Why hate/like [rec] over Quarantine and vice versa?

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

They're essentially the same film.

i don't understand why people like one over the other. they're essentially the same film. 98.9% of these films are shot for shot the same film. i saw both the Spanish version and the Americans version and i liked both....most of the reasons i hear are usually superficial. if it's just out of sheere spite of them making an American version then i guess i understand, but other wise....if your gonna like one, like both. and if your gonna hate one hate both.

[the goddamn batman]

Just because it's shot for shot doesn't mean it's actually as good.

I think the main thing that irritates me is that such recent movies need to be remade. Because, you know, Americans won't read subtitles.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

Just because it's shot for shot doesn't mean it's actually as good.

I think the main thing that irritates me is that such recent movies need to be remade. Because, you know, Americans won't read subtitles.understandable on both counts, but the American version is genuinely good though.

[the goddamn batman]

I thought it was alright. I mean, it wasn't great. Some of the acting was pretty ass in spots. But it really wasn't much different from all the other "POV" movies like Cloverfield or what have you.

I'm guilty of not seeing [REC] yet, so I can't really make any comparative statements about quality.

[ForeverTaskmaster]

I thought Quarantaine was just the Spanish [REC] but renamed differently in the U.S. Although I haven't seen Quarantaine I cannot imagine they could copy the hysteria that was found in [REC]. The Spanish have a knack for playing hysteric characters.

[Paradox]

The remake of Psycho WAS shot for shot from the original.

And it stunk.

Haven't seen the movies you mention, but there's more to films than the shot blocking.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

cannot imagine they could copy the hysteria that was found in [REC]..
they did...Jennifer Carpenter especially (Steve Harris as well).

The remake of Psycho WAS shot for shot from the original.. not completely, they failed to capture the mood and tone etc... quarantine captured it. . it's not a soulless clone. it managed to recreate the emotion as well.

[Paradox]

Tish-the-Scorpion qualifies:

not completely, they failed to capture the mood and tone etc...

Oh, I'll sort of agree, but mostly because you seem to be using a rather loose definition of "shot". If you're not talking about the actual shot blocking, then we're just talking about two different things.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

Oh, I'll sort of agree, but mostly because you seem to be using a rather loose definition of "shot". If you're not talking about the actual shot blocking, then we're just talking about two different things.

i gotcha...

[Pól Rua]

The American remake of Luc Besson's 'Le Femme Nikita' managed to do something I thought was impossible.
It managed to make a film featuring Gabriel Byrne, Miguel Ferrer and Harvey Keitel stultifyingly dull.

One of the main reasons I dislike remakes is that Hollywood frequently insists on casting photogenic stars in remakes of films that previously starred good actors. While a Spanish, German or Japanese director will cast someone who may not look like a model, but who has genuine acting chops, American studios will frequently cast some wooden clotheshorse whose acting ability consists of the ability to look fashionably beat-up and smile pretty for the camera.

[the goddamn batman]

That's pretty much how I see the Let The Right One In "remake" going. Shit child actors... I was really impressed by the kids in that movie. I thought they did a fantastic job. No way will the American version come even close to matching that.

[2-4-5_Trioxin]

i don't understand why people like one over the other. they're essentially the same film. 98.9% of these films are shot for shot the same film. i saw both the Spanish version and the Americans version and i liked both....most of the reasons i hear are usually superficial. if it's just out of sheere spite of them making an American version then i guess i understand, but other wise....if your gonna like one, like both. and if your gonna hate one hate both.


Shot by shot does not make them the same movie, nor the same quality.

Different directors, different music, different actors, different lighting, sound effects are all subtle things but can change a movie entirely and have done so in this case.

They were both decent movies but personally I hated the hollywoodized flair given to quarntine. I also didnt like the acting in it and the token black dude. And the ending has nothing tense about it, and the visualization for the last infected you see at the end wasnt creepy but just pretty standard vs one in rec looked really cool.

In the end quarntine actually looked like it was filmed to just make money, no one doing it wanted to make a good horror film. REC on the other hand had more to it that made it seem more like it was people trying to make a horror movie. And the lower budget helped because in hollywood movies when something cant be done easy for the most part they throw money at in the form of special effects and that just cheapens a movie.

But quarntine while almost the same movie still was re-done to be more marketable to americans and disgestiable. And thus was a inferior product.

[the goddamn batman]

and the token black dude.

The ethnicity of the cast was a pretty mixed bag, so I'm not sure that's a valid complaint...

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

Shot by shot does not make them the same movie, nor the same quality.
AS IT WAS ALREADY POINTED OUT, THUS NOT EXACTLY WHAT I MEANT IN THE FIRST PLACE.



sorry caps lock :tongue:

[Comic_Mobsta]

I think this could be a case of "your mileage may vary", but yeah i think the movies are basically the same. Both in execution AND tone (btw i saw Rec first). Some are likely just being petty and spiteful.

