Batalla en el infierno

First off, its quite easy to tell that author Clive Barker didn't have a lot to do with this film. There are few of the trademarks that one expects from a Barker tale here. Obviously this was meant solely to be a production that he could get off the ground quickly and without trouble to start off his Midnight Picture Show company.

The story follows a mysterious plague that causes all the children of the world under the age of 9 to fall into a coma. Skip ahead 10 years and the children have begun to awaken. The only problem is they have a strong desire to kill any and all adults.

There are some great twists in here. After 10 years in a coma, one's muscles would be jello, so the authors have given the children seizures twice a day every day to keep the muscles in active condition and allow them to grow and become strong. The first thought one might have is of the standard zombie film scenario: survivors hole up as hordes outside hunt them and kill them. Indeed, there is some truth to this. The difference is that the kids don't want to eat the adults, just kill them and send them into the afterlife. A lot of this is never fully explained much like the reasons for the zombies in Night Of The Living Dead. There are some reasons suggested but no concrete evidence given.

What brought the film down was its ultra low budget. The film looked cheap. The less than stellar acting also caused the film a heavy hit in my opinion. Lots of people have criticized James Van Der Beek for his performance but I'd have to say that the blame lies fully on the entire cast. No one here delivers a decent performance.

All in all, its worth a look, but it will hardly set the world on fire.

This movie started really well and, as others noticed in their comments, ended rather obscurely. One could say that if you mix Children of the Damned with Night of the Living Dead, you get this movie, which would have made a reasonably scary and interesting film. However, they added a bit of Steinbeck leftism, a bit of obscure clerical writings, probably Catholic only, and crashed into an uninteresting and meaningless ending.

That doesn't mean it wasn't good. The start has that nice feel of Night of the Living Dead (the black and white version, the good one). The characters are presented and developed rather well. However, after a while, they all start dying stupidly and only show that using emotions in time of crisis is plain idiotic. After all, this is the only moral in this movie.

Bottom line: a film with a great potential turns out to be an average movie.

In the not to distant future, every human child under age nine mysteriously falls into a coma. Most of the kids are hospitalized, but a few are cared for at home. Twice a day, they have convulsions (which seems to give their bodies a good workout). "The Plague" extends to newborns, also; all are born comatose. As years pass, no healthy babies are born. Births are discouraged, and abortions are mandatory. The victims remain comatose. With no functioning offspring, the human race is threatened with extinction.

This is a reasonably well set-up, but ultimately pointless, confusing, and unsatisfactory story. It's like "Village of the Damned" and "Night of the Living Dead" were copulated, and gave birth to a script. Then, they tried to film it as "The Grapes of Wrath" with James Van Der Beek (as Tom Russell) taking on the protagonist's role and Ivana Milicevic (as Jean Raynor) wanting to take over. The best thing you can say about the ending is that because it's so bad, any subversive message will go right over your head.

**** The Plague (9/5/06) Hal Masonberg ~ James Van Der Beek, Ivana Milicevic, Brad Hunt, Joshua Close

Advertising for this film seems to mention Clive Barker's name quite a bit which was enough to intrigue me - after all, who can't love the guy who created HELLRAISER and who was responsible for some of the strongest horror writing in the 1980s? Sadly it turns out that Barker was only a producer here and had no hand in the writing or anything.

And THE PLAGUE suffers as a result. The title and premise makes it sound like some kind of post-apocalyptic movie but instead it turns out to be nothing more than a low-budget zombie outing with some decidedly dodgy writing. Indeed, the writers never seem to really figure out what makes their antagonists tick and the addition of a religious edge to the narrative is very tiresome. It particularly falls apart at the head-scratching climax, which will have you groaning and shaking your head at the same time.

Up until that point, it's B-movie business as usual, with the exceptionally wooden James Van Der Beek struggling to contend with a virus which has transformed all of the world's children into killers. The script is poor and the characters absolutely diabolical thanks to their stupidity. I found the women characters particularly dumb here, given to acting in idiotic ways which soon ends in their death; even poor Dee Wallace can do little with the role she's given. A handful of mildly tense siege bits and some gore isn't enough to lift THE PLAGUE from the B-movie doldrums, however.

i watched the movie and i thought it was really well directed. James has also did a great job. it contains a bunch of really thrilling scenes. he will be able to experience what the movie characters are feeling...all the horror, pain, scare, despair, it almost feels like you are there. however, the story is not well developed, coz even despite the effort to make this to look real, it seems surreal and there are a couple of things that were explicit (or even implicit -that i've noticed-). the end of the movie could also be more mysterious or cause more impact, but even though it is a good movie, specially when compared to what we can see in theaters these days.