Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A tense and chilling horror film..., February 23, 2009
I really liked "Quarantine" despite the number of people who bash it. Yes, it's an example of a serious and debilitating problem in the US horror movie genre right now in that it's a remake of another movie. I'm sure most horror fans like myself are tired of seeing unnecessary remakes of classic horror movies we've already seen and are ready to see some original stories being written. However, when the film in question is a remake of a foreign-language film and it sticks to the original concept and story, then I don't have so much of a problem. And so it is with "Quarantine".
Yes, it's a remake of the Spanish movie [*REC]. Since the two films are almost identical, I prefer this one since I don't have to take my eyes off the action to read subtitles. "Quarantine" is a claustrophobic, tense, and chilling little film and I enjoyed it very, very much. Jennifer Carpenter put in a great performance, as did the rest of the cast, and if you enjoy good horror movies you will enjoy this one. Is it a milestone in the horror film genre? No. But then again, milestones are few and far between, hence the term. I *can* tell you that "Quarantine" is the most memorable horror film I've seen since it premiered in US theaters and pretty much kept me on the edge of my seat once things kicked into gear.
My only qualm with the DVD release is the price. $19.95 for a single edition DVD with so few extras? Come on... Not cool, guys.
Cheers
B
|
|
|
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Far better than the previews would lead you to believe., June 22, 2009
Quarantine is a much better movie than its previews would lead you to believe. Previews make it look like people are trapped in an old building with zombies running amok in it. Maybe they came up from the sewers.
In fact it follows a reality TV reporter who is following an LA fire crew on calls. They go to a building when neighbors have reported screams coming from the apartment of an old lady. What follows is the outbreak of a savage, mind destroying disease where tenants and first responders find them sealed in with those already infected, by the CDC.
Like Cloverfield and Blair Witch, the film is shot from the single camera view of the reality reporter's camera man. Unlike those films the camera work is clean and does not distract the viewer. Watch the long shot when a call comes as the camera man has to follow the reporter down a hall, a flight of stairs and into a truck and realize it was all done in one take without cuts. The first 20 minutes of the film are the `reality show' walking around the fire house, talking to members of the fire crew and setting the stage by letting you meet the key players in the film. This is clearly the set up but it doesn't feel stilted. You don't feel like saying `get on with it" because you care about the characters. Carpenter, as the on air talent is likeable and believable, going from bubbly on air talent, to real reporter as things turn serious to scared human as she realizes just how deep in they are. And she takes the viewer with her.
Previews make this look like just another zombie film. There are certainly elements of that in Quarantine but for the genre it is so much better than much of the competition. They even have an explanation, scary in how reasonable it is, for what is happening. Is it "Sound of Music?" of course not. It is a horror film, but one in which the director has taken a lot of care to make the whole thing frighteningly possible.
|
|
|
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Zombies Take Over, News at Eleven, October 11, 2008
The director of "Quarantine" is John Erick Dowdle, but since his film borrows so heavily from three other directors, they probably deserve just as much credit. One is George A. Romero, who basically reinvented the zombie genre with the original 1968 version of "Night of the Living Dead." In "Quarantine," a group of survivors are trapped in a building with infected flesh-eating monsters. Subtler ideas also come into play: a young girl showing signs of fever; a TV set that displays a scrambled news report; the vague explanation that it's caused by some kind of virus. To be fair, I'm not entirely sure that the zombies in this film are dead, as they are in Romero's film. They are, however, mentally altered to the point of base animal instincts. And they bite people. The other two directors are Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez, who introduced the world to the Queasy Cam with "The Blair Witch Project." "Quarantine" is shot entirely with a handheld news camera, often in dark corridors with only the camera's light to guide the characters along. Is something hiding in the corner there? Look out!
Jaume Balagueró and Paco Plaza are the only filmmakers credited for inspiring "Quarantine." They wrote and directed "[REC]," a 2007 Spanish movie about a young TV news reporter, a cameraman, and the shocking footage they capture in an isolated building. That's right, folks--"Quarantine" is an American remake of a foreign horror film. I'm not at all surprised by this, considering the popularity of films like "The Ring," "The Grudge," "Shutter," "The Eye," and "Mirrors." Is this to say that "Quarantine" is a bad movie? I wouldn't quite go that far; it's not at all an original story, but it does get the job done. Barely.
The foundation of the plot (provided by the ads but not by the film itself): On March 11, 2008, the government sealed off an apartment complex in Los Angeles. No one inside the building was ever seen again. Thanks to newly discovered camera footage, the truth of what happened that night is now open to the public. It's an interesting setup, although when you think about it logically, it's unlikely the footage would ever be found, and that's because it's difficult to imagine anyone going back into complex. Isn't the point of quarantining to permanently seal everyone off? Be that as it may, the film opens with a news reporter named Angela Vidal (Jennifer Carpenter) and her cameraman, Scott (Steve Harris), covering a story about Los Angeles firefighters at night. After some friendly banter, the alarm sounds. Angela and Scott tag along in one of the fire trucks. They end up at an old apartment complex where, apparently, an old woman has been screaming. They go upstairs and find Ms. Espinoza (Jeannie Epper), half-crazed and apparently foaming at the mouth. And then an even crazier person jumps out of the darkness and attacks. Not long after, the authorities surround the building and refuse to let anyone out.
Do I really need to describe the rest of the plot? I'm sure you have a pretty good idea of where this is going. But there is something I'm curious about. It seems awfully convenient that a veterinarian just happens to be one of the tenants, and isn't it nice that he just happens to speculate that the infected have some mutated strain of rabies? If Dowdle trusted his audience, if he truly believed in what he was doing, he would have just let the scenes happen. He would not have tried to provide us with an explanation, not even a vague one. And he certainly wouldn't have included the final five minutes, which involves a multitude of newspaper clippings with the oddest headlines. It only worsens the confusion over the rabies theory. All we needed was the scene of the TV showing the scrambled news report; it might have been ripped off from "Night of the Living Dead," but at least it was a genuinely tense moment. It helped that the power was completely cut off just as the last vital bits of information got through.
As I said before, it would be too much to call this a bad movie. Some of it is actually quite scary, due in large part to both the lack of lighting and the unsteady camerawork. What a reliable technique for a horror film. It was successfully used this year in "Cloverfield," a film that achieved greatness because it chose to not explain anything. It just happened, as it would in real life (were such a thing possible). "Quarantine" would have been much better if it had been allowed to do the same.
Here's a word of warning: If you've seen the trailer, then you already know how the movie is going to end. Too bad the final shot was also one of the most chilling--I don't think it would have been included in the trailer had it not been. And be aware that not everyone will be able to tolerate nearly ninety minutes of the Queasy Cam, which only gets shakier as the film progresses. While I'm not recommending "Quarantine," I did find some of it intriguing. There was one scene in particular that I enjoyed a great deal; when a zombie attacks Scott, he uses the camera to bludgeon it to death. Within two or three blows to the head, spatters of blood cover the entire lens. It's an interesting perspective, to say the least. It's also one of the few original ideas this movie had to offer. Everything else is an example of what has already been done. This isn't a good sign, because in all honesty, I'm not sure future zombie films will be able to give us anything new.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
Video On Demand ~ Bradley Cooper
Video On Demand ~ Odette Yustman
Video On Demand ~ Virginia Madsen
Video On Demand ~ Michael Stahl-David
Video On Demand ~ Garret Dillahunt
Video On Demand ~ Manuela Velasco
Video On Demand ~ Shauna Macdonald
