Okay, so this is partly a review on my part, but feel free to discuss your own oppinions of this film. If you plan on watching this film yourself, and don't want any spoilers then... Just don't open the spoiler tags. 
Right...
Last night, I finally decided to get 'round to watching the film [Rec] 3 - Genesis. I hadn't seen any trailers, or read anything other than what was on the blurb of the DVD. But still, I kinda had some high expectations since I very much enjoyed the first two installments.
Note that I am speaking of the original Spanish trilogy, not the remakes that are titled 'Quarantine'.
The first one, for me, was a fresh and interesting take on the zombie horror genre. Mostly being a fan of George A. Romero's films, but still very much enjoying Danny Boyle's 28 Days/Weeks films, it was nice to see something that could kinda be considered a mix of the two. I also enjoyed the whole 'Documentary' take on it, as this was before everyone started using that style of filming in horror films. The second one followed the same formular as the first, but improved on it. It answered much questions that were left unanswered from the first, and in general it was a very good sequel.
Now this is where I'm left utterly baffled...
Having read into this film after watching it, I found that it was more a "parallel sequel", so the events in the film were happening before, during and after the first two. Whoever wrote that is stupid, because [Rec] 3 covered the span of a young couple's wedding night, so the events in this would have only covered one of the two films. But regardless of that, what threw me was how funny the film actually was.
It's like the director just took the first two films and decided to make a spoof of them. He also seemed to want to take some of the rather crappy elements of the Resident Evil films (Well, the crappiest elements, I really thought those films sucked so much.) with the whole "hot woman slaughtering loads of zombies." Except, that scene was utterly laughable because...
The film in general was full of terrible jokes. It was one of the most cheesiest things I have ever seen in a horror film. And in general, it was such a let down compared to the first two. Now don't get me wrong, to begin with it did have so much good going for it.
The story depicted a young couple's wedding. However, things were amiss upon the presence of a relative who had been bitten by something. Of course, he was infected with that 'zombie' virus. Then after his, for lack of a better word, transformation, all hell broke loose. It was a fantastic scene in which the virus was spread rapidly among the guests at the reception party, and the whole hall was a huge slaughter fest.
It was very shortly after that when the film got terrible. It focused the story on the husband and wife, who were trying to find each other amidst the outbreak. It had the premise for a rather sad, yet sweet story, which in theory wasn't such a bad thing. But it was executed terribly. The young couple were portrayed as to have some sort of "telepathic" connection, where they could "sense" that the other was alive. They didn't need to rationalise someone desperately searching for their loved one just because they "sensed" they were alive. I mean, put in that situation myself, I would go searching simply because I don't know whether my loved one is dead or alive and therefore any chance what so ever of them being alive would be enough to motivate me.
And so began an incredibly terrible and cheesy romp through masses of zombies
in an attempt to try and find each other.
Having said all this, I will say that the film did have quite a decent ending.
In general, I thought the film was terrible. I guess as a stand-alone film it isn't too bad, as I have seen much worse zombie horrors. (Resident Evil) It's just that, because it is supposed to be part of the bigger story involving the events of [Rec] 1 and 2, all it seemed to do was make a mockery of the films the same way the Resident Evil films made a mockery of the games. It was as if someone like Michael Bay had got his hands on the franchise and put a bullet in its head.
But it was from the exact same director! That's what baffled me the most. He did such an excellent job with the first two, and then it was like he just decided "Hey, let's make a spoof of this!" and made something that couldn't be any further from what the other two had accomplished.
So, who else has seen this film, and what are your views?
Right...
Last night, I finally decided to get 'round to watching the film [Rec] 3 - Genesis. I hadn't seen any trailers, or read anything other than what was on the blurb of the DVD. But still, I kinda had some high expectations since I very much enjoyed the first two installments.
Note that I am speaking of the original Spanish trilogy, not the remakes that are titled 'Quarantine'.
The first one, for me, was a fresh and interesting take on the zombie horror genre. Mostly being a fan of George A. Romero's films, but still very much enjoying Danny Boyle's 28 Days/Weeks films, it was nice to see something that could kinda be considered a mix of the two. I also enjoyed the whole 'Documentary' take on it, as this was before everyone started using that style of filming in horror films. The second one followed the same formular as the first, but improved on it. It answered much questions that were left unanswered from the first, and in general it was a very good sequel.
Now this is where I'm left utterly baffled...
Having read into this film after watching it, I found that it was more a "parallel sequel", so the events in the film were happening before, during and after the first two. Whoever wrote that is stupid, because [Rec] 3 covered the span of a young couple's wedding night, so the events in this would have only covered one of the two films. But regardless of that, what threw me was how funny the film actually was.
It's like the director just took the first two films and decided to make a spoof of them. He also seemed to want to take some of the rather crappy elements of the Resident Evil films (Well, the crappiest elements, I really thought those films sucked so much.) with the whole "hot woman slaughtering loads of zombies." Except, that scene was utterly laughable because...
The dude she was with said that they should run, but she was all like "No, we stand and fight!", which was all well and good for her because she had a fucking massive chainsaw, and he had bugger all to defend himself with. Needless to say, he died in that scene.
The film in general was full of terrible jokes. It was one of the most cheesiest things I have ever seen in a horror film. And in general, it was such a let down compared to the first two. Now don't get me wrong, to begin with it did have so much good going for it.
The story depicted a young couple's wedding. However, things were amiss upon the presence of a relative who had been bitten by something. Of course, he was infected with that 'zombie' virus. Then after his, for lack of a better word, transformation, all hell broke loose. It was a fantastic scene in which the virus was spread rapidly among the guests at the reception party, and the whole hall was a huge slaughter fest.
It was very shortly after that when the film got terrible. It focused the story on the husband and wife, who were trying to find each other amidst the outbreak. It had the premise for a rather sad, yet sweet story, which in theory wasn't such a bad thing. But it was executed terribly. The young couple were portrayed as to have some sort of "telepathic" connection, where they could "sense" that the other was alive. They didn't need to rationalise someone desperately searching for their loved one just because they "sensed" they were alive. I mean, put in that situation myself, I would go searching simply because I don't know whether my loved one is dead or alive and therefore any chance what so ever of them being alive would be enough to motivate me.
And so began an incredibly terrible and cheesy romp through masses of zombies
with the husband wearing some replica armour of St. George, no less!
in an attempt to try and find each other.
Having said all this, I will say that the film did have quite a decent ending.
The wife had been infected, but the husband took her out of the quarantine zone regardless. It was quite a well-filmed scene in which they had their last kiss, the wife giving in to the zombie virus and ripping out his tongue, and then them being shot to hell and back before finally collapsing to the floor, dead.
In general, I thought the film was terrible. I guess as a stand-alone film it isn't too bad, as I have seen much worse zombie horrors. (Resident Evil) It's just that, because it is supposed to be part of the bigger story involving the events of [Rec] 1 and 2, all it seemed to do was make a mockery of the films the same way the Resident Evil films made a mockery of the games. It was as if someone like Michael Bay had got his hands on the franchise and put a bullet in its head.
But it was from the exact same director! That's what baffled me the most. He did such an excellent job with the first two, and then it was like he just decided "Hey, let's make a spoof of this!" and made something that couldn't be any further from what the other two had accomplished.
So, who else has seen this film, and what are your views?