The original
Cabin Fever is a fun, gory horror film. It has some weird laughs (“pancakes”...if you don't understand, don't worry) and some cringe-worthy - in a good way - effects; the bathtub shaving scene freaks me out every time. The sequel -
Cabin Fever 2: Spring Fever - was terrible. A complete waste of time on my part and time, money and effort on the part of the film makers. So, why would I subject myself to another Cabin Fever film?
Because I’m willing to take the punishment, so you don't have to. I just care. So. Much.
Synopsis
The only survivor of an outbreak of a super-strain of flesh-eating virus - Porter (Sean Astin) - in the Dominican Republic is picked up by a bunch of guys in hazmat suits. He is brought to a remote island laboratory run by the ruthless Doctor Edwards (Currie Graham) who is looking for a cure and wants to use Porter, who is a carrier, but immune, to this end.
Next, we are introduced to a bunch of annoying people who are in the DR for a wedding. You’ve seen these archetypes in every horror movie in the last 30 years. Douche guy (Brando Eaton), druggie/geeky guy (Ryan Donowho), bimbo who is girlfriend of douche guy (Jillian Murray), and decent guy getting married who slept with bimbo and who is douche guy’s brother (Mitch Ryan)...see, wasn’t that easy? They head off on a charter boat the day before the wedding for an island bachelor party. Guess which island they wind up on?
Porter, using his blood, manages to infect a number of lab personnel. They, in turn, infect most of the others. Also, the virus somehow gets into the surrounding waters, infecting two of our partiers (bimbo, douche). Decent guy and geek head to the lab, looking for help. They find almost everyone dead or dying. Violence ensues and the lab is blown up. Porter escapes after infecting the last two healthy people (decent guy and one of the lab techs (Solly Duran)) in order to cover his tracks. The end.
Analysis
CF:PZ is pretty bad. It does have some nice gore effects. Near the end of the film, there is a cat fight between bimbo and an infected lab babe (Lydia Hearst) who are both falling apart as they battle. It ends with bimbo crushing lab chick's face in with a giant dildo. It has the same sense of gonzo gore that made the original fun to watch. Unfortunately, there is little else in the film to recommend it.
Porter's story could have been interesting. A focus on him and the lab would've set this apart from the first two films and, potentially, resulted in a neat medical horror movie, with escalating gore and violence. Sadly, the film focuses on the partiers and they are one-dimensional stereotypes. Boring ones. The brothers never feel related. Why bimbo is still attracted to decent guy is unclear, since he is aggressively bland. Everything they say and do, right down to douche bringing a blow-up sex doll onto the party boat - seems like it is taken from "Slasher Movie Characters for Dummies."
There are also major plot holes, the most egregious of which is how Porter lets the virus out of his sealed room in the lab. During the movie, it is never explained. To be clear, we are eventually shown this, but only during the end credits. To me, that is a cheat; if you can't work you're explanation into the actual film then you've failed as a storyteller. What if I had turned off the movie as the credits rolled? In addition, the explanation is such a Rube Goldberg series of events it is more insulting than not explaining it would have been.
The acting is pretty bad. No one seems to care that much about the movie, although, given the quality of the writing, I have a hard time blaming them. Beyond being cliches, the characters are poorly motivated, needlessly betray each other and, finally, on the part of Porter, murder dozens of people for no apparent reason. Yes, he is being held against his will; but he also must know just how dangerous the disease he has is. And he is not presented as a killer. Heck, he was part of a Habitats for Humanity group at the beginning of the film.
On a technical level, the camera-work is okay. Most of the film is shot at night or in gloomy indoor settings, but you can always tell what is going on. I will say, this decision to have mostly night/indoor shots detracts from what could have been an interesting visual juxtaposition between the graphic violence and the natural beauty of a Caribbean island. As mentioned before, the make-up effects are good.
The film looks more like a demo reel made by the effects people and the cinematographer and camera crew. Something along the lines of "See what we can do? Now, can work on a movie that tells a good story?"
Verdict
Is this film better than Cabin Fever 2? Yes, I'd say it is. However, that is a pretty low bar to get over. This film just seems so perfunctory, so cynical in it's use of stereotypes, poor characterization and sloppy plotting, that it is not entertaining. Avoid.
Note: The film is supposed to be a prequel to the first two films. While it does work in that regard, it is also unnecessary. There is really nothing in the film that indicates that it is anything but the story of another outbreak of the disease, just in a different location.
