tops, and the ones that are in no way important are there most of the movie. All said, don't go to this movie expecting a scary tale of a family surviving a zombie apocalypse, expect a weird, often humorous tale of a seemingly invincible man running around a zombie filled earth with no real defined goal. Expect a shallow plot and even shallower back stories, giving you no reason to care for any of the people in the story except for one handless girl who has no reason to even be in the film. Wait until it hits dollar theaters and prepare to laugh. Expand
  5. Jun 21, 2013
    It's absolutely awful. It takes nothing from the incredible source material authored by Max Brooks, discarding it as if it's irreverent. I've been waiting for this film for the last seven years, but i've got to say, I am incredibly disappointed. That said, Brad Pitt puts in a decent performance as the main protagonist ('Gerry Lane, a UN worker), and some of the scenes work well. Where was Yonkers?
  6. Jun 21, 2013
    World War Z is missing some zzzzzzzzzzz's it its title. Bland plot, Bland characters, Bland performances, even bland zombies. There is no back story on how the disease spread, no back story on our main protagonist, it's just scenes smashed together to resemble something of a action flick. All the characters say and do stupid things..and the scenes come and go as quickly as you realize this movie was a waste of money. No emotional attachment to anything I saw on screen. 3/10. Wasn't one of the worst movies of the summer, but just ZERO to offer. World War ZERO. World War ZZZZZZ you name it. Be very cautious of the people giving it scores like 9's and 10's. This ain't no "Thrill Ride" "Best zombie movie I've ever seen". Go get the AMC series Walking Dead and you will find more character depth, action, and suspense in one 40 minute episode. Expand
  7. Jun 21, 2013
    Some decent suspense scenes but a real lazy script. Tons of holes throughout the film with characters so bland you wonder if Brad Pitt could have just been talking to cardboard cutouts the entire film. The main reasoning behind the cure is stupid it made just about half the theature laugh. Oh and the zombies teeth chomping got so stupid after seeing it over and over again.
  8. Jun 23, 2013
    This movie is an excellent example of how hollywood ruins everything. The book was a New York Times Best Seller for a reason, but this movie is just awful. Even if one ignored how much the movie deviates from what made the book great, the movie alone is pretty bad. The zombies are a joke terrible computer graphics, and they transform way too quickly. There's a reason this movie isn't doing well and had to have the third act re-written and re-shot. Save yourself from disappointment and read the book instead. It'll be much more exciting, tense, rewarding and ultimately fulfilling. Expand
  9. Jun 23, 2013

    has turned out so well.



  10. Jun 23, 2013
  11. Jun 21, 2013
    Zombies attack on a huge scale but I'm afraid there are no huge scares. 5 minutes into the movie and the fastest zombies ever are bashing there way across a city but immediately the lack of gore and blood is very noticeable. The 12A/PG13 rating really hurts as there is no pay off to seeing zombies killed as you don't get to see it! However the big set piece with zombies climbing a 100 foot wall in the middle of the movie is stunning and well done. I just hope the Bluray/DVD is uncut and we get to see some zombie heads get squashed properly. Expand
  12. Jun 29, 2013
  13. Jun 21, 2013
  14. Jun 21, 2013
    The movie was great! Why? It's like The Walking Dead, and Left 4 Dead type of zombies and s**t. When The zombies running (similiar to Left 4 Dead), and their smelling human bodies from nowhere (The Walking Dead). You also notice there are also military action when you starting the movies a little bit of kicking ass. It's so wonderfull, why Brad Pitt starts this film...
  15. Jun 21, 2013
    I was extremely disappointed. I read the book and this film had barely a passing resemblance to the plot. I couldn't help but mutter how stupid the last third of the movie was. Frankly the book lent itself to being the basis of a TV show, and not a movie adaptation.
  16. Jun 22, 2013
    I'm not sure what I was thinking. Zombie movies are not typically my type of film, but Brad Pitt has chosen (largely) good movies over the past few years, so I thought I'd give it a go. I enjoyed the set-up, but as the film progressed, I just got more and more bored. World War Z was World War Zzzzzz.
  17. Jun 21, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Brad Pitt muddles through this messy nonsense with a supporting family you just want to strangle. A clinging wife sniffling and sickly children do more to distract their father placing them all in more danger than the zombies. The young scientist who was the world's best hope to find a solution to the zombie problem is unfortunately put In a situation that required a different skill set.

    A wall protecting a whole country letting everyone in failed to plan to keep the zombies out! Planes land with their off ramp left open. Come on in zombies Oh what about using the ventilation system in the WHO lab to zap the zombies with a sleeping agent or to navigate through the building without running into the zombies.

    Ok it's a good trick to drop the audience into the middle of the story. We don't have a clue what created the zombies or how they will be cured. But we do know that Lane is the hero and a good man who loves his family.

