by James Gapinski

Created on: April 01, 2009

Cross Cloverfield with Dawn of the Dead and you've got Quarantine of. Directed by John Erick Dowdle, 2008's Quarantine follows a chipper news reporter assigned to shadow group of LA firefighters for a human interest story. The soft-news piece quickly turns to a breaking story as the firefighters are called to a disturbance at a residential complex. The initial disturbance turns tragic as the isolated old woman being "rescued" attacks her supposed saviors. Though the plot reveals a slightly more unique twist than "zombies," the infected people act much the same. Severe aggression and transmission via bites are symptoms among the infected, though these individuals are not technically undeadwhile not spoiled in this review, the film does eventually reveal infection's true nature and original source.

The film tries to infuse a level of depth with the typical gore-fest zombie flick, giving semi-plausible origin stories for the outbreak. However, these details take a back seat to the more poignant human drama unfolding. The movie is aptly titled Quarantine because the government quickly steps in, locking down the apartment complex. Those left inside resort to infighting, struggling to make sense of the situation and maintain power within the group of isolated individuals.

Even more impressive than the hints of dramatic depth is the movie's cinematographic distinctiveness. The entire film is shot in mostly-real-time through the realistically wobbly and bloody lens following the young news reporter trapped inside the quarantine zone. It creates a level of realism and also allows for some impressive scare tactics throughout the flick.

While there are plenty of startling moments, with great quick-frame action and frightening sound effects, the overall look of the injuries inflicted on the characters of Quarantine is of poor quality. The shoddy special effects are especially obvious on close-up shots of wounds. While realism is stressed throughout most of the film, the gore often looks fake.

Further detracting from the film's positive points, the aforementioned dramatic depth attempted by back-stories and quarantine-related squabbles is only in its initial development stages before characters begin to get rapidly killed off. Essentially, the characters exhibit little more than very brief personalized touches overshadowed by dozens of running and screaming shots. While the characterization was occasionally lacking, the general flow of the film worked well, and the plot was well-tied together; the one exception was the ending, which seemed a bit abrupt. This abruptness was clearly by design, but it did not fit with the rest of the film's progression.

Overall, the film is good for a startling, well-shot zombie-esque flick. It provides terror, intrigue, and some new twists to a classic genre. The acting is not always the best, but that is to be expected when several characters have few lines beyond yelps of agony. For its general success and only occasional failings, Quarantine gets a 7 out of 10.

Learn more about this author, James Gapinski.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.