A Sequel to World War Z Is Confirmed

Chris Savage

World War ZHow many of you guys went to see World War Z this past weekend? Judging by these numbers it would appear as if many of you did as the film took in $66 million in North America alone. Not just that, but the film has already raked in $111.8 million worldwide, which marks the film as the best opening for an original live-action tentpole since Avatar.

So, with the film doing so well, I for one am surprised, especially after all the trouble they had with the production of the film, but it appears as if the audience have spoken and with that, Paramount have spoken too.

Before all the trouble began with the production of World War Z, the project was planned as a trilogy, but once all the trouble started, the idea of a franchise was scraped and I guess they just hoped for the best.

Now, in a turn of fortune, the film has done very well, and according to The Hollywood Reporter, Paramount is riving plans for a sequel, and quite possibly this could end up as the trilogy which was initially planed, but who’s to say it will stop as a trilogy if future films continue to do so well?

So what do you guys think? Excited for more World War Z, or was the film a total flop for you? Hit up the comments and let us know.


Our policy for commenting is simple. If you troll or post spam or act like a child we will send you to your room without dinner and take away your posting priviledges. Have fun, be polite!

      1. lance malarky June 24, 2013 at 9:14 am

        In my humble opinion, just because the film done so well on the opening weekend does not make it good. As with Avatar, I believe it done so well because everyone wanted to see what all the hype was about. That and the fact that Brad Pitt commands a large audience for being a great actor (and he gets the ladies wet between the legs, too, so I hear).
        Unlike Avatar, though, this film is crap. I for one was very disappointed in this film and I believe that you will not see the numbers steadily increase as I don’t see how any good film fan will be ranting and raving about it to their fellow man.
        The plot was weak, the special effects were not so special for the 21st century and doing yet another zombie film is like saying ‘hey, guys, I’ve got this great idea! A guy meets a girl, they fall in love but what do you know, they can’t have each other for some stupid reason until the very end and they live happily ever after’
        This film had nothing going for it that makes it stand out as an original, good movie.
        I personally will not be looking forward to a sequel and feel if they do this, it will be a great mistake, just like the first movie.
        I am an avid horror fan and can’t hep but think that surely we haven’t ran out of ideas? It’s been 45 years since the original Night of the Living Dead and I really feel we have exhausted the whole Zombie Movie franchise.
        Maybe my fellow horror fans will stand up with me and demand they make something good, that isn’t a bloody remake!
        Any thoughts?

        • Chris Savage June 24, 2013 at 10:51 am

          Thanks for commenting. I totally agree, Lance. This is one of the reasons why I’m all for the indie scene. Originality isn’t dead, it’s just hidden and only if some of the major studios took notice and gave these films the outlet they deserve, we would be inundated with some awesome original horror features on the big screen. Sadly though, they’re all for the quick buck. Will I see World War Z? Yeah, probably, but only when it hits DVD as a rental.

      2. Sara Miller June 24, 2013 at 12:16 pm

        I am a zombie enthusiast, so I love all zombie movies. I liked the movie. I think the first movie is leading up to something better and I am willing to give it another chance. However, I do think they should have focused more on the zombies and had more zombie gore. The public wants to be scared and grossed out. People want to see zombies eating flesh and brains. I’m sorry, but it’s true. When someone says zombie what comes to mind. Flesh eating, disease ridden, puss bags eating human flesh. So, I definitely think if it had more zombie gore, brains, and blood flying at the screen that people would have loved it. So, I really hope they learn from their mistakes and make it better. I’ve been watching zombie movies from the age of 6 and I know what I want to see in a zombie movie and WWZ just didn’t have it. So, I am hoping that they amp it up with the blood and guts for the next one. They need to go back to the old zombie movies and see what the hell scared everyone and use it in the next one because there is something about the old zombies movies that scared the crap out of people. I mean look at The Walking Dead, it has a whole crap load of blood and guts. So, I am hoping and praying that they put more gore in it, but as a zombie enthusiast I will be there for the second movie.

      3. Erik Christensen June 24, 2013 at 1:52 pm

        Avatar sucked harder than World War Z.

