Efficient? Yes. Fun? Sometimes. Stupid? Very much so.

If you’ve never seen a zombie film before, or if you don’t understand the whole zombie thing, World War Z might not be the movie for you. Brad Pitt’s (Killing Them Softly) latest flick never adequately describes what exactly defines the movie’s zombie syndrome; you see some biting, you see a person “turn,” but you’re left to your own devices when it comes to putting two and two together.

Instead, the movie, much like its ridiculously fast undead legions, is too busy jetting all over the world to answer your simple questions. That, in a nutshell, represents both the film’s greatest strength and its fatal flaw.

World War Z has, if nothing else, fleet, economic filmmaking. The plot is threadbare; Pitt, a vaguely disgraced ex-United Nations employee, is tasked with traveling the world in search of a cure for the zombie epidemic.

Fans of the source material — Max Brooks’ stellar faux-oral history — will be (and probably should be) disappointed. The writers have jettisoned all semblance of political satire and a majority of the human essence of the book in favor of the movie’s blitz through Philadelphia, Newark, N.J., South Korea, Israel and Wales.

This shedding of thematic inquiry and narrative scope enables World War Z’s trim pacing and storytelling. In a rare feat for a summer blockbuster, World War Z has virtually no exposition (save for two very quick scenes) and virtually no extraneous subplots (other than a half-baked, basically ignored wife and family thread).

Even better, director Marc Forster (Machine Gun Preacher) injects a wicked playfulness into the otherwise serious, grim enterprise. You wouldn’t catch Christopher Nolan doing an extended zombie bunny chew gag or dwelling on an utterly idiotic death, but Forster lacks such shame.

Instead of making World War Z dumber (not that the movie needs any help in that department) the weird humor throughout makes the movie and its flaws more palatable. Remarkably, the film keeps its funny streak alive despite an ever-increasingly morose plot, without sacrificing drama or tension.

The film accomplishes that tension and sustained dread best. World War Z isn’t quite a horror movie, but the film ventures frequently into that territory. A chilling, effective sequence in a cramped Newark apartment opens the film, and a chilling, effective sequence in Wales (with shades of 28 Days Later and Resident Evil) closes the film.

Trouble is, a whole lot of stupidity happens in between. Though the humor undercuts some of the rampant idiocy, the movie is still frequently overwhelmed by its story beats. Without a doubt, World War Z contains some of the dumbest things you will see in a movie this year.

From a groan-inducing death in Korea to a horrendously conceived airplane set piece, an absurd amount of the grim, gravelly voiced movie is unintentionally wacky.

Pitt’s cipher of a main character certainly doesn’t help. His performance does boast a good deal of charisma and presence, yet it’s frequently undermined by just how damn fast the movie goes. He gets lost all too often among the zombies, another pixel in a sea of angry, marathon-running pixels.

The swift, unfussy storytelling robs the movie of some of its humanity. Had more time been devoted to setting up Pitt’s character or giving ludicrous set pieces room to breathe, the stupidity of World War Z wouldn’t have registered so strongly.

When I go back and look at the movie, I can’t help but wonder if World War Z is a really dumb movie or a smart movie with a lot of dumb elements. If I seem too positive on this otherwise mediocre-sounding film, that’s because I have the sneaking suspicion World War Z qualifies as the latter.

World War Z is not transcendent or even a good adaptation of the novel, but it’s clear that considerable craft and skill went into making all the things blow up real good. Like Pitt’s enigmatic lead character, it’s easy to like World War Z, but difficult to feel much else.

diversionsdbk@gmail.com