Warm Bodies – worst zombie movie ever!

Warm Bodies – worst zombie movie ever!

In the category of zombie films, it’s hard to imagine there even exists a bottom! There is a joy and pleasure in making and watching bad and campy zombie films in a way that most other genres do not enjoy. Gore that looks like ketchup and rubber body parts, story lines that are more absurd than stories told by five year old children, dialogue about as quality as listening to a couple guys fart at each other, we love this stuff! But, I have found a zombie movie so bad, so horribly offensive to my eyes and ears, that I feel like I have to share with everyone as a warning to stay away.

warm-bodies-2With the insane popularity that the zombie genre currently garners and the recent box office success of the Twilight series it seemed inevitable, unavoidable even, that someone needed to make a Twilight-esque zombie movie. Enter: Warm Bodies. The premise of this film is that zombies do in fact think. They have feelings and long for companionship, just lack the ability to articulate these things. They eat brains because it gives them the previous owner’s memories, which makes them feel somewhat human again. Well, one zombie, who we come to know as “R” is particularly unhappy with his lonely and meaningless existence and seizes an opportunity to save a girl instead of eating her. As they become closer he becomes more human until the moment when they kiss (a living girl kisses a corpse) when he miraculously comes back to life. We learn that the cure for zombies is not a bullet in the head, but love, sweet young love!

If you read that last paragraph and don’t see the problem with this film then I think maybe you’re on the wrong website. If you read it and said, “oh God, why?!” then just hold on, because it gets far worse!

  • Lets start with the glaring similarities with Twilight:
  • Undead boy who should want to eat girl, protects her instead.
  • Girl falls in love with an undead boy.
  • Boy is incredibly pail.
  • Boy has weird looking eyes.
  • Girl is stuck, unhappily, living with her father who “just doesn’t understand her.”
  • Girl is an outcast for not being into all the silly happy things her peers are into.
  • Boy has friends who come to accept the living girl among them.
  • There are “good” undead and “bad” undead.
  • It’s always cloudy and foggy and depressing.
  • The actress playing the girl looks strikingly similar to the girl in Twilight, even down to facial expressions.

Lets ignore the fact that Twilight is a horrible series of melodramatic tween garbage, and just stick to the fact that any obvious knockoff of even a great movie is lazy and annoying. This movie is the poster child for such lazy and annoying movie making.

We’ve talked about what the movie is like, now lets talk about what it is not like: a zombie movie! Lets talk about what we love about zombie movies, and lets talk about how Warm Bodies takes a big dump on all of this. First of all, and we all have a side in this debate, the zombies run. This can be overlooked, since many great zombie movies make this mistake, and we’ve learned to live with it (most of us at least). Second, we love gore! There are a couple scenes where zombies are eating people, but they hide the good stuff, we don’t see blood and guts hanging out. At one point “R” takes some leftover brains out of his pocket for a late night snack and he might as well be eating cheetos for all we care! Third, and this is the big one to me, zombies are no longer human, they are dead and the soul of the person is gone. Zombies are just walking, plague-carrying, eating machines. That is what makes the genre so fun, you kill them because they are already dead! In Warm Bodies this whole concept is totally thrown out the window, which, in my opinion, is the very foundation of the genre and what makes zombie movies great!

The real slap in the face of this whole thing, is the fact that they actually had the gall, after totally making a mockery of the genre we love, to try to think they are an actual zombie movie! What I mean by this is that we see a couple things that we are used to seeing in zombie movies, moments of respect for the genre, moments that, in this movie, just infuriate the true zombiephile. It would be like Justin Bieber doing a tribute song to Johnny Cash or covering a Led Zeppelin song or something. It’s a disgusting thing to see! They start out the movie in an airport, it isn’t a mall, but you get that same vibe, with the escalators and people milling around, it was pretty obviously meant to have the same feel as the popular mall scene. The worst moment though is when “R” thinking to himself (before he can speak, yeah he learns to speak) talks about how people used to be connected, how they could spend time with their families and hang out with their friends, and then there is a cut scene to a bunch of modern day people walking around ignoring each other while on their cellphones. Seriously?! You are going to try and wedge social commentary into this movie?! The worst part is how hypocritical it would be, if you even thought they were being sincere in their attempt. A movie that exists solely to capitalize on the popularity of another franchise (Twilight) and a popular genre (zombies) and demonstrates a total lack of creativity with nothing in site but dollar signs tries to give social commentary. That is reprehensible.

