Movies: 18454 | TV Series: 3282 | Added today: 0 | Storage: 65882 GB
- Forgot password?
- | Register
- | Support
- | FAQ
- | Help
Download, Watch online Contagion (LQ) Movie.
| Genres: | ThrillerDramaSci |
| Starring: | John Hawkes, Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow, Matt Damon, Laurence Fishburne, Josie Ho, Monique Gabriela Curnen |
| Director(s): | Steven Soderbergh |
| Country: | USA, United Arab Emirates |
| Year: | 2011 |
| IMDB Rating: | 6.8 |
Soon after her return from a business trip to Hong Kong, Beth Emhoff dies from what is a flu or some other type of infection. Her young son dies a few days later. Her husband Mitch however seems immune. Thus begins the spread of a deadly infection. For doctors and administrators at the U.S. Center for Disease Control, several days pass before anyone realizes the extent or gravity of this new infection. They must first identify the type of virus in question and then find a means of combating it, a process that will likely take several months. As the contagion spreads to millions of people worldwide, societal order begins to break down as people panic.
 |
Contagion (LQ) (iPod) | Resolution: 480x272 px | Total Size: 282 Mb |
|
|
 |
Contagion (LQ) (DivX) | Resolution: 524x288 px | Total Size: 1615 Mb |
|
Movie Photos: We have taken some photos of "Contagion (LQ)". They represent actual movie quality.
Visitor Reviews: (20)
Jizdenky 17 May 2012
Soderbergh's Forgettable Outbreak Flick
I doubt whether 'Contagion' would have gained as much recognition ifthe cast comprised of lesser known actors. With Steven Soderbergh asdirector and a host of talented actors, I'd expected somethinginteresting that would at least be a step ahead of those outbreakflicks. Unfortunately, it isn't that different from other outbreak-typemovies except for the big names involved and money.The movie does attempt to address some interesting themes and raisesome questions for example how scammers take advantage of suchsituations, media manipulation, government manipulation etc but at thesame time the movie is filled with clichés and poorly developed. Thebehaviour of the characters is hardly believable. For example, whywould a WHO investigator walk around without a mask (when her fellowresearchers are), why would a CDC scientist not take all the necessaryprecautions and so on.'Contagion' boasts of big names of international actors like KateWinslet, Lawrence Fishburne, Marion Cotillard, Matt Damon, GwynethPaltrow, Jude Law, Jennifer Ehle, Sanaa Lathan, John Hawkes, BrianCranston, Enrico Colantoni etc. This is obviously an ensemble. Yet,given the talent involved, 'Contagion' is far from any of the actors'best works. Either their screen time is too limited or their roles arepoorly written for any single one of them to stand out. I thought JudeLaw's 'Australian' accent was laughably bad. How many episodes ofCrocodile Hunter did he watch to prepare for this role. I mean nodisrespect to the late Steve Irwin but Law saying the word crikey hadme laughing out loud.The execution is quite adequate. The colour tone is particularlywell-used and the score is awesome.Anyway, there's nothing memorable about this Soderbergh flick. Hope hegoes back very soon to making worthy stuff like he did early in hiscareer.
cunhafp 17 May 2012
Plain rubbish
If it wasn't the actors, i would stop watching it buy the minute 30! Atthat time i felt this one wouldn't get me no where, and it didn't. Itwas supposed to be a drama??? I wished they all died just to see someaction and stop earing that clocking music over and over and overagain! So, if you are looking for a Sci-fi, this is not appropriate. Ifyou are looking for a thriller...LOL. If you are looking for a drama,then watch it! At the end, you see you'll have your own drama becauseyou've watched for an eternal 100mn! This movie should be classified asa fictional documentary that has no start and no ending. This is allsome mixing rubbish about the press and a deadly disease! If you liketo stare at your plain bedroom's walls in the dark of the night forabout 2 hours, then this movie is excellent to you, otherwise skip it.Unfortanetly i had my vaccine! Rated 2 stars just for the actors (noteven the acting)!
