Quarantine Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x1040 | 8140.88 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x688 | 4463.06 MiB | 720p | |
|
325.81817627x180 | 412.14 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
On March 11 2008, the government sealed off an apartment complex in Los Angeles. The residents were never seen again. No details. No witnesses. No evidence. Until now.
Television reporter Angela Vidal (Carpenter) and her cameraman (Harris) are assigned to spend the night shift with a Los Angeles Fire Station. After a routine 911 call takes them to a small apartment building, they find police officers already on the scene in response to blood curdling screams coming from one of the apartment units. They soon learn that a woman living in the building has been infected by something unknown. After a few of the residents are viciously attacked, they try to escape with the news crew in tow, only to find that the CDC has quarantined the building. Phones, internet, televisions and cell phone access have been cut-off, and officials are not relaying information to those locked inside. When the quarantine is finally lifted, the only evidence of what took place is the news crew's videotape.
| Jennifer Carpenter | Angela Vidal |
| Steve Harris | Scott Percival |
| Jay Hernandez | Jake |
| Johnathon Schaech | George Fletcher |
| Columbus Short | Danny Wilensky |
| Andrew Fiscella | James McCreedy |
| Rade Serbedzija | Yuri Ivanov |
| Greg Germann | Lawrence |
| Bernard White | Bernard |
| Dania Ramirez | Sadie |
| Elaine Kagan | Wanda Marimon |
| Marin Hinkle | Kathy |
| Joey King | Briana |
| Jermaine Jackson | Nadif |
| Sharon Ferguson | Jwahir |
| John Erick Dowdle |
6.20 out of 10 (7807 votes)
Visitor Reviews
A Nutshell Review: Quarantine
posted on 22 Aug 2009Call it a case of deliberately engineered deja-vu, that I consciously decided to sit through this American remake of the recently screened Spanish horror film REC. Well of course the purpose is to discover if what's essentially the same story and technique employed, could get screwed up in a remake, given that Hollywood more often than not, lets down the original brilliance which they think they can replicate easily to translate to box office dollars.So what's the verdict? If you've already watched REC, then this one just simply pales in comparison, because of the need to be verbatim, and somehow the filmmakers here found it necessary to tell you every now and then, that there's actually someone behind the camera. Scott the cameraman (Steve Harris) appears quite often in front of the camera, well, and actually does so from the onset. Also, to up the body count quotient, new characters were included (although supporting ones), and unlike the original which had an opening scene dedicated to the fire station filled with more meat, here it drones on and on at how the assigned firemen are getting the hots for reporter Angela Vidal (Jennifer Carpenter).The storyline's almost the same, save for a few more extra scenes included to jazz up the gore department, and to incorporate some additional action elements. Otherwise, there's plenty of overacting here by everyone, so much so that instead of rooting for the characters to get out of their predicament, you're more likely to find yourself wishing that they meet their demise soon enough. Such is the original essence lost, and with that, what primarily works in REC.Between the two Angela Vidals, I'd confess that Jennifer Carpenter can't hold a candle to Manuela Velasco. The latter's the sweet damsel you'll risk life and limb to save, whereas the former, well, you'd just wish that she shuts the hell up and stop barking orders. I guess the direction of John Erick Dowdle will have take responsibility for that not-too-subtle difference between the Vidals. And through this film I'd learnt to appreciate how the shaky-cam was used to great effect in REC, and how easy it is to lapse into pitfalls as in Quarantine. Same storyline and plot development, same technique, relatively the same type of characters, but totally different outcomes in terms of how it engages the audience, because there were crucial moments where it failed to understand the need for restraint.Sure you can't expect rocket science to be coming out of this film, but unfortunately it joins the pile of "remakes that don't make it". Word is REC2 is currently in production, so I'll be looking forward to that, and hoping that there won't be a Quarantine 2 to embarrass itself.