        That being said.. World War Z was an abortion of a movie. And the “solution” to the zombie plague was just stupid

        • lance malarky June 24, 2013 at 4:32 pm

          Mayhap we could agree that they both sucked, Erik? My argument, although not really stated, is that at least Avatar was something different. It got people talking, where as I don’t see that people will be shouting from the roof tops about this pile off Sh*t.
          Sarah, I agree with you about the gore, as I mentioned about the special effects in my own rant. The Walking Dead do this amazingly well and break away from the more traditional night/dark sense, if they had done that in this movie with a lot of blood and wreckage, I would have had a sh*t eating grin. Instead I was left looking like a sad clown.
          And Chris, man, thanks for the post. Any suggestions on good horrors? I’ve found myself turning to Korean and Japanese movies over the past 5 years.

        • Chris Savage June 24, 2013 at 5:19 pm

          Totally. Our foreign friends have really been showing us how to do horror right. As you’ve been watching a lot of foreign films, I can only assume that you’ve seen ‘I Saw the Devil’, ‘A Tale of Two Sisters’, ‘Bedevilled’, ‘Three…Extremes’, ‘Martyrs’, ‘Tokyo Gore Police’, and films like that.

          As much as my love for foreign horror, I totally love our homegrown indie horror flicks. There are some films just hitting the scene titled ‘Resolution’, ‘The Battery’, The Demon’s Rook’, ‘Cool As Hell’, and one of the best films I have seen in a long time is ‘Found’, but sadly that one is hard to find as I don’t believe it has been released, but if you hit the festival circuit and it’s there, hit that sucker up!
          Also be sure to hit up our Top 10 Page; http://www.horror-movies.ca/series/top-10-horror-movies/#/page/3 as I’m sure you will find something awesome to watch.

      4. Carl Lopez June 24, 2013 at 2:27 pm

        I wonder just how many people went to the movie based on the title, expecting it to be just a little of the audiobook. To me, this was the classic “Bait and Switch” . You expect something (based on the title) and you get something less (a typical zombie movie). I was disappointed. This movie was ok, not great or fantastic but just ok.

      5. M. June 24, 2013 at 10:33 pm

        I think you underestimate this film. I am a fan of zombie movies, but I have never been truly scared by a movie. World War Z at least is how I imagine a zombie apocalypse happening: nobody listening, chaos, and panic. Even if there were plot holes, I feel like it struck much closer to home than most zombie movies I can think of. They didn’t focus on the blood and guts because this isn’t an action film really; it is based off a book that is written interview style, almost like a documentary. To throw in all the gore you crave is to make it the exact same as every other zombie movie out there; hero wakes up, hero kicks zombie ass, hero survives, everyone is happy (give or take). For a zombie movie this is original. What is so unique about the earlier zombie movies? It was a new idea, but coming first doesn’t make them better, and if you want unique, indie horror movies that’s great, but some people still want zombies. And they want different zombies, not the same formula applied over and over again like a romantic comedy.

      6. Mike New June 25, 2013 at 6:27 am

        I saw this movie and I did like it. Like all movies, we have our pros and cons. I thought it was very creative on their solution to fight back with the zombie outbreak. I also thought it was awesome how Brad Pitt’s character protected himself against the zombies. Spoiler—He would use duct tape and magazines to protect himself from being bitten. I thought the action and the acting was good. The zombies in the movie were bad asses. However, I do wish they looked a little bit more “zombie” than human. That was my only complaint about the zombies. When the zombies where attacking, it was so fast it was hard to keep up. If you blinked for one second, you would miss something. They were like the zombies from Dawn of the Dead (remake), but on steroids. Like Everyone else, the CGI of the zombies didn’t look so good. I did enjoy the airplane scene and the scene when Gerry was in Israel. I won’t lie, I think the airplane scene will always be the best scene of any zombie movie. Even though it was somewhat of a weak plot, I thought it was a very creative movie. I wish we knew how the outbreak got started, but that is ok. All people want to compare this to the book. If you view it as simply as a movie as if the book didn’t exist, I think a lot of people would enjoy this.

        I think it would be a very bad idea to make this in a triology or a sequel. If a sequel where to be made, they would probably need different characters. They would need a big name actor/actress to be attached to it.

      7. Read more books July 7, 2013 at 2:32 pm

        Taiwanese rabies too bad there rabies doesn’t existing in Taiwan. Also if the incubation period was so short it wouldn’t have been able to spread to other countries so quickly this movie sucks doesn’t make sense and dose not deserve to carry the same name. I feel that that just too a steaming shit on one of my favorite books other than the 5 minutes of dialog with the Musad agent and the statement that the zombies have no circulatory system there are no similarities with the book.

        • John July 29, 2013 at 2:12 am

          Taiwan has rabies!

