World War Z by Max Brooks

By Brian Prisco | Posted Under Book Reviews | Comments (29)

Is this what summer promises to bring? After all the buildup and hoopla, I was kind of disappointed in the final result. I dig oral histories, and Brooks is pretty goddamn ingenious when it comes to formulating his zombie mythos through the great Zombie war, but I think his failing was in assembling it as an oral history.

Granted, I’ve only ever read a few oral assemblages in my time, two based on “Saturday Night Live,” and one, the last decent book Palahniuk wrote. Stylistically, they read like documentary films, getting multiple view points presented by several people. And I felt like that was the failing of World War Z. Instead of being delivered in what could have been an outstanding assemblage of character pieces, it came off like a bad collection of monologues. Almost like a Vagina Monologues, only about the undead. My zombie is a flower: hungry, tearing up soil, and craving hot sticky brains. Wait, plants aren’t hungry.

I can see how this would be an interesting audio book, mostly because I can imagine with the right cast, this would be a fantastic read. But each one of the characters is only presented once. And I think that’s the problem. It’s interesting, but I also felt cheated. I didn’t care about the characters. Because it was all told in flashback, relating the events, there was no danger of death. Sure, there was some amazingly poignant stories being related, but really, I was about as unfeeling as if I were one of the chewy chewy chompers coming after them.

I don’t know how this will translate as a film, unless they go the supercast route, and just pack it full of neato cameos. But really, I was a little let down in the execution. It’s not like Brooks is a hack, he’s incredibly witty and you can almost taste the thought that went into the work. But really, I wished he hadn’t forced the awkward style on himself. It would have worked so much better.

Follow @pajiba

← The Pub Crawl Five | 2081 Trailer →

Comments

WHAT! This book was awesome.

Posted by: jotthedot at May 15, 2009 9:05 AM

I kind of felt that way too, that it was a little disjointed. But I still enjoyed it and am looking forward to a Hollywood interpretation.

How they do the oral history interpration will be interesting.

Posted by: annoyingmouse at May 15, 2009 9:09 AM

One of my favorite books, but I read it within a couple of weeks of hearing about it the first time, so I had no hard expectations to speak of. It's original, creative, and unique. Heartbreaking in places.

Posted by: socalledonlycousins at May 15, 2009 9:21 AM

The Indian shipyard still vividly resonates in my head and I hope they do it well in the movie.

Posted by: badalamenti at May 15, 2009 9:33 AM

I really enjoyed the book too, and I think I was able to accept the format because it seemed more realistic that someone would go around collecting these stories after the fact than that someone would sit down DURING the Zombie war and start writing about their experiences. It doesn't mean that what was written was any less heartbreaking, and you knew immediately that every story was the story of a survivor, and I like that they showed how many different ways people had of surviving.

And I thought we did revisit one or two characters, or at least had callbacks to them. Maybe I'm wrong, it's been a while since I read it.

Posted by: Genny (also Rusty) at May 15, 2009 9:36 AM

yeah, but...zombies!

(i also like the word 'oral')

Posted by: gp at May 15, 2009 9:44 AM

I just reread this, and Max comes back multiple times to the soldier who is at the beginning and end of the war. I believe he also is at the end of the book. I read this book as a Ken Burns documentary. Snapshots of an event that the reader is responsible for putting together. It's presented as an historical event rather than an action or survival story.

Posted by: Mrcreosote at May 15, 2009 9:44 AM

Thank you! Finally someone agrees with me. It's a brilliant idea that isn't carried by its execution. The writing just isn't strong enough or believable enough to be dialogue. The audio book actually makes it apparent that it just doesn't work. The actors sound so stiff and awkward reading it. Gah.

I have high hopes for the film, though.

Posted by: JakesAlterEgo at May 15, 2009 9:54 AM

This sounds like a variation on the epistolary novel. Bram Stoker's Dracula and Wilkie Collin's The Moonstone, being two examples. When filmed, these normally just ignored the epistolary approach and just told the story straight. Or, it could be filmed like Kurosawa's Rashomon where you see the same story from each person's different point of view.

OK, I confess. I just wanted to use "epistolary" in a sentence, cause it sounds like you peed in your pants with a gun.

Posted by: BWeaves at May 15, 2009 10:00 AM

Man, I really disagree with this review. I thought the format was brilliant. At first I wasn't sure, but then I really got into it. Each interviewee had their own specific voice and perspective and it was awesome. It felt real to me; particularly with all the political elements included.