Quaratine all remakes
posted on 22 Aug 2009Quarantine is a remake of a 2007 Spanish film called REC.Usual story of humans zombies infecting one another with the "disease" and standard chaos ensues. The only difference here is that instead of a world wide pandemic the action takes place inside a small block of apartments.This is handy as it builds up the claustrophobic tension.PLOT: TV crew follow a group of firemen for the night filming their activities and it all goes swimmingly until they are called to a disturbance in the most run down block of apartments in history which are inhabited by the usual horror movie character clichés Once all the clichés are rounded up in the main entrance we learn that there is a nuclear threat from some guys in space suits and they all need to give a blood sample (WTF nuclear blood!!) to prove that they are clean.A group of arrogant Americans are unable to stand still for long enough to allow this simple procedure to take place and amongst the chaos that they mostly created for themselves the one infected old woman manages to start the contagious "pass the infection on" game.The Spanish version managed to do this with a smaller cast, noticeably smaller budget, little blood splattering violence that American Horror films have come to know and over use and with this they created a film that was scary as hell, with a real sense of panic amongst the entire cast.The American version screwed up the two most successful scares in the Spanish version in an almost scene for scene remake.The Americans had a larger cast but only to serve the purpose of killing them off in the most violent ways possible. The key fact that the American version missed out on is violence does not make for a scary film. It is the build-up of tension and suspense which make the scares more enhanced when they do come :O Overall I would give: REC 9/10 as it is one hell of a film Quarantine 6/10 as it was a pointless remake of a Spanish film for the sole reason that it would make more money if it were in English to an English Speaking audience. The fact that the last scene of Quarantine ended with a bra and cleavage shot shows that Americas do not actually have a clue when it comes to making good horror movies any longer which is a shame
Excellent Remake but.........
posted on 22 Aug 2009.......the camera work in this film was way too shaky. It seems as though they went over the top a bit to add to the realism, also, the camera had too many blurry moments.The camera work aside, this film was an excellent remake of a Spanish original. The cast were good, especially the leading lady. There are a few extra scenes in this film which were not in the original (REC) and they added to the plot/horror of the movie.I gave this a 6 because although it is a good movie, it is by no means a classic. The camera work ruined it a bit for me too.I would recommend waiting for the DVD release before watching as it's not one that i would want to watch on the big screen.On a side note, people who say that America spoil original movies need to watch this and see that they don't. I believe this to be better than REC but i'm sure you will make your own minds up.
Lacking bite
posted on 20 Aug 2009Rather contrived. The hand-held news camera type presentation was rather too good at getting the best shots, almost like it was being directed, and even so it was still annoying.The question that zombie movies raise is, how can people in the modern world spend so long not recognizing a mad zombie when they see one. The viewer has to really believe that so many supposedly intelligent educated people can be so stupid and slow on the uptake. It's like they forgot that the only good zombie is a beheaded one.On the other hand, I may be over-analyzing all this just a tad.Not really scary but a good ending redeemed it somewhat - it was just what I hoped would happen.
The Worst Piece of Cinema
posted on 18 Aug 2009When it came to the rating of this film, I gave it a 1. I'm usually very lenient when it comes to rating films, but this I had to give a one. Mostly because the lead roles were poor in choice and the decision of making the film entirely documentary like. Not only was the shaking very annoying, but when films are shot in this perspective, the audience cannot get a full grasp of the events taking place. Honestly, I KNOW for a fact I can do a better job of directing a horror film than the director of this one. And all the actors, especially Jennifer Carpenter did the worst job of acting their roles. They made poor attempts on making the events seem real; their acting looked and felt like horrible acting, and not as if they were actually documenting true events. Screaming and crying are real things in scary situations, but this was just ridiculous, they took it to a level that was unrealistic and at the same time very very annoying, where you'd want to skip ahead to get on with the story. ALl in all, worst than the worst movie I've ever seen in my life.
terrible.
posted on 16 Aug 2009This is probably the WORST movie I have ever seen. It was boring, and very poorly acted. It was more funny than anything. Also, it was very confussing. The camera is flying all over the place, so you can't really see what's going on. Then, a dog, that was suppose to be at a vet, randomly appears out of no where. The best part is a little infected girl, and the way she starts attacking. The whole threater cracked up laughing because it was so ridiculous. Another thing is that you lose interest 15 minutes into the movie when the main character stands outside the firehouse, doing nothing. Plus you already know the very predictable ending if you watch the trailer or even look at the movie poster. Absolutely awful, and I suggest no one waste their time ever watching this horrific movie.