madamexopinions 15 May 2012
Disappointing
The stars shown in the previews in this movie entice you to think itmay be good based on their past performances,their performances haven'tchanged but their actual time on screen in this movie has been cut veryshort so you are left with not so top notch stars. for example I wasexcited to see G.Paltrow appear in this ,she dies less than 2 min in,so I am already disappointed here and then it unfolds,what I see asMain characters are dying before they are even introduced to us ,theexcitement shown in the previews was about all the excitement there wasand so not worth the $$ at the theater,If I were to be chatting withsomeone about this movie Id say wait for the red box,that way you willonly waste a dollar.
shacklefort 15 May 2012
underwhelmed bigtime... very disappointing film with no depth at all
I really have to say that I was completely underwhelmed by thisexperience. It's not a bad film but it certainly is no thriller. It'sexactly what it says. A film about disease and the spreading of saiddisease. There's no real connection with any of the characters or anyof the stars of the cast. They try with Damon and Fishburne'scharacters but they spend large chunks of this film absent from thestory. It's a messy grab bag of a film that splinters and runs off inmany directions for no reason at all. Also, the impact of this globaldisaster wasn't even depicted to the level one would expect. Itcertainly takes a shortcut through just what an economic disaster thiswould create. No "evil" liberal blogger would be able to profit andeveryone would be economically devastated as much as anything.Overall, very disappointing.
phd_travel 14 May 2012
Absorbing - worth a watch
I was quite absorbed through out this movie. Sodebergh's style is stilla bit fragmented but not too confusing here. Compared with previoussimilar movies like Outbreak, this is less of an action adventurethriller and more of an "And the Band Played On" scientific and CDCmovie. We don't need another horror type disease movie. There aren'tany melodramatic scenes of mayhem and large scale disaster. The panicaspects are quite muted and small scale. Good points: Seeing how thedisease spread and started. Also it's fun to watch which of the maincharacters lives and dies. It was nice to see that the main characterswere flawed. Liked the exotic locations but could have had a bit moreon location filming in places other than Hong Kong. The actors aregenerally good but Lawrence Fishburne looks a bit bored and not quitethere. Matt Damon looks a bit puffy and haggard - he isn't that old.Gwyneth is fun to watch as patient zero. Cotillard is good andattractive. Winslet is okay. Minus points: A little bit of ambiguityregarding Jude Law's character (and what's with that Aussie accent andhis teeth?). Do big outbreak diseases have to originate in Africa orAsia? But I guess they do. Overall if it gets people to be a bitcleaner and stop touching things and then touching their faces - thismovie could stop the flu from spreading. Besides it's quite well doneand don't expect thrills and gore. Go see it.
sweetbug42 14 May 2012
Don't waste your money!
In the beginning, it seemed like it was going to be a good movie, butit had a flat, pointless ending. The movie also left many unansweredquestions! If you're thinking this is another great movie like"Outbreak," don't hold your breath. Some journalist is running aroundduring the movie making outlandish claims that the government alreadyhas the vaccine and is withholding it, and then claims that he gets thedisease and cures himself with a homeopathic remedy. The problem isthat you never find out if he is lying or not! Kate Winslet has apretty good role in the beginning of the movie as a physician from theCDC, but then gets randomly killed off in the middle. As the movieprogressed the plot just fell apart. The ending seemed like they ranout of ideas and just slapped something together to meet a deadline!Ha! My recommendation? Go see Lion King instead!
John DeSando 12 May 2012
Star-studded process . . .
"It's an ultrarealistic film about a pandemic, and that's the keyphrase." Director Steven Soderbergh The thought of a pandemic killing millions around the world is excitingin the thriller sense, but this is not the best film to bring thethrills: Steven Soderbergh's Contagion is about the onset of anepidemic, reminiscent of Outbreak (1995), which had a good measure ofaction and even memorable if one-dimensional characters played byDustin Hoffman and Renee Russo. Contagion differs from other well-knownvirus films such as Omega Man (1971) and 12 Monkeys (1995) because theydeal with the aftermath. My personal favorite is 28 Days Later (2002),in which the result of the epidemic is an interesting array of zombies.In Contagion, Matt Damon and Kate Winslet, among many other stars, trytheir best while the film plays down the drama and plays up the processof finding the disease's source and a vaccine to counter it. In thedisaster movie genre, the '70's were a rich mine with such star-filledepics as The Poseidon Adventure (1972) and The Towering Inferno (1974),famous examples of larding the drama with enough star power to make usforget how thin the dramatic content is.To give Contagion its due, it is not the conspiracy-riddled melodramaof Outbreak, which played on the fears of an Ebola-like virus. For thedeconstruction of the steps along the virus disaster way, Contagion isa notable piece that works best as a high school health class lesson inthe spread of a disease and the steps the CDC and WHO must take tosearch and destroy.Those last two verbs suggest thrills and dramaÂneither is as present asthe thought alone of the contagion. However, the film made me stopscratching my face the average few thousand times a day, and I moveaway more quickly from coughers.
