Trucks, SWAT, And Concrete Cows!! More From The Filming Of WORLD WAR Z!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY-SfConW5g

awesome.

they wouldn't NEED placemarkers to cg cows in an open field- are you kidding me? and if they did they'd use rubber, latex or some kind of board . not concrete- which must weigh a bitch to use for that purpose. plus then why would they purposely distress them? no, these look to be foam cows MADE TO LOOK LIKE CONCRETE which will probably be sculptures of maybe a decorative concrete fence at this fake dairy. seriously you guys. quit jumping to fucking conclusions.

Or statues of cows... Wwweeeeeeeeee!!!!!!

If HBO had done it in miniseries format, it would have been great - and it would have blown "The Walking Dead" right out of its everything-after-the-pilot-was-mediocre water. Instead, we're going to get a pretty lame movie. Search your feelings. You know it to be true.

Is everyone retarded today?

easy to see those cows are going to be lined up along the road edge near that dairy. a fence. they are just where they are (clumped behind sign) until the scene is set. and by the looks of it, the farmer was shooting toward the road at one point- blowing bullet sized chunks out of the cows. but i don't remember anything like that from the book. i admittedly forget shit though.

And aparantly Beelzebub is way excited about it.

and for cows they tie some cats together. ITS CALLED MOVIE MAGIC NUMBSKULLS There using a labradoodle for Bane..

this really concerns me, are the rumours about the plot, rating etc true? C'mon aicn investigate this stuff will ya

but hearing the rumors about major alterations to the story and a Pg-13 rating I'm not not so sure. I hope they prove to be untrue, but the movie has dropped from "must see" to "well, we want to see a movie...I guess we can go". I'm afraid it'll soon drop to "look what came out on DVD/Blu Ray".

I took the photograph of the 'concrete' cows and the signs. Yeah, they were made of foam or polystyrene but painted and distressed to look like concrete. They were not even life size, so they wouldn't even look good from a distance. Still pretty odd. Here is a link relating to the scenes they appear in. I hope Brad was insured... http://preview.tinyurl.com/wwzaccident This is a long isolated road running alongside an industrial area so the closed it off. There were about a dozen or so American style cars running up and down it. At the end of the filming the took away a smashed Philidelphia yellow cab and a wrecked Chrysler Cruiser. Brad's Winnebago (of which there were two identical models - one was for long shots and the other had a close up camera rigged to it and it was pulled by a camera truck) also suffered damage, with both door windows being smashed in, as if someone had attacked it. More photos here... http://preview.tinyurl.com/wwzphotoalbum

Now I agree HBO would probably do a great job with it, but did anyone stop to consider *maybe* HBO was never approached or they were approached but said they were uninterested? Remember, just because *you* want something, doesn't mean *you* are going to get it.

Movie not even out, you guys are fucking beyond retarded, no trailer and a few spie shots and it's instant dismissal.... Oh noes PG13... Fuck off how do you not know that there won't be an unrated blu??? Sure if your want your R rated gore go fund romeros next fucking trainwreck

Well, pretty easy to dismiss it when the script basically removed everything that was great about the novel. The rating was simply the final nail. So ease up there little mister.

He beat me to it. Zombies have been done to death (bah dump bump). WWZ, the novel, was one of the first examples of turning the genre into something epic and meaningful in terms of what it had to say about society. Good fiction will always do that. What they appear to be doing here is completely eviscerating everything that made the novel an incredible read and a more incredible work of fiction. I don't mean the usual, "the book is better" criticisms. They don't appear to even give a shit what was in the book. The biggest set piece in the book, The Battle Of Yonkers, doesn't appear to be a part of this movie. Some of the best stories from the book took place during and long after the outbreak. The use of a single protagonist (Brad Pitt) trying to PREVENT that outbreak basically means they are going to use the well-marketed/well-received label World War Z and not much else. I can only imagine what Brooks thinks of all this.

Sequences from the book, inserting him as an American pov they can do several of the best sequences from WWz. The rating doesn't phase me, because the ratings board gives much latitude to "fantasy" or "make-believe" violence, and in essence "Walking Dead" level violence would only get a PG-13. The proof will be in the writing and acting--decent gore can be found in bargain-bin horror films. Still very interested in this.

and any fan should know that it doesn't suit a 2hr movie format, as has been said plenty of times it's more suited to a tv series but let's face it that's not even likely due to it's huge scope and as a zombie fan I'm fucking ecstatic that were actually getting another "big" budget zombie flick without romeros taint over it even if it doesn't follow the book, the story or the central premise the fact that Brad Pitt is starring in this is another huge bonus so people should really shut the fuck up and await the trailer before nailing the coffin shut

Hollywood used to be able to make films for adults. What the fuck happened to that?

