Directed by John Erick Dowdle
Review based upon the Sony Blu-Ray Release
There are two things that I always try to do when writing a review. The first is never to include spoilers that might damage the experience for the audience, and the second is to take my time and think about the piece carefully before jotting down my critique.
With this review I’m breaking both of my golden rules, and for very good reason. This film made me angry. Not just a little bit cross or frustrated, but verging on furious. I’ll try not to rant during this piece, but the fact remains that in a nutshell “Quarantine” has taken one of my favourite horror films of all time and bastardised it, creating a sanitised Yankee version that insults its audience and destroys the final impact of the original through radical narrative changes. It might be good in some areas, but frankly it’s nowhere near good enough. To me, this is the Hollywood equivalent of Lloyd Kaufman remaking “The Shining”… but taking it seriously.
For the uninitiated, “Quarantine” is a US remake of the wonderful Spanish shocker “[REC]” (review here), which was released in 2007. Sony bought the rights to remake the picture during the pre-production phase of the original, and some of the creative team were even hired as consultants to create a similar look and feel for the American version. Released only a year apart, the speed of this process proves that Sony believed they had a quality product on their hands, and as the audience of the original will tell you, they were definitely correct in this assumption.
However, while “[REC]” used it’s low-budget handheld camerawork and no-name European actors to full terrifying effect, this glossy Hollywood production copies much of the Spanish version shot-for-shot but manages to omit the realism and urgency of the original. Even the documentary shooting style (like “Cloverfield” and “Diary of the Dead” this is a movie supposedly made up of video camera footage) somehow seems too vibrant to be genuine.
The premise of the piece is that a small television crew are making a documentary section for a late-night TV show, looking at how the firemen of Los Angeles spend their nights. During the shoot an alarm is raised, and the TV crew consisting of Angela (Jennifer Carpenter) and cameraman boyfriend Scott (Steve Harris) go with the firemen to a house downtown, where an old woman has seemingly gone crazy. What they find is a virus on the rampage, which seemingly turns the victims into zombies. The CSC quarantines the building and unable to escape, the events that unfold for Angela and the residents are portrayed vividly through Scott’s camera lens.
I suspect that to those who never saw the original, “Quarantine” would be a very scary movie. After all, it has a strong story, some effective jump moments a
nd the gore factor to keep all horror camps happy. Unfortunately it all just falls down so badly when compared to the original.The key conceit that“[REC]” executes so well is the sheer believability factor. This is accomplished due to three things: the European nature of the story (more on this later), the performances, and the overall style of the piece.
The style aspect is swiftly dealt a blow from the outset; in “[REC]” it actually LOOKS like grainy video footage, whereas “Quarantine” (like “Cloverfield”) just looks like someone TRIED to make it look real. And frankly, they tried a little too hard.
With regard to the performances, they’re solid but unconvincing. It doesn’t help when recognising the faces of actors is distracting you and you’re then trying to figure out what sitcom they’ve been in! Some of the stalwarts from “Ally McBeal” and “Two and a Half Men” are in here, trying to play ‘real’ people, and frankly that kind of recognition completely detaches you from the apparent documentary unfolding on the screen. Perhaps most problematic is that Jennifer Carpenter’s performance as Angela lets the side down in a crucial anchor role. She is fine at the beginning of the movie, but as the terrors mount she seems to turn into a quivering jellyfish who shakes more than she emotes. Manuela Velasco’s performance in the original version was far more ballsy and realistic which as a result had much more impact, especially at film’s denouement.
The removal of the European nature of the story is without a doubt my biggest gripe, and is symptomatic of the narrative changes that significantly reduce the scare factor. “[REC]” did not offer any explanation for the onset of the ‘virus’ in the apartment building. It did so for two very good reasons. Firstly, it credited the audience with some intelligence and did not feel the need to explain everything, polishing it up to crystal clarity. Secondly, “[REC]” was building the inconclusive nature of the outbreak to a twist in the final 15 minutes.
***If you have not yet seen either of these movies, you may wish to skip the next 3 paragraphs, as there are a lot of spoilers contained within***
“[REC]” builds to a conclusion where Angela and Scott trap themselves in the penthouse, only to find details of a possessed girl who was subject to experiments with the full knowledge of the Vatican. This girl was locked away from the world but survived, and it was her who caused the outbreak. This adds a crucial and unsettling supernatural overtone to the story, especially when Angela and Scott are confronted with the twisted creature that created this terror. In “Quarantine” however, there is no mention of religion or possession. Instead, we are expected to believe that this is a virus created by something called ‘The Doomsday Cult’, presumably a bunch of terrorists. Nothing else is offered aside from some cages, weird experiments and a tape machine which when played sounds like a lot of pig noises. The final confrontation in this version makes no sense, as we don’t know who this twisted figure actually is or if we should actually be scared by her at all.
In my opinion this significant change undermines not only the twist, but also the genuine intelligence of the original film. As far as the director John Erick Dowdle is concerned (he co-wrote this version with his brother Drew Dowdle), the audience has to leave the cinema with something tangible that
they can understand, and as we are told everyday, terrorism is a real and terrifying threat. Well, no, it isn’t. In a horror film like this it isn’t as terrifying as using religion and supernatural elements that are never explained, therefore leaving the viewer with something to consider in their own imagination. When will Hollywood learn that over-explaining a plot point takes away the fear of the unknown, which most horror aficionados enjoy more than anything else?In “Quarantine” we have a vet explaining that the virus appears to be rabies just with a faster gestation time. We have scenes where residents are watching the news only to be told that the CDC has evacuated everyone, reminding us who the bad guys are. All of this is needless and stops the film from being what it should have been: truly terrifying. The audience are spoon-fed the facts for no reason. I can only surmise that the Dowdles think horror fans are stupid. I find that, and the pointless change of the ending to be a great insult.
*** End of spoilers***
The sets for “Quarantine” are very atmospheric, and there are several scares to be had if you are unfamiliar with “[REC]”. All I hope is that people will be sensible enough to watch the original after seeing this version of the story. There is so much more to be had in Balaguero and Plaza’s work than in “Quarantine”, and while I enjoy some remakes immensely (“The Ring” and “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” being two solid examples), this takes a wonderful movie and takes away it’s soul.
See “[REC]” first and then watch this, and you’ll understand why Hollywood has simply got to get some new material and stop lazily plagiarising the work of other (and arguably more talented) filmmakers.
5 out of 10
An empty remake, which plays like Ron Howard directing "The Blair Witch Project"... not exactly a recommendation. See "[REC]" instead.
