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
Add a Review
-
Sleepin_Dragon2 January 2018
-
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. -
eismoc26 May 2018A slow horror movie filled with dialogue like ^ - Are you wearing makeup? * - Yea like a little. Do I look like a hooker? ^ - Yeah but like a rally high class hooker. *- Od Kaeh :D :D ^- Do you wana dance? * - Cooh
and anyone can figure out the rest of the nonsense in all the rest of the dialogues.
Story was fine, pretty good in fact since it deals with the consequences of a strange infection on human nature, but I think the directing was pretty bad.
There is no sci-fi in Viral, so 4/10 and I wont watch it again. -
chrichtonsworld14 April 2017Viral starts out interesting and compelling. Forget that it follows every cliché in the book concerning viral outbreak / zombie / infected films. Even the main character was likable. Until the events started to cause uproar and chaos.
Then suddenly cautious Emma Drakeford (Sofia Black-D'Elia) becomes a total idiot. What is the point of a mask if you keep removing it? I swear she keeps taking that damn thing off at moments where it was needed the most. That kind of stupidity is just infuriating. Her big sister Stacey Drakeford (Analeigh Tipton) is even worse who for some reason can't be bothered to care what is happening around her outside her little world. She gets bored by breaking news reports,warnings and presidential speeches about health care and safety measures. Instead she chooses to ignore what is happening not so far from her home and party instead. She even suggests her little sister shouldn't take things so seriously. Yeah, real good advice Stacey! Still I was fine with that since I was hoping that the film at least would give us something nice on the side to chew on. Like some real hair rising thrilling scenes or some bloody and gruesome action. But no, the jump scares are predictable to a tee. And the few scary or creepy moments that could have been terrifying are ruined by the severe lack of tension or dread. The whole movie suffers from not making it clear how dire the situation is. It relies too much on the imagination of the audience and in this case I find that unacceptable. The clicker zombies or infected sounded too much like the ones in video game Last of Us. I am not sure what to think of that. If directors Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman have borrowed or were heavily inspired by the fungal zombies of that game would it have hurt them to take it to next level and come with some of their own ideas thrown into the mix to make it more interesting? Predictable monsters are boring. So all you have to do is make them unpredictable to make it fun. These clickers were as scary as fluffy bunnies and cuddly bears.
I already wasted too many words on this since I can't tell you how disappointed I was. Viral had real potential. But nothing creative has been done to make this film stand out from the rest. If you have seen a million zombie / infected films like I have you expect more. This is a complete waste of your time. So do not watch this! -
yossarian10029 July 2016Did 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. -
paul_haakonsen17 June 2018This movie had potential, especially since it took place during the early stages of an infection that would affect many people.
But the movie ultimately failed to cash in on its potential, and ended up being a mediocre movie that somehow felt like an attempt of mixing the zombie genre with elements from "The Strain".
It should be mentioned that "Viral" does have good acting performances from a good cast. And the movie also has good special effects and CGI effects.
But the movie was just suffering from being too generic and predictable. And the ending to the story was a slap to the face with a cold fish.
"Viral" offers nothing of any interest, and if you are a seasoned horror fan, like I am, then you are better off finding something else to watch because "Viral" is not all that interesting. -
geraldohanna30 July 2016It 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". -
funnycommentor11 September 2021It's just a nice apocalypse film. The casting, the characters and the location were all so good. The plot was basic, but interesting. It wasn't scary, because the jumpscares were predictable. In my opinion, it deserves a sequel. The kills were average. Also, it has many similarities with the real world we live in. For example, the face masks, quarantine, those who believe in conspiracy theories, the ones who don't believe in the outbreak, those who die because of the virus.
-
DogFilmCritic2 August 2016This 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. -
This movie angered me because it had potential. then the characters had to go and do things like not arm themselves with more weapons. One pistol when they had the opportunity to pick up an extra gun towards the end? No melee weapons? No fortifying of the house? Block the windows? We wouldn't want to do that, then we might live longer. It's pretty obvious what's going on but other than finding dad's gun they do nothing to protect themselves.
