Con: Where Do You Take The Characters?
Even though I kinda liked
World War Z (read my reaction to the film
here), I did have an issue with the paper-thin characters that populated the movie. Outside of protagonist Gerry Lane, none of the other characters were all that interesting. Many of them existed as living plot devices, disappearing entirely after brief exposition dialogue bits. Even Gerry's family served no real purpose other than to give
World War Z an emotional aspect. When Hollywood sequels are at their best, they don't just expand the movie's universe, they continue the development of the characters and push them in new directions as they face new challenges. In
The Empire Strikes Back, we saw Luke begin his Jedi training. Aragorn gradually becomes a leader during the
Lord of the Rings trilogy. Ripley learns to overcome her fears of the aliens in
Aliens and fight back with a vengeance. It helps the prospects of your sequel when the characters still have some untapped potential. The examples I listed above work for that reason. If you have your character's arc become complete by the end of the first film, then there's no place to go for part two. By the end of
World War Z, I had trouble figuring out what else the filmmakers could do with the characters. Even Gerry - despite some strong moments - doesn't have that much depth when you step back and look at the overall picture. This is troubling for the sequel. One way around the weak characters is to focus on a new cast for the next film (think
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, which trades James Franco for Gary Oldman) but that's a major risk. Pitt is one of the biggest stars around and casual audiences like their familiarity with sequels. It's a fine line Paramount has to walk. I do see them adding some new characters for the sequel if only to keep things interesting.