PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
3,7/10
12 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Añade un argumento en tu idiomaWhile staying at a remote cabin for a week-long vacation, a group of five college friends succumb to an infectious, flesh-eating disease.While staying at a remote cabin for a week-long vacation, a group of five college friends succumb to an infectious, flesh-eating disease.While staying at a remote cabin for a week-long vacation, a group of five college friends succumb to an infectious, flesh-eating disease.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
- Premios
- 4 nominaciones en total
Randy Sean Schulman
- Henry
- (as Randy Schulman)
Tim Zajaros
- Connor
- (as Timothy G. Zajaros)
- …
Derrick R. Means
- Dennis
- (as Derrick Means)
Reseñas destacadas
Cabin Fever (2016)
1/2 (out of 4)
Five friends go out into the woods for a fun week but soon a flesh eating virus begins to take them over.
This is a remake of the 2002 Eli Roth film that put that director on the map and helped bring in some "frat boy" type of horror movies. Roth was involved in this one and had spent several months really pushing for people to give this film a chance but the end result is without question one of the biggest disasters in recent horror history. I've seen worse film but I've never seen such a pointless remake in my life. I'm a huge defender of remakes because quite often they're at least more original than sequels, which usually just copy the first movie. That's certainly not the case here because what we basically have is a scene-for-scene remake.
For the life of me I can't understand what Roth and company were trying to do with this film. At least the original film had two sequels that at least tried to be different or do something slightly original. When I say this is a scene-for-scene remake I'm not kidding. It really does seem like the original screenplay was used here with only a few things brought more up=to-date. This includes an assault rifle being used, stuff like the internet mentioned and the Deputy character is now a woman. Everything else is exactly like the original movie so what was the point? If you've seen the original then you're just going to be bored by what you see here.
The kills are slightly different but they're certainly not great enough to save the picture. The cast really isn't any better here. The direction isn't any better. As for the screenplay, as I said, it's pretty much just the original with a few alterations. Even worse is the fact that the film runs the same length, which just goes to show how alike they are. CABIN FEVER, the 2016 version, is one of the most unoriginal movies I've ever seen and it's just shocking that Roth would sign off for this type of remake. His rumor was taken out but the darker elements add up to nothing. I will avoid giving the film a BOMB rating since it's at least professionally made. Still, what on Earth were they smoking?
1/2 (out of 4)
Five friends go out into the woods for a fun week but soon a flesh eating virus begins to take them over.
This is a remake of the 2002 Eli Roth film that put that director on the map and helped bring in some "frat boy" type of horror movies. Roth was involved in this one and had spent several months really pushing for people to give this film a chance but the end result is without question one of the biggest disasters in recent horror history. I've seen worse film but I've never seen such a pointless remake in my life. I'm a huge defender of remakes because quite often they're at least more original than sequels, which usually just copy the first movie. That's certainly not the case here because what we basically have is a scene-for-scene remake.
For the life of me I can't understand what Roth and company were trying to do with this film. At least the original film had two sequels that at least tried to be different or do something slightly original. When I say this is a scene-for-scene remake I'm not kidding. It really does seem like the original screenplay was used here with only a few things brought more up=to-date. This includes an assault rifle being used, stuff like the internet mentioned and the Deputy character is now a woman. Everything else is exactly like the original movie so what was the point? If you've seen the original then you're just going to be bored by what you see here.
The kills are slightly different but they're certainly not great enough to save the picture. The cast really isn't any better here. The direction isn't any better. As for the screenplay, as I said, it's pretty much just the original with a few alterations. Even worse is the fact that the film runs the same length, which just goes to show how alike they are. CABIN FEVER, the 2016 version, is one of the most unoriginal movies I've ever seen and it's just shocking that Roth would sign off for this type of remake. His rumor was taken out but the darker elements add up to nothing. I will avoid giving the film a BOMB rating since it's at least professionally made. Still, what on Earth were they smoking?
I'm not the one to hate on horror movie remakes I actually enjoy watching a classic remade for the modern audience. But that's only when the director can create a new modern twist or add more to what the original didn't have like what Zombie did for Carpenter's Halloween. But the remake of Eli Roth's Cabin Fever is just one of the most pointless horror remakes I've ever seen next to Psycho. The story of the movie is lame. It's everything you seen in the original just with different actors in these scenes. You actually know what's coming next. You even know what the characters are gonna say next. There's nothing new added in the directors own vision. It's the same Dog death opening scene. The scene where one of the characters gets his hand attacked by Dennis is the same. Even the camp fire story is the same. The only difference is the ending of the movie, which is not half bad. The characters are very unimportant to this movie or at least they felt like it. You don't pay even a minute of attention to them because, well they are supposed to be the same as well and they make the same dumb choices of survival as the original. The blood n gore effects seem to be up higher than the original. But it might it some gore lovers we do see a lot more blood all around in some scenes especially in the bath tub scene we see even some skin coming off.