Radagast23 11 May 2012
It's no Outbreak
I waited a while to watch this movie for a single reason - I didn'tthink it wouldn't be as good as 1995's Outbreak. It's a similarformula, a world-threatening virus film packed with star power.Outbreak worked because it cast the right stars and wasn't vague on itsambitions. Contagion well it got a lot of things right, but lostbecause it failed on the latter.Contagion is a unique take on the epidemic movie. While there are maincharacters, most of them aren't connected in any way. You get to followseveral story lines across the globe, from a woman (Gwyneth Paltrow)that returns from a business trip feeling extremely sick to her familyin Minnesota, to a conspiracy blogger (Jude Law) holed up in SanFrancisco. These characters and a dozen others are used to givedifferent perspectives as a deadly virus spreads around the world. Thefilm also changes tone as it progresses. There is a feeling ofexcitement and mystery as cases start to pop up, which quickly turns toa feeling of panic and paranoia when the death toll mounts. By the end,it feels almost like you are watching a different movie from when youbegan.While I don't think Jude Law gave anything exceptional to Contagion,the rest of the cast was pretty good. Winslet, Cotillard, and Fishburneall gave their usually quality performances. Matt Damon stood out, ashe has more and more recently, as a father who finds out he is immuneand attempts to do everything he can to keep his daughter alive.Jennifer Ehle, a relative unknown, also manages to draw attention awayfrom her veteran costars, portraying one of the last dedicated doctorstrying to create a vaccine.In the end, the success or failure of the film rests on the director.And while Soderbergh is as capable as they come, I have to place myblame on him for Contagion falling short. At first I wasn't sure whatbothered me about this film, but in writing this review, I realize itwas the identity. After the first half, I was just confused whatContagion was trying to be. While I was engrossed at first, thevagueness of what this film was trying to do started to irk me. Itdragged on, good characters were forgotten while average characterswere focused on, and the overall urgency of the story was lost. It did,however, have a pretty strong ending. It was just the 40-50 minutesbefore that that needed to be different.A low 7/10.
kgprophet 01 May 2012
Bizarre Living in Minneapolis, Still Feeling OK
No reviews I read implicated that my current residence in Minneapoliswas a major center of an epidemic, killing thousands, maybe millions ofpeople. AAAAAHHH!!!! As a Minneapolitan, I know as a fact that L.A.style rioting would NOT break out. We Minnesotans are very orderly andtidy. It has become a movie cliché that people take the time to throwall their clothes out into the street before bolting out of town.Again, too tacky for Minnesota. I hate to laugh at such a seriouscalamity, but the clichés started rolling out about mass chaos andpeople breaking into banks. Wait, what good is a bunch of money from abank if you are simply trying to stay alive? It felt cliché, whetherthe story intended to avoid it or not. Did I start paying attention tohow many times I touched my face? Yes I did. It was no where near acouple thousand times a day like Kate Winslet said.All the great actors and a pretty good director only slightly elevatedthe "Hot Zone" freakout attempted by "Outbreak" a while back. ReplaceDustin Hoffman with Laurence Fishburne. Toss in that younger guy fromcomedy central. Almost got away with it. There are scenes that aresupposed to tug at your heart at the end. For some reason it felt morelike a TV movie, somehow less affective. I will give credit to thescreenplay for not trotting out strange twists or unrealistic reactionsto unfolding events (save for the clothes in the streets). One shouldbe aware that although Matt Damon has adequate screen time, many otheractors are featured. Primarily Fishburne, with more urgency in hisposition as head of the CDC to save the planet than the other majorcharacters. I can't say I've been a big fan of Marion Cotillard, thego-to lady for films such as "Public Enemies", "Inception", as well asthe upcoming "Dark Knight Rises". She's pretty, but put her in the samemovie as Winslet, and it's two different levels of acting. Damon seemsto wander aimlessly, not knowing what to do in the darkest moments ofthe pandemic. Again, I credit the screenplay for letting Damon'scharacter act normal, not become some crusader.Jude Law gives off a different vibe. His scenes are played a littlemore over-the-top than the gravitas given to the rest of our characterspredicaments. Perhaps he is serving the role of comic foil to take abreak from the doom we are feeling. Clocking in at less than two hours,the constant doom facing everybody nevertheless gets stuck in clichéterritory. I was getting impatient waiting for the resolution totranspire. The moments of deliberate confusion were better moments tovisit, but I guess it would be unfair to confuse the audience too much.So a lot of expected character arcs begin and take their course, onlyto skip into a different arc. Thankfully, these alternate arcs sparesthe audience from the hokum shoved down our throats in "Outbreak".Almost. I say wait for the DVD.