    But Lane gave Lane enough insight the find a solution to survival.
  18. Jun 23, 2013
    This movie was World War Z just in name. I lived the last years dreaming to see the Battle of Yonkers, and it never came up. The CGI was pretty amazing, but apart from that, everything else was just a plain old boring overused theme of zombie survival/apocalypse. The characters, even the main ones, did not click, did not reel you in with their charisma and atop of all... the zombies, the zombies felt just like an unstoppable giant rolling ball running towards every little sound. No human factor no nothing. It might as well been a giant ocean wave coming for Brad Pitt. Oh scratch that, they had already done giant waves, and it also was a fluke. In conclusion I would like to stress that the movie is a further testimony to Hollywood's destruction of great literature with slashes to the original story, flashy CGI and overpaid actors. Not a single link to the books and it brought nothing new and unprecedented features to the zombie genre. It was plain old boring.
    I am giving 3 points because of the effects and sincerely it is the first time i feel like wanting my cash back.
  19. Jun 24, 2013
    I went into this movie expecting to be disappointed, with no expectations or hope. And yes here I am disappointed. This movie is drivel at best. Giant plot holes, cheap scares undeveloped characters and any reason for a $25,000 explosion. It was non-sense. I'm mainly disappointed in the execution compared to the novel this movie is apparently attached to. Threw the entire book into the air. It's as though not a single person who worked on the film read even the synopsis of the book. I suppose if I could get past that, I may have been able to see some entertaining value here. However all I could think was that I was watching a hero out to save the world, teleporting through meaningless shallow dialog and action sequences to inevitably give us a safe generic movie that is not worth your time. I'm sorry. Expand
  20. Jun 22, 2013
    TERRIBLE! Just terrible! This movie is an insult to fans of the book and author Max Brooks alike. Aside from the title and that it's a zombie movie there is nothing left of the original book/script in common. Brad Pitt and his studio can seriously go themselves. The story would be laughable if I wasn't already so pissed off at this abomination. Even if you've never read the books I doubt you'll find anything to enjoy even as just a dumb popcorn flick. Honestly I'm pissed off as a fan of the book and cannot imagine how the author must feel to have his work just raped by Hollywood Avoid at all costs! Expand
  21. Jun 21, 2013
    Just terribly, terribly boring. There is nothing in this movie to get you excited or even the least bit interested. The zombies look fake, the only times they look vaguely realistic is one of the many, many shaky cam sequences. They take themselves way to seriously for a movie with so many absurd things happening all at once. The soundtrack, wait, was there even a soundtrack? The dialogue was all completely uninspired. At no point did I believe anyone was in the slightest bit of danger, or that any of the actors even cared.

    It's just a very large disappointment. It would be one thing if it was bad, or awful. At least then it would get points for managing to entertain me with laughs. Nope.
  22. Jun 24, 2013
    Not sure if the "Z" means the last World War or if it stands for zombie. Either way, there's a worldwide outbreak of undead and Brad Pitt is dispatched by the UN to solve the crisis. The plot is standard formula (there's even a kid with asthma) and dotted with leaps of logic. The frantic fervor of the zombies is the only cool special effect. Throughout his worldwide quest, the action never loses momentum and borders on gripping. Expand
  23. Jun 23, 2013
    World War Z is a film that has so much potential but 'decided' to become simply a film targeted at the teenage 'Resident Evil' crowd. Absolutely great set pieces are framed by a narrative that is too simple, disregarding the heavy morality prevalent in brilliant series 'The Walking Dead' in favor of large scale action. Sure these set pieces are pulse pounding and brilliant, Pitt still the always great leading man and all, but hey... where are all the nuances that made the original novel a masterpiece? Nevertheless, a very watchable film but just leave 'your brain' at the front door of the theater ;p Expand
  24. Jun 21, 2013

  25. Jun 22, 2013
  26. Jun 21, 2013
  27. Jun 21, 2013
  28. Jun 22, 2013
  29. Jun 29, 2013
  30. Jun 26, 2013
  31. Jun 22, 2013



  32. Jun 23, 2013
  33. Jun 25, 2013
  34. Jun 23, 2013
    Good summer movie. They should of made it R rated. CGI could of been better. Script needed more work. But with all that said, it will entertain you. The ending wasn't as bad as some made it out to be, just to abrupt.
  35. Jun 23, 2013
    With a world-sweeping plot reminiscent of Steven Soderberg’s Contagion, an intense, kinetic pace tastefully interspersed with snappy dialogue, and a leading man, in Brad Pitt, up to the task of anchoring it all in the realm of suspended disbelief, World War Z may very well be the best modern zombie film yet to grace cinemas.

    To say it was an arduous task to deliver the movie might be
    this year’s movie-related understatement, and there have been and there still remain many doubts as to whether or not it would all be worthwhile.

    Based on the novel, World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War, penned by Max Brooks, the son of comedy filmmaking legend Mel Brooks and actress Ann Bancroft, the movie’s script went through several difficult and drastic alterations before filming wrapped in October of last year. Initially adapted in 2008 by sci-fi and comic book scribe J. Michael Straczynski, the screenplay went through a complete overhaul by Matthew Michael Carnahan, whose debut film, The Kingdom, delivered the kind of politically-infused action Paramount Studios and Pitt’s production company, Plan B, were looking for.