[ibwib]

Perhaps its the fact that there's no language barrier in Quarantine (http://www.theleisurelab.co.uk/en/Movies/Quarantine-Review/), but I have to say I found it less convincing-the intonations, the constant mentioning of and justifying of the camera and it's uncanny ability to capture the creature close up when needed, it just didn't quite convince me. I enjoyed it, and it made me jump enough times to get a thumbs up, but it wasn't anything special.

My Quarantine Blu-ray review (http://www.theleisurelab.co.uk/en/Movies/Quarantine-Review/).

[Whirlwind Dinamo]

understandable on both counts, but the American version is genuinely good though.


Hollywood should fund ORIGINAL screenplays for a change, I watched the Spanish original. Not a big fan of this horror but it was ok though...don't see why people rave about it so much. del Toro's Devils Backbone was much better

[blackdragon6]

count me as someone who liked both versions. and yes i think they're both equal. i know that's politically incorrect to say but that's how i feel. and yes i too saw the spanish version first.

[noh-varr]

They're essentially the same film.

i don't understand why people like one over the other. they're essentially the same film. 98.9% of these films are shot for shot the same film. i saw both the Spanish version and the Americans version and i liked both....most of the reasons i hear are usually superficial. if it's just out of sheere spite of them making an American version then i guess i understand, but other wise....if your gonna like one, like both. and if your gonna hate one hate both.

No matter what, a remake is not the same movie. Even if shot for shot, with the same script. 99% of the time remakes aren't as good as the original. I haven't seen Quarantine, and I doubt I really ever will. Why? I saw the movie already. How about we make original movies in Hollywood again?

[Royal]

They're not the same.

The production company wanted to capitalize on this before it was popular, but didn't want to commit. So they turned chickenshit and gave it a run of the mill ABC plot.

That's why it sucked.

[HulkSmash666]

I saw REC a couple of years ago, and when Quarantine came out, I cringed at it, knowing full well that Hollywood was trying to cash in on a cult hit. I pisses me off when Hollywood has to Americanise foreign movies in an attempt to cash in on someone elses idea.

Quarantine is a prime example.

And now Hollywood is doing it again with a remake of "Let the Right One In". This movie was the best vampire movie I'd seen in years, maybe ever, and perhaps one of the best movies I'd seen in any genre. It captured the feeling of childhood romance and "first love" extremelly well, and even without the vampire element, it would have been a fantastic movie. As it is, it's a fuckin brilliant movie.

Now America wants to make money out of it. The movie isn't even a year old and it's getting a remake?

How about just watching the original version? Can't American's read subtitles? Are they that fucking illiterate that they can't watch a movie and read at the same time?

A great movie is being ruined on account of a bunch of illiterate yanks who don't like reading subtitles.

How many more great international movies are going to be ruined by remakes?

-Martyrs?
-High Tension?
-Frontier(s)?

All great horror movies made in Europe.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

if quarantine had a "ABC" plot then so did [Rec] .



and yes, yes, people... remakes sucks, Hollywood need to be more original, yadda yadda, etc etc... i get that, but that's a different can of worms....

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

-Martyrs?
-High Tension?


All great horror movies made in Europe. REALLY???.....if those had of been American films they would have been considered trash...it's foreign so it must be good i guess. BTW i think Martyrs is overrated and Haute Tension's plot is illogical and filled with implausible paradoxes., and i like Aja's work.

[Royal]

The ending of [REC] was far more original the Quarentine. It adds that final punch in the gut to the situation.

I can count fingers and toes movies with viral terrorism.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

I can count fingers and toes movies with viral terrorism.*shrugs* no more than demon possession stories...



at the end of the day Hollywood will always go with a prooven product then do something original. if foreign movies do well the American film industry will jump on it. Hollywood isn't out of ideas, they're just not gonna risk 10's of millions of dollars on a original concept from a established talent let alone a new unproven one. thats just the way it works now...but like i said that's a completely different argument.


having said that i do wish they had kept the original patient zero though...the concept of the virus i didn't care about.

[king mob]

The ending of [REC] was far more original the Quarentine. It adds that final punch in the gut to the situation.

It's an ending that draws upon Spain being a catholic country, while using the fear of immigration as a drive for the tension between the residents. The American remake is a paint-by-numbers remake with no life or soul of it's own.

I can count fingers and toes movies with viral terrorism.

Indeed. It's one of the many things that made the remake a fairly bland remake.

[blackdragon6]

i liked them both equally, the only thing I thought REC did better than quarantine was the aforementioned girl monster which was waaaaay creepier than Doug Jones version..

[The Transient Guest]

So what IS the magical ending of rec that makes it so good?

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

So what IS the magical ending of rec that makes it so good?the previously mentioned final monster ghoul thing was creepier than the one in Q, and the virus was hinted at being supernatural. other than that not much difference.

