Connect with us

Editorials

Does ‘Resident Evil: The Final Chapter’ Contain the Biggest Plot Hole(s) of 2017?

Published

on

*Keep up with our ongoing end of the year coverage here*


The Resident Evil film franchise is an interesting creation. Adapted from a 1996 video game, the first installment (released in 2002) had almost nothing to do with the game it was based on (save for the fact that there were zombies, zombie dogs, a Licker and an evil corporation called Umbrella). Nevertheless, it was a financial success (earning $102 million worldwide on a $33 million budget) and a franchise was born. Earlier this year Resident Evil: The Final Chapter, the supposed final installment in the franchise, was released. With a $26.8 million domestic gross, it was the lowest performing film in the franchise domestically (but it was saved by a $282 million gross from foreign markets, making it the highest grossing film in the franchise). Financials aside, Resident Evil: The Final Chapter has the distinction of taking a big ol’ dump on the series’ continuity, making it an insult to the fans that have followed it over the past 15 years. 

Before I really dive into this, I want to address one thing: I know you are going to tell me that the Resident Evil films are brainless and I shouldn’t think too much about the plot. Save for the Resident Evil and Resident Evil: Extinction, none of them are particularly good. Fun? Absolutely. High-quality cinema? Not at all. But here is the thing: I don’t care. Even though a film series is pure popcorn entertainment, the creator should still have enough respect for his audience to give them a satisfying conclusion that also makes sense. If Resident Evil: The Final Chapter tells us anything: it is that Paul W.S. Anderson does not respect his audience at all. It pains me to say this, as I have long been a defender of this dumb but fun franchise. It is my guilty pleasure, but I don’t feel guilty about it at all. I actually like all of them except for Resident Evil: Apocalypse, which is a big heaping pile of garbage despite it being the most accurate adaptation of the games.

Resident Evil: The Final Chapter actually has a few plot holes that either retcon or undo information we were given in the previous five films. For instance, the big showdown that was teased at the end of Resident Evil: Retribution (a big battle at the White House) is glossed over, with everyone (Jill Valentine, Ada Wong, Leon Kennedy, Becky) except Alice (Milla Jovovich) dying off-screen between films. This robs the audience of what could have been a spectacular moment in the franchise. Of course, it’s likely that battle had to be skipped because Anderson couldn’t get the actors and actresses who portrayed those characters to return for The Final Chapter, but it’s still a crushing blow to fans, especially since none of those characters are even mentioned by Alice in The Final Chapter.

The series has always struggled with continuity (will we ever find out what happened to K-Mart? Why does Claire never mention Chris after Resident Evil: Afterlife? It’s her brother.), and it’s never really been that detrimental to the overall plot of the films. So let’s get into the major plot holes of The Final Chapter which are detrimental to the series.The big twist/reveal in The Final Chapter tells us three things:

  1. Umbrella’s founder James Marcus (Mark Simpson) “discovered the T-Virus” to save his daughter Alicia (Ever Gabo Anderson, the daughter of Jovovich and Anderson), who has a disease called progeria that causes her to age rapidly. He recorded every moment of her young life in order to preserve her likeness and spirit. His business partner Dr. James Isaacs (Iain Glen) had Albert Wesker (Shawn Roberts) kill him in order to take control of the project. Isaacs then used Marcus’ recordings of Alicia to create the Red Queen.
  2. The T-Virus outbreak was not an accident, but rather a decision made by Dr. Isaacs (Iain Glen) and the rest of Umbrella to kick-start an apocalypse that would wipe the world clean à la the Great Flood. All of Umbrella’s elite would then be cryogenically frozen and wait out the apocalypse until it was over and then repopulate the planet.
  3. Alicia Marcus is still alive and wheelchair-bound. Umbrella cloned her and that clone is Alice. Alice was “born” in the shower in the first movie. This means that from the get-go, she has been a clone and that was her first interaction with the world.

On paper, all of this sounds really cool. In fact, if you casually watched the franchise over the years and didn’t pay too much attention to the details, this would be a fairly cathartic set of revelations for the end of a franchise. The Final Chapter brings the franchise full circle and also gives it a heartfelt conclusion by allowing Alice to have the memories of the childhood she never had (Alicia’s memories). Unfortunately, these revelations also ignore or downright contradict things that previous franchise entries have told us.