    For the rest of the review, please visit:
  36. Jun 23, 2013
  37. Jun 24, 2013
  38. Jul 6, 2013
  39. Jun 30, 2013
    I want to start by saying that overall I enjoyed the movie and thought it was pretty decent. Having said that however I also feel there was just a ton of lost potential. First, there are some pacing problems. Several scenes are overdone (e.g. when they sneak past a zombie) and some are rushed (e.g. the ending). Secondly, the first half of the film was extremely good especially as things in the world were going to hell. But it seemed to fall apart a little when Pitt started just flying all over the world. Finally, I think the movie suffers from a lack of identity because it wasn't really a thriller or horror and it seemed to try to do a little of both to no real success. So yeah... just a lot of lost potential which was disappointing because I really looked forward to this movie. It was good but not great. Expand
  40. Jun 22, 2013
    Relentless pacing. High production values. A desperate situation. It works well. And it gives you more beyond that: a special idea, well stated by a character with an inappropo amused gleam in his eye--that reframes the movie in 30 seconds. And still more: irony. Very solid entertainment. I ran to the theatre men's room and back.
  41. Jun 25, 2013
    Very disappointing. I love zombie movies, I love action movies, and Brad Pitt doesn't usually let me down, so I was surprised at how bored I was during this movie. The script is pretty bad, and there are some really illogical parts that stood out to everyone in my group. Not illogical like "zombies don't exist" but illogical like "if they thought of this, why didn't they think of that." You will see what I mean, but I would wait for this to show up on cable to find out. Expand
  42. Jun 24, 2013
    What World War Z has going for it is a massive, global scale outbreak, a variety of infected, and some nice dialogue sprinkled throughout the film. What brings that down is that the story is basically focused on the zombies, they don't utilize a great actor, the story is frankly dumb sometimes, and there aren't any characters to delve into. I like Brad Pitt, but for being the lead and the most focused character, there simply isn't much to him or anyone else in the movie. With that in mind there are definitely some enjoyable scenes that are shot very well. I left the theater just not caring about anyone that I saw, there is no human connection to the film other than Gerry (Brad Pitt) and his family. The action is good, the scares are present, and overall the movie is focused on the zombies and finding a cure. At times it's a pretty generic story set up, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel and some scenes shine. Expand
  43. Jun 21, 2013
    Good thrilling movie, but somehow it felt like the story's being compressed from 3 hours to just under 2 hours. It's definitely much better than resident evil as it ends in good bitter way. Brad Pitt as the main character in the world war z has done a great job and made this movie a very entertaining one.
  44. Jun 24, 2013
    There are some saying there were no scares, but
  45. Jun 22, 2013
    I've watched some zombie movies and this one is good. I like the way they did the zombies attacks, reactions and effects. 2 things lack in this movie, more zombie action, there wasn't enough killing for a zombie movie and a better plot. The movie just starts too fast and the way the main character travels in search of a cure, i just disliked and the way the cure was found just didn't really seemed much credible. But it was good, not great but anyway, there where some incredible scenes like the way the zombies rushed to the people and the way they made stairs out of themselves and the big number of zombies collapsing in this movie.
    Overall there was some scares and very thrilling moments and this movie makes me remember how much i like zombie apocalypse movies/ games/ series.
  46. Jun 21, 2013
    Major kudos goes to Brad Pitt, as he navigates the audience through the bumpy, but still enjoyably thrilling ride that is "World War Z." Although, it's certainly funny when it shouldn't be, and askew as hell, it still marks a worthy notch into the belt of the zombie genre.
  47. Jun 21, 2013
    If you loved the book, this will not be a good movie. If you didn't, maybe you can see some redeeming factor in it, because as a fan of the book, i did not.
  48. Jun 21, 2013
    I wanted to see how powerful Marc Forster's World War Z was, what I got was 2 hours of good, bone crunching, zombie horror fun. Sometimes a movie surprises you. Something you thought was going to be a mid-summer slog or an underwhelming riff on familiar themes turns out to be something more. Familiar tropes are reinvented, a tired villain gets new life, and presumed lines of safety are crossed. You find yourself in the middle of a relentless rush of anxiety, fear, and exhilaration, and when you walk out of the theater you can’t wait to tell someone what you just witnessed. World War Z is that kind of movie. The adaptation of Max Brooks’ best-seller has been best known up until this point for its production problems. Last year Paramount delayed the film’s original 2012 release date to allow for extensive reshoots. Much of the blame was laid at the feet of director Marc Forster (Quantum of Solace, Monster's Ball) and a script that hadn’t been ready to shoot. Writers like Damon Lindelof and Cloverfield’s Drew Goddard were brought in to completely rework the film’s third act in an effort to salvage the big-budget tentpole from disaster. The finished film starts off by mercilessly throwing the audience into the deep end of the zombie apocalypse. There’s a brief scene where Brad Pitt’s Gerry Lane makes breakfast for his wife Karin (Mireille Enos from The Killing) and their two daughters. Then the family find themselves stuck in city traffic and all hell breaks loose. Explosions strike, fast-moving zombies swarm, and everybody starts running for their lives. A former investigator for the United Nations, Gerry is able to get his family to safety on an aircraft carrier with the help of his colleague Thierry (Fana Mokoena). Whatever struck the world struck fast, Gerry learns