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.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.
- Directors
- Writers
- Stars
Lio Tipton
- Stacey Drakeford
- (as Analeigh Tipton)
- Directors
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I wanted to like this movie, I really did, but once I realized that it was Blumhouse production, I knew I was going to be sorely disappointed. If there was ever a production company that catered to the worst parts of horror, and to the lowest hanging fruit in society, it's Blumhouse. What they have done to soil horror in the last 20 years will not be easily remedied, and this movie is no exception. Teenagers you can't stand start contracting a virus that makes them violent and belligerent. Town is quarantined. Shoehorned romance. The End. Nothing about this movie is original or well-done, and the ending left such a horrible taste in my mouth that I physically spit up phlegm. One of the worst of the PG-13 crap that has been permeating cinema as of late, it screams of lack of creativity, vision or care. In fact, the only saving grace about this movie is that the acting was actually very well done. The rest of the film? Garbage, pure and simple. Do not make the same mistake I did and avoid this movie like is actually spreading a virus. Pathetic.
This movie can surprise you the idea was well executed and the two leads felt like actual sisters, to me that's the high point in the movie how their relationship unfolds, they are complete opposites still in the situation they care for one another, and the roles from strong and weak will go back and forth.
Sadly everything else is fairly passable as it focuses on what happens when your cut off and teenagers make some dumb decisions, I can say this could have been better but the way it was executed was pretty enjoyable.
The parasite idea I thought was pretty good.
I recommend this one but be ready for a slow burn.
Sadly everything else is fairly passable as it focuses on what happens when your cut off and teenagers make some dumb decisions, I can say this could have been better but the way it was executed was pretty enjoyable.
The parasite idea I thought was pretty good.
I recommend this one but be ready for a slow burn.
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".
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 starts off as a drama, but quickly tunrs into a horror movie. Well I reckon it is rather slow - once it turns around. And it stays with you - it does try to encapsulate the horror from past days, old school as some might call it. References to something like Body Snatchers and other movies can be felt, while I wouldn't say they are being ripped off or stolen from.
This is still original for what it is and it does a solid job overall. Unfortunately there is something deeper missing - even when you care about the characters on screen, something that lights the fire, makes this really go places that make it truly great. There are things that cannot be explained (no pun intended) ... decent horror movie with quite the mayhem towards the end ... and some solace I reckon (maybe?)
This is still original for what it is and it does a solid job overall. Unfortunately there is something deeper missing - even when you care about the characters on screen, something that lights the fire, makes this really go places that make it truly great. There are things that cannot be explained (no pun intended) ... decent horror movie with quite the mayhem towards the end ... and some solace I reckon (maybe?)
Did you know
- TriviaIn 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.
- GoofsWhen 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.
- Quotes
Evan Klein: [the Drakeford sisters are confronted by a Evan's infected stepfather] Don't worry... he can no longer see us
- How long is Viral?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $551,760
- Runtime
- 1h 25m(85 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content