आउटब्रेक

I loved this movie when it first came out and found it just as enjoyable upon a recent re-watching. Afterwards, I noticed that it carried the same IMDB rating of 6.6 as a more recent disease-disaster movie, "Contagion", which I find perplexing.

While "Outbreak" was fast-paced and carried an engaging plot with an exciting climax, "Contagion" played out like a BBC documentary, with no real plot, no character development, and no climactic finish. Both movies had great casts, but I felt that they were largely wasted in "Contagion" since the characters were incidental to the virus and you never become invested in anyone's welfare. Neither is wholly realistic, but at least one is entertaining.

I challenge fans of the genre to watch both movies and vote to correct what seems to be a great injustice to "Outbreak", which is clearly a more entertaining movie.

One of those superficial movies with (feared) mass catastrophe, with the cliche memories from the past, the good, the bad and the ugly characters etc etc. Also the classic American-people-this-American-people-that crap which may not annoy you Americans but makes a movie UNBEARABLE for the rest of the world. Cliche guy who is the best but has a problem with his superiors and cliche divorced couple who rejoins in the end. Generally, only for those seeking an average to good no-brainer action movie. Call the pizza delivery half an hour before, you don't wanna start watching this film with nothing to eat.

Outbreak (1995, Dir. Wolfgang Peterson)

It's 1967 and there's a deadly outbreak of 100% mortality rate virus in Motaba River Valley, Zaire. The Valley is destroyed to prevent the virus from spreading, but 27 years later, the virus finds its way over to the USA aboard a monkey. This time though, the virus has evolved and is now airborne, as Col. Sam Daniels (Hoffman) races to not only prevent a virus epidemic but to prevent the destruction of Cedar Creek by the corrupt Maj. Gen. Donald McClintock (Sutherland).

Great acting from its talented cast and superb storytelling make a well made film which hooks you into waiting for the final outcome. Story doesn't focus on the effects of the virus, but rather the hunt for the cure, which makes a far better film.

You want a hotshot scope-jockey, fine, but, frankly, I'm hurt. – Maj. Casey Schuler (Kevin Spacey)

Despite of being from 1995, then "Outbreak" is still a movie that very much holds it own and is very watchable even now in 2020. Well, especially more so now in 2020 given the Covid-19 situation. Which, incidentally, is also the reason why I opted to sit down and watch this classic one more time.

The storyline in "Outbreak" is very riveting and captivating, drawing in the audience quite fast, with a very intense and interesting storyline. This movie is essentially about a small outbreak of a new strain of virus that crosses borders and quickly turns into a very dangerous virus that runs amok and out of hand.

Aside from a very interesting storyline, then the movie definitely also benefits from having a very impressive cast ensemble, which includes the likes of Dustin Hoffman, Rene Russo, Morgan Freeman, Kevin Spacey, Cuba Gooding Jr. and Donald Sutherland.

"Outbreak" is a movie that can be watched again and again, and it never ceases to be as intense and interesting as it was the first time I watched it. For this accomplishment the writers Laurence Dworet and Robert Roy Pool really deserve a lot of praise. And also director Wolfgang Petersen did a great job with this movie.

If you haven't already seen "Outbreak" for some reason, now is the right time, especially with the pandemic situation happening in the world today.

My rating of "Outbreak" is a very solid seven out of ten stars. I can warmly recommend that you take the time to sit down and watch - or re-watch - this movie, because it is very intense and very entertaining.

This is not a movie you will watch and then think is great all the way through. It's fun enough and the topic at hand is super cool, but you need to know what you are getting into here. Firstly, the part about the pandemic itself is very good. All the virus and lab stuff is just great and makes the movie enjoyable. Seeing the researchers track down the virus is great stuff and frankly something I haven't seen in any other movie. We have slim pickings in pandemic movies and this is surely one of the top ones as they actually pretty much use US pandemic plans to create this movie. Much of what is going on is very similar to what you saw during Covid-19. Of course here it's all Hollywood so very few people are doing all the work. In real life you have thousands of people all doing small parts. Other big pandemic movies are showing us the pandemic, but then avoiding the science, research and data. Contagion for example is more about the experience itself. Here we follow the researchers doing a job and actually SOLVING the problem. Which is refreshing.

The atmosphere is also fun and relaxed with joke statements and personal connections. You don't quite see this in modern Hollywood and modern movies are more flashy and CGI focused. Here the scenes feel natural and close in modern movies scenes feel set up and overblown. This feels like a personal experience where the characters are in the center of everything. The editing gives them time to be among each other and just hang out which adds a ton of personality to this movie that we are sorely missing today. And to be fair this style of movie making wasn't a thing before the 90's either. In the 60's everything was a set and theatrical acting. And I'm sure we will return to the 90's style at some point as it's extremely personal and effective movie making where every set feels real instead of cool. The 90's style also has a silliness to it. It's not super realistic, the acting is not always on point and they do try to make it look like a movie to make it accessible for even foreign moviegoers. As a fun experience. Today hyperrealism, dark colors, and gloomy scenes and actors is more the norm. One style is not always better than the other style, it's just nice to have both.

Now, the movie frankly has a huge problem: the military. You have a great movie about a pandemic and on top of it you have a ridiculous mess about some super government plan. 20% of the movie is not great. There are some very long helicopter scenes here that belong in a B-tier TV show. We have full-blown stupid Hollywood scenes in an otherwise good movie. It's like they are plastered into a movie just to add action scenes. The whole military storyline makes zero sense and they don't even fully explain it. It's so random and stupid that it takes this from being a classic to being a silly Hollywood movie many will happily skip. In the first hour and 20 min of the movie I was having a blast. I did feel that maybe the lead didn't have too much to do, but it was still fun seeing the virus spread and seeing different people work together to contain in. Hoffman is not a good actor anyhow. Then the lead suddenly becomes a superhero and can do EVERYTHING. It just becomes a typical low-tier action movie with nonsensical plot and stupid dialogue that makes no sense. I still don't understand what the hell the military wanted or why.

So yeah, here you have 80% of a great movie with 20% bad cinema. I still think this leans to the "you can enjoy this" camp. But it's very close to tipping over to the other side. The first hour is just really fun and I don't think you should avoid it even though you will feel let down by how much they dropped the ball in some scenes. At least watch the first hour. Then you can always shut it off and go about your day.