DonFishies 01 May 2012
Incredibly disappointing, even with the talent involved
I was taken off guard when I first watched the trailer for Contagion.It looked like a crazy, off-the-rails thriller that was genuinelyterrifying in its depiction of something too close to reality. When Igot passes for an advanced screening last week, I had to contain myexcitement. With Steven Soderbergh at the helm of a plethora ofOscar-winning/nominated talent, how could I possibly go wrong?A deadly virus has been discovered after multiple deaths beginsurfacing around the world. As various members of the CDC and WHO raceto find a cure, the world stands at the brink of a rising epidemic.While some are safe, others must do everything they can to avoidinfection, or risk the fatal consequences.It may sound vague, but with so many characters and story lines goingon at once, it is slightly difficult to nail down a synopsis withoutgiving too much away. The film takes the approach of giving us theevents on a day-to-day structure, showing how quickly and destructivelystretches and mutates. Characters drop in and out to give us varyingpoints of view of the effects of the virus, whether it be from analmost random citizen, a doctor on ground zero, or the scientists inthe lab. We learn early on that no one is safe, and the film pulls nopunches letting you know that sentiment again and again. While I was a little flabbergasted at the almost ludicrous amount ofmontages early in the film, it became clear exactly what kind of slicklook Soderbergh intended for the picture. Depending on the location,the colour scheme modifies and reinvents itself. Some scenes looksimply stunning in their production values, making a big budgetHollywood project look like a down and dirty, gritty amateur indie.Soderbergh has never been easily classified, and with this film, hisfirst major motion picture since Ocean's Thirteen, he maintains andfurthers his enigmatic nature. The pounding 1980s synth score was anice and bewildering touch too, but I would have expected nothing less.Despite what the trailers and some of my early praise would have youbelieve, Contagion is actually a slow and meticulous film that is onlypartially thrilling. Yes, there is a panicked tone that carries thefilm for a good portion  one that frequently veers into claustrophobiaas it dawns on the characters and the audience themselves just howwidespread and devastating the virus is  but this tone never seemsright. It jumps and fluctuates, disappearing almost entirely in someinstances, and overdoing it in others. It seems completely unable tosettle on any one ideal, and as a result, feels very allover-the-place. It saddens me to say it, considering what a masterfilmmaker Soderbergh truly is, but the film starts unraveling themoment it starts and never seems to be able to find its footing. But I think this can also be blamed on the script by Scott Z. Burns. Hepartnered with Soderbergh before and gave us the moderatelyentertaining The Informant!, but he suffers here by building a complex,dense and incredibly verbose narrative around a mere nugget of a goodidea. Instead of developing the idea into the thought-provoking andhorrifying vision we are meant to take from everything we have beenshown, we are given a cross-section of stories that intersect at pointsand fail to come to any sort of fruition. By the time the film comes toa close, after more than a handful of screeching halts and asininecharacter motivations and reactions, I just found myself asking whatthe point of it all was. There is some heavy handed satire buriedwithin the picture, as is a treatise on some disturbing realities ofthe healthcare system worldwide. But outside of these vague notions, itall feels like a huge build-up to nothing. It feels like Burns andSoderbergh simply stopped caring after the basic idea stage wascompleted. And if they do not care about what is happening, then whyshould we?And really, with all the jargon and technical terminology being thrownaround, did they really need to talk down to the audience on more thanone occasion? I am by no means a genius, but I felt kind of offendedthat the film found the need to hint and then spell things out entirelyfor me.While it was initially impressive to see such a diverse group of actorsin roles of varying importance (including Canada's own Enrico Colantoniin a fairly substantial role), sadly there