World War Z: 5 Pros & Cons

Pro: Gerry Lane

World War Z There was a lot of outrage from fans of the source material when it was revealed that the movie World War Z would deviate greatly from the original book. Instead of telling the "oral history of the zombie war," Marc Forster's adaptation would focus on U.N. employee Gerry Lane (played by Pitt) who is forced to leave his family behind as he goes on a globetrotting adventure searching for a cure to the zombie outbreak. I'm guessing the filmmakers made this decision in order to make World War Z more cinematic and the Gerry Lane character is one of the biggest bright spots in the whole film. It's not the role moviegoers will always associate with Pitt (a certain Mr. Durden claimed that title long ago), but the actor gives a very nice performance as an everyman thrown into an extraordinary situation. Gerry is an easy character to relate to and root for. He possesses all the qualities you would want to see in a movie hero. He's selfless (he's always concerned about what's best for his family). He's resourceful (he quickly picks up on strategies to gain the upper hand against the zombies) and he's willing to sacrifice himself for the greater good (the nail-biting climax in the tense third act). When he completes his goal and is reunited with his family at the end of the movie, you feel happy. While a faux documentary featuring "interviews" with "survivors" of a war could have been an interesting route to take, reworking the narrative and creating Gerry Lane was a wise choice both from a business (this type of film is easier to market) and artistic (Gerry Lane makes it easier for the viewers to experience to film's events) perspective.
Contributor
Contributor

I spend most of my free time either reading about upcoming movies, watching movies, or going to the movie theater. I enjoy watching all types of films from summer blockbusters to Oscar contending dramas. I am also a huge sports fan, rooting for the New York Giants, Knicks, and Yankees