Awful and boring
posted on 16 Aug 2009Awful and boring!I could watch REC (The original movie) million times. Even I know what happens in the movie, it doesn't lose a suspense. But the remake "Quarantine" is horrible. There is no suspense at all. AWFUL. The things I didn't like in this movie: (May contain spoiler) 1. The acting is awful, exaggerated. The whole acting is like a movie and not documentary. "Quarantine" can't give you a feeling of "reality" like REC gives you. 2. The camera is way too shaky. And almost all the time blurred. 3. The story is awful to compare to the original movie REC. In the original you can see at least what caused this accident in this building. By the way the building in REC is way scarier then in the "Quarantine".So don't waste your money for "Quarantine" and watch the original movie REC.
One of this years best horror films!
posted on 12 Aug 2009This past Saturday I saw Quarantine and was thinking to myself it's not scary. Of course after sitting through it I realized that the reality of this movie is so real it can scare anybody if caught in the same situation. During the whole time I was getting more and more scared because it seemed so real. I didn't expect it to end the way it did.Without giving anything away I think their's a lot of unanswered questions which could call for a sequel. It's hard to say if there will be one or not.If you want to see a great horror movie for Halloween i think Quarantine is your best bet other than Saw 5.
high octane movie with little description of why
posted on 12 Aug 2009If you're into high action zombie movies, this one is for you. As a fan of horror movies, I usually laugh at the stupidity of many of the characters. This movie, however, was the first in a long time to actually scare me.One aspect that was most interesting about the movie was its first person point of view. It can be shaky at times, but offers a more personal fear factor. Each character has their own personality, and each becomes effected in a big way by the mysterious sickness. The characters are all left with little to no idea about what reasons could possibly bekeeping them inside, another aspect that heightens the insecurity of a viewer. Overall, this movie was an hour and a half of non-stop action and zombie insanity. It invokes fear, sadness, discomfort, and mounds of confusion. "Quarantine" will leave you on the edge of your seats for the entire hour and a half and will make sure you check your back as well as every corner for zombies on your travels back to the hypothetical comfort of your own home
Wait till it comes out on DVD ...
posted on 12 Aug 2009***CONTAINS SPOILERS*** Let me start of by saying that I'm not bashing this film because I've seen the original. No. Even if I hadn't seen the original, I'd still have a lot of problems with this film. First off, a lot of the characters simply disappeared and reappeared infected. You had no knowledge of how they were infected. The writers of this script did not give us enough background information on the infection. When Angela and Scott enter the empty apartment on the top floor, you see for a few seconds a bunch of articles. But they didn't show enough for the audience to get any solid info. The tenants of the building didn't have much character development. The entire film focused on Angela, Scott, and the fireman. The tenants were simply background people. The last person we see in the empty apartment was not as scary as I'd have liked her to be. I found the plot kind of choppy as well. The movie seemed really rushed and there were scenes that could've been made longer and better, rather than short and sloppy. On the more positive side however, this film did have some good makeup effects and the camera wasn't extremely shaky so it was easy to watch. In conclusion, if you're looking to watch a good, scary zombie flick, I recommend the original.
Not too intelligent a story but scary anyway. I was entertained.
posted on 10 Aug 2009This is a first rate fright-fest. It started out as kind of silly and goofy when the Jennifer Carpenter and the cameraman enter the Fire Department. Due to the commercial making a dead giveaway and the no "evidence" written on the movie poster, here I am thinking, that this fine young woman is going to die. I really wish she didn't just because she was too attractive. The biggest flaw of this film was the trailers. It was a Cloverfield type of movie, but at least Cloverfield left me guessing on what happened. I knew in the beginning that there was no hope. This movie became progressively scarier up until the very end. Direction was good at keeping in the intensity. The rabid vampire-zombie creatures were kind of repetitive as seen in I Am Legend, 28 Days Later, and Dawn Of The Dead. Another thing was that this is a remake of a Spanish title from last year. The actors didn't apply much common sense in their roles and they make a lot of stupid horror movie mistakes. Like victims going up the stairs to check on their dog. Victims just hanging around the infected monsters without giving a thought that the monsters could kill them. One scene where a cop is trying to inject a sedative in a little girl who already mutated, even though she already bit and infected her mother. The cop then lets his guard down, like any bad cop would do, and she comes running in to bite his neck. Also like when the last remaining were in too much of a hurry to run out into the dangerous hallways. Even though they were safe in the room they were in. In reality, that cameraman should have put his darn camera down even though it wouldn't have been much of a movie without it. Overall, this was a still quality film, and it makes me want to see the Spanish version in which I hear is a little bit better. Jennifer Carpenter gave her emotions for us to feed off of, her fear and her almost obnoxious hysteria in the movie made this movie scary. I enjoyed it overall. I think a 7 is a modest score for this film. It is one of the frightening I've seen this year. The fighting back was kind of cool. That dog was kind of scary with that wicked drool. Nice little quick thrill.