the president of the United States is already dead and with the entire globe infected the only hope is to find Patient Zero. "Mother Nature is a serial killer," a UN doctor tells Gerry, but she does leave clues behind. To ensure his family stays safely aboard the ship, Gerry agrees to lead the investigation into the origins of the plague. It’s such a quick progression of events it makes your head spin. In fact, it’s almost too fast; at a certain point, it feels like somebody left out the requisite moment when everybody looks around and wonders just what these crazy zombie creatures actually are. But by then the movie is already off to its next action set piece. And what set pieces they are. World War Z is a string of unrelenting, harrowing sequences that continually manage to top one another spanning multiple countries, the ground, and air. When attacking en masse the zombies are an overwhelming tidal wave; one-on-one they’re a vicious mix of tics and snarls. Imagine the undead from 28 Days Later, make them twice as fast, and combine them with the swarming fury of fire ants and you’ll get an idea of World War Z’s creatures. They make the zombies from The Walking Dead look positively cuddly in comparison: lightning-fast biters straight from the subconscious that simply do not stop. The movie shouldn’t be confused for a Romero-style zombie flick, however. World War Z is a disaster film in the classic 1970s sense think The Towering Inferno or The Poseidon Adventure serving as light allegory for our indifference towards nature while also bringing a lot of smarts to the table. Early on, Gerry gets zombie blood in his mouth and runs to the edge of a building, realizing he may have to throw himself off should he transform. He clocks the 12 seconds it takes for people to turn upon witnessing his first transformation, putting the pieces of the puzzle together quicker than what we’re used to seeing. Pitt carries the entire movie, as both its star and emotional core. Gerry’s mission is simple and basic he wants to keep his family safe and when he says goodbye to his daughters you believe it. Forster thankfully takes the time to focus on these small character moments, which could otherwise get lost in the face of the film’s larger sequences. Gerry’s wife Enos isn’t given much to do other than furrow her brow and stare at a satellite phone, but together the pair provide just enough of an emotional hook for the story to work. The film’s ending also feels like it’s missing one final note. It certainly works, but given the emphasis on family and Gerry’s emotional drive it’s hard to escape the feeling that it could have gone just a touch further. It’s as if Forster and his creative team were able to get the ball to the 1-yard line, but couldn’t quite punch it into the endzone. Of course, with so many summer movies fumbling at the 40 it’s a mild complaint. There’s tremendous joy in watching a movie like World War Z that just works. Too many films this year have seemed more concerned with showing the audience how clever they are either though misdirection, callbacks, or faux gravitas instead of just telling good stories. Collapse
  49. Jun 22, 2013
    this was one of the best zombie movie ive ever seen. its like dawn of the dead and left 4 dead mixed together. the story and characters were good though the ending could have been better and less... happy. the zombies in the movie were fast and unpredictable (Zombie ladder wtf XD) overall great film glad i saw it.
  50. Jun 23, 2013
  51. Jun 23, 2013
  52. Jun 23, 2013
    When looked at as a movie based off of the source material, fans of the book may be thoroughly disappointed by how thoroughly it disassociates itself from it. However, having said that, director Marc Forster is able to bring chilling suspense and swift thrills, coupled with gripping set pieces located in large cities, and tie it all together with impressive CGI and hard hitting action. Brad Pitt gives a terrific performance in the title role playing "Gerry Lane," a former UN operative tasked with locating the source of the infectious zombie outbreak. All in all, Forster's solid direction alongside Pitt's usual stellar acting is another decent blockbuster addition the to the zombie entertainment genre. Expand
  53. Jun 21, 2013
    Brad Pitt can bring up ratings and I enjoy watching him in the movies but he was not enough for this movie. I do not think this was a good movie. I think the movie was done good. I just think a zombie movie is not the best choice to spend $200,000 million on.
    This movie is not a movie I would watch again so that tells you everything...
    Do you want the truth or a lie???
  54. Jun 24, 2013
    If you read the book....Oh man, this was a horrible let down. You can read it in other reviews, the plot holes and clichés are numerous. Being a zombie fanatic, I guess, you really get few aspects of the post apocalyptic humans v. zombies scenario that I expect. I mean sure there are zombies and the world as we know it ends, but when the whole movie theatre laughs when a zombie gets a close up, it kills the essence of the theme. The movie attempts to be character driven but the acting and plot are just plain weak. On top of that, the story literally gets no where. Every new scene seems to be completely disconnected from the previous. I honestly cant think of a moment in the movie that awed me in any way. The positives to this movie are so minuscule. There really are no similar movies to compare this to, but if you have seen the show, The Walking Dead, the quality of screen play and emotions provoked from a zombie apocalypse do not even come close. 3 seems like it may be a rough score but as a fan boy, this movie was a true let down. Expand
  55. Jun 23, 2013
    let me save you some money, don't bother. poor writing, implausible in every way, especially with Pitt having a spear through him and three days later he is fighting the zombies again. lame, cookie cutter script makes you sleepy.
  56. Jun 25, 2013
    Do not waste your hard earned money on this mess of a movie. Shame on you Brad Pitt. No horror, no plot, no connection between Pitt and his family and not thrilling at all. si-fi is all you will get, and bad at that also.
  57. Jun 28, 2013


