IMDb रेटिंग
5.5/10
11 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंFollowing the outbreak of a virus that wipes out the majority of the human population, a young woman documents her family's new life in quarantine and tries to protect her infected sister.Following the outbreak of a virus that wipes out the majority of the human population, a young woman documents her family's new life in quarantine and tries to protect her infected sister.Following the outbreak of a virus that wipes out the majority of the human population, a young woman documents her family's new life in quarantine and tries to protect her infected sister.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
Lio Tipton
- Stacey Drakeford
- (as Analeigh Tipton)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I quite enjoyed this film, I felt if I'd watched it at the age of sixteen I'd have loved it. As a story it's of course been done to death, but the delivery was pretty good, some nice rounded characters, with some great interplay, particularly between Emma and Stacey. The makers obviously felt no need for endless gore and violence, more subtly then terror. Trouble is we've all gotten used to hard hitting, no holds barred zombie films and serials, this would be a tad slow for many. It was watchable. 6/10
A virus breaks out causing the infected to lose their faculties and attack the healthy. In a small American town two sisters try to survive on their own when their parents are locked outside the quarantine zone.
This film starts off really well. The two female leads are excellent, with strong engrossing characters. Watching them live their ordinary lives is great viewing. The relationship between the two sisters, one who is sexually active and the other not, is played out with great skill. As things start to head south they deal with the situation as best they can.
This is where my praise for the movie ends. You can actually hit the pause button and see the exact second where some company executive taps the director on the shoulder and says "hey, bud, you remember this is a Sci-fi right?"
The director and writers obviously weren't up for this. I think they probably asked the guy from the local comic book store for advice. As all the hard work and investment in the characters is thrown away to stick some ridiculous tentacles in - then try and pass it off with some very flaky biology.
I am a big fan of sci-fi, especially post apocalyptic stories. This fails to deliver on both accounts. Despite my tastes I would rather this had panned out as a coming of age movie.
Watch it for the characters, then turn it off to avoid the laughable appearance of the actual virus.
This film starts off really well. The two female leads are excellent, with strong engrossing characters. Watching them live their ordinary lives is great viewing. The relationship between the two sisters, one who is sexually active and the other not, is played out with great skill. As things start to head south they deal with the situation as best they can.
This is where my praise for the movie ends. You can actually hit the pause button and see the exact second where some company executive taps the director on the shoulder and says "hey, bud, you remember this is a Sci-fi right?"
The director and writers obviously weren't up for this. I think they probably asked the guy from the local comic book store for advice. As all the hard work and investment in the characters is thrown away to stick some ridiculous tentacles in - then try and pass it off with some very flaky biology.
I am a big fan of sci-fi, especially post apocalyptic stories. This fails to deliver on both accounts. Despite my tastes I would rather this had panned out as a coming of age movie.
Watch it for the characters, then turn it off to avoid the laughable appearance of the actual virus.
Had I seen VIRAL in 2016, like others I'd have been frustrated by the stupidity of characters pulling off - or never putting on - their masks during a viral outbreak. "How ridiculous!" I would have opined, "NO ONE would be that stupid!" How time sadly changes perspective.
This isn't "World War Z" and doesn't try to be. It treads closer to a teen-centric "Contagion," focused on character rather than gore. The performances of Black-D'Elia and Tipton as sisters of varying temperament and maturity ring true, and a budding romance evolves as organically as one might under this circumstance.
I found VIRAL satisfying as a sisters-under-duress-sticking-together kind of movie, and as for the believability of people behaving recklessly and stupidly during a pandemic? This movie was certainly ahead of its time.
This isn't "World War Z" and doesn't try to be. It treads closer to a teen-centric "Contagion," focused on character rather than gore. The performances of Black-D'Elia and Tipton as sisters of varying temperament and maturity ring true, and a budding romance evolves as organically as one might under this circumstance.
I found VIRAL satisfying as a sisters-under-duress-sticking-together kind of movie, and as for the believability of people behaving recklessly and stupidly during a pandemic? This movie was certainly ahead of its time.
Did I have a good time watching this? Absolutely. Would I watch it again? Yep. Would I recommend it? Certainly.
If you don't nitpick it to death, this is an entertaining, well made, contagious critters in your blood movie. The actors all do a good job, some of the characters are memorable, the writing is fresh, the photography looks good, and the director knows his job. I wish more movies in this genre were this good.
As for those panning this movie, I'm glad I don't have to sit through watching a movie with them, or anything else, for that matter. They're probably the type who complain about everything but contribute nothing of their own.
The people who made this movie spent the money they had, and they spent it well. They ended up with an entertaining, scary movie about highly contagious blood borne parasites....nasty little buggers too, and I had a great time watching it.
If you don't nitpick it to death, this is an entertaining, well made, contagious critters in your blood movie. The actors all do a good job, some of the characters are memorable, the writing is fresh, the photography looks good, and the director knows his job. I wish more movies in this genre were this good.
As for those panning this movie, I'm glad I don't have to sit through watching a movie with them, or anything else, for that matter. They're probably the type who complain about everything but contribute nothing of their own.
The people who made this movie spent the money they had, and they spent it well. They ended up with an entertaining, scary movie about highly contagious blood borne parasites....nasty little buggers too, and I had a great time watching it.