A review for everyone (especially for those who already wrote a negative comment)
posted on 10 Aug 2009I gave a perfect 10 for the movie because it entertained me from the beginning to the end and that is what I expect from a movie.I have to admit, the movie has it's logical flaws, I hope CDC does not handle emergencies as badly as in this movie but again, if everything goes smoothly there is no reason to make a movie, something must go wrong. Which brings me to my point: this is not a documentary movie. You don't see comments complaining about Battlestar Galactica that "it hasn't been proved that FTL jumps are possible" or "you can't cure radiation poisoning". This movie is a horror movie, it is supposed to scare you not to lecture you how to handle crisis situations. And if it did not scare you, maybe you watched too many horror movies and you are immune to them, next time try watching one alone after midnight when you are a little tired.I didn't see "Rec", so I cannot compare the movies but I think this one definitely worths a look. And if you did enjoy it I recommend you the movie called "28 weeks later".
Finished to Fast
posted on 06 Aug 2009I'm quite the horror fan, I love movies with the thrill and excitement of getting scared and having your heart beat so fast that you aren't sure you can take it. Quarantine did have it's moments, it did get my heart beating pretty fast in certain parts but overall it just wasn't that good a thrill. The acting and effects were well done, the hand-held camera work was a little irritating and made some of the parts hard to actually concentrate on just like Cloverfield, but overall not too bad. The movie just seemed to drag too long when there was no action and then the movie just seemed to end once the action finally took place. It's worth seeing, but maybe wait to rent it out.
Kept me at the edge of my seat....
posted on 04 Aug 2009Don't let the beginning of the movie stop you from watching the whole thing. Granted the lead actress is obnoxious (but I knew this coming into the movie because I love Dexter, but hate that girl in it) When the movie started I was worried it was going to be cheesy throughout its entirety, about 20 min. into the movie I found out I was wrong. The whole concept of the movie was what kept me so interested. I wanted to find out why everything was happening and I loved the fact that you actually do get all your questions answered by the end of this movie. (unlike the strangers) Trust me, sometimes I like when movies force you to stay up all night replaying the scenes in your head trying to figure out "why?". But with Quarantine, you still think about the movie after it ends, just in a different way. I love scary movies and jump at every chance to see a possible real horror flick. I'd have to say that Quarantine was one of those good horror flicks. Just don't only listen to the people who are saying Quarantine isn't as good as its' original, because it doesn't have to be.
Who shows the ending in the movie trailer?!?!?
posted on 02 Aug 2009This movie was well done. It had me hold on to my boyfriend's hand a lot and plug my ears. It's definitely a worthwhile experience for horror fans to see it in theaters. There was enough blood and gore, thrills and chills, and surprising moments to keep you in your seat with your eyes glued to the screen. There was only one problem with it which is the reason I only gave it 9/10 stars: the ending. I know that not every movie can have a happy fairytale ending, but everyone dying/turning into mindless killing machines was not a crowd-pleasing way to end the movie.Like many movies before this one, there are added scenes that are included in movie trailers and commercials to make a movie more interesting. When I saw the lead actress get pulled away in night vision mode by the infected people, I figured that this was an added scene to make the movie look scarier than it is. However, in reality, this is the ending of the movie which was the one bad thing about Quarantine. The movie abruptly ends without rhyme or reason leaving many loose strings such as what eventually happened to the building, did the virus become a worldwide epidemic, was a cure eventually found to cure the virus, etc. I know that movies to some extent need to have unanswered questions with answers that are in the imaginary minds of the viewers. However, this movie ended too quickly leaving too many unanswered questions that make it difficult to make an ending out of imagination.Nevertheless, it was for the most part an entertaining horror flick that makes me want to see the original one.
Low budget, but still kind of creepy ...
posted on 31 Jul 2009After the first few minutes, you can sort of tell that is not a high budget movie, but they still managed make a better movie than most of junk horror movies that get made.My verdict: Overall it was worth seeing. If you don't mind the moving documentary "live-camera" style (like in The Blair Witch Project and Cloverfield), then I'd say that first 3/4 of the movie is an 8/10 and the last 1/4 is a 6/10.One thing that the filmmakers did well was to create good atmospherics. There are some well-executed surprises that will get a lot of people a little jump in their seats. After the movie, I even felt some of the ambiance while driving out of an empty parking structure at night. The story is setup as follows: A TV crew is doing a kind of "day in the life of a firefighter" report. They follow the fire team to an apartment complex where an old woman is reportedly screaming. While investigating the situation, the old building that they entered is suddenly sealed off without any reason. The camera crew captures the horrific events that begin to happen inside.Another thing that Quarantine has in its favor is a strong acting job by Jennifer Carpenter. While it's a little overdone (and likely annoying to some) towards the end, I blame that on the script. The first half of the movie demonstrates that she is interesting to watch and is immersed in her character.While I didn't quite like the ending of the movie, the ambiance (as mentioned above) did succeed in creeping me out for a good while. It even overcame my initial dislike of what seemed to be a low-budget movie. All in all, this is a worthwhile movie to see if you want to get a few good scares at the theater. For horror fans, this is a "must see" for 2008.
" The Blair Witch movie - Revisited "
posted on 29 Jul 2009Just when you thought there could not be another film as bad as the Blair Witch, a second has appeared in the guise of this movie called " Quarantine. " The two actors who head the accomplices list are Steve Harris and Jennifer Carpenter. He plays the camera-man and she the on-screen reporter. Through out the film and despite all that is happening around them, neither has the sense God gave a horse to stop what they are doing and concentrate on the mounting problems they are systematically forced into. Their story begins as a routine visit to a fire station to film a 'normal' day at the fire house. Yet once they are in, they fall prey to an on-going CDC situation where a virus of some sort has been released inside an apartment complex. It seem some animals have contracted a bug which spreads from victim to victim incredibly fast. So much so that the outside world wants to seal them inside their enclosure permanently. Although the film warrants attention, it's nevertheless a visual disappointment and it's consignment should be relegated to the back row of obscurity. *
Quarantine, a horrible movie
posted on 27 Jul 2009I went out to see quarantine today with a couple of friends. Now this isn't my opinion alone when i saw this. Starts out with the news team at a fire station where you meet a few of the main characters. Boring stuff some humor and then they get called to the apartment. The only good part of the film was the beginning. When you get into the movie like 20 minutes. It really starts to suck. I'm taking to filming classes and know some of the basics and what to spot. But any person can spot how the camera man, regardless first person this movie was meant to be shot in. Cant hold a camera still, it was horrible when the camera moved like it was a 9.0 earthquake. There were times he stayed still and it shook. It was like "Look a door!" and the camera shakes like the guy has Parkinson's. My two friends started getting motion sickness, and one of them almost puked from it (we were sitting up front) The story of the movie also is horribly stupid.***Spoiler*** Its some stuff about a mutant form of rabies. Jesus Christ, is that the best they could think of. Rabies that affects humans or some thing. And you get like 30 seconds of newspapers of some cult which could've added to the story but it didn't.***Spoiler***Also the last 10 minutes of the movie were completely worthless. And they ended it horribly to top it off.My advice if you wanna see it. Take motion sickness pills before the movie, its like getting sea sick. Hope you don't mind a stupid story line, and really bad crucial plot points.On the + side. It was brilliant acting by the main character Angela Vidal. She did a wonderful job acting in it, and was able to show excellent fear. She shook during a lot of parts and almost convinced me she was going into shock. So that was perhaps the only up side to the movie.End note: Don't see it, stupid movie. You'll hate yourself for seeing it. I feel bad for dragging my friends along after asking them for a week to see it. Its another well advertised film, which turns out to be horrible. I honestly wonder if the director ever saw this movie. If he had he would've slapped himself and recalled it. It makes me realize why you don't film 1st person. Does the director think himself witty for doing that. Because it was a dumb idea that should never be adopted to anymore films.