Most of the people running Hollywood now are Boomers who never actually grew up themselves.

The Walking Dead gets it's rating from the network itself so there's far more leeway than having to submit each episode to a ratings board. There has never been a PG-13 Zombie film, not a one. You can't do a real one without the gore.

with the vehicles.

Big budget adult drama about possible end of the human race. Couldn't give a shit if it's PG13. Bored shitless of standard zombie gore at the moment anyway due to recent glut of the same story being retold with the same shots. If they really are going for lighter rating maybe they've figured out alternative way to tell an apocalypse story. Hell, even if it's the Irwin fucking Allen version of a zombie movie I'd still be more willing to give it a go than some of the supposedly hardcore zombie turds that have been floating DTV recently. Actually I kind of like the sound of the Irwin Allen Zombie movie. The Swarm needs a reboot.

I can say that the story board was much worse...

This Battle of Yonkers "Centerpiece", at least in how it was explained (didnt read it), sounds purely moronic, dumb enough to completely write off this book. Zombies routing an organized Western military force? Oh I get it, its our hubris or something the book is making a "statement" about. Wheee, more liberalism taking down a sweet zombie movie, just like when the end of 28 Days Later was brought to a screeching halt to make some stupid point about soldiers or the military industrial complex or whatever liberal du jour issue of the day was.

.......I'm going to go-off on a tangent here, but say the same kind of behind the scenes shooting that has been going on for Dark Knight Rises and World War Z was done, say, it its day for The Empire Strikes Back? Lets imagine at that time we could see all the warts, the stuff we don't really want to see, that isn't in the movie? The answer is right there. You would be completely non-plussed, to the point where you'd be put-off the film altogether. This is the issue I can see here; we're all being fed these images of these films, and never mind that when the film is finally on the big screen we're going to be able to judge the work for ourselves; right now, we're seeing what we shouldn't. And I feel its tarnishing any good the film might have. Forgive me for my rant, I'm just saddened a little.