is no real time for any oneactor to really make something of their role. No one drops the ballthankfully (they let the film do that for them), but at the same time,no one seems like they are putting any substantial effort in either.Singling any one actor out is practically unfair, because there are nostandouts. I realize this is a very ensemble based film, but even themost hardened examples of this type of film have one character that theaudience finds unforgettable. This film does not have this character inany capacity. And for such a great pool of Oscar-calibre talent, thisis the most disappointing and disheartening element of all. While I went into Contagion with excitement, I came out let down. Forwhat little the film actually has going for it, it just seems like itall went to waste (including the absolutely shocking death that isruined by the trailers). Whether it wanted to be a paranoia-driventhriller, a not so subtle satire, or just an exercise in fear,Contagion fails on all counts. It is overly slow, and at the worst oftimes, incredibly boring. You are better off watching the trailer onloop and imagining just how much better the film looks, than itactually is. 6/10.(An extended review also appeared on http://www.geekspeakmagazine.com).
Troye Dchgl 01 May 2012
Disappointed, but maybe I was expecting too much...
"Contagion", for me, is a mediocre thriller drama about an epidemicthat spreads over the globe. It presents itself along with a lot ofscientific background to consolidate the sense that this epidemic is areality. I was expecting an exciting thriller, but this was no wherenear the excitement in "28 Days/Weeks Later".This isn't a documentary; it's supposed to be a movie. Sure, there aremultiple story lines and they seem to be handled fairly appropriatelyand there are a few dramatic moments, but nothing is special enough tomake this movie good. It hasn't done well on the side of excitement,and on the side of drama it is definitely sentimentally inadequate andpowerless.And you can't help but think this is a waste of talents with such aall-star cast, and all they are told to do is something that manyaverage or rookie actors can manage.Then again, perhaps it was my expectations that went in overdrive and Iwas hoping for something huge. I would say the movie isn't poor, butit's not satisfying on many levels.
link9913 01 May 2012
As a chronic nail biter of 20 years, I quit after seeing this movie
Do you realize how many surfaces you hit, and how many people havetouched those surfaces? Sure, you come in contact with germs, but whatif these germs caused an epidemic? What I liked the most aboutContagion was the fact that this could happen at any time. Theyhighlight how the world overreacted to the Swine Flu, and is nowreluctant to take the new virus seriously. In addition, right from thebeginning of the movie, you are reeled into the movie with the amountof action. Further, while all this action is going on, you see theepidemic from everyone's point of view from different parts of theworld.These are a few of the reasons why I loved this movie! It is realistic,action packed, suspenseful, touching, informative, and sad. The actingwas great. I do not have too much to say about this movie because itwas THAT great :)
laffnj 26 April 2012
Entertaining and interesting portrayal, but expected a lot more
This film was one I was so excited to see. It has an all-star cast, andthe plot sounded as entertaining as anything. Going into this film withits competition in my eyes being Outbreak (1995), and it did nodisappoint. The story was very smart and seemed very realistic. Theall- star cast was fairly disappointing, not their acting aspects, buttheir roles in the film. Gwyneth Paltrow in the film for about twominutes, and Matt Damon play a pretty quite roll, not like the Damon wesee in Bourne Identity and The Departed. Laurence Fishburne and JudeLaw played the two main rolls in this film, and they really did carrythe film, although Jude Law needs to work on his accents. This film isdefinitely watchable; it will entertain anyone with its interestingepidemic portrayal. I wouldn't say it's a must see but it will top mostof the movies out at the present time. Just note that this movie willmake you think twice about what you touch and who you speak to.
Jeff Hammer 26 April 2012
Contagions suffers from a bad case of subtraction by addition.