So, if you like Twilight or if you like zombies or if you like not being seen as cattle waiting to hand over their money in some brainless manner because you have to see the new teen falls in love with a monster movie, then please, for the love of all that is good, do not see Warm Bodies, it is categorically THE WORST ZOMBIE MOVIE EVER!

 

Be Sociable, Share!

4 Comments

  1. Yaaay!! So glad you hate this movie. In addition to the things you mentioned, I hated the way the ‘gothy’ zombie boy *and* the gothy-ish girl were *both* ‘converted’ to Disney normalcy in their appearance in the Happy Ending.

    • yeah, that was terrible too! not to mention the Romeo and Juliet element, taking a classic like that and shoehorning it into this mess was appalling! I could go on forever!

  2. Actually, I enjoyed this movie. I don’t see the Twilight connection the way you seem to, though I grant you they are both supernatural (or sub-natural, if you prefer) romances. But the monster movie genre has seen many such revisions in the last 30 or so years. The Victorians who gave us Frankenstein and Dracula as irredeemable monsters considered the sexual urge and the urge to destroy as unthinkably deviant, a viewpoint that we simply no longer share. As early as Anne Rice’s vampires, the sensual nature of the beast that eats us being the beast that we could love has entered the consciousness of pop culture — why be surprised that it migrated into the zombie world? Viruses evolve, why not genres? I grant you, the Twilight movie I saw (only the first one) was poorly made and didn’t convey a great deal of depth. But as you point out, it is a Tween story and not necessarily going to be wildly complex. I think you miss the quintessential monster movie connection — the story has to be, at its core, about the human condition. We do feel disconnected and “Dead” inside, too often in the modern world — the “quiet desperation” complex. And it is through connection to others, through “love” and relationship, that we come alive as human beings. This struck a chord with me, the love conquers death theme. Or since “Amor omnia vincit” love conquers all, was first articulated in ancient Rome, would you consider the movie derivative on this account? All stories derive from sources. Even Romeo and Juliet was taken from the Greek Pyramus and Thisbe. Re-envisioning the impossible love story into modern idiom using the zombie construct was an interesting challenge, which I thought they pulled off well. It managed to be refreshingly original.

    • Hey Rebecca, just wanted to let you know that you look like a pretentious idiot right now.

      For starters, just because you’re at a zombie website, it doesn’t mean that people are unaware of the literary history of horror. ‘Frankenstein’ — which was published 20 years before the Victorian era began — does not present a portrait of an “irredeemable monster” and, in fact, goes to great lengths to explore the notion of fear of the other, and question the nature of man when faced with the unknown. Shelley expressly wove themes of disconnect and abandonment into the work, and created anti-heroes in both Frankenstein and his creation.

      More importantly, how can you say that ‘Warm Bodies’ isn’t derivative of ‘Twilight’ in the same breath where you confess to not having much exposure to the ‘Twilight’ franchise? It’s all well and good to like the film being discussed and to want to mount a defense, but maybe don’t start with: “I have no idea what we’re referring to, but you’re incorrect to compare things to it.”

      Whether or not ‘Warm Bodies’ is good, it can be safely said that it’s far from “refreshingly original.”

      You’re also way off base in your complaints about Dan missing the point of social commentary. If you re-read the article, you’ll notice that he sites it as a strong building block in horror stories that he found presented as a trite and wasted cliché in this film. Anyone who loves zombies knows that they’re at their scariest when they’re allegorical. In ‘Warm Bodies’ it’s too heavy-handed, since the central story arc is a romance and not actually based around horror elements.

      Also, sexy and sympathetic monsters go back to at least thirty years before Anne Rice. The new sub-genre that seems to be pissing everyone off is the one that takes away the actual danger, sanitizes the monsters, and turns everyone into brooding Byronic messes of emotion who just need to be understood.

Leave a Comment