        • Amauri Alves July 29, 2013 at 7:59 pm

          It is said somewhere in the movie. that the spreading of the virus was became faster while the virus evolved.

      8. chase July 8, 2013 at 4:13 am

        I for one enjoyed and liked the movie. It showed light that sometimes our flaws can be our greatest strength. Yeah they did a zombie movie but kept it very realistic and modern day i cant wait to see the next one.

      9. anna t July 11, 2013 at 2:49 am

        I went to see this NOT because it has Brad Pitt in it (in fact I really dont care for him) but because it was a zombie movie. I also went to see this with only the understanding that the book was written as a compilation of survivors stories, after the war whereas the movie followed one person per se and was set in present tense. It was not meant to be your typical bloody gory zombie flick that doesnt scare anyone. There were a couple spots that made me jump in this where I see most zombie movies (romeros included) to be inherently awful but still good enough to watch and entertain. I dont believe they ever firmly linked the outbreak to rabies, some said it was that but eh who knows? and while the camoflauge created seems unlikely at least it gave us something. Something other than a group of survivors sailing off into the sunset, not knowing what happens or they end up on an island thats over run. This had an actual end, and a possible beginning for more. And surprisingly enough Brad Pitt did a decent job of kicking ass in the movie, very intuitive too!

      10. anna t July 11, 2013 at 2:52 am

        Oh and Im fairly certain that Max Brooks states in one of his books that zombies do not have a circulatory system…and BTW like the walking dead, it wasnt supposed to be just like the book at all

      11. Amauri Alves July 12, 2013 at 5:46 pm

        I think a second and third WWZ movies would be great. It is a great action movie, but I think it should be at least rated “R”, so we could see some blood and body parts 😉

      12. Jim August 2, 2013 at 3:23 am

        Ok, I may not be the typical “zombie fan” but I am a zombie fan non the less. I am frustrated by most “typical” zombie fans that are possibly the reason great zombie movies are so rare. I have no qualms with blood and gore but they are absolutely not what makes a zombie movie great. What makes it for me is the sense of an overwhelming and spreading threat that the characters must at least attempt to escape. The blood and gore are tools. There are too many zombie movies that are largely unwatchable because they think all we want is to see zombies chomp on rotting flesh. We want that because it supports the idea of the threat and what we really want is to escape that threat. Think about why so many “that’s not a zombie movie” movies are so often thought of as a zombie movie. its because they are built around that same premise. The Crazies, 28 Days Later, I Am Legend. these movies are the same “genre” that we want to call the zombie movie because the virus is spreading and the few are fighting to survive. i love that thrill. i love to play “infection” style games where many start and only one survives. The Walking Dead works best because it leans on story and characters and the blood and gore shows up where makes sense.

        • Amauri Alves August 2, 2013 at 2:16 pm

          I agree in parts with you. The Walking Dead does work because it is drama-centered instead of gore-centered, but I think that sometimes they go to far in the “drama road”: to much crying, and too much Lory (actually she doesn’t stop bothering us even after her death LOL).

          And I agree that the center of the called zombie movies is the survival element. Even the Romero’s classics are based on that. Other pillar for zombie movies is the group interaction issues: how different people will work together to survive. The “zombie menace” is just like any other virus or threat: it is spreading all over, sometimes faster, sometimes slower, sometimes it had spread all over and ended with all life form but one guy and his dog. De question is not about the zombies; it is all about surviving.

      13. Jim August 20, 2013 at 7:49 pm

        Yes. That is exactly how I feel. I also think the Walking Dead (the show at least) leans too much on drama. Its mostly because I don’t care much for the acting.

      14. Sarah October 14, 2013 at 6:23 am

        I am legend is actually a vampire movie, not a zombie movie….go to a bookstore and look for the original book, before the movie cover change-it has vampires all over it, and it speaks of “blood-thirsty creatures”, story synopsis speaks of a disease that resembles vampirism. But it did help with the development of the “zombie genre” because of the apocalyptic nature of the book. WWZ was alright, in my opinion they spent too much of their time setting up the story, then when it came down to the nitty gritty of why and how do we fight? there was no time left so they rushed it. It DID state that it was a “screen adaptation”, so those who were expecting the movie to mirror the book better, you should have known from the get go that it wouldn’t have. Screen adaptation = literary license to change as they feel will draw crowds. To me, it was as though they tried something different, but weren’t sure how to follow through with that same style in the intimate sections, so they fell back on what they knew would sell. Lets just hope the timeline falls out a bit better in the next film.