Achoo! You're Dead!: Trying to Make Sense of "World War Z"

                So you’re going to tell me that the best way to not be infected by the zombie plague is to already be sick?   If you’re DNA strain is not “pure” then the zombies will simply pass you by?

                Not only does this make a whole lot less sense than zombies being able to run super fast, it also beckons the moral issue.  If the zombie apocalypse is coming (and I’m pretty certain some people out there really believe it is) then this movie is saying you should drink, smoke and have unprotected sex… unless you want the zombies to get you. 

                The few pieces that I have found wrong with the entire Hollywood theory are that first off, zombies are dumb.   Zombies aren’t going to be able to tell anymore good from bad than any other animal.  You want an example?  Zombies are going to be dumber than your dog.   You know, the dog that farts itself awake and eats its own poop.  Yeah… A zombie will probably get drunk off of your wasted ass, but not simply walk on by.  (Not really, zombies not being able to get drunk is another story)

                If that’s not doing it for you, if you still believe some sort of theory about zombies being smarter than that, then consider this.  Zombies eat brains, correct?  So imagine a zombie eating someone’s brain, biting into their head, much like an idiot would.  If there was a disease in it, the zombie would react as if the brain tasted bad, spit it out and move along.

                Oh yeah, and whatever happened to the whole kill shot in the head idea?  If you blow up their head, they die—a flesh wound won’t stop them.    So, no offense to anyone out there suffering with disease, but why would a zombie care if it has cancer or the black plague?   It’s a freaking zombie—it’s already dead!!

                This movie was fun to watch, sure, and I was interested to see how they’d get out of it but illness is just not the answer.   If you’re fighting the dead, you can’t really taunt them with things that, you know, hurry on death. 

                It’s like if something was attacking you that was immune to fire (or made of fire even) and your defense was to throw unlit matches at it.   It is that absurd.  

A Good Day to End Your Franchise: "A Good Day To Die Hard" Movie Review

                The fifth installment of the Die Hard series brings us… more of the same.  I’ve seen the third Die Hard film, With a Vengeance, the most out of any of them.  The fourth one, Live Free or Die Hard, I believe I’ve only seen once, but making another one of these is just like revisiting the same plot again.

                Okay, so maybe they have different characters from one to the next, but the point is still that they seem to be stuck in this world where the stories have already been told but someone still feels the need to tell more anyway.

                I imagine as being this great author having a series of books and then upon completing it saying, “No wait, there are more stories.  This one time we went out to lunch and the server got our order wrong!”  Who cares, right?

                So high speed chases, action, blah blah blah, Bruce Willis aka John McClane eventually bonds with his distant son.   And as I’m looking up Bruce Willis on IMDB for some idea as to why he might be reprising this character still, I can’t help but see his name attached to yet another Die Hard movie called “Die Hardest”.

                I don’t know if it’s worse that since 2012 Willis has been credited with such great movies as “Moonrise Kingdom”, “The Expendables 2”, “Looper”, “G.I. Joe: Retalliation”, “Red 2”, “Sin City 2”… I mean, “Fire with Fire” is on Netflix and I’ll probably watch it eventually.

                So which is worse:  Willis having all of these great roles and having to go back to the character he is best known for or the fact that I will most likely be watching the sixth installment as well?