2012-11-09, 04:49 AM
Re: World War Z (the film)
The book isn't so bad.
Brooks explained why many kind of ammo didn't work well against zombies, both for the collateral damage, both for things like "who cares if you suck out the air?". Some explanation works, some others, much less.
It's not realistic? again, who cares? we're talking 'bout zombies, it's not that a scenario with zombies with supernatural abilities (ala L4D) is less stupid.
in WWZ, zombies are impervious to explosions and so on, this is the setting.
'bout yonkers. It's stupid? yes. It is somehow justified? sort of. Soldiers were wearing senseless equipment for the presence of the TV, it was a sort of spot. See, we all know it was totally dumb, the whole trenches thing, the stationary tanks, yadda yadda.
You know what? it happens. Real military history, even the recent one, is literally full of battles losed by dumb decisions, made because you overestimate yourself, and undervalue your enemy. To be absolutely sure of your victory, usually leads to disaster, and (just to cite a famous example) you don't need to be a genius to guess that charging frontally a fortified position filled with cannons, with a cavalry light brigade, isn't probally the best option available.
So, I can buy one Yonker. I'm less incline to buy that a single battle losed, throws into chaos your entire army and you're not able to do anything in your whole country except fleeing.
Last edited by Killer Angel; 2012-11-09 at 05:30 AM.
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes. (W.Whitman)
Things that increase my self esteem:
Avatar removed, work in progress...
Originally Posted by Kaiyanwang
Originally Posted by JoeYounger
Originally Posted by Ryu_Bonkosi
Originally Posted by grimbold
Originally Posted by PairO'Dice Lost