It has come to my attention that Hollywood loves a good epidemic to shake us at our core. With recent film like "Blindness", "Contagion", "Maggie" and "The Bay" being just a small few to name, they really allow us to fantasize and view what could become of earth if an epidemic overtook us.
"Viral" is another film to add to your collection of "Disease Outbreak Films".
Emma (Sofia Black D'Elia, "The Night Of") is a new fish in a small pond. Starting a new school and moving to a new house all at once makes her shy and nervous, unlike her big sister Stacey (Analeigh Tipton, "Two Night Stand") who rather live freely and outspoken. When a virus mysteriously breaks out, trapping their mother at the airport. Their father (Michael Kelly, "Secret in Their Eyes") is forced to go get her; trapping himself in the progress. Emma and Stacey must now deal with fending for themselves and surviving this unknown virus.
Screenwriters Christopher B. Landon ("Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse") and Barbara Marshall craft a small and tight knit script that offers some scares at times but overall lacks in momentum and storytelling unlike its aforementioned "Disease Outbreak Films". This would rather focus on the characters of the story than the disease itself, Which is fine if and only if you balance the two. Landon and Marshall would rather us pay attention to Emma and how she is affected by the virus that is rapidly changing those around her. But with Emma not being a strong character, to begin with, or lacking emotional gravitas I found myself not caring about the difficult choices she had to make throughout the film. Now don't get me wrong, she is a very confident, smart and likable character. It's just her actions make less sense as the film progress leaving us - the audience to wonder what we might have done differently in her situation.
And this is the real reason why this film suffers its setbacks. If it had been released first before any outbreak film or tried to adapt or acquire new details to this ever growing genre we would have embraced and welcomed it. But because we've seen this countless times, Nothing is new to us. Which is why I found myself wanting the film to pick a side to land on. Landon and Marshall are not so much at fault here - They do create interesting and likable characters and establish a backstory that shapes the reason why our two leads find themselves in this predicament.
Directors Henry Joost & Ariel Schulman ("Catfish" and "Nerve") feed off tension and unease as they follow the little details of this virus. After the success of "Catfish", "Paranormal Activity 3", and "Paranormal Activity 4", coincidentally both written by Landon. They have an eye for found footage horror, which maybe this could have been - I think we're all happy it's not.
"Viral" is a new addition to our list of "Disease Outbreak Films", Sadly I don't think it will make our list of "Best Outbreak Films".
"Viral" is another film to add to your collection of "Disease Outbreak Films".
Emma (Sofia Black D'Elia, "The Night Of") is a new fish in a small pond. Starting a new school and moving to a new house all at once makes her shy and nervous, unlike her big sister Stacey (Analeigh Tipton, "Two Night Stand") who rather live freely and outspoken. When a virus mysteriously breaks out, trapping their mother at the airport. Their father (Michael Kelly, "Secret in Their Eyes") is forced to go get her; trapping himself in the progress. Emma and Stacey must now deal with fending for themselves and surviving this unknown virus.
Screenwriters Christopher B. Landon ("Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse") and Barbara Marshall craft a small and tight knit script that offers some scares at times but overall lacks in momentum and storytelling unlike its aforementioned "Disease Outbreak Films". This would rather focus on the characters of the story than the disease itself, Which is fine if and only if you balance the two. Landon and Marshall would rather us pay attention to Emma and how she is affected by the virus that is rapidly changing those around her. But with Emma not being a strong character, to begin with, or lacking emotional gravitas I found myself not caring about the difficult choices she had to make throughout the film. Now don't get me wrong, she is a very confident, smart and likable character. It's just her actions make less sense as the film progress leaving us - the audience to wonder what we might have done differently in her situation.
And this is the real reason why this film suffers its setbacks. If it had been released first before any outbreak film or tried to adapt or acquire new details to this ever growing genre we would have embraced and welcomed it. But because we've seen this countless times, Nothing is new to us. Which is why I found myself wanting the film to pick a side to land on. Landon and Marshall are not so much at fault here - They do create interesting and likable characters and establish a backstory that shapes the reason why our two leads find themselves in this predicament.
Directors Henry Joost & Ariel Schulman ("Catfish" and "Nerve") feed off tension and unease as they follow the little details of this virus. After the success of "Catfish", "Paranormal Activity 3", and "Paranormal Activity 4", coincidentally both written by Landon. They have an eye for found footage horror, which maybe this could have been - I think we're all happy it's not.
"Viral" is a new addition to our list of "Disease Outbreak Films", Sadly I don't think it will make our list of "Best Outbreak Films".
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाIn May of 2015, the movie was announced to be released in theaters in February 2016, but was later dropped from the schedule. It was released on video on demand (VOD) July 29, 2016.
- गूफ़When Emma gets a text message from Stacey on the first day of the story, the date on her phone says Thursday, October 2. When Emma gets a text message from Evan on the night of the following day, her phone display still reads Thursday, October 2 even though story-wise it should be Friday, October 3.
- भाव
Evan Klein: [the Drakeford sisters are confronted by a Evan's infected stepfather] Don't worry... he can no longer see us
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Viral?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $5,51,760
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 25 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें