I'm not sure what I was expecting out of Eli Roth's 2002 horror film Cabin Fever. After years of being told how great it was and that it was a must see, I felt rather disappointed and let down by the experience. It might just be that I'm not a fan of Eli Roth's work as a director as I'm not a fan of the Hostel films, while I do love him in Inglorious Basterds. Cabin Fever just felt to... fake. The idea of a flesh-eating virus infecting a group young college students on vacation in a creepy cabin sounds awesome and by all rights should be. But the actions of the characters are to far fetched and outlandish to make for a real sense of horror. Cabin Fever is pretty straight forward, five friends, Paul (Rider Strong), Karen (Jordan Ladd), Bert (James DeBello), Jeff (Joey Kern) and his girlfriend Marcy (Cerina Vincent) head to a secluded cabin for standard spring break shenanigans. Their first night at the cabin, Bert encounters Henry (Arie Verveen), a local hermit who's infected with a fleshing eating virus. Henry begs Bert for help, even after Bert shoots him in the leg. Though Bert eventually chases …show more content…
This is mainly due to just how stupid the characters act. From the college students, to the cops and even the kids dad who bites a clearly sick person. Not a single person acts like an actual person. At best they're caricatures at worst they're insulting. Actually that's my only issue with this film. Wait, no. One other thing, but Spoiler. At the end of the film when Jeff stands triumphant that he alone has survived, uninfected and gets gunned down by the police. Then thrown on the infected pile and burned. Which feels like a rip-off Night of the Living Dead. Not a call back or a homage, but a straight rip off. Weakening an already weak film. Other than that, not so bad. I really like the character Old Man Cadwell played by Robert Harris and is without at doubt the best part of this film. Without. A.
I personally thought this was a great film, although initially I thought it might be boring. Once I got past the older production quality and immersed myself into the story, I enjoyed it. I can see why this film is a cinematic classic, especially with the memorable dialogue. My favorite lines came from Carr, the floor walker. He seemed to know his job like the back of his hand. “Any man loses his spoon; he spends the night in the box”.
In all, the directing and acting both had its good points and its bad points. Unfortunately, the one well directed scene and the one convincing actor would not have been enough to satisfy my friend, and it was not enough to satisfy me.
In my opinion invasion of the body snatchers is a ok movie. My main problem is the cast. They could have been acted better actors. Also it’s a cheesy plot , but still somewhat well written. Most likely I wouldn’t ever watch it again, only if I had too.
A year later, in Reston Virginia, a monkey house used to quarantine imported monkeys before they can be shipped out to parts of the United States, was losing monkeys to an unknown virus. All the characters of "The Hot Zone" are called together to discover and contain the unknown killer. The research team discovers this is a new strain of Ebola. This one definitely is airborne. They call it Ebola Reston. Unlike it's sister viruses, it doesn't seem to jump species. It is traced to Manila, Philippines where the monkeys originated, which is a mystery since Ebola is an African disease. The monkey house is decontaminated. Its contents, including the dead monkeys are incinerated. After another year, the monkey house is back in use. Ironically, monkeys shipped there from Manila begin dying from the Ebola virus again.
The book had a lot of thought put into it by the author and it appeals to many audiences of different ages. The book put me on the edge of my seat throughout the whole book, and it was one of those books that you never want to put down. The way the author wrote it had quite a suspenseful, eerie, dramatic feel to it and that is what made the book so great, on top of the plot. The plot of the book was also very well thought out and put together, and I enjoyed reading it. Although the movie was great, I don’t think that it did the book enough justice. There were so many great aspects of the book that they left out, that would’ve made the movie just that much better. They should have put in some of the missing scenes and still portrayed the characters the same as they were in the book. However, I think that it would be hard to create the same feel as Ray Bradbury did in writing the book. It was the way that he connected with his audience that made the book appealing. Both the book and the movie were fantastic ways of portraying the story. If they had kept all of the scenes and properties of characters as they did in the book, the movie would have appealed to me more. But, the movie version of the story could appeal to others more than the book
The viruses are spread in many different ways in the novel, but all are due to human mistakes. One of the most common forms of errors found in the medical field is the recycling of soiled equipment. The repeated use of dirty medical equipment is found commonly in the poor regions of the world where resources are limited and fundings are bound. This is an example of the errors the human race performs that lead to disaster.
