Oh hell yes. I don't think I've ever seen a movie in theaters that actually made me want to walk out of the theater. I actually considered taking a nap. I even closed my eyes for a bit.

We rented it from home (Uverse On Demand). The GF fell asleep at around the 20 minute point and never woke up. In fact I think she's still hiding from this movie in her slumber right now. I have to call her and wake her up. I'll just let her know the movie finished about 14 hours ago.

Just remember to cop a good feel before you wake her up.

Thats "How" I wake her up. That or I fart real loud, but thats (usually) not on purpose.

I was just making this exact same comparison to I Am Legend yesterday, after I watched World War Z. Its easy to judge each film on its own without comparison to the books, because they really have very little in common with them.

Does it HAVE to be though? Can't the two works exist separately?
I guess I would only expect that if they promote the film saying that it's an adaption of the book but if they don't say that then why must people still compare the two?

Yeah sure.. No one HAS to compare the movie to the book. Obviously thats easier said than done for most people, myself included. I'm only saying its easier not to in the case of WWZ and I Am Legend, because they deviate so far from the books.

The thing is, they're not marketing the film as an "inspired by but not actually and adaption of..." with World War Z. The people who don't like the film are going to totally dismiss the book because they didn't like it. Fans of the book are getting upset because of the missed opportunity for those people to enjoy the greatest zombie fiction of all time. Everybody wants the things they love to be loved by other people.

Sorry DJ...I don't think I read your last post correctly or all the way through. But I think the answer to your question is pretty simple...they have the same names as the books and ARE attached to the books promotionally. Whether they are saying it's an "adaption" or "inspired by" or whatever is mostly irrelevant to the general public, whose first inclination is going to be to either compare them, if they've read the book, or assume its the same as the book if they haven't.

And Exo...I totally agree with what you're saying. All we can really do is assure as many people as possible that the film and the movie are nothing alike. In the case of I Am Legend, I've talked a couple people into reading the book by assuring them that it's pretty much nothing like the Will Smith film, except that the main characters have the same name basically. It doesn't have to be a comparison though. I actually enjoyed the film on it's own, and I think that's only because it was so different from the book. To me they are separate entities all together.

Anyway, speaking of last movie seen, and World War Z:
http://latimesherocomplex.files.word...pg?w=230&h=360
The movie was completely and utterly mediocre. The acting was sub par. The plot was underwhelming. It was too busy. It didn't give you enough time to be invested in any of the characters. Yes, it was stressful in some parts, but afterwards I had no desire to talk about how epically great or terribly poor the film was. It was just...meh.

The interesting thing about I Am Legend is that there are actually three different movie adaptations of it: The Last Man on Earth (1964), The Omega Man (1971) and I Am Legend (2007). They're all pretty different from each other but I enjoy all of them in different ways.