[king mob]

the previously mentioned final monster ghoul thing was creepier than the one in Q, and the virus was hinted at being supernatural. other than that not much difference.

It's more than that though. It's a ending built up throughout the film in passing references, and has a climax built upon the social and religious aspects of Spanish society. Quarantine has a scary virus monster. There's a massive difference in terms of nuance, something often lost in Americanised remakes of films.

[Royal]

So what IS the magical ending of rec that makes it so good?

Well they keep mentioning in passing the tenant at the top loft and how he was usually an absentee.

At the end, the news crew find themselves hiding in the top loft. The find out, through press clippings, that the loft was a HAZMAT area for a failed attempt to biologically contain a demon via exoticism.

[The Transient Guest]

From yalls description it does sound like the original ending was better. But other than the ending the movies were about the same right?

Did they both end with the "pull away" from the camera trick?

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

Did they both end with the "pull away" from the camera trick?yup.......

[xnef1025]

I haven't seen [rec] but I just recently watched Quarantine. Since it was a remake for a US audience, I'd say the change to the outbreak's origin, particularly given the current craziness over H1N1 and vaccinations we're going through, was a good call.

[noh-varr]

the previously mentioned final monster ghoul thing was creepier than the one in Q, and the virus was hinted at being supernatural. other than that not much difference.

But the ending is what made REC a good movie. I just read the synopsis of the ending for Quarantine and saw the words Doomsday Cult, this made me laugh hysterically... REC's ending made me feel all creeped out and lacked any loling.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

But the ending is what made REC a good movie. I just read the synopsis of the ending for Quarantine and saw the words Doomsday Cult, this made me laugh hysterically... REC's ending made me feel all creeped out and lacked any loling.fair enough but i don't think the explanation of the virus added or hurt the premise. of course i would have preferred if it stayed ambiguous.

[Royal]

fair enough but i don't think the explanation of the virus added or hurt the premise. of course i would have preferred if it stayed ambiguous.

Course it did. the premise was excised and made it another zombie movie.

If they left well enough alone and pay a decent dub crew, it would've made Paranormal Activity like buzz back then.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

If they left well enough alone and pay a decent dub crew, .i wouldn't have mind that...although i doubt it would have gotten paranormal activity type of buzz, mostly due to the sheere violence. PA's buzz is built around the fact that it relies on off screen spooks rather than violence.

[Dr Cthulwho]

They're essentially the same film.

i don't understand why people like one over the other. they're essentially the same film. 98.9% of these films are shot for shot the same film. i saw both the Spanish version and the Americans version and i liked both....most of the reasons i hear are usually superficial. if it's just out of sheere spite of them making an American version then i guess i understand, but other wise....if your gonna like one, like both. and if your gonna hate one hate both.

I actually liked Quarantine. But I did see [Rec] a fair while before Quarantine, and I thought it was very good.

So when it got to Quarantine I found myself thinking "yeah, this is a good copy" - it didn't really raise the stakes or bring much new to it, and at times there were points where I thought the original did it better.

So I wouldn't feel I was missing out on anything if it had never been made, and I can't say I see much reason for it to have been remade in the first place, but it wasn't a bad film (like many remakes are).

It's more than that though. It's a ending built up throughout the film in passing references, and has a climax built upon the social and religious aspects of Spanish society. Quarantine has a scary virus monster. There's a massive difference in terms of nuance, something often lost in Americanised remakes of films.

Yes, that is one of the things I didn't feel was as good in the remake. The ending is important, and the lead up and pay off in [Rec] was better then what it became in Quarantine.

That's pretty much how I see the Let The Right One In "remake" going. Shit child actors... I was really impressed by the kids in that movie. I thought they did a fantastic job. No way will the American version come even close to matching that.

I just can't imagine why anyone would think we need a remake. When the original is such a great film (based upon a very good book), and so recent, it is nigh impossible to imagine a remake going in any direction except backwards.

And you're right about the actors. But then I have read that certain ambiguities that existed in the original aren't going to be present in the remake, so the remake's actors might be playing less complex characters (sigh).

[king mob]

So I wouldn't feel I was missing out on anything if it had never been made, and I can't say I see much reason for it to have been remade in the first place, but it wasn't a bad film (like many remakes are).

For an Americanised remake it was ok, but it was a souless photocopy, but at least it did a job.


I just can't imagine why anyone would think we need a remake. When the original is such a great film (based upon a very good book), and so recent, it is nigh impossible to imagine a remake going in any direction except backwards.

And you're right about the actors. But then I have read that certain ambiguities that existed in the original aren't going to be present in the remake, so the remake's actors might be playing less complex characters (sigh).

I think that's a safe bet. Still, it's not as scary as Speilberg remaking Oldboy with Will Smith.