thomas4cinema

While [rec] created a very nice original idea (or let’s say: original within the clear-cut confines of the zombie- or crazie-genre), the second part varies this theme with traditional elements, or shall we call it: superimposes the topics of “Exorcist” and “Omen”, some say “Da Vinci Code” (actually, the blood testing is more or less inspired by “John Carpenter’s The Thing”, but maybe all blood-testing-for-vicious-things is. And “species” and and and… Some clever ideas prevent the film from going stale after a few segments: the perspective changes with the cameras available, and through tricks like defects and empty batteries, the film gets occasional changes of perspective without necessarily being guilty of neglecting an available perspective (with one exception, and that is the original camera from the first part, which we will meet again at a stage a bit too late to help anybody). The film is outright creepy: the subjective camera does that, the ferociously attacking infected tenants (and guests) of the house, and the fact that we already know that there is something wildly more dangerous and terrifying than just rabid zombie-thingies lurking in the penthouse. And through a nice twist of narration, we are forced to live through this nightmare in a mostly ill-lit setting (because sometimes, there’s more to be seen in the dark …). It would actually be much better to watch this in a movie theatre with the big screen and the lights out and a nice hand to grab your shoulder in terror… but even the home cinema watching was creepy enough. Interesting that through some complete coincidence, I watched that briefly after Haneke’s Hidden / Cache, not realising until now that both have the same theme: the importance of perspective and point-of-view, and differ in the important question of who’s in charge, the watcher or the watched.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1245112/