Final thoughts, it's awful and lives up to its poor reputation. I can understand why this film was straight to video and I can't honestly suggest to anyone. As a fan of the zombie genre, this one nearly put me to sleep. Which is something a zombie film shouldn't do. Because even with all the action going on on-screen, Day of the Dead still managed to be boring.
Preston opens with Charles Monet infected with Marburg. He goes into detail of the Ebola Zaire virus and the Ebola Sudan. Ebola was found in Nurse Mayinga’s blood by Eugene Johnson. As an outbreak in Bumba continues the C.D.C., Centers for Disease Control, travels to offer aid. They find the virus at its climax
The story begins with the tale of a French man, Charles Monet, who lived on a plantation in western Kenya. He enjoyed the outdoors, so for the New Year’s he planned a camping trip with one of his women friends. They drove to Mount Elgon and spent the night in a large cave called Kitum Cave. After his trip to Mount Elgon, he felt completely normal and was able to return to his job. Then seven days later, Monet had massive headaches that would not seem to go away. These headaches caused back aches and aspirin failed to work. Little did Charles Monet know that these were the first symptoms of the deadly virus within him. Three days after the headaches, the fevers came along with nausea and vomiting. Charles Monet’s personality began to transform and he became a completely different but frightening person. Doctor’s sent him to a large hospital in Nairobi to treat his worsening sickness. He travelled alone and throughout the flight, was vomiting blood mixed with a black liquid. After his long flight, he waited in the waiting room at Nairobi hospital, barely being able to talk to anyone. Finally Charles Monet lost all control of his body and he began vomiting large amounts of blood along with intestinal lining. He became a human virus bomb.
This is an ironic and unfortunate example of a film that would have really been considered a lot better than it is if it were not for the book upon which it is based. It is clear that the film is strong and that it is well made, but when compared to Shelley's novel, it's really a pretty sad mess. The film by itself is more than able to captivate and impress, but to someone who knows the original story, it is a weak attempt to bring the story of Frankenstein and his monster to the big screen.
was a spectacular film there were some things that I did not enjoy like, the
It is over in a matter of days. The victim staggers, disoriented and exhausted, and collapses in a fever. His eyes turn bright red, and he starts vomiting blood. Within a matter of hours, he "crashes" and "bleeds out" surcumming to agonizing death with blood seeping from his eyes, ears and other orifices. At autopsy, pathologists discover, aghast, that the patients internal organs have disintegrated into an indistinguishable mass of bloodied tissue. The killer: A "hot" virus, a highly contagious and deadly microbe that has never been seen before, and has no known cure. (Bib5, CQ Researcher, 495)
The setting of the movie takes places in the jungle of Zaire where an outbreak had already occurred. The monkey from the jungle was the carrier/host of the pathogen. The monkey was then captured and held in a government storage facility and then traded to a local pet shot in a small community. The infectious agent was the Motaba Ebola Virus.
Overall, the film isn’t half as epic as Emmerich’s previous. blockbusters or half as entertaining. The dialogues are about as interesting as watching paint dry and the bland characters have about as much depth as a puddle in the street! The storyline isn’t exactly. deep, introspective stuff, either.
I view this as one of the few truly great movies of all time. I say this because it carries all of the basic cinematic elements that compose a great film. These elements begin with the characters. You can hardly expect to enjoy a movie if the characters are not believable. In this particular movie the characters were not only believable but you could identify yourself a little in one or all of the characters. One thing that can have an unfortunate detraction from even a good movie is anachronisms. The only one I found was a halogen bulb in a light fixture. However, I doubt anyone would notice were they not looking for one. This movie can be enjoyed by even the most mentally devoid of audiences. The reason for this is that most people do not like being bossed around or forced to do anything. It did make me think about how little freedom we actually have in life and how we all need to live just a little bit more.