    The cast
    The family of Gerry: Who care about them?


  58. Jun 24, 2013
  59. Jun 23, 2013
    I don't quite understand the fascination with zombies. I suppose some form of monster, alien or mutant has always been a mainstay in Hollywood H.G. Wells' book "War of the Worlds" was a huge hit and terrified readers of the day, as did a radio play of the same book in 1939 by Orson Welles, enough that some listeners thought a Martian attack was actually happening. And let's not forget the slew of sci-fi monster movies that kept drive in theatres busy for decades, including giant mantises, tarantulas and anything else that slithered or crawled.
    So the question is, how do you do a movie with undead people and make it plausible instead of the same old ARRUGHGGH? "World War Z" gives it a shot, and it actually works, as the focus is more on the viral disease that is turning people into fast zombie killing machines by the millions, making it more of a medical thriller than a B movie.
    Brad Pitt does a fine job as one of the people who might be able to save the planet, and because he makes it believable, it gives the film authenticity and is actually easy to believe. There is plenty of zombie munching and heads getting blown off, but in dim or no light, considering the PG13 rating. The script however is actually done quite well, and as far as this type of film goes, it's far superior to most similarly themed movies, with the comedy "Warm Bodies", that also involves zombies, the only other zombie movie this year you can actually enjoy. It's not the greatest film of Pitts' career, but it's a good summer flick and just scary enough to keep you on edge just a little bit. Not bad.
  60. Jun 22, 2013
    My problem with this movie might have been my expectations because I love a good zombie movie but to be honest I still think this movie would fall flat again even with a 2nd viewing (which will wait until dvd release). I give a lot of leeay because it's a zombie flick but the staples of a good zombie flick where forgotten in this movie. Couple that with amazing plot holes and that =1 bummed out zombie fan. Expand
  61. Jun 23, 2013
    Simple and typical may be what I may describe this movie. World War Z is good enough not to fall on the classification of lousy or awful. At least it does not drag; the movie is engaging and never ever slows down to cause the slightest bit of boredom. At best, it feels like what I imagine would be a perfectly well-made zombie video game adaptation. I'm sure that the movie has some intellectual or subliminal message hidden in and around the movie, or whatever message the writers want to convey. Whatever it may be, we could not really notice that since the pace of the film is fast and hyperactive. But at least it's never chaotic and messy. Expand
  62. Jun 21, 2013
    What a bland un characterised piece of that was.No thought or detail was put into the making of this film and instead it was a distorted mess of ideas glued together just because they looked cool.Seemingly the scenes have no connections but the dull and boring characters reveal more plot points than bullets fired in the movie.While it does look impressive and is well acted that does not change the fact that this movie has no character or any emotional connection going for it.Nothing is detailed and the whole thing is rushed,save yourself 10 dollars and don't see it Expand
  63. Jun 22, 2013
    So there you have them: Will Smith, trying to save humanity and find a cure to revert the process and make all zombies human again, and Brad Pitt, choosing to burn them alive or dead, since they're zombies and contribute to our extinction.
    Brad, that's not cool, man, just not cool.
  64. Jun 23, 2013

  65. Jun 23, 2013
  66. Jun 24, 2013
  67. Jun 25, 2013
    Give me a break, pitt survives a plane crash. The family in this movie made it tedious. Putting another star in a cage and giving him jibberish to talk at supposedly a south Korean base was complete waste. Why did the guy in the plane take off from Jerusalem? Who created the virus?, still don't know. Why put scenes of mass zombies at the end of the movie whats the point they would have been better at the start. a pointless waste of talent. Expand
  68. Jul 8, 2013
    World War Z is, despite dull moments and being uneven sometimes, it is thought provoking, intense and a powerful movie about the collapse of humanity. World War Z has a great action build up and a clever plot that will stay with you for some time. The acting is first rate and truthful with some dazzling visuals and practical effects. World War Z has good editing and a great directing. Watch it as soon as possible and often you get some good "end of the world" movie type. Expand
  69. Jul 1, 2013
  70. Jul 5, 2013
  71. Jun 24, 2013
    Well it tried! The holes were too big. How does a Zombie cross the Atlantic? It doesn't. End of story. I know, I know suspend disbelief. O.K. the real problem was that the story was sparse and the build up non existent and the ending lame. Is Pitt now taking over Harrison Ford roles? Plucky everyman fights wrong and wins! The CGI was O.K. and the gore was minimal and it was psychologically frightening, but the story was weak. Expand
  72. Jul 11, 2013
    BORING !!!

    ......NO SCRIPT......annoying characters out of aTommy Hilfiger ad.......and enough already with the hyper caffeinated zombies who can merge into "wooshes of energy" and CLIMB WALLS .......that hurt !.....come on guys- I`m not THAT stupid !.............I only wish that whoever wrote the half-baked script for this turkey had had a fraction of the energy and ability to focus as
    those zombies !.....and finally to all the people who gave this film 9s and 10s and found it A-M-A-Z-I-N-G I say "Please get A Life Expand
  73. Jun 29, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. There is something about zombies and the the death of humanity and then there's this guy and he's Brad Pitt and some computer zombies and a Israeli army lady and some zombies and something about disease and then it ends but it doesn't end and hugs all around. Eff-U World War Z. I'm 116 minutes older. Expand
  74. Jun 28, 2013
    This movie was terrible. It was a Syfy movie with better graphics. About half-way through, I decided to continue watching simply because I wanted to see how stupid things got, and I wasn't disappointed. The "solution" is one of the most absurd things seen in a zombie movie yet, and as others have stated, I simply did not care about anyone in this movie. It really felt like they kinda filmed the first 2/3 of the script and then got stuck, and then kinda threw together something for the end.

    As others have also said, this has nothing to do with the book. I'm fine with that as long as it could at least be in the same universe as the thing it got its name from, which it can't. This definitely goes on the list of the last zombie movies to watch during the zombie apocalypse.
  75. Jun 26, 2013

    lot of people are probably upset about that. Expand
  76. Jun 24, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Worst adaptation of a book EVER. There was no reason for them to even claim this was based on the book. If you're expecting the book, don't bother with this movie.

