Quarentena

Despite being an almost scene-to-scene rehash of the Spanish horror masterpiece, REC, Quarantine is one of the worst remakes in existence. Made specifically for the viewers who can't read but are too smug to admit it and use the stupid excuse of distraction caused by subtitles as their defence, Quarantine is one of those crappy films you deserve to watch if you can't be bothered to read a few subtitles.

Set in Los Angeles, the story of Quarantine follows a television reporter & her cameraman as they are assigned to follow a firefighting crew on their night shift duty. Things are set in motion when they respond to a call coming from a small apartment building but soon find themselves locked inside it along with its residents when the place is quarantined by CDC without an explanation and end up filming much more than they bargained for.

Written & directed by John Erick Dowdle (known for The Poughkeepsie Tapes), Quarantine fails at everything that the original managed to get right with immaculate precision for this film has no understanding whatsoever of what actually made REC work so well in the first place. The direction is terrible as Dowdle is unable to recreate the bone-chilling atmosphere and the screenplay is poorly written as well for the dialogues end up feeling quite forced.

Another problem with Quarantine is its unconvincing cast. They all seem so well rehearsed with their lines and equally aware of the camera hovering over them that they end up trying a little too hard, because of which the whole realistic approach this film was aiming for falls apart. Carpenter's performance is better than the rest but still not good enough to keep the film together. Camera-work fails to recreate the frenzy, chaotic style of the original, Editing is a mixed bag for the pacing is fine but its runtime is unnecessarily extended.

On an overall scale, Quarantine is a half-assed attempt to remake one of the scariest films of all time and despite being filmed with six times the budget fails to improve upon or even match any of the aspects of the original. If Americanising a film usually means lowering the IQ of the original characters and allowing them to act stupidly, as evident in so many other examples, then world cinema would definitely be a much better place if no foreign language is ever allowed a Hollywood adaptation. All in all, Quarantine is a cinematic turd that itself should be quarantined from the filmgoing audience. Skip it & savour the vastly superior REC instead.

There must have been comedians in the projection booth the night that some friends and I went to see a family friendly film. These particular friends tend to watch only light-hearted material and get upset for weeks whenever they see horror films or intense thrillers. They were totally unprepared for a 'Quarantine' trailer and it shocked them all so badly that we nearly had to leave and get our money back. Maybe it was because of their strong reaction that my interest in the film has stayed so high for the past several months.

This week I have seen both 'Quarantine' and 'Rec' the film that 'Quarantine' is a remake of. 'Rec' is not without flaws but it is a very solid and chilling horror film. 'Quarantine' is able to expand on several of the strengths in 'Rec' while falling into a few pitfalls of it's own. Both films are about a TV news crew taping a show about what a night in the life of a fireman is like. A seemingly routine call turns out to be something much more and the news crew is trapped in a quickly quarantined building.

Giving credit where it is due, 'Quarantine' kept me on the edge of my seat for most of the movie. It lures you in with a very relaxed opening ten minutes but once you reach the building and the cop in charge asks why the camera crew is there, the whole tone of the movie changes. The fun and games, the light-hearted banter is gone. We only realize how serious it is though when they enter the apartment of an injured old woman. For me the tension starts with the entrance to the apartment and never lets up. Each new segment that the TV crew starts filming holds potential terror. The set design and the lighting are terrific and 'Quarantine' walks a careful tightrope of character action. So often in horror films the audience is yelling with frustration at what characters on the screen are doing because it all goes against common sense. There is a little bit of that early on but 'Quarantine' does a better job of playing to the characters and their panic. Characters die not through naivety or stupidity as much as they do from inevitability and inescapability. The key performance comes from Jennifer Carpenter.

The film's greatest strength and weakness at the same time, Carpenter is the focus of the camera because of her role as the reporter and it isn't an easy part to play. She is solid for the majority of the film but terror essentially overwhelms her with ten minutes to go and she is reduced to a sobbing, shrieking, shivering bowl of jello. Would I or anyone else be any better in the situation that 'Quarantine' creates? Hard for me to say but probably not. The problem is that there were three primary acting choices for her to make in the final ten minutes: she could play it as a hysteric (which she does), she could play it as numbing down her fear like the cameraman does in order to try and escape, or she could have been so overwhelmed by her fear that she becomes a functional catatonic working on autopilot. Carpenter's choice is probably the 'truest' choice for how people would react. That doesn't mean that it is going to make for good drama. Her transformation from confident and outgoing to hysterical jabbering is so jarring that it feels forced instead of real. The camera man keeps telling her to calm down when they've reached a potentially safe room but she is far beyond the calming down stage and well into the years of therapy one instead. I found it to be just too much and actually pulled me out of the horror and towards comedy instead.

'Rec' felt a bit more organic and gritty than 'Quarantine.' The performances are decent in both but you feel less of a connection to the characters in 'Quarantine.' Many are clearly there to serve as fodder with no attempt to seriously develop them. 'Rec' does a much better job, particularly when the reporter interviews each of the buildings residents. The five minutes spent in filming those sequences gave more of a stake to the audience into the well-being of those characters. That never really takes off in 'Quarantine' and I regret that they didn't follow the lead of 'Rec'. One thing that I thought 'Quarantine' did a much better job of was in plot clarity and how they provided information. The clues to the source of what is going on are much more explicit and come very early in the movie. 'Rec' dropped a few hints for the viewer to put together but relies on the final five minutes to give the major clues about patient zero. What patient zero is spreading is clearer in the remake and I thought the clarity benefited the plot. Of course by the time you find out about patient zero, Carpenter's character is beyond being able to help provide the audience with anymore real analytical power. Don't blink or you'll miss everything you need to know.

