Lazily scripted, without even a pretense of character development or psychological depth, it offers nothing new for genre fans and no reason for mainstream auds to bite.
Pray tell, how should the characters have been developed any further, given that they only have one angle to go from. The sort of filmmaking does not require character development in the way you think. Because it is done from a realtime, handheld, point of view. In order to get any more development we would need the actors tell their life stories to the camera, which you could find ways of showing in a conventional movie with flashbacks, multiple things happening at once with a broader scope, which in this style are simply impossible. You should learn how to critique different styles, and not rely on your stock of default responses.
Apr 12 - 04:19 PM
This seems like an incredibly jaded review of a great film. It is actually an amazing film and a great accomplishment in filmmaking PERIOD.
Apr 15 - 03:40 PM
Jun 6 - 03:59 PM
Alissa nailed this flick perfectly. The first ten minutes of the film worked fairly well, but from the moment the old woman made her first appearance to the final shot, this was an exercise in cliched writing and poor acting (shrill doesn't even begin to cover it). Imagine a film in which a character who has been lucid and normal for many hours "turns" seconds after a physician reveals that s/he is infected. Rec is just that kind of hamfisted movie. Strictly for zombie friends and not in shouting distance of the 28 Days/Months series.
Aug 13 - 01:27 AM
Top Ego Critic
Sep 14 - 12:46 PM
"no reason for mainstream auds to bite"aaaand less than 1 year later it is successfully adapted into an American film, with audiences already anticipating a sequel. A poor critic like you would typically write off this modern masterpiece as another Blair Witch clone simply because of it's chosen film style. I would like to see Ms. Simon's reaction to this film turning into a worldwide phenomena, when she's done chewing her Crow of course.
Sep 29 - 12:35 AM
that was kinda the point! and it seems variety knows nothing about the new horror.
Oct 16 - 02:54 PM
Totally agree, this film was really, really bad and I can't for the life of me understand why it received the acclaim that it has. The majority of this movie consists of (bad) actors/actresses asking each other, "What is going on" and then being told, by the same people who crapping themselves only five minutes earlier, to "Be calm". Here's a question that springs to mind having watched this rubbish, what does Rec, 28 days later, all the Resident Evil movies and all the George Romero zombie movies have in common? The answer - Everything! It's the same old crap! There is a last minute attempt to differentiate the story from all the other 'infectious aggression' films that came before it but it's poorly done and far too desperate. There is absolutely nothing special about this movie. It uses the same old rehashed story, the same old 'scary face popping out of the darkness' scare tactics and ends with the same old cheesy 'we're too cool to finish writing the movie properly so we'll just cut to the credits mid action'. Ironically the movie actually ends just as it begins to improve (ever so slightly). I also believe the title of this movie was incorrectly translated. In English the title should actually read 'Reaks'. Save yourself the dissapointment, this movie is lame.
Oct 18 - 04:30 PM
OMG I didnt even see the post above my first one.....ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL"In English the title should actually read 'Reaks'."come on really....? Are you REALLY that stupid. Congratulations! You confirmed that there is someone who has less intelligence than our fabulous Alissa Simon. If you cant understand the title of the movie ESPECIALLY after looking at the movie poster thats up in your top left there, do us all a favor and jump off of the tallest bridge you can find. The world will be a better place without you
Oct 20 - 12:57 PM
Wow, someone can't take a joke. He was making a pun. He thought the movie was so bad that he made a play on the word REC and turned it into Reek. I don't agree with his assessment at all but I'm amazed at your stupidity.
Mar 16 - 06:45 PM
John The ripper
I can agree, it is POSSIBLE that not all mainstream audiences would bite when it comes to this movie because apparently it is "an old and tired theme" that has "worn its self out" or something like that. Of the MANY zombie movies that I have seen, this is the first one that depicts even a shard of realism in terms of the actual PANIC factor of a zombie outbreak. It shows how quickly every thing falls apart inside of the building they are all trapped in. The best thing about this and ALL zombie movies is beause tension is mounted from early on and it escalates constantly through out the duration of the film. Yeah, its true, perhaps a lot of you are looking for something fresh and original when it comes to these films, but there are a lot of people who see these films because they like ZOMBIE MOVIES. I like them for the same reasons I like deathmetal! or any subject matter containing blood and guts. Some of us enjoy to watch the hysteria of others while they slip closer and closer into their impending doom at the hands of hungry undead cannibals! This was a good movie! The focus of this film was to portray the REACTION. the news crew was simply the window into the atmosphere of the movie, they are not nescessarily the MAIN characters. Its the whole situation you have to look at. and although this movie has its cliche's , this is the first SHAKY CAMERA movie I have actually been impressed with. Kudos to spain!
