Plague

In my actual job (unfortunately, writing user-comments here on IMDb isn't my job), yours truly is active in the safety & prevention department of large multinational. Most of my job exists of investigating incidents, determining root causes and develop learnings. Why this piece of seemingly irrelevant and personal information? Well, solely to be able to claim that the events unfolding in "Plague" follow a certain pattern that is very typical for harsh and large-scaled incidents. And, even though fictional and seemingly far-fetched and surreal, the plot is reasonable accurate not as outdated as you might think...

Everybody is familiar with the principle of "Murphy's Law", right? Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. Within the fine profession of incident investigation, there exists a similar theory called the "Swiss Cheese Model". Explained as simply as possible: each process or mechanism has a series of protective barriers and built-in preventive measures to ensure that, in the event or a calamity, serious or even disastrous consequences are avoided. But, as in Murphy's Law, you'll always see that these barriers can and will fail when you need them most. And, to make matters worse, multiple barriers will fail at the same time and the hazard will always find a way through the mazes of the net. To visualize it: the hazard always finds a new hole in the Swiss cheese through which it can pass.

Why is this relevant in the context of a review for a cheap & cheesy late-70s horror flick like "Plague"? Well, to illustrate the plot of the film is not that exaggeratedly far-fetched. Unlikely things happen and usually solid barriers do fail. The ventilation pipes of air-conditioning systems will inexplicably blow in the opposite direction. Carriers of a virus will sadly be the ones to escape from quarantine. People that usually wear hygienic gloves to prepare sandwiches will exceptionally not wear them on the fatal day the should, etc. It's the painful truth of Murphy's Law or the Swiss-Cheese model. In many reviews, even by acclaimed critics, I noticed these plot elements being referred to as dire clichés, but they are truthful.

There are two eras to look at film titles like "Plague", or at better and more known movies of the same type, like "The China Syndrome" or "Outbreak". There's pre-Covid and post-Covid. Nobody really believed scenarios like these were realistic in pre-Covid times, but we're not so sure anymore now. Even in this low-budgeted and practically forgotten 1979 flick, there are sequences where newscasters spread messages like "stay inside your house" and "avoid contact with other people as much as possible". Those warnings have an entirely different impact now, after the year 2020, than they had in 1979.

Even purely talking in terms of entertainment and horror/cult value. I enjoyed "Plague". True, it's extremely slow-paced and overly talkative, but writer/director Ed Hunt manages to maintain an uncomfortable atmosphere of fear and tension throughout. The footage of dying school children, violent riots between militaries and ordinary petrified people trying to leave the city to save themselves, or infected scientists locking themselves inside their laboratories to prevent further spreading of a virus are unsettling. The fairly unknown (to me, at least) cast members give believable performances and the minimal use of music and noises (like chiming bells) are effective. On a more personal note, I'm also a follower of the curious director Ed Hunt. He made one of my favorite early 80 horror flicks, with the uniquely original and creepy "Bloody Birthday", but also two of the worst - but nevertheless amusing - Sci-Fi/horror flicks with "Starship Invasions" and "The Brain". In terms of quality and amusement value "Plague" neatly ranks in the middle of his oeuvre.

Contary to the opinion of one reviewer of this film, it is NOT the worst film ever made, far from it. It may not be the best either but there are countless worse ones out there. Check out 'Ransom Runner' for example, that is a stinker by anyone's standards.

I quite like the low key documentary feel of this film, far less sensational than a film like 'Outbreak,' this rather prosaic style is probably the more realistic way it would be in real life. As the saying goes, the world ends with a whimper and not a bang.

In it's own way this is quite an effective little thriller along the lines of the old BBC television series from the 1970's, the 'Surviours.' And as another fellow reviewer points out, also somewhat contemporary now with the threat of 'bird flu.' Or indeed, other fearful epidemics like MRSA or even the constant threat of AIDS. Although, this was made before any of these awful diseases were known.

The acting is nothing to write home about and is standard at best, although, the actress playing Jessica, shines as a sardonic secretary.

While not in the same class as films such as 'Outbreak' or '28 Days Later' or even 'The Satan Bug,' which use the same end-of-the-world plot line, this passes the time and holds the attention to the end. Also interesting is the final reward to the two people who help save the world.

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.

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 movie about an outbreak on a bacteria called M4. The bacteria causes people to die in extreme pain, in body spasms. A woman who is a carrier escapes from a hospital and goes on the run, spreading the plague to people she encounters, and onto food in fast food stops etc. She has no idea however that she is a carrier, and as such may carry a cure. For those interested in science there are easily recognisable reasons for the reaction to the bacteria also; there is an exponential release in acetylcholine, increasing nerve activity yada yada yada. I don't want however to give the impression that due to this being a realistic account of a plague outbreak, that it is like sitting through a lecture. The movie plays like a made for TV entertainment flick, and if you go into expecting this you can get a lot of entertainment from it. The film towards the end begins to flag however, and possibly due to budget we seemingly get a good 2 minutes here and there where we get random shots of buildings and bacteria under the microscope. This in a way made the movie lose a bit of its momentum, but luckily only happens towards the end, and the movie does manage to hold together. The movie carries a kind of scientific message, which holds a lot of truth in todays society, where science moves further into unknown territory, and questions the consequences of such practises, to some extent if we should play god.

The acting in the movie far surpasses what it needs to be, and adds a lot to the movie. Daniel Pilon plays Dr. Bill Fuller who works on trying to make a cure to the bacteria, which actually he and his assistant were responsible for creating, the latter responsible for releasing.

For people who have seen Ed Hunt movies previously such as The Brain or Bloody Birthday, and liked them, i can guarantee you will get enjoyment out of this. It is excellent 70's trashy fun. However if you do not like late 70's cheaply made movies, and you are looking for something more along the lines of 28 Days Later, this movie may not be for you.