Ugh... just ugh... -
The Blumhouse production company presents a story that, even with some horror elements, tries to be something different, focusing more on drama and science fiction. Viral is a film that at the time was not a big deal, but after the pandemic, it can now be seen from another perspective. This movie is a drama with suspense elements focused on 2 teenage sisters who have to survive in a quarantine. At first glance, the movie seems like just another silliness, but it has certain elements that many have ended up experiencing in the pandemic. People who cannot leave the house, mandatory use of masks, young people going to a party regardless of the risks. The crazy thing is that Viral ends up being another movie that predicted what would happen in 2020. You could say that Blumhouse hit the nail on the head with this movie, as that combination of drama and suspense makes the movie a bit more realistic. Even the filmmakers decided to be subtle in making this film because Blumhouse often works on a moderate budget and doesn't bother to show how the rest of the world is falling, that's just left to the viewer's interpretation. The concept of the parasite is good and it sure had a lot more things that could have been implemented if it weren't for the moderate budget. Viral is in conclusion a simple, but accomplished science fiction and suspense drama. My final rating for this movie is 8/10.
-
scythertitus18 August 2016This is definitely not a blood and guts zombie rampage, although there is the occasional gross scene or fight. Instead it is a character piece about the relationship between two sisters, and it is done pretty well.
The characters are likable and believable in their relationship, it just so happens that the family issues they have are being resolved during some sort of viral outbreak that has many of the same characteristics of a zombie apocalypse. There is some good world building on that end too, with differing creature rules from your average zombie horror, but most of this is put to the side for the actual family dynamic, so there is still stuff to be explored.
This is a small scale story in a bigger world, but still has enough quality to be an entertaining and heartfelt piece. The only real problem is the predictable and somewhat generic ending, especially considering how thoughtful and interesting the rest of the film is, maybe they ran out of steam. Still worth a watch though, just don't expect a raging kill-fest. -
manuelasaez31 July 2016I 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.
-
Leofwine_draca6 July 2020VIRAL is another disappointing low budget B-movie horror flick, this time dealing with a small town plague outbreak that turns carriers into raving zombies. It's notable for being directed by Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman, the guys who made their name making documentary CATFISH, but it's their worst work yet, a mindless and entirely predictable stab at the teen horror genre. The viewer wades through half an hour of cliche and trite characterisation before the horror hits, but it's merely physical grue rather than anything deeper or, indeed, more affecting. It ends up being exactly the same film as you've seen a million times before.
-
kosmasp14 August 2021It 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?) -
mendzel28 July 2016I will pretty much watch Any major studio horror release but this film left a lot to be desired.
"Extinction"(2015) had a semi- original plot with great acting. "Afflicted"(2013) had a smaller budget with a great story.
This film was lacking all those qualities and seemed utterly predictable and boring. Viral, zombie-like parasitic outbreak in a small town, area quarantined as the zombie/virus/parasite people rum rampant. "30 Days of Night" did this MUCH better and "Contacted" (2013) had a much more likable cast.
I also saw Multiple stolen elements, mainly from the TV show "The Strain" as well as an "I Am Legend" scene (spoiler: towards the end when they're huddled in The dark room)
The ending was BRUTAL too.
All-in-all it's watchable but not very enjoyable. I wouldn't spend money to see this. -
chris607 August 2022Had 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. -
renewesthuizen18 September 2016I wanted to give this one star, but I actually have nothing against the special effects, so I added another star.
Yes, so the effects were believable, the rest of this movie - not so much. I think this might be the slowest paced horror movie I have ever seen. What a drag to watch. And I honestly think this had so much potential.
The acting wasn't all that bad, but most of the time I didn't believe the characters. You don't get to form any connection with this story.
I went in not knowing what to expect. I haven't even seen the trailer. I checked out the trailer afterwards and man, I was grateful I didn't go watch this on account of the trailer. Because the trailer is rather good and I think I would have felt even more cheated by this film, if I went in with any expectations. Wish the whole movie followed the pace of the trailer.
There was one thing that really stood out though (and unfortunately it's not a good thing), but it's like the director or cinematographer had a love affair with the slow pan. A pan is not a bad thing, but it gets in the way if that's the only thing you notice instead of it subtly adding to context or story.
This movie really gave me the sense of lazy film making. There is absolutely no suspense build up and there was maybe one "edge of your seat" moment. It had quite a few scares, but once again, lazy and unfortunately poorly executed, scares. I mostly flipped out of my seat because of sudden big crashes and overbearing noises to add scares. But I really feel cheated by these techniques. Scream is a good movie to teach you all about creating some good scary moments. And I am Legend, knows how to build up some good tension. Viral, however, lacks the "scary" and lacks the "tension". -
mastermaker-2788611 October 2016Unlike pretty much every zombie movie ever this movie actually explores the one way that zombie like behavior could genuinely happen, through a virus or parasite affecting basic behavior(rabies for instance cause the infected to become hygrophobic and afraid of water).
