TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

Lawbolisted Powerful

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

Stephen Abell This film is a rare creature indeed - A sequel that's better than the original. Let me just state it's a sequel to a bad American adaptation of a Spanish film "REC". I am a fan of the Spanish movies but I have to give respect and credit to writer and director John Pogue for not giving the audience another weak version. Instead of going the religious route of "REC" 2 , Terminal escalates the fear of terrorist attack with a man- made killer virus. This alteration gives both films a more solid footing in reality and puts it into the thriller genre instead of horror.Once again the action takes place in the tight confines of a restricted location. This time we are placed in a small aeroplane then we move to the baggage handling section of the terminal. These settings give the audience the feelings of claustrophobia and the threat of being trapped with no escape, especially in the plane.Pogue does a good job of creating an atmosphere of tension and anguish that keeps the viewers entertained and interested. Where this film starts to falter is in the last third. The story goes out the door as people just run about screaming and killing. The action isn't great and the use of speeding up the film is atrocious and reduces the films strength. To be honest, I cannot explain why this is the case as Pogue does well with the action in the earlier action scenes - the shot of the thundering unstoppable mass of a man barrelling down the aisle of the plane is a great shot and well executed. He is also adept at controlling the flow and pace of the story and interweaving the various atmospheres.Another thing that suffers at the same stage is the acting and characterisations. On the whole, the performances are above average but when the mayhem breaks out the skills disappear. It is actually the last section of this film which reduces the rating. For example, the opening sequence where we're introduced to the stewardesses and the pilots it a solidly realistic and interesting scene, which even introduces a thread of tenseness: Whereas, towards the end of the film there's a scene where two characters are on their way to possible freedom when they have to face the possibility that one of them is infected; a previously strong and logical character is suddenly overly emotional and illogical. This sudden flick-of-the-switch change once again diminishes the film's potency.This is a well crafted, acted, and filmed story. It's well worth a watch, especially if you enjoyed the American version of "REC"; it even works as a stand-alone as there are references to what happened in the previous movie as this story is set in the same timeline. Remember: If you're a fan of the Spanish movies then you have to realise this has nothing to do with them and follows a different and alternate storyline. Though I won't watch the original Quarantine again I may watch this once more... even though it may be in another ten years.

Eric_Cubed I don't get all the bad reviews about this one. Sure, it's no 28 Days Later, but it is a solid Infection movie that is highly watchable, even more so than the one that preceded it. I for one am hopeful for a Quarantine 3 and 4, following REC 3 and 4. It's claustrophobic, it's scary, it's well acted and it comes together nicely. Don't listen to all the haters out there. Perhaps it is the Alien 3 of the REC and Quarantine movies combined, but that doesn't make it a bad movie. I thoroughly enjoyed it, as a big fan of the Zombie/Infection genre. Maybe the critics should just be glad this one was made at all, you bi---es. It even was reminiscent of 12 monkeys, with the rat carrying passenger. So just rent it, don't have high expectations, and you will really enjoy yourself.

stuart linn From start to finish the plot was closed and sealed. The fact that a character would be bitten within "minutes" of the film was obvious on where this film was going. The acting was similar to that of a high school play, dramatised and seemed like they filmed the dress rehearsals in the final edit. Many flat lined scenes, numerous mistakes includingLocking down an airport after a virus is discovered. The pilot would of been informed of this mid air prior to landing. Allowing a suitcase containing an anti virus with syringe on a plane after the baggage handler has stated the new "lock down procedures" after 9/11... contradiction??Moving a passenger from Wheelchair to aircraft seat? The passenger would remain seated in his/her wheelchair through the flight. (health and safety)The last scene in which the young boy leaves the woman in tunnel... She's still alive, not dead, he walks off, in the back ground is the airport with NO LOCKDOWN ALARMS/MILITARY/POLICE etc guarding this area...? All in all a very bland, "Sunday afternoon while half asleep after a roast dinner" film. I'll

loomis78-815-989034 This sequel picks up on the same night that the original takes place; a plane departing Los Angeles isn't airborne long when the infection breakout happens on the plane. It is forced to land and a group of passengers fight off infected passengers as they are isolated and cut off by the military in a terminal. They quickly understand that help isn't coming and the infected dead try to viciously kill the living. This simple idea is stretched from the first film into this one and sets it in a airport terminal instead of an apartment building. Fortunately we have a group of survivors we can root for and Writer/Director John G. Pogue makes this movie tense and truly scary. The movie also benefits from moving away from the shaky camera style the first film used. Plenty of blood and jump scares pack this surprising sequel that is a worthy follow up to the original.