I don't usually post on AICN but the level of stupidity on display here has hit an all-time high. I can't sit idly by any more. We've always known that the majority of people who post on here probably still live with thei mothers, don't have jobs and divide their time between masturbating, playing violent computer games and arguing on bulletin boards about obscure and pointless science fiction minutiae - but the lack of common sense, maturity, social skills and intelligence on display here is beyond belief. And for people who claim to enjoy imaginative fiction (ie fantasy and sci-fi) the lack of imagination on display is staggering too. For fuck's sake, get a grip and stop being such idiotic and immature little twerps. First - there are NOT going to be any CGI zombie cows in this movie. Those fake-concrete cows are set dressing. Nothing more, nothing less. Use your fucking common sense, instead of being a literal-minded idiot Second - who the fuck cares whether this is a PG-13 or an R. What's the obsession with gore? Only pubescent boys are obsessed with gore (the bulk of the people on this board, it seems) and its a sign of deep immaturity. Grow up. A movie (even a zombie movie) does not need an R-rating or be steeped in gore to be fucking terrifying and disturbing. That's what World War Z should be: a disturbing and terrifying piece about the disintegration and destruction of the human race by an almost undefeatable enemy. You don't need buckets of gore to tell that story. One of the most universally respected horror/sci-fi movies of all time (ALIEN) is - with one notable exception - almost entirely gore-free and yet instills a pervading and relentless sense of dread. World War Z can do that too. And besides, how much gore was there in the book, when you actually think about it? hardly any. Enough with the rants about a PG-13 rating. I just want Marc Forster to deliver the best movie he can, whatever the rating, and I want as many people as possible to see it and enjoy along with me. If you want gore, go watch some torture porn, and enjoy jerking off to it. Maybe one day you'll actually meet a real female and see the error of your ways. Third - the movie does not need to be an exact shot for shot adaptation of the book to be a great movie. Films are ADAPTATIONS (look it up in a dictionary, it might help). If you want everything that's in the book, then read the fucking book. Its been ADAPTED for the medium of cinema. That means its been changed. ** SPOILERS AHEAD** I've read two different drafts of MJS's script for World War Z now, and I think what he's done is actually very clever. He's accepted that a full dramatisation of the book is unfilmable because of its scale - at least without the biggest budget Hollywood has ever seen, the biggest cast and a shooting schedule that would run into years. He's also accepted that the "first person interview format" wouldn't work on screen - so what he's done is to create a COMPANION PIECE to the book. Its a piece of meta-fiction, telling a fictionalised account of how the book was written. The final scene in the scripts has copies of "World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War" rolling off the printing presses, and while it keeps some of the key set-pieces from the book, it interweaves them with the story of 1) Brad Pitt's character collecting stories for the book and discovering a conspiracy as he does so, and 2) the experiences, in flashback, of Brad and family as they try to survive in a world going to hell. (Note there is NOTHING in the scripts about Brad saving the world and preventing the zombie plague.) The reason I think this is clever is that in some works of art, the content and the medium are inseparable. They are both part of the work; two sides of the same coin. Could you imagine the Mona Lisa as a poem? Could you imagine a Marx Brothers comedy as a novel? Could you imagine Blade Runner as a radio play? No, of course not. And World War Z (the book) cannot be anything OTHER than a book. It's medium and the style its story is told in prevents it from being anything other than a book. An attempt to simply dramatise it would fail. So that's why Straczynski and Forster are creating something parallel to the book something that uses the medium of cinema rather than text. And it works. ** SPOILERS OVER** Fourth - I just don't believe the synopsis that came out recently is accurate. It certainly doesn't bear any relation to the scripts I've read (whereas the scenes being shot do). It was probably written by some coked-up person in the publicity department in the last few seconds before they went out for a liquid lunch. They've probably never even seen the treatment, let alone read the script and they just simply fell back on the tired old cliches that they spew out for every other movie. Use your fucking common sense. Somebody screwed up and got it wrong. Fifth - I'm sick of reading "this will suck" etc. How the fuck do you know? Can you see the future? Have you got a fucking crystal ball? If so, can I please borrow it so that I know where to invest my savings? Just shut the fuck up and stop being such a moron, and wait and see the movie (like the rest of us) before you give your opinion on it. Jeez....

Yes! Thank God someone else here is sane and not some reactionary child. Thanks for saying what I've been thinking about the Talk Backs for a long time. Being a negative prick is out (especially about things you have no real clue about). Get with the program. Being a negative prick does not make you cool or more knowledgeable - it makes you seem retarded and imature. Thank God most of you wont be breeding.

You have to read the book. It explains why the military was overrun. Without giving it away, it makes sense it you understand the tactics, weapons used and other factors that go into fighting an enemy of this sort. Even if you do not understand, the book explains how and why. read the book before you pass judgement.

while i agree with what your sayin, i feel it's the lack of any concrete news (or cows) is what gets peoples backs up, especially mine. An for that the problem lies with all the speculation that surrounds an adaptation of a book like world war z. i thought this site had moles an guys on the inside to get us the cool news?

You are dead on, my friend. And not only is it inadvisable, or common, not to do a shot-by-shot of a book, I suggest it is IMPOSSIBLE to do a precise scene-by-scene translation. Never seen it, ever. Not even when the same writer did the book and the screenplay. Close, yes. Exact, never. Be very interested if anyone out there has a single contrary example.

I guess I can roll with what you said, except for the fact that the title is WWZ. If they wanted to toss the book out the window, why even name it that? Me thinks it's because they want to bamboozle the fans of the book into paying a few credits to see the movie. Also, can you explain why you think having Brad Pitt in the movie is a huge bonus? Not slamming him, just curious since I've never heard to him referred to as such. And once again, ease up with the insulting language little mister, it's just so totally misplaced.

Please someone explain to me how a pg13 rating works for such a project? Im a big dense, so by all means go into detail, draw diagrams, etc.

Its a risk, no doubt. the rating was probably a take it or leave it type deal.

in a music video by Glasgow band Sonny Marvello for their 'tiny little sparks' e.p. I managed to get a look at some of the 'attack' scenes, very surreal hearing all those screams echo around the square. And because we couldn't see the cameras it looked real. Fun times.

What happened was a) everyone got screwed over by over-priced theatre tickets, and b) internet piracy went through the roof. Hollywood decided there wasn't any room for multiple markets and demographics. It wants/needs to sell to everyone, so everything has to have broad appeal or else be based on proven properties. Sucks for sure, but that's your reason.