sixda The movie "Contagion" was better than I thought it would be. At first before the movie started I had the feeling it would be cheesy like a horrible Sci-Fi movie. The quality of acting in this movie was not of the best of quality, the only actor's face who I knew was the dad's from the television series "Wonder Years." The actors did not say their lines with the "realness" that they should have. There were a lot of holes in the movie, for example with the president's family. They didn't exactly speculate what happened with his wife and they talked a lot about the son, but we never saw him or heard anything about him. The believability of the storyline was alright with the virus spreading through the hospital by it being airborne made somewhat sense. The ending was annoying, first with her cutting only one of the straps on the tunnel and it expanding and then when she made the last second phone call. All in all this is a movie that you watch during a boring weekend to go to sleep.

ramsayma After watching Contagion I realized that yes it is possible for a terrorist to attempt to set off a bioweapon that could be very hazordous to the environment. It is actually very possible for someone to transmit the virus through the dart like in the movie. However, the effects in the movie were very bad, and in fact disturbingly annoying. And obviously one of the worst things in the movie had to be the idea that the president and the doctor started falling in love with each other. If I had to choose "the best line" in the movie it would probably have to be when the doctor said, "I have been waiting to do this", and then fixes his tie. Therefore, I gave the rating a 5 for the idea that the bioterrorism threat is indeed very possible, however, the acting was very bad.

JenMarie8776 The film, "Contagion" by John Murkowski is a hilarious, stereotypical low budget product. The quality of acting was laughable to say the least. The actresses and actors' invariable use of cliché lines from past films made the plot turn sour real fast. The flow of the movie was quite choppy and irregular. It wasn't difficult to follow the movie per se, but there were numerous times in which the average viewer questioned the legitimacy and purpose of certain scenes. The movie itself had the potential to become an endearing film such as "Out Break"; however the film fell real short of making the impression the subject matter should have had on its viewers. It doesn't take a scientist to figure out that you should be taking off your bio gear before leaving the quarantine room with contagious pathogens running a-muck. Similarly, it was also hard to believe that the supposed antagonist of the movie could be disposed of by a flying bungee tunnel off the roof. As creative as the ending was, it made the movie even more unbelievable and made a serious subject a very comedic one.

cpuglies I will start off by saying that the idea for this movie could have been done a lot better if this movie wasn't so low budget. The camera shots were horrible, the dialogue was no good, and some parts of the plot were not very believable.The poor camera work made some scenes very un realistic. When a president walks out there should be a lot of people, and if you don't have the budget to do that don't have a wide shot from a high angle showing how few people you actually have. The dialogue was cheesy and cliché, and that always makes a movie kind of corny. On top of that; a president should have much more security than they had. Real presidents have men on buildings with big guns sitting on the rooves surrounding the place when he comes out of buildings. So therefore one one of them would have noticed a guy with a gun poking out of the window across the street. Overall just a poorly made movie.