Contagion suffers from a bad case of subtraction by addition, it neverquite recovers. A film of this magnitude needs a protagonist that anaudience will walk through hellfire and brimstone for. We like thecharacters well enough, but there are so many that we never fully getto know them. Any of the subplots with a backdrop of a worldwidepandemic would certainly provide a very dramatic story. We could havefollowed Dr. Ellis Cheever (Laurence Fishburne) and Dr. Erin Mears(Kate Winslet) as they struggle to contain and create a cure for thedisease. We could have had an every man's point of view by seeing theevent from the eyes of Mitch Emhoff, who's dealing with great tragedyand deceit at the same time. Marion Cotillard plays Dr. LeonoraOrantes, a woman who is kidnapped, but becomes sympathetic to hercaptors. This circumstance could made a phenomenal film, as could havethe story of Jude Law's Alan Krumwiede, who tries to turn a profit frompeople's fears and naivety. The point is, the film had promise, there'sjust not that one person to really latch on to. Sure the film has ascientifically solid story, which I do appreciate, but maybe that's itsproblem. Movies make people cry, even though they aren't real, yet whenwe read about atrocities in the paper, we merely say "that's terrible"and go on with our day. This is so realistic, it has a newspaper feelto it, it just doesn't quite push the right buttons. There are momentshere and there where the dialogue is strong, such as when Dr. Cheeveris talking to a man about the history of handshakes; once handshakeswere used to show that you meant no harm, were unarmed, yet in thetimes of Contagion a single handshake could lead to hundreds of deaths,maybe more. But in the sequences of great dramatics, like the tragedyof losing a loved one and debates of how to alert the public, reactionsseem disingenuous and poorly written. Soderbergh uses close-ups andcuts of infected items which will strike fear in the hearts ofgermophobes, but the typical viewer will be less than convinced. Thefilm is better used as a public service announcement thanentertainment.
gtmail77 26 April 2012
Very disappointing
I agree with the other reviewers listed under Hated It. A kinda dullmovie can still have its good points - artistic, sad, mysterious, leftto interpretation - esp when dealing with a pandemic and personalstories using a strong(ish) cast. (rent Take Shelter or Sunshine) Butthis thing is DOA. The only really interesting character is KateWinslet as a hard core Dr. But even with the clock ticking as the virusmakes its way around the world, this movie has no plot. Outbreak wasbetter, even the original Andromeda Strain (1970) was 100X better andmade all the medical stuff real but understandable. Here, thecharacters are either mixing medical research with politics (Zzsnore)or revert to CGI drawings to help moviegoers understand high schoolbiology. The ending should have been the beginning of the good part,after leaving all the gabbing and Jude Law's trite char on the cuttingroom floor. I still want to know if Paltrow's 'friend' ever got sick?And why did the woman run out of the airport waiting area? I guessquestions like these can be answered by jumping to different chaptersof the DVD. But in this case, not worth the time.
Pongo000 25 April 2012
A lugubrious mess
Steven Soderbergh's plodding, insipid direction and a host ofcharacters you really can't sympathize this makes this movie one of theworst I've seen. Worst of all, the trailers are absolutely misleading:No one could have watched these and not expected a mix of "28 DaysLater" with maybe a bit of "Resident Evil" thrown in. Instead, we'reoffered a classic case of bait and switch.Soderbergh hasn't come out with a decent movie since "Traffic". Whatwas he thinking here? Trademark Soderbergh directing abounds in thisone: Long lingering shots that are confusing or that the viewer reallydoesn't care about (door locks anyone?). An incredibly interminablecasino sequence where we get to watch a character played by GwynethPaltrow gamble. For long minutes. I mean, really? Soderbergh has thisuncanny ability (shared with Woody Allen) to attract top stars to hisfilms. Unlike Allen, Soderbergh's movies (save for the aforementioned"Traffic" and possibly "sex, lies, and videotape" are all fluff pieces,here and gone faster than you can say "It's not just lysine. It'scitric. It's gluconate." What in the world was Matt Damon thinking whenhe took on this script? I forgave him for "The Informant!". But geez,since when do patients get bad news about the passing of a loved one infront of the patient registration desk? Damon is practically devoid ofemotion throughout the movie, which I attribute not to Damon's actingability (he's actually a brilliant actor in the right setting), but toSoderbergh's brain-dead directing. His character is simply one that'sdifficult to care about, as are most of the other characters.I could go on an on about good actors wasted in a bad film: KateWinslet handing a sick person her blanket off her own death bed (yeah,we get it: She's a person that thinks about others, but that's whyshe's a doctor)...Paltrow, so excellent in so many movies, reduced toan adulteress that has zero character development, yet we're expectedto actually care for her...Laurence Fishburn, whose character isincredibly egocentric, looking out only for himself and those aroundhim until Soderbergh figures out he should be imbued with a shred ofcompassion to tidy things up at the end. What in the world were you allthinking?For the love of God, your loved ones, your friends, and most of allyourself: Skip this one. I am still kicking myself over changing mymind at the last minute to see this instead of "The Thing". What in theworld was I thinking?
davidx2718 25 April 2012
Thriller with more science than personality
'Contagion' is a fascinating, clinical look at how a virus getslaunched into the human race and how humans around the world react.  Weget a close-up look at scientists, scumbags, looters, corporate bottomfeeders, conspiracy theorists, teenagers, the military, ... evenChinese villagers, and how they cope when the world around them startsto disintegrate. It seems that during emergencies the heroes swing intoaction and the worms come out of the woodwork. Some humans are worsethan the virus. 'Contagion' works the way a good documentary does.There are no bloody- eyed, zombified virus carriers launching theirinfected selves at terrified innocents. The danger and adrenaline comeswith a quiet cough, or when one person sips from a glass and someoneelse picks it up. This movie gives you a behind the scenes look at thedisease control command centres and will have you wondering to the lastminute -- if you're interested in that kind of thing -- who was patientzero and how did this virus get started? My wife was not impressed withthis movie. She tends to like character-driven or blockbusterentertainment. I felt bad that I picked this movie and she had to sitthrough it, but I sure enjoyed it.
dtucker86 24 April 2012
Terrifying
This movie is one of the most chilling doomsday thrillers you couldpossibly imagine. I rank it right up there with Outbreak, The Day Afterand Fail Safe. What is most scary is that it is entirely plausible. In1918 there really was a worldwide epidemic that killed millions. Itkilled 1% of the population of the entire world. In less then a year,it took more lives then in all the years of World War I. They mentionthis in the movie as a matter of fact. The scenes in the film showingdeserted cities, airports, people fighting to the death over food andmedicine and above all the scenes with the dead being buried in massgraves will always stay in my mind. Matt Damon as always does a greatjob as the grieving husband and father, I am eagerly awaiting the nextBourne movie. The one beef I had is the fact that they give ElliottGould such a small part, he is one of my favorite actors and in myhumble opinion one of the most unappreciated great actors of our time.One other thing I wanted to point out is that the terrible epidemic of1918 was the result of a simple flu bug that went genetically berserk.According to experts it could easily, VERY easily happen again!
CaptMTS 23 April 2012
Germaphobes Beware of Infectious Contagion!
Contagion was surprisingly tense and riveting for a broad film coveringa lengthy pandemic that devastates the world.Overall, the acting was very strong, and the characters wereinteresting and integral parts of the story. Matt Damon, Kate Winslet,and Laurence Fishburne all did an excellent job with the standardtear-jerking life and loss moments.Of all the characters, Jude Law stood out playing an eccentric,conspiracy-theory reporter that provided some great moments and comicrelief for the film.Contagion was face-paced and well-directed providing great insightsinto viral contagions, how they spread, and how they are stopped.But, if you fear germs, or fear that you may fear germs, this movie isnot for you.
Mike Aposhian 22 April 2012
Contagion was pure garbage
Yea the title pretty much says it all. The movie has a star studdedcast of horrible actors with the exception of Fishburn. The film was soboring, left massive holes in the story, and had no ending. There waslittle to no suspense, no climax, and no build up. The virus kills abunch of people and then all of a sudden there was a cure. theend......worthless. Worst movie of 2011. I was reminded tonight of whyI haven't been to the theaters in 3 years, I'm better off downloadingmy movies then giving my hard earned money over to these hacks whorecreate the same movies over and over again. This movie reminded me ofsomething a film student might have made. I actually hated it enough tolog into this web site and blast it, normally I wouldn't put in thismuch effort, but thats how bad this movie was. Anyone who thinks thismovie was compelling and suspenseful, is a retard.