    If you've never read or heard of the book, don't bother either. It's so poorly written, and poorly acted. People make unrealistically stupid decisions because the screenwriting couldn't think of a more clever way to move the story along. The zombies are inconsistent with their strength and speed, with these characteristics changing from scene to scene. They go from superhuman speed and strength to clumsy dolts that you can easily outrun.

    Honestly, if I hadn't have gone with my wife, I would have just walked out.
  77. Jun 24, 2013
  78. Jun 24, 2013
    Fairly speaking, World War Z the movie does NOT respect the original novel at all, however it is still a very good movie if it was not overshadowed by its novel counterpart.
  79. Jun 29, 2013
    Thoroughly entertaining, tense, and visually awesome. Only minor complaints here.
    This is probably the best summer movie I've seen so far. Liked it better then Iron Man 3 (uneven, and not quite fun enough), Star Trek 2 (didn't get into the story, but liked the special effects), Great Gatsby etc.
  80. Jul 7, 2013
  81. Jun 26, 2013
  82. Jun 22, 2013
    My true score is 6,7. This isn't a bad movie... it isn't great either...
    It offers good moments such as the abundance of infected people trying to reach a city, specially in the big screen and in 3D, but lacks creativity... This is the typical movie that you watch the poster, see Brad Pit's name in it and you know he is going to save the humanity somehow.
    It isn't a boring movie, but
    it's to predictable, and unrealistic: [BEGIN SPOILERS]
    First they get straight to the point, a little rushed in my opinion.
    Then, the great finale... In a room full of controlled diseases, the "Hero" has to guess what will he inject himself with so he'll be able to camouflage himself from the infected people and.... Yes! What a surprise, you guessed it right!!! the right disease, the right quantity, and ONE person saves the world.
    It's a clear cly che, but you know... It's not mind blow movie but it's an okay one.
    If the movie you wanted to see in the theaters is full or unavailable, this is a fine choice.
  83. Jun 23, 2013
    several points off for not being the book by the same name. But still A good movie on its own.
    What other studios bid for the rights to the book should be allowed to make that movie.
    The Max Brooks book that restarted the Zombie Craze should be made.
  84. Jun 23, 2013
  85. Jun 24, 2013
  86. Jun 24, 2013
    Have not read the book- but it was as a movie, so captivating, enjoying and terrifying. Much of it seemed too real.
    there were weak points, yes, but I would see it again, and soon. well-done and I think it did it's job as a movie.
  87. Jun 25, 2013
  88. Jun 28, 2013
    This movie is just a mess. It's not... awful. The effects are nice, and some of the action scenes are actually quite well directed. A scene set in Jerusalem where hordes of zombies form a human ladder stands out as particularly memorable. Brad Pitt does a decent, if not particularly memorable job as Jerry. All of the other characters whinge dramatically at the camera in hushed tones about the horrors they've witnessed in a manner that has become par for the course in zombie fiction, but the problems with this film lie not with the actors, the effects, or the direction. The good things about the film are bogged down by the fact that the plot is absolutely abysmal. Almost every single action that drives the "story" forward is predicated entirely on human stupidity. SPOILER ALERT: The crowning achievement actually comes rather early on when the man who is supposed to be the last, best hope for humanity; the most brilliant scientist on the planet, trips and accidentally shoots himself in the brain. That is absurd. END SPOILERS It's just a bad story poorly told, so much so that, for me, by the end of the movie, it felt as though it were interminable (even though it's only about 100 minutes long). That said, it does have some cool set-piece moments. If you can catch it on TV in a few months, you'll have paid the perfect price for it. Expand
  89. Jul 8, 2013
    World War Z falls into that category of "alright", those interesting, but not particularly memorable films. Having read both WWZ and The Zombie Survival Guide, I had rather high expectations of the movie, and while I will try to put those aside, please be aware that since this was directly based off of the book, I do believe that it should try to stay true to the name.

    this is the biggest downfall of the movie; it does not stay true to its roots. It is a very fascinating story, but its aspirations to try to be the book I think prevented this movie from doing more than it could have. On one hand, it tried to tell a captivating original story, and on the other, it tried to replicate the book. In the end, its a bit disjointed; it should have either stayed the personal story it was in the beginning, or the epic world traveling it was in the end. I personally think that it should have been one of those "based off of" movies, like Blade-Runner, as opposed to trying to copy the book directly, because this expectation means that it tried to please everyone; a jack of two trades, but a master of neither. Fans of the book will especially not like how physical the zombies are in this film rendition portrayed as the slow, but persistent cannibalistic tortoise of the Tortoise and hare fable in the book, in the movie, they are more superhuman, and this is honestly enough for me to say they should have gone their own direction, rather than taking the title (or stayed with the lore of Brooks' Zombies)

    Now, that out of the way, I can say the special effects were pretty nice. Brad Pitt, I believe did a pretty good job as the lead. While it did not capture the full cultural and political balance of the book, its pretty darn hard to do that in a 2 hour production, and I do have to say that given the problems they had in production, the story felt pretty good, given the limitations they had. That being said, it is not exceptional, but still fairly good, and definitely worth seeing.