Apr 14 - 11:44 AM
Well gents let take into account how many reviews this "Critic" has actually done. Yes thats right 28. Its seems like anyone with an high school education can write a review on this site. This "Critic" even goes so far as to point out the "flaws" in the movie, but in fact points out all the things that set this movie aside from the average worthless monster movie/zombie flick. The bottom line is if you need music and character development to make a movie scary you should check yourself for down syndrome. I mean just because everyone else reviewed the movie and like it doesn't make your wrong. Just like the mentally handicapped person stepping into a Mensa meeting and shouting "I think your dumb" .....Its ok we think your dumb too ; )
Oct 20 - 12:50 PM
I'm sorry for saying this Alissa, but [REC] wasn't made for people like you.
There's an audience for visceral horror, and the films of directors such as Lucio Fulci prove that beyond doubt. For every person who wants characters to cheer for, or a nice background story to tie everything together, there's a loner in the back row hoping to avoid a sappy Hollywood ending. [REC] was made for the guy in the back row.
[REC] hits the ground running, leaves almost nothing to the imagination, and delivers one of the most terrifying climaxes ever captured on film.
Any true horror fan should see this film immediately...
Oct 22 - 01:47 AM
Wow you must be proud of yourself. Your pointless and ignorant review just degraded the rating of a great film.
Nov 30 - 04:32 AM
Shows how much you know!And you're a top critic???Saddening.
Dec 10 - 09:32 PM
Hollywood relies far to heavily on too much dialog and music to tell a story. The script was exceptional not lazily written. Actions speak louder than words. It offers nothing new for the genre? You're right, besides interesting story telling, a unique camera perspective for the genre and heart pounding tension it adds nothing new. True films lovers don't care about what the "mainstream" audience wants. We want a good film, not a classic Hollywood happy ending movie.
Jan 19 - 09:40 AM
Apr 5 - 06:24 PM
REC is an entertaining movie, I'll give it that, but it doesn't really live up to all the hype. It's also not very scary either. You can see some of the 'kills' coming a mile away. There are also a few ridiculous plot twists; someone already mentioned the little girl going from normal to berserk in a split second. That said, it did hold my interest from start to finish and the ending was fair unlike most other horror flicks. I'd give it a 65.
Jul 7 - 10:25 PM
Yeah, I'd tend to agree with that. Not dreadful by any means, but a 6/10 sort of movie. It was, y'know, okay. (Shrugs.)
Feb 20 - 10:10 PM
You don't understand anything. Just because it's made on a low budget doesn't mean it's stupid and not original.It had very good scares, a decent plotline, it WAS well set up, which I can just clearly state as.You're someone that no one knows and doesn't know anything...SUCK MY DICK
Sep 14 - 11:30 PM
Oh, look - I've just been through about 5 good films which have negative reviews, only from Variety.I check on one of my favored films, one negative review...look...Variety again.You truly know nothing about horror. How about you **** off?
Sep 26 - 04:28 AM
Kaput I guess you weren't really paying attention to the movie because as we watch the movie we clearly hear the Spanish Hazmat worker explain that after someone is bit it depend on several factors in the body before they "change". Blood type, probably how much saliva was transferred from the infected to the non, and other reason were didn't have time to figure out/be told since this movie as said before was happening in real-time. I just saw this movie and I have to say that I was thoroughly impressed with the outcome and the last 15 mins of the flick are so intense I was literally hanging off the edge of my couch. Nicely done little piece of B horror, nothing relatively close has come out in 2009 that works as well as this film. By the way, watch the behind-the-scenes featurete and you will see that most of the time the actors didn't even know what was going to happen in the script until the same day of shooting. This causes a REAL sense of "what the hell is going to happen next?"
Oct 10 - 02:41 AM
How does it feel, to be the only rotten tomato in one of the best horror films ever made? I guess you prefer the american version (Quarantine) better?
Alissa Simon, you shouldn't be allowed giving rotten tomatoes at all...
Dec 22 - 11:31 AM
This is a blatantly derivative horror film that unabashedly borrows from successful films and blends them together into an unconvincing story that relies almost purely on cheap scares to shock the audience.
It's not a terrible movie; some of the special effects, especially the zombies, are done well. And that acting is -not- bad. Regardless of a few good points, this is one of the most overrated films I've seen in years.
And I love the horror genre, visceral or not.
Jan 24 - 10:57 PM