my thoughts on.... 'Quarantine 2: Terminal'

Remakes are something that create a lot of arguements on the pro and con side as to whether or not they're a good thing. Sequels to remakes of original films that don't follow the original sequels storyline are an entirely different animal. Have I lost you yet? Basically, the original Spanish film '[REC]', was remade in the United States as 'Quarantine'. It was fairly true to the original source material, however, they decided to make a sequel. Now, there was already a sequel to '[REC]', called '[REC]2'. (original title, right?) The sequel to the original sequel does not follow the same storyline. It carries on from 'Quarantine', but it goes in an entirely different direction. Basically, we have the 'virus' breaking out in an airplane that then gets quarantined in an airplane hanger. Despite the difference in storylines from the original, I still really enjoyed this film. Another strike against 'Quarantine 2: Terminal', is that it was a direct to DVD release. That is most certainly the kiss of death for most films and even more so for a lot of franchises. That doesn't mean that the franchises stop, but they are effectively dead from that point forward. I don't know how this film beat the odds, but I feel that it did it and did it well.

Here is the plot from IMDB.com: "A plane is taken over by a mysterious virus. When the plane lands it is placed under quarantine. Now a group of survivors must band together to survive the quarantine." It doesn't get any simpler than that. The beauty of the plot is that it's so simple it's almost impossible to screw it up. You know the basics of the story from the original film and this just hits the ground running, only in another place with different faces. It's like 'Die Hard' and 'Die Hard 2: Die Harder'.... only with plague/virus victims.I am kind of thinking that my opinion about this film might be the unpopular one. I mean, people were already up in arms with someone remaking '[REC]', so I kind of assume this pissed em' off even more. I don't mean to piss on the originals. I think both '[REC]' films are amazing films of the virus/plague subgenre of horror and zombies. But I also think that the 'Quarantine' films have done them justice. Sue me. This film knows its limitations and plays to them. It doesn't try to be more than it is and keeps it simple and to a formula. I mean, if it ain't broke.... don't fix it? Right? Thank god for that.

I cannot see this getting any less than 4 out of 5 stars. It is almost the perfect film in the way that it takes an already established storyline and just runs with it. As a matter of fact, the more I think about my earlier 'Die Hard' reference, the more I think it is the perfect example here. 'Die Hard' was based on a 1979 novel by Roderick Thorp titled 'Nothing Lasts Forever'. I'm sure when the fans of the novel heard that there was going to be a film made starring Bruce Willis, they were in an uproar. The film has gone on to be considered a classic and the ultimate guy film. It beat the odds. When they went forward with a sequel, I'm guessing that didn't go over all that well either. But I think that the 'Die Hard' sequel along with the sequel to 'Quarantine', both prove that sometimes you just have to check your expectations at the door and be willing to just let go and enjoy what you're seeing. With all that being said, go ahead and prove me wrong. I dare you.

Movies similar to this: 'Quarantine', '[REC]' and '[REC]2'