| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 11/25/2008 : 11:28:25
Quarantine
I'm not sure the Dowdle Brothers have made a strict shot-for-shot version of Jaume Balaguer�'s Barcelona shakey-cam horror [REC], but, apart from a reputed 5 or 10 new minutes, it might as well be.
Now the main reason for a remake, especially one released so quickly after the original as this, is in some way to improve on it. And there is certainly room for improvement.
You might, for example, want to cast a thin beam of light on the most glaring unanswered question: if a weird and dangerous situation has evolved within the confines of a building, and the fire department is called out, and the rest of the film takes place entirely within the building where you the audience are quarantined with the characters ... how come the CDC, the over-riding authority, know not only to show up, but have managed to label the situation code red before they've had a chance to evaluate anything.
Too logical? OK, well, you may want to develop one, two, any of the relationships that have been sketched in in the opening sequence. So that the strane and scary events have more resonance than the kind of cliched reactions and dialogue we've seen in so many ooo-ooo horror scenarios.
But this remake is strictly a box-office strategy. I'm not sure what the opening w/e take in Spain was for [REC], but, according to published figures, Quarantine's first w/e release in America made it's $12million budget back plus another $2million.
Because the US target market is no way going to sit through a sub-titled or even a dubbed version of actors they don't recognize and set in a - no, no, don't make me -- a foreign city. Shudder.
Look, I can't say this is a terrible movie of its kind. And it would have been a lot better had no other film ever been made like this before. But they have been. And this one adds nothing to the cannon. So, apart from money money money, there was no reason to make it.
And it's no use asking me if its scary because I just don't get scared by a movie. I get very scared at the way some moviemakers manipulate the market, but I know I'm in the minority. Shock horror!
|
| 8 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 11/27/2008 : 00:05:13
It is clearer in [Rec] (presumably because the most pertinent ones ware subtitled), but the same kind of clippings are on the wall in Quarantine. Some research has gone wrong. The girl has presumably been accidentally infected, and locked in the attic by someone involved. I don't know how she is supposed to have transmitted the disease to the dog - perhaps her fluids leaked through the floorboards and he licked them or something. |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 11/26/2008 : 17:22:19
Not mystifying so much as unexplained, I guess. What the fuck was going on up there? Who was doing all that and why? What was up with that thing in the attic? My favorite part of the whole scene is when she finds that tape recorder, the kind you always see in movies that explain everything. Except this one doesn't work. Ha ha. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 11/26/2008 : 13:12:16
Well, it's like rabies but without an incubation period in which to treat it. That seems pretty scary to me.
What's mystifying about the ending? |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 11/26/2008 : 04:50:56
I liked "Quarantine." don't like the argument that a remake isn't different enough from the original. To me, that's like admitting that the original wasn't good to begin with, that it doesn't hold up to a second viewing. Yes, I do like Gus Van Sant's "Psycho."
I also don't agree that the relationships between characters should have been sketched out more. I don't see how that would have been possible given the format of the movie. It simply wouldn't have been realistic for the cameraman to have filmed a backstory for these characters.
In fact, my biggest problem with the film is that it's not realistic enough. People die in all the expected ways, in the exactly the order you expect, the main characters survive the longest, and so on. I don't see the point in using the faux-documentary format when in all other respects you're going to play by the rules. (This is also true of "Cloverfield," and most egregiously, George Romero's "Diary of the Dead," easily Romero's worst movie.) What you get is essentially the same movie, only you can't tell what's going on. I do give it lots of credit for breaking the rules with an utterly mystifying ending that is wisely never explained.
Another problem: How the movie insists on identifying the fatal disease as "rabies." You know what's scary? Zombies. The Rage Virus. You know what's not? Rabies. |
| damalc |
Posted - 11/25/2008 : 17:16:48
i liked "Quarantine" -- a cross between "Blair Witch Project" and a Romero zombie movie.
SPOILERSPOILERSPOILERSPOILER
i thought the scariest part was when the man, determined to get out, ripped the plastic from the window and was shot by police. as soon as he started messing with the window, i nearly said out loud, "get away from the window dumb-ass."
i don't get why in movies like this one -- someone is attacked then becomes another attacker -- why it takes people so long to figure out the pattern and that they need to destroy anyone who is attacked. i can almost understand in the case of kids, but i like to think i'd be more like Selena from "28 Days Later."
Selena: Were you bitten?
Mark: ... wait ...
(CHOP, CHOP, CHOP)
|
| damalc |
Posted - 11/25/2008 : 17:00:54
space holder
|
| Airbolt |
Posted - 11/25/2008 : 12:37:08
Among people you do not want turning up at the door, the CDC must be in the top five! However their arrival usually presages some hilarious hi-jinx which is why they are so popular in films.
I imagine in real life they keep their work quiet. " I work for the C ( nudge in ribs from partner ) , er, CBS "
I agree that audiences have a lazy attitude of audiences toward subtitles - it's their loss. They miss out on "Nine Queens"or "Taxi" and get inferior remakes. Ironically most films are set in foreign cities to the US, usually Vancouver or Toronto |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 11/25/2008 : 11:40:07
The C.D.C. quarantine the building because of the dog having come from there. That and the content of the 911 call about the old woman makes it plausible enough. I imagine that the 911 call gets directed to the Fire Department in the normal way and they go straight there from nearby, but an alert on the zip code or something means that the content of that call is also sent to the C.D.C., who arrive a little later to seal the building off as a result. I don't mean that it would be the best way to handle a threat (i.e. instead of investigating the building as soon as they hear about the dog), but it's passable.
However, you are right about the pointlessness of the film. I really cannot imagine what the extra footage is, unless the stuff in the fire station is slightly different. And maybe the man and dog in the lift is new. At every other point, I knew exactly what was going to happen next. The building has the same layout, there is the same kind of workshop in the back, the final scene is identical etc. etc. I really enjoyed the original, partly because I had no idea what it was going to be about. (The title of this film leaves the potential audience in little doubt.) However, I've probably now had enough of camera-being-conveniently-present films, let alone seeing the same one again. I laughed when I saw script credits at the end. |
|
|
