So the question still remains – is the now giant gamble that is World War Z going to pay off for Paramount Pictures and all the producers involved? Well, when you’re already $200 million in the hole, you’ve got a pretty hefty sum to make up monetarily, so they’re not getting off on the right foot.
Defining a film as a success is always objective because a film can financially be deemed a “success” when it makes a positive margin, yet reviews could absolutely pan the film and deem the quality an obvious failure. But studios don’t really care for critical analysis, because they aren’t making their money off critics – the money is made off of mainstream audiences.
So a movie gets 60 negative reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, yet it turns a $350 million dollar profit, la-di-freakin-da, am I right? You think there’s a producer going “Oh man, we’ve got a 7% on Rotten Tomatoes, there’s no way we can put a sequel out there,” and not “hell, the entire world just saw our movie, think they won’t see another movie about the same crap in a different place? Cha-Ching!” So in addressing Paramount’s gamble, we first must address what signifies success.
Let’s discuss the monetary gamble of World War Z, which some reports are claiming to cost almost $400 million based on the addition of advertising and whatnot. While I don’t really believe this, the number that has been confirmed is in the $200 million ballpark, thanks in part to all the reshooting and an overall lack of attention.
Paramount’s President of Production, Marc Evans recalls leaving Malta and finding a stack of forgotten purchase orders relating to the cast and extras just thrown in a desk drawer and forgotten until the final clean-up. That’s millions of dollars in overages literally just stored away and forgotten, basically summarizing the terrible preparation and bumbling production that plagued the entire film which World War Z now has to make up in revenue, only adding to the already grandiose budget.
With that said, all the promotional material is emphasizing the fact that Brad Pitt will lead the fight against this zombie scourge, and superfans all over the world will see just about anything the Hollywood hunk makes. You’re going to get audience turnout just from Pitt’s persona alone, despite World War Z technically being a zombie film. Again, the marketing seems to be ignoring this fact by only showing far-away shots of the CGI zombies, and the watered-down PG-13 rating opens up the film to younger audiences who don’t know any better having not seen the numerous R-rated zombie movies released each year. These giant demographics will undoubtedly contribute a nice chunk of revenue.
World War Z is crafted to be the safest “horror” movie possible, and it’s been done rather well. There’s no doubt these tactics will pay off, letting viewers of all walks of life approach World War Z with open arms.
What does that mean for revenue? Honestly, forget the fact that Brooks wasn’t involved in creating World War Z – people are going to show up, and it’s going to be successful. Do you think even half the audience will have read Brooks’ novel before catching Forster’s film? Yup, his warnings won’t mean anything to those viewers without any knowledge of what the source material even represents.
World War Z will be just another mainstream zombie thriller. A money-snatching, studio pleasing thriller. Quality wise though? Well you’ll just have to check back next week for my follow-up article predicting whether this crazy ride will be worth the price of admission.
My Verdict?
World War Z should earn enough dough to put producers in the green. Enjoy it, Brad.