Posted by: HB at May 15, 2009 10:30 AM

I actually listened to this as an audio book, and it worked brilliantly in that format. Separate voice actors perform most of the monologues and it made for one of the better audio books I've ever listened to (and I've heard a lot on my period cross country commutes). Cast includes Alan Alda, Mark Hammill, Henry Rollins and John Turturro. I always thought they should star in a Zombie movie together...

We need a mini-diversion about great audio books. I need fresh blood!

Posted by: Nate at May 15, 2009 10:39 AM

I really enjoyed it. I really liked the way he told the story as an oral history as I think, had Brooks done otherwise, it would have felt really campy.

I blew through it in two evenings and I can't remember the last book I read that I literally could not put down.

Posted by: admin at May 15, 2009 10:46 AM

Max Brooks views himself as a historian in real life. He wanted World War Z to be as realistic as possible, given its basis in a humor book on how to survive a zombie attack. Hence, the collection of individual stories after the events took place. I'm sorry this technique didn't work for you; I found myself on the edge of my seat wondering what would be revealed next. I didn't care that the characters didn't repeat because most of the events were linked. If you read one story about the mass exodus to the northern regions of Canada, you also read at least two other stories that are directly connected to the migration by the end.

I fail to see how this would work as a book, and when I met Brooks at a convention a few years ago, he didn't even know if Brad Pitt's production company actually read the book before they bought the rights. I'm not holding my breath.

Posted by: Robert at May 15, 2009 10:53 AM

And I obviously meant "I fail to see how this would work as a film..." Don't ask me how I managed to post a comment without clicking any buttons to do so.

Posted by: Robert at May 15, 2009 10:55 AM

you're crazy, this is the best book ever.

Posted by: southwer at May 15, 2009 11:15 AM

I have to completely and utterly disagree with you Prisco. The oral history approach is what makes the book so effective. The way I explained it elsewhere:

Think of the best Stephen King books, or any horror for that matter. There are probably a half dozen brilliant and gripping scenes from any of the books that sucker punch you and stay with you. World War Z is a novel composed entirely of those sucker punch scenes. Because there are no main characters specifically, the book can continuously change perspective and skip to new characters in different situations. In twenty pages, you might see the breakdown of society from the point of view of a teenage recluse living in a high rise in Japan, to Chinese sailors smuggling their families aboard and stealing a nuclear submarine once they decide the government has lost control, to a soccer mom who fleeing north out of the infested suburbs with her kids into the Dakotas because of rumors that the zombies freeze in the bitter winter.

What makes this approach work is the fundamental realization that in certain horror stories, the human characters are incidental. The true main character is the monster. So instead of feeling like a shallow story skipping from vignette to vignette without gaining traction with any one set of characters, the reader settles on the zombies themselves as the main character. We watch the growth and spread of the zombie plague, explore the aspects and permutations of zombie infection with a variety and breadth that would be impossible or at the very least eye-rollingly ludicrous if focused on one particular set of characters. But it's not just a freak show, it is a systematic and focused telling of a story from start to finish. It just isn't a story in which the human characters are constant fixtures from start to finish.

The end result is one of the most horrific and gripping horror novels that I have ever read.

Posted by: Steven Lloyd Wilson at May 15, 2009 11:21 AM

The last I heard, not only is the screenplay written, but a director has been chosen. (The guy who just did Quantum of Solace, I believe.) I know, I know...still a long way to go before a movie comes to fruition, but at least it's moving forward.

And, yeah, in case you couldn't tell: I couldn't disagree with the review more. I just loved the book, despite my initial trepidation regarding the format. Both scaring and heart-wrenching, often within the same paragraph, while still being amazingly well thought out in terms of how Brook's global vision of the war all fits together as a whole. (okay, that was verbose. sorry....)

In fact, I loved the book so much that I'm almost afraid that a movie might only fuck up my perfect little memory of the story.

Posted by: boscobarbell at May 15, 2009 11:24 AM

I also heartily disagree with this review. As someone who reads a lot of non-fiction and oral histories, this book felt totally believable to me. I thought it was great the way the experience spirals outward from that first Chinese doctor all the way to an L.A. bodyguard, suburbanites fleeing for the tundra, soldiers, politicians, scientists, film-makers, etc. I liked the interview format, which made the "interviews" seem more realistic. In all, I thought it was an outstanding book that kept me on the edge of my seat--my only problem was that, knowing Max Brooks's history and parentage, I kept expecting the book to be funny, and it very much was not.

Back on topic, I am not entirely sure how a movie of this would be done. I think it would have to be a mockumentary more than a straight up action movie, since there's really no "main" character or storyline.