    I give it a 6 out of 10, because it is a fairly well written and well presented story about the apocalypse that tried to bite off a bit more flesh than it could chew in some instances I also believe that it would have been better as an alternate rendition rather than a direct one, as this did disappoint me as a fan of the book. However, given the problems with production, and the polish of the film, I have to say that it turned out pretty well, given its limitations.
  90. Jun 30, 2013
    Unmitigated swill. We have come to expect much better when Brad Pitt is aboard, since he's a talented draw who can pick and choose his projects. This film, however, demonstrates only that these days, the bigger the budget, the stupider the film. There is almost no plot here, just a zillion cartoonish, CGI zombies with rabies getting shot, hacked, burned, stabbed and punched as they just keep comin'. The moment of suspense, such as it is, is near the end, when Brad Pitt must retrieve the save-the-world serum from a lab where zombies dwell. The stupidest plot point of the year involved Pitt's wife and kids getting 86'd from their safe haven by the Guvamint. You have to see it to laugh at it. I'm sure a dozen absolutely talentless hacks worked on the alleged script. Expand
  91. Jun 24, 2013
    The movie keeps my interest, however I do not find myself glad for seeing it. Nor do I find myself saying ti is a bad movie. The movie had some parts that were a little cheesy, it was not on the top of my list of zombie films. The movie felt like the focus was more on Brad Pitt being a hero rather than humans trying to stop zombies.
  92. Aug 16, 2013
  93. Jul 8, 2013
    For all of the buzz about it delivering, it sure lacks delivery. The CGI zombie warfare destroying cities didn't do anything original, and the film became a globetrotting mission of hilariously-overdone stunts that even in Hollywood is a stretch. You've seen this before and you won't remember this 2 weeks after you've seen it. Worth a rental.
  94. Sep 3, 2013
    When Romero made Night of the Living Dead in 1968, he introduced a horror that was akin to the haunted house of a theme park. Zombies were a slow, marauding, creeping dread. When his movies were remade in the 90's and 00's, the dread of the haunted house was replaced by the adrenaline rush of a roller coaster ride. Suddenly zombies were fast. Critical scholars might point to the exponentially quickening feeling of society and its developments and problems leading to the shift. On television people are bombarded by endless waves of information and propaganda, tickers scroll by in all corners saying this or that. We've become conditioned to need things to be moving fast, lots of moving and shiny parts, to be appealing on a large scale. I can't think of a movie in recent years that has done this part better than World War Z. Its special effects are almost flawless, we see zombies behaving as a hive species, using their bodies to create more efficient means of transportation, much like ants do. The technical achievement is stunning, as are the visions of a world thrown into explosive chaos. My eyes darted around the screen constantly, trying to process as much that was going on as possible. The sheer pace of the movie never allowed my adrenaline to completely drop. This was a roller coaster ride. I'm actually surprised it didn't garner an 'R' rating it's a very aggressive, shocking movie in parts and although it spares the gallons of blood seen in its counterparts, scenes of people being smashed under cars, having an arm cut off, yanking teeth out I guess I just find it humorous and telling that a movie with a few boobs would get an R, while this stayed at PG13. Anyway, that's an aside. It's a good movie, a total popcorn flick. Pitt is okay (I never really think Pitt is anything better than okay, for an example of why I think he'll never be a 'good' actor just see his reaction to his daughter at the beginning when she asks him what 'martial law' means). But he's eye candy and he does carry the movie with a certain soulful charm. Direction, great set pieces phenomenal, action almost unprecedented. Which brings me to story. Despite liking this movie quite a bit, it bears no real resemblance to Max Brook's infinitely superior book of the same title. An indie movie like 'The Bay' did a better job of segmenting contributing storylines into a coherent whole, and I would have loved to have seen a more literal interpretation of Brooks' book. I think they could have done wonders with it and truly made the zombie movie of zombie movies. Instead, they went a different route, opting against the slow dreadful creeping global menace, captured by individual stories of survival and, well, they went for the rollercoaster. They manage to have Pitt globetrotting, so they do capture the 'flavor' of different regions of the world, but in the movie it's really all one flavor, while the book had very different 'feeling' settings, accentuated by interesting cultural-specific nuances and behaviors. That's what made the concept work for me, and they didn't pull it over into the filmed version. Had they called this movie something else, I would have been more impressed, because the remaining links to the book are mere strands. Plus, I'll personally always be more frightened of the menacing dread of a lumbering zombie, to the adrenaline rush of a fast one. So this movie is a mixed bag. It's a good action flick, it'll keep you glued to your seat, and you'll feel you got your money's worth. It's a decent addition to the zombie genre turning zombies into swarm predators isn't new but it's never been done on this scale or with this much style. But as an interpretation of Brooks' book, it's pretty sad. I can't imagine the author is happy with where this went. The masses will love it, fans of the original will wonder what happened to their book. The absolutely blatant foreshadowing of sequels means Brooks' already-classic zombie yarn will likely continue to be raped for years to come. I will be in the front row, and moaning the whole time while I get my guilty jollies. Expand
  95. Dec 26, 2013
    When the first World War Z book was published it took young readers by storm and climbed to the top of the New York Times Best Sellers list. It was destine to become a movie, especially now, with the popularity of zombies, but ultimately, the highly anticipated film fails to deliver anything different. U.N. Employee, Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt), is out with his family when a recently discovered virus hits the United States and all hell breaks loose. The first 45 minutes of this film were literally like the pilot of The Walking Dead. No one knows what's going on, people are panicking, it was all very predictable. The film does go into a different direction after that, but how many different ways of doing a zombie film are there? Lane starts traveling the world seeking a cure for the disease, while at the same time trying to avoid being attacked. The unfortunate fact is that no matter how good the acting or the writing, there is very little you can actually do with a zombie film. The zombies and the circumstances behind the outbreak are always a little different, but ultimately it becomes about survival or the race to find a cure. Brad Pitt is terrific, and as I have been saying for year, it doesn't matter how good looking the guy is, he belongs in action films! This is the genre where he excels and even though World War Z was painfully predictable, Pitt makes it worth watching. He is the focus of the story and it takes a lot of quick thinking and tremendous stunts to keep him alive. For me that was the best part of the film. There was a lot of hype behind World War Z and it was a very intense film, but like I said, there is very little you can do with an end of the world/zombie film that hasn't been done over and over again. While some what entertaining, World War Z is ultimately just another copy cat. Expand
  96. Aug 13, 2013
    That's not horror- I get scared easily and that movie didn't frightened me at all. To be honest, some zombie models appear to be more funny than disgusting. However, it's good action movie. I'm not fan of Brad Pitt, yet I think he managed to make a convincing appearance as retired UN agent. Huge variety of locations (e.g. Korea, Izrael) make it a bit more interesting. It's not perfect or very good- but you won't regret watching it. Expand
  97. euu
    Jun 30, 2013
  98. Jul 2, 2013


