This was BAAAAAAAAAD. / / / / / / / / / / / Bad film lol

Preacher's daughter Ann Burden (Margot Robbie) survives a nuclear apocalypse alone with her dog. Her family had left to search for other survivors. She scavenges supplies from the nearby abandoned town. One day, she encounters John Loomis (Chiwetel Ejiofor). He gets sick from contaminated water and she nurses him back to health. There is tension especially with her religious beliefs but they grow closer. Then, another stranger named Caleb (Chris Pine) appears out of nowhere.Robbie is the it girl right now although her role would be played more effective by a more mousy, quiet actor. She needs to be a plain tomboy and possibly rougher. She doesn't seem to be doing any specific accent which leaves the location unknown. The stripped down plot is effective. It's a slow start and needs a better way to pull in the audience. It should follow Loomis at the start as he escapes the devastation. That would be compelling although it may be beyond the no-budget production. Once the triangle is formed at midway, the movie picks up a little steam. It's an apocalyptic movie not for the usual fans.

I won't say,"the book is better than the movie," because I read the book only after watching this movie. I will say that the movie tells a completely different story than the book, borrowing Robert C. O'Brien's characters and setting.The ending as given in the movie suggests that John Loomis killed Caleb, by pushing him down into the radioactive water and sacrificing the safe suit. Otherwise, why would Caleb leave without saying goodbye to Ann and without taking his things and supplies? I like the suggestion from a fellow reviewer that the scene at 1:26 showing Ann rolling a glass off the table and leaning on a book suggests that she imagined the whole thing because she's bored. Lack of dialogue in the final scenes supports this suggestion.The John Loomis character in the book is a control freak and a killer who tries to rape Ann and Ann hates him. At the end, she outsmarts him and steals his safe suit to leave the valley. This is the act of a smart and strong girl who decides to explore the unknown, leaving behind her possibly the only other human living on earth. But just because he's the only other man around doesn't mean that she has to live with him or mate with him. This is the diametric opposite of the Ann character shown in the movie, who is a wishy-washy girl caught between two men. Please. The men who made this movie should remember that the Ann character was created by a male writer, Robert C. O'Brien. They should also consider what kind of message they're sending to women by distorting her character in this way.Good things about this movie: the beauty of New Zealand and Chris Pine's eyes. But I can watch the beauty of New Zealand in "The Lord of the Rings" and Chris Pine in other films.The movie also serves as PR for Robert C. O'Brien's book, which is a good thing. I also read his "Mrs Frisby and the Rats of NIMH" as a child after watching the animated film version and picked it up again after reading this one. Reading it as an adult, I wonder where O'Brien's preoccupation with disaster came from.

If this film has one thing going for it, it's the sheer lack of thought put into it. I will tell you now, I have not read the book, but I know enough to know it does not follow it AT ALL.Z for Zachariah asks questions, but answers the ones that are not important. The name is also total bullshit, because there isn't a character in Z for Zachariah, named Zachariah.The characters are dull. The plot is drawn out (There is only so much you can do with three characters) The atmosphere is non- existent, The pacing is so slow, I felt blood pooling in my legs after the 80th minute.By all means, the story that is being tried to tell, was not the story you wanted. If you find this movie for over a dollar, don't buy it. It's one of the most slow, drawn out movies, with an ending that will leave you unsatisfied. Case closed.