Garbage
posted on 27 Jul 2009I seriously don't understand why so many people are saying how good this movie is. The only positive thing I can say about this, is that it did have some thrills here and there and the acting wasn't that bad, but a few thrills simply isn't enough to save this film from it's terrible flaws and annoying characters. The camera work was simply horrible. Half of the time I couldn't see what was going on because it was so shaky. The characters were very annoying and they weren't very smart either. Ordinarily you would care enough for them that you would want the characters to and make it out alive. However, that's not the case here. Almost every character set themselves up to be killed/infected. Instead of using the cops gun, they'd use things such as, a sledgehammer, the camera, etc. Another thing that just didn't make sense was that instead of just killing the zombies on sight they would take their chances trying to help them and risk getting bitten, very ridiculous. This movie is a complete waste and offers little to no entertainment value whatsoever and fails miserably at everything it tries to achieve.
Absolutely Silly but not horrific if you have the slightest clue.
posted on 30 Aug 2009btw...although some are calling this a "zombie" movie, there are in fact no zombies in it. Rabies DOES infect humans. The people who have been bitten in this movie are not dying and reanimating and trying to eat everyone --they are supposedly displaying the madness that strikes rabid dogs and running around trying to bite everyone just as the infected dogs will.It's difficult to imagine the reasoning behind some of the positive reviews calling this silly plot line good or effective or even just frightening. If you missed the advertising and aren't aware it's supposed to be a horror flick the beginning won't clue you in. That's actually one of the good points of the film, a fairly realistically done beginning (informational news piece on the life of a firefighter at the fire station) that provides a few glimpses of some of the man characters and allows the development of some liking and sympathy for them before getting to the action. This segment concludes with the reporter and cameraman riding along with the crew on a call involving a paramedic situation (rather than a fire) that even incorporates the nice touch of the cameraman telling the reporter "I can't slide down that pole with this camera!" and the two detouring to a run down the stairs to jump on the fire truck. The only bad points to this part of the movie was that it went on a little too long and it's impossible to believe a professional cameraman can't figure out how to focus his camera. After the news duo and firemen arrive at the dilapidated apartment building things quickly go south. the film is so DARK that the supposed tears all the victims show can't be seen, and the supposed salivating is actually vomit or blood in most cases. This rabies is scary because it causes disease in minutes instead of in "months" (rabies actually takes 3-8 weeks to develop in most people, and that's do to the physical limits of the virus moving up nerves to reach the brain, which cannot be genetically modified). (And yes, a veterinarian would know that...veterinarians know more about diseases that spread from animals to humans than medical doctors do. They have to...they're the ones most at risk to catch those diseases.)The CDC, working with the cops, somehow seals off the building (just after the fire department people and news crew get inside) because a man who lived there took a sick pet to the veterinarian and it "ran around biting all the other animals" who started "showing aggressiveness within an hour". Does anyone reading actually think sick animals run around in one big pen in the clinic instead of being kept in separate cages? Well, maybe the sick dog was running around the waiting room biting all the other animals being held by their owners? And of course not biting the owners.....? The CDC being notified and showing up the entire length of the country away THAT fast? For an unknown disease that only affects animals (remember, they said only the animals were showing aggressiveness)? Without the local public health people ever being called in? Let's not even mention that rabies doesn't usually take the furious form (like 'mad dogs') in humans. But it gets sillier.The CDC comes in wearing moonsuits and start taking samples to see what is causing the problem...with a drill at least 10" long they sink full length in fromt he top of the victim's head! What were they trying to get a sample of, his tonsils? BTW, rabies in living humans can be diagnosed by a sample of cerebrospinal fluid, which only requires a needle and syringe. Oh yeah, and don't forget they handcuff the guy to whatever he's lying on first. at his waist level...so of course he sits up --AFTER they obviously drilled his brain into mush and bites the other CDC guy, unhampered by handcuffs.No end to sheer stupidity yet. The child who owned the sick dog has had a slight fever for hours, but suddenly goes nuts and bites half her mom's face off...and the cop runs after her, kneels in front of her and assures her things are OK instead of shooting her from a distance --and of course gets bitten too. The building superintendent says he has in his apartment the key to a drain cover they can all escape through (in the basement) while standing in front of glass doors they just shut to keep out an infected guy, and gets bitten. The news crew runs up the stairs after getting the key, blathering about finding a way out that way although we all know by then its not possible, find an apartment full of rodent cages and clippings about doomsday cults and turn on a reel-to-reel tape at half speed but can't tell it's voices at half speed. And the absolute corker...the CDC prevent human egress but forgets all about the mice and rats that infest every slummo house in the L.A. area...