  99. Jun 28, 2013
    I am going to dedicate one paragraph and one paragraph only to the subject of the film being massively different and inferior to the book it is allegedly based upon. Max Brooks' novel is a collection of accounts of the worldwide war against zombies and covers social, religious and political repercussions stemming from the global war. Marc Forster's film is a zombie based action film led by Brad Pitt with occasional references to locations (Israel) or terminology (Zeke) from the source material. The term 'based on' has never been so loosely used. Being a massive fan of the book, I lowered my expectations for the film to match my disappointment after finding out that the screenplay was not staying truer to the spirit of the book. Anyway, that's out of the way now and this review will now attempt to assess the film on it's own merits.

    The film wastes no time, racing out of the traps with only a few minutes used to introduce the Lane family, father Gerry (Pitt), mother Karin (Mireille Enos) and two daughters, before the zombie outbreak takes over Philadelphia. From this point it's all zombie tension and action, including some well shot action sequences in an eerily lit apartment complex, until Gerry gets his family out to the UN fleet off the coast of America. This domestic introduction to the outbreak gives way to a more global perspective as the UN look to investigate the source in order to develop a vaccine. I felt this worldwide globe-trotting series of locations and discussions of the differing strategies of different nations following the outbreak was much more consistent with the spirit of the book.

    In my mind, introducing the zombies so early on in the film (we discover the world is overran within thirty minutes) underlines that Forster saw the film as more of a global thriller investigating the world's ability to cope with a zombie outbreak more similar to the likes of Contagion rather than a true zombie horror flick like Dawn of the Dead. I had no issue with this, and neither did I have any complaints (as I have seen consistently made) with either the lack of gore (only a 15 in the UK) or the speed of the zombies. Firstly with the gore, I personally don't see it as a prerequisite for a zombie film, if the director (or studio I imagine) choose to include it then so be it but I think there has been enough on The Walking Dead to see me through to the next season. Secondly with the zombies, there are some inconsistencies in their relative speed and intelligence and they did look very similar to the vampires from I Am Legend, but the fast nature of the herd is a change from the norm and does lead to some awesome looking scenes. Also, I don't think the film ever really confirmed that the infected were zombies or the undead, only that these were literal translations of terms used in other countries.

    I found the film capable of a decent level of tension and suspense in places although I really did begin to get frustrated with the repeatedly clumsy nature of the cast as they banged into everything in their way and attracted the attention of zombies. Doesn't anyone look where they are going?

    I thought that the rehashed ending (courtesy of rewriters Drew Goddard and Damon Lindelof) lost it's way in comparison with the more international nature of the film's first two acts and became more of a typical zombie film without being anything special, and this act was definitely the film's weakest part.

    Considering the delays and re-writes, World War Z is a success, in that it made it to the big screen at all and I actually enjoyed large parts of it. However, it's inconsistent writing and ending, not to mention the huge divergence from the book will always be a source of frustration to many.
  100. Jun 28, 2013
    OK I am not going to be a geek and analyse the film or point fingers at the direction or anything like that or give away the plot. Basically, this film is better than man of steel in that it's more involving but doesn't have the mega FX. It's a pretty cool story, but not one you really want to think too hard about otherwise you will start thinking 'well why didn't he just....' Brad goes off on a mission to save the world and he does a good job, the zombies are both scary as hell but gore-free more or less and weirdly 'family friendly' as they both race around and shuffle and jerk in the time-honoured zombie style. The whole thing is a bit like a adventure video game come to life. Def one to see on the big screen. Expand

Generally favorable reviews - based on 46 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 30 out of 46
  2. Negative: 2 out of 46
  1. Reviewed by: David Denby
    Jun 29, 2013
  2. Reviewed by: Peter Rainer
    Jun 21, 2013
  3. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    Jun 21, 2013