Posted by: Siege at May 15, 2009 11:35 AM

The Korean situation...very scary. Are they all down there working for "The Leader" or are there 20 million zombies just waiting for someone to open the door....

Posted by: jotthedot at May 15, 2009 12:33 PM

I couldn't even get past the first 100 pages. Just couldn't get into it. And I tried to, more than once.

Oh well!

Posted by: Snuggiepants the Deathbringer at May 15, 2009 1:07 PM

disagree. great concept carried off well. Extremely clever. Plus the soldier from the Battle of Yonkers is used at least once more.

Posted by: ponch at May 15, 2009 1:37 PM

I loved this book. Read it on the way back from my honeymoon (ah, so romantic!) and I've loaned it out to several friends who've enjoyed it as well. The damn thing is falling apart from all the reading, but hey... that's what cheap paperbacks are for.

Posted by: Becky Tri-Tip Goddess at May 15, 2009 2:07 PM

I've read the book, and listened to the auido book. Personally I enjoyed the book more, it goes more in depth, tells a more complete story. That being said, the audio book DID have an all star cast, which I think kinda took away from it because I kept playing guess the voice...

Anyways, the audio book cast taken from the World War Z website:

Max Brooks as Max Brooks
Alan Alda as Arthur Sinclair
Carl Reiner as Jurgen Warbrunn
Jurgen Prochnow as Philip Adler
Waleed Zuiater as Saladin Kader
Dean Edwards as Joe Muhammad
Michelle Kholos as Jesika Hendricks
Maz Jobrani as Ahmed Farahnakian
Mark Hamill as Todd Wainio
Henry Rollins as T. Sean Collins
Eamonn Walker as David Allen Forbes
and Xolelwa Azania
Ajay Naidu as Ajay Shah
John Turturro as Seryosha Garcia Alvarez
Rob Reiner as "The Whacko"
Jay O'Sanders as Bob Archer

Posted by: punkrawkknitter at May 15, 2009 2:17 PM

I enjoyed the book fairly well, but I do pretty much agree with you. I lent it to a friend who was excited about it, and she still hasn't finished it. The problem (for both of us) has been that it's a little too easy to put down. You finish one story, and sure, there's more to go, but you've finished with that person. I read it mostly over lunch hours at work, and it was a book I never had this itch to keep reading even after my lunch hour was over. Some books I have to restrain myself over so I don't end up wasting time at work and getting myself into trouble. This just never was one of those.

Posted by: Tyburn Blossom at May 15, 2009 2:37 PM

I agree that once you finish a story there's not much to add to it, but I don't think that works against the whole book; the point of the oral stories is to give it a more "realistic" feel; when most zombie related material is people in makeup screaming "braiins", the focus on mankind in diverse situations (like in The Walking Dead comic book) made this book interesting. I loved the fact that it was presented in such way because it felt like we were reading actual stories, I believe that some of the effect of the Zombie War would have lost some strenght if it had been a regular narrative (I'm looking forward to listen to the audio book, sounds quite interesting). I don't think that the zombies were the protagonists of the story; I believe that mankind as a whole and differente bunch is what makes this work, the wide variety of characters allows the author to explore different aspects of the war and give different reactions.

Posted by: Radlum at May 15, 2009 3:14 PM

I adore this book, and recommended it to all I know and love.

Very few of my loved ones took me seriously, considering I love all things zombie (Resident Evil movies included. Not ashamed!), but after reading this book, many were converted to the world of zombie fiction.

Funny thing, considering this book for me is less about zombies, and more about the breakdown of civilization. Zombies are merely the catalyst for the analysis this book presents.

Posted by: Sarah at May 15, 2009 6:36 PM

Prisco, you are a horrible human being for not liking this.

Posted by: Shane at May 15, 2009 8:51 PM

Dude, I loved this book. It and Stephen King's "Cell" (which is not *precisely* a zombie book -- zombie purists get pretty upset about it being called one I think) were my introduction to zombie apocalypse novels...and I haven't found any others that work for me in the same way.

On that topic, has anyone here read any other zombie novels that don't suck? (Specifically ones available on Kindle...)

Posted by: julian at May 15, 2009 9:26 PM

Brian, have you ever read the David Wellington 'Monster' trilogy? The sight of an African schoolgirl army sounded SO cool. But Hollywood is scared of that, I guess, unless they had Madea as their captain.

Posted by: Shazza at May 16, 2009 8:40 PM

Pajiba

Pajiba: Reviews, Commentary, Angst

World War Z by Max Brooks

Comments