I didn't enjoy this remake at all it's nothing, but watching the same movie you already seen. You know what's coming next. The characters die in the sane order as they did in the original. The only differences you'll find is the ending, higher blood n gore, and different actors who shouldn't be allowed to ever act in another movie again. I don't recommend you watch this waste of a remake. You'll have a much more better time re watching the original movie.
I didn't enjoy this remake at all it's nothing, but watching the same movie you already seen. You know what's coming next. The characters die in the sane order as they did in the original. The only differences you'll find is the ending, higher blood n gore, and different actors who shouldn't be allowed to ever act in another movie again. I don't recommend you watch this waste of a remake. You'll have a much more better time re watching the original movie.
I'll admit I've never been much of an Eli Roth fan. The original Cabin Fever was a pretty bad movie but I wouldn't even recommend this film to Eli Roth fans, as it is a pretty pointless remake. Fans of the original probably should stay away.
If there was one positive thing about the original film, it was that it had that low budget charm to it. There's something about low budget horror films that I like and Cabin Fever had that. However, this remake does away with that charm as it obviously had a higher budget. A higher budget doesn't always mean a better film, though.
The acting in this remake is atrocious and the dialogue is even worse. The characters are all underdeveloped stereotypes that you really don't care about at all. Nearly all the scenes of the original are redone shot-for-shot, but they're handled in a much messier manner. There are a few minor differences, such as the "party man" cop character is now played by a female, for some reason.
As for positives, there aren't many. The cinematography was decent and the gore and makeup effects were pretty damn good actually. Some of the music was alright. But that's about it. I don't see why this film had to be made.
Overall, this is a shallow remake of a bad, low budget horror film from 2002. If you've never seen Cabin Fever but plan on watching it, I'd go with the original, as it is the better of the two. However, that's not saying much, as they're both pretty shitty. If you are a fan of the original, you probably won't like it much. But you might watch it anyway just to compare the two. I wouldn't pay much to see it, though. Maybe rent it if you get the chance.
3/10
If there was one positive thing about the original film, it was that it had that low budget charm to it. There's something about low budget horror films that I like and Cabin Fever had that. However, this remake does away with that charm as it obviously had a higher budget. A higher budget doesn't always mean a better film, though.
The acting in this remake is atrocious and the dialogue is even worse. The characters are all underdeveloped stereotypes that you really don't care about at all. Nearly all the scenes of the original are redone shot-for-shot, but they're handled in a much messier manner. There are a few minor differences, such as the "party man" cop character is now played by a female, for some reason.
As for positives, there aren't many. The cinematography was decent and the gore and makeup effects were pretty damn good actually. Some of the music was alright. But that's about it. I don't see why this film had to be made.
Overall, this is a shallow remake of a bad, low budget horror film from 2002. If you've never seen Cabin Fever but plan on watching it, I'd go with the original, as it is the better of the two. However, that's not saying much, as they're both pretty shitty. If you are a fan of the original, you probably won't like it much. But you might watch it anyway just to compare the two. I wouldn't pay much to see it, though. Maybe rent it if you get the chance.
3/10
I mean what the hell. Remaking movies that're less than 15 years old... What's next?
The film industry must be in real crisis if average films are being remade after little more then a decade. The original was an OK film, I wouldn't have said it was a classic, and this remake seems so unnecessary, it doesn't differentiate from the original in any way, it doesn't bring anything new or different, it's basically remade word for word. The gore scenes are somewhat improved, a little more dramatic, and the dog scene is more dramatic.
I have so very little to say here, as I didn't enjoy it all that much, it seems only a few years ago that I went to the Cinema to watch the original, I find it more disappointing that new ideas simply aren't there, there surely has to be a vast undiscovered writing talent out there.
mehh, 3/10
I have so very little to say here, as I didn't enjoy it all that much, it seems only a few years ago that I went to the Cinema to watch the original, I find it more disappointing that new ideas simply aren't there, there surely has to be a vast undiscovered writing talent out there.
mehh, 3/10
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesMost of the shots that are based on similar shots from the original are staged horizontally inverse to the original movie. Characters that were on the right-hand side of the screen in the original shot are on the left-hand side of the screen in this movie's recreation of that shot and vice-versa.
- PifiasDuring the end credits, a scene is shown of a young college girl looking at Karen's Facebook page. As she flips through the photos she see various photos of the trip our protagonists were on. She then is horrified to see photos of the girl's bloodied legs, then a photo of bloodied shredded mouth and a photo of one of the guys bringing down a shovel to he face. Besides the photos being out of order, these "photos" are clearly screenshots from the film itself and were NOT taken by anyone, as they were taken from angles where there were no cameras (other than the ones filming the movie).
- Créditos adicionalesThe police can be seen collecting the bodies during the credits. Afterward, a young woman is shown looking at photos from the movie on Facebook on her laptop and being disgusted by the gory ones.
- ConexionesFeatured in Phelous & the Movies: Cabin Fever Remake (2017)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Cabin Fever?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- Títulos en diferentes países
- Cabin Fever: Reboot
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Recaudación en todo el mundo
- 114.835 US$
- Duración1 hora 39 minutos
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta