Plaga

I mean, there is even a newscaster telling the public to stay at home and avoid contact with other people! Anyway, "Plague" is an attempt to make a disaster movie with no real budget to speak of; it is very drably shot, photographed, directed and acted, but its bare-bones, no-frills, minimalist approach is occasionally effective. ** out of 4.

its sometimes funny how old crappy movies turn out to be signs of the future, a flu like plague carried by birds?????? who would have thought.......

like Zombie Creeping Flesh, this Canadian flick levels the spread of an epidemic directly at the Powers That Be, and i like it for that. I didn't know this movie was available on DVD and happen to own the original VHS release under the title 'Induced Syndrome', boasting on of the greatest covers of all time - a poor rip off of Iron Maiden's Eddie bursting out of planet Earth, misleading to say the least as I was expecting a zombie film and instead got this. Also a little like Rabid, with the infected woman roaming around passing the virus.

All in all quite an OK waste of hour and a half, i'd save the money for the DVD though and get something else.

Plague is a film without special qualities - average director, script, actors. It's not bad though. The action, although standard for this type of films, holds the viewer's interest. Of course, the whole "scientific" part of the movie only sounds scientific and can only mislead a person who has no concept of bacteriology, but this is also standard for this type of films. The so called bacteria in the videos is in fact Paramecium - you can get it in the nearest swamp and studi it in a standart microscope. Don't expect action, don't look for special effects. Actors play average and you won't see known faces.

All in all, if you like 70s thrillers, you won't regret it.

most of the people who comment on this film just don't get it. they don't appreciate it for the low budget gem that it is. "gemini strain" makes an excellent companion piece to the original "andromeda strain." "andromeda" is quality "a" filmaking, a full-budgeted production helmed by a major director (robert wise). as such, it's one of the best and most interesting pictures released by a major studio during the seventies. "gemini," on the other hand, is a down-and-dirty, low budget Canadian tax shelter flick. as a result it's grungier, grime-ier, and more "realistic" in a banal way. neither film is "better" than the other. each one represents a different approach to similar material. each deserves to be appreciated on its own merits. (i'm not going to give the film a numerical rating. film is too subtle and nuanced a medium to be quantified on a one to ten basis.)

And I mean it too. I saw this film late at night on the Sci Fi Channel a few years back and I despised it. It is filled with clichès and a really thin excuse for a plotline that will just bore the most timid viewer. Basically it is about some stupid female scientist who tampers with some highly toxic bacteria that she shouldn't have been anywhere near in the first place and she unleashes a deadly virus to the public, a virus that is spread whenever someone touches anything that has been contaminated. This film also suffers from a veeery low budget, since it has the victims writhing and shaking like they're having seizures when it's their time to kick the bucket. This film was so cheap that it couldn't even afford any special effects!!!! The music heard throughout is suitably creepy, but becomes predictable as hell whenever it plays before someone dies. This film just introduces a bunch of people that have no coherence to the story whatsoever just so they could be bumped off! Any young upstart fresh out of high school could have written a better story than what this pathetic film has. Your better off watching OUTBREAK instead. 1/10.