Audience Member
Alright, boys, grab a two-four and settle in, ‘cause we’re talkin’ about Cabin Fever (2016), the remake of Eli Roth’s 2002 cult horror flick. And let me tell ya, this one’s like showin’ up to the rink only to realize someone replaced your freshly sharpened skates with a pair of rental boots from the ‘90s—just a painful, unnecessary experience.
For those who don’t know, Cabin Fever is about a group of young folks who head out to a remote cabin, only to catch a flesh-eating virus that spreads faster than rumours in the locker room. Now, the original had some charm—some good ol’ practical effects, a sick sense of humour, and enough gore to make you wanna skip the post-game wings. But this remake? It’s basically the same game plan, just executed worse.
Let’s break it down:
The Good (Barely Clippin’ the Post)
The effects are still decent, and yeah, the gore does its job. If you came for some nasty body horror, you’ll get a few moments that might make you turn away from your plate of poutine.
The setting still works. A creepy cabin in the woods? Classic horror setup, can’t complain there.
Some of the cinematography looks alright. At least it’s watchable, which is more than I can say for my beer league team’s defensive play.
The Bad (Missin’ Empty Nets)
This is a straight-up copy-paste job from the original, except somehow worse. Same script, same story beats, but with zero energy or charm. It’s like when a team tries to run the same power play as the NHL boys, but they forget they don’t have McDavid.
The acting? Oof. Some of these performances are stiffer than my back after a weekend tournament. The characters are just kinda… there. No personality, no reason to care when they start droppin’ like flies.
No fun. Horror remakes can work if they add something fresh (Evil Dead 2013, I’m lookin’ at you). But this? It’s like takin’ a beer outta the fridge, only to find out someone drank half of it and filled the rest with water.
Final Verdict
Cabin Fever (2016) is the definition of "why even bother?" It’s a lifeless rehash of a movie that wasn’t even that old to begin with. If you’ve never seen the original, just watch that instead. And if you have seen it? Then skip this one, crack a cold one, and put on something actually worth your time—maybe even a good ol’ hockey fight compilation.
2/5. Only worth watchin’ if you’re too deep into the beers and don’t feel like changin’ the channel.
--- Deer Hair Pads Review. Follow on Facebook & Instagram
Rated 2/5 Stars •
Rated 2 out of 5 stars
03/23/25
Full Review
John C
‘Cabin Fever’ was released back in 2002. And again in 2016. However, about the only thing about the 2016 version is that it forces us to ask that most existential question: how can something be exactly the same yet completely different? The 2002 film has gone down as a cult classic. And for good reason – it’s awesome! Okay, if you’re into cheesy horror films with teens dying in various gruesome ways then it’s awesome. It takes the – oh so familiar – premise of a group of annoyingly beautiful teenagers going on vacation to a remote cabin in the woods and then meeting a sticky end. Nothing new there, but it’s just the way it’s done. It knows it’s not original and often plays on the clichés you’d normally find with the genre, plus it throws in some truly random and surreal moments just to keep the audience on their toes.
And not they’ve gone and remade it. And a remake it literally is. They’ve used the same script as the original, sticking to the same running order of scenes and same dialogue (or at least 90% of each). Therefore, it just feels weird watching a film you know really well, only with new actors speaking all the lines. Just pick your favourite film then imagine watching it with new actors reading the same words just slightly differently. It would probably be a bit disorientating and off-putting and you’d probably just end up thinking, why am I watching this? Well, that’s how this remake comes across.
It’s not even like the actors are that good. They all look as uncomfortable as we – the audience – probably feel watching them. They have no chemistry and come across like they’re all starring in a different film to each other. Plus the gore looks cheaper than the original – seriously, there’s an animal in the opening scene that looks like a blood-soaked children’s puppet you’d see on kids’ TV. I loved the original and regularly watch it. This version brings nothing new to the genre. If you’re a horror film, just watch the original. This one is possibly the most pointless remake ever (with the possible exception of that ‘Psycho’ remake in the late nineties).
Rated 1/5 Stars •
Rated 1 out of 5 stars
07/19/24
Full Review
Dan R
Why 2016's 'Cabin Fever' even exists is beyond me. But it does.
SYNOPSIS: 'While staying at a remote cabin for a week-long vacation, a group of five college friends succumb to an infectious, flesh-eating disease.'
Why would you remake a film from 2002 14 years after it's released? Worse still, you use the same screenplay and script as the first film. It's a carbon copy but without the special touch of Eli Roth.
Roth's original film was something unique at the time and he, as a director, made his mark in Hollywood. This has none of that originality, obviously, and has been turned into a totally bland horror movie.
Completely pointless. Dreadful
1/10
Rated 0.5/5 Stars •
Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars
03/14/24
Full Review
Jules N
Un remake qui ne possède aucune identité propre et qui reprend scène par scène l'original. En revanche l'humour de la saga est un peu plus discernable.
Rated 2.5/5 Stars •
Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars
01/21/24
Full Review
Springbonnie105
it really did not need a remake, the second one needed a remake but not the first
Rated 0.5/5 Stars •
Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars
10/15/23
Full Review
Qasim R
This is the reason why Modern movies are suck.
Rated 0.5/5 Stars •
Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars
09/16/23
Full Review
Read all reviews
Continue with Google
>
