5/10: A good zombieflick but fails on a couple of key points

5/10:

In short:
This is one of the better zombiemovies made during the last few years, it is what world war z (2013) could have been. Good zombies, it combines the different zombietypes in a fluent manner and has an agressive virus at the forefront. More sci-fi than horror. Some larger misstakes (in my eyes) in the context lowers the grade from a 7 to a 5.

In long:
As the title say some key points let it down quite badly; coordination between directing/editing (mentioned why below) makes you question the rationaly in characters and gives it a Hollywood 90's feel (in a bad manner). Ad to that the rationality and actions of the characters can in themselves at times be questioned and you should get the picture (this is not saying that everyone has to make the right decision 100% of the time - just to make that clear).
It does take place during daytime which is feels refreshing and does exploit catching the train (the stress thereof) which should resonate to those commuting daily.
The sound is allright even though an ambient backdrop at times is lacking lessening the realism of it, having a tune connecting it all together in this way could not work, which has cleverly been solved by putting it elsewhere.
The physical backdrop - the environment is dead on. The CGI used is also good bang for the buck, though the CGI blood and smoke is not as good as it could have been (the real smoke does make an impact to more fluently let it pass more easily by).


Pro's
• Plotline (though Snowpiercer 2013 and war of the worlds 2005 comes through quite a bit)
• Acting (which at points is up and down but that is more down to the directing/editing i think)
• Real people as zombies - makes a HUGE difference.
• The smooth solution to fast versus slow zombies (varies during darkness and light surrounding).
• Costume & makeup.

Con's
• Rationality of the characters are at several points lacking and the plotline seems built on these failures.
• The director seems to have added some extra time before the scenes individually open up and the editing has kept those in, which means in several scenes you get a cast that seems to be waiting for something.
• Zombies are precise and fast with their bites while at times are completely inable to bite properly.
• The terror and fear could better have been illustrated with first person views at times (or simply cut the inaction a little bit shorter), as it it falls in the classical Hollywood trap - the characters rationality comes strongly into question as they do not act logically (as with one character whom gets struck by fear, fights zombies, and then again become struck of fear faced with zombies...).

End notes:
With some smaller adjustments you could have increased the impact of the movie ALOT, that alone bodes well for the sequel (hopefully they do see what was done right and wrong in the clear light of day).
IMDb doesn't mention production company only distributors, but (take note) it has a STRONG Hollywood feel to it (after having a look on RT it say "Redpeter Films" but links to "Well go USA entertainment").

[EDIT] There is alot of different cinematograpical styles, but most movies out of Hollywood mainstream has the edges cut off due to the active censorship (if the choice is to remove one element and the movie will be PG-11 insteag of something higher than whichever choice is prognosed to be most profitable is chosen - that means maximize audience and rarely means staying true to the script). With this pointed out others can (I think) get a better feeling for how the movie is to watch.

Ignorance is only a bliss if you haven't reached awareness.
My imdb posts are getting altered.