Resident Evil Plot Holes

Let’s start with item one, which seemingly retcons the origin of the T-Virus. In Resident Evil: Apocalypse, we are told that Dr. Charles Ashford’s (Jared Harris) daughter Angela (Sophie Vavasseur) had to walk on crutches when she was little. Charles “found a way to make [her] stronger.” This was the T-virus. Umbrella stole the virus from him and harnessed it to make Bio Organic Weapons. Okay, so who created the T-Virus? It all comes down to semantics. Charles Ashford “found a way” to cure his daughter and James Marcus “discovered the T-Virus” to cure his daughter. If it was Ashford then that means Marcus stole his research, squandering any sympathy The Final Chapter asks us to have for him. If Marcus created it then that means Ashford stole it from him, which also loses any sympathy that Apocalypse asks the audience to have for him. My bet is that Anderson knew the dialogue in Apocalypse was vague (he did write it, after all) and he kept it that way in The Final Chapter so he wouldn’t have to explain it.

Before we move on to items two and three, let’s have a little recap: the plot of the first Resident Evil film follows a Sanitation Team sent in by Umbrella to contain the T-Virus in an underground facility known as The Hive. When they get there, they discover Alice and Spence (James Purefoy), both of whom have lost their memories due to the Red Queen’s defense mechanisms. The leader of the Sanitation Team (Colin Salmon) tells them that they were security operatives for Umbrella posing as a married couple inside a mansion that sits on top of The Hive. They also find Matt (Eric Mabius) who eventually reveals that he and his sister Lisa (Heike Makatsch) were environmental activists who were working to bring down Umbrella. Lisa infiltrated The Hive with the help of a contact from Umbrella, who is revealed to be Alice in the third act. Alice worked with Lisa to bring down Umbrella because she no longer believed in what they stood for. It is also revealed that Spence knew of Alice’s betrayal and stole the virus from The Hive, intending on selling it to the highest bidder. He also released the virus in The Hive, thereby starting the viral outbreak.

Resident Evil: The Final Chapter seemingly undoes all of this (I say seemingly because it’s possible I’ve missed something, but I really don’t think I have).

If Umbrella released the virus intentionally, then what was the point of the whole Spence reveal in the first film? Was he working under Umbrella’s orders to release the virus? If so, why was he going to attempt to sell it to the highest bidder if his future had one of three paths: 1) Live out the apocalypse with the remaining survivors, 2) Become infected and die or 3) Be cryogenically frozen with the rest of Umbrella’s elite and wait out the apocalypse until it was over. In all of those scenarios, money would mean absolutely nothing.

Next (and here’s the big one), if Alice really is a clone of Alicia Marcus and her first moments of life were her waking up in he shower in Resident Evil then that makes everything that happened before that null and void, thereby undoing the entire twist/reveal in that film. It could be argued that Alice was made a clone well before the shower scene, and that she really did have all of those interactions with Lisa. Dr. Isaac’s exact words in the climax of The Final Chapter are: “You have no memory because you have no life. Nothing before the mansion when we created you 10 years ago.” Once again, it all boils down to semantics. Does he mean they created her to be Spence’s fake wife and after a few months she defected to become Lisa’s contact? Or is the film completely ignoring her relationship with Lisa and saying that her waking up in the shower was her first moment on earth? The fact that the experiments being done on other Alice clones in Resident Evil:Extinction always begin with her waking up in the shower seem to support the latter, but the plot of The Final Chapter is so lazily thought out that it could be either one.

Resident Evil

Again, I’m fully aware that you’re not supposed to watch the Resident Evil films for their brilliant writing, but you would think that after 15 years Anderson would have had enough respect for his fanbase to offer up revelations that actually work with the continuity he has created. As is the case with so many other final installments in horror  franchises (looking at you, Saw: The Final Chapter and  Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension), logic and continuity are thrown out the window in favor of mind-blowing twists. It ends the franchise on a sour note for me, which is a bummer considering how much of a supporter of it I’ve been over the years. Oh well, at least it’s better than Apocalypse.

A journalist for Bloody Disgusting since 2015, Trace writes film reviews and editorials, as well as co-hosts Bloody Disgusting's Horror Queers podcast, which looks at horror films through a queer lens. He has since become dedicated to amplifying queer voices in the horror community, while also injecting his own personal flair into film discourse. Trace lives in Austin, TX with his husband and their two dogs. Find him on Twitter @TracedThurman

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

on

Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.

To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.

Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.

After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.


SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.

For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.

Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.

Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?


AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.

From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.

The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.

Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.

With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega


There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.

Continue Reading