I give the slight edge to 'Rec', but certainly recommend 'Quarantine' to horror fans. It's problems aren't severe enough to detract from a very decent effort.

Even at a glance, it is clear that Quarantine has boarded the 'fad' bandwagon it two respects. Firstly, this chiller joins up with the abundance of remakes that choke the gullet of Hollywood, and at an impressively rapid pace I may add, duplicating its Spanish predecessor (Rec) within a year's time. Secondly, it is the successor in a line of films, some from earlier this year in fact, that adopt the hand-held camera technique (which may soon be classified more accurately as a gimmick) to construct a first hand, real time account of events. Yet, despite succumbing to these popular fixations, and the flag of death that is the studios reluctance to screen the film, Quarantine is crisp effective horror.

When comparing (Rec) and Quarantine, the similarities are glaring. In fact, the films are almost identical, save a few altered snippets. Which is good in the sense that nothing was lost in translation and although nowhere near as disgraceful as remaking classics or art films, it still begs to ask the question why? Alas, the average viewer does not wish to read subtitles, especially when watching horror, so the update went through. Directed by newcomer John Erick Dowdle he makes the most of his debut. Procuring a larger budget then its inspiration, Quarantine looks better as a whole (despite more frequent incomprehensible shots involving darkness and jiggle cam) and is able to incorporate some effects into the production, such as a continuous and chilling shot of a person being tossed down a stairwell. Comparisons to 2008's earlier films Cloverfield and Diary of the Dead are unavoidable, and remains squarely in the middle; a far-cry from the ingenuity and atmosphere of Cloverfield, but avoids the horrendous acting and scripting of Diary.

Mirroring (Rec) Quarantine begins with a reporter, Angela Vidal (Jennifer Carpenter) who hosts a late night television program. On this particular night, Angela and her cameraman Scott (Steve Harris) are doing a ride-along with the firemen of a local station in L.A., including Jake (Jay Hernandez) and Fletcher (Jonathan Schaech). After a tenuous night of boredom and anxiety, they are finally called to the scene of an apparent accident in an aging condo, involving an elderly tenant. Things are not as they seem however as soon after, the CDC seals off the building with the foursome, and the reaming residents still inside. Their reasoning is good it seems, as all hell breaks loose as a mysterious rabies virus rips through the building turning those exposed into zombie-like fiends. The survivors must work together to battle the infected, the authorities and each other.

Both films incorporate the inherent problem of the disease itself, which seems to frequently shift in its required incubation period, but is not really a huge impediment for the film as a whole. The opening act which is situated entirely at the station is both surprisingly involving and witty, and works to some extent as character development. The finale is also pulse-pounding, if not entirely inspired, but lacks the sheer terror I felt at the finale of (Rec). When breaking it down, Quarantine's opening is better then the original, and (Rec)'s final act is better then its imitator, so things balance out. Each film boast a superb scene mid to late film, including the aforementioned stairwell plummet in Quarantine and a scene in (Rec]) involving the same stairwell in which the heroes peer down to see the lower floors of infected peering back; eerie stuff. I would encourage horror fans to see both before making their choice, and to be honest I haven't quite chosen myself which is superior. Regardless, Quarantine takes advantage of a ploy that has not yet become stale, and yielding authentic portrayals from its relatively unknown cast and an ominous atmosphere, this flick is infectious to be sure.

See all my reviews at: http://simonsaysmovies.blogspot.com

I had high hopes for this movie when I saw the trailer and felt that the movie delivered what it intended to.

The movie itself takes place from the point of view from a cameraman named Scott. The cameraman is shooting a take on what firemen go through on an ordinary day when their ordinary day turns into extraordinary. They get a call to an apartment complex and get locked inside with what appear to be zombie like creatures.

It is a movie that I would place in between the 28 days/weeks movies and Cloverfield. It has suspense (will be great on DVD w/surround sound in the future) but some of the characters lack common sense. The fact that the movie is shot from one camera had some people disappointed since it didn't involve too much of a story as to what is being "quarantined", but that is to be expected.

I would say that the movie could have been a heck of a lot better with a solid story and a bigger climax/plot. It is worth your time to watch, but if you don't like shaky cameras like Cloverfield and Blairwitch Project, then I wouldn't watch it.

If you didn't know. This film is another American-Remake. That's right. Once again, American underlings of the film-persuasion lacked any real originality or motivation to write anything of their own, so they chose to massacre an existing one. That isn't to directly say this movie is horrible. But the strange thing you may notice if you educate yourself is that the ORIGINAL had a plot, where as this one, sadly, comes out with little to NO plot.

Now if you like the common films that have no regard to your intelligence or sense of accomplishment that one can get from watching a good film. (Like 'One Missed Call' 'The Ring' 'The Eye' etc). Then you will think I have no clue what I am talking about. However, if you're not a dolt, you will agree and wonder why this movie delivered the higher budget film, but removed the plot.

The film is 85% it's original. However it does take some originality in developing the 'infection' earlier on in the plot, however you really don't get any explanation on much anything. (It's like they teased you with it. Although the tease being a very weak attempt at a conclusion).

Honestly, you cannot grasp the entirety of this film without watching Rec. The same can't be said inversely, but both are enjoyable to watch.

In conclusion if you just want a drive-by horror. Go ahead. If you actually want to have something to talk about with your friends, get Rec and this one and watch them back to back with the gang and make it your own discussion.