So far this is the best Zombie movie I have seen, not from an action or survivalist perspective but as far as story, concept and execution is concerned it is heads and tails above anything else I have seen to date.
If you are fed up with zombie movies being more splatter and low brow than actually story line you will probably find this movie to be an intelligent breath of fresh air brought to the genre. -
Tweetienator15 September 2019Viral is messed up by your typical unlogical and stupid behavior of the main characters, even for teenagers they just behave, well, stupid (one could maybe rightfully argue that's a basic human right in that hormon-driven age). Or the other weak spot - the story. One example for the dumbness of the movie/story: the other sister tries to cure the disease of her sister with the help of a book and some stuff from the kitchen and/or father's garage!? Unbelievable bad and stupid this idea is to put it into the script and into motion - but of course it fills screen time if you got no real idea what to tell. Anyway, still watchable if you like the genre(a lot), but the Scandinavian movie Sorgenfri from 2015 (What We Become) is imo the better choice to watch, and Viral more or less a copy-cat or remake of that one.
-
dbcseriesvlogs15 August 2018The movie has a good plot. To be a low budget movie is good. But the only thing that fails is the end because I think that more than 1 person left thoughtful in what could happen later. I would like there to be a sequel. But this time more effort and above all make clear many explanations. as who was the mother of emma !? What happened to emma's father !? Who was your uncle !? Did they have problems going to Washington State !? What happened to emma and evan !? Many things were like that. I want a sequel, and I hope it's done soon. Good movie.
-
Viral is a not too bad little virus/zombie flick. Its pitched squarely at the late teen, early twenty something demographic but its accessible to older movie goers too.
Its a predictable, well worn formula for the most part. Virus leads to end of the world style zombie outbreak. There's something of an emotional component and focus to this film, that somewhat "softens" it and makes it more thought provoking than your standard zombie fare. What happens to families and people in general, when a disaster occurs, how does it shape our behaviour and influence our loyalties?
Its a nice touch that lifts this film above a lot of similar films in the survivalist/zombie horror genre. Its reasonably well acted too, which is also a plus.
All in all, a well scripted, directed and acted film that's an enjoyable, if at times sad watch. Seven out of ten from me. -
kalawaysimo28 July 2016This will probably be one of the worst movies of 2016. I watched it yesterday and it was a waste of time. The story is so unoriginal, it's like a second rate trying hard (if they even tried hard enough) copycat of the strain. Though i must say that it succeeded at copying the crapiness of another worst film contender of the year.. CELL( samuel l. Jackson).
That script is so crappy only a dumb person would say that in real life. The acting is really bad, especially from the main leads, the cute guy, the cute girl and aneleigh tipton's boyfriend. The two main characters are eye candies but they can't really act. Oh, and there's even a cringe worthy love story going on in this movie too. It's like twilight but instead of vampires it's a vampire,zombie,WORM hybrid.
Sorry for my crappy English.. but this movie is crappier (if that's a word).
If you're planning on watching this, don't. It will just eat your brains out and will get insane JUST LIKE IN THE MOVIE. Just watch the happening instead. It's a bad movie, but compared to this, its a masterpiece.
P.s. it's not even a virus.. It's a parasitic worm.. Whoever gave title to this movie should've checked the definition of viral first. My gee. -
No, seriously, don't waste your time. Very stupid teenagers doing stupid things and stupid decisions. It's so stupid that it gets on your nerves. Its a waste of time...
-
subxerogravity31 July 2016So there's a virus that has been spreading throughout the world and it finally comes to America via a small town in California.
It was a good movie, it could have been better as it was slowed paced and stretched out. Feels like they were trying to get 90mins for something that could have been done under and hour.
Viral spends a lot of time trying to make us believe that something like this could happen, by keeping the whole thing very subtle. I did like their efforts when it came to parts when America was watching as China went through it. Then they altered what sounded like an actual Obama speech to make it feel real.
Analeigh Tipton was a personal favorite for me in the film. I think she's cute so it's my own personal star power that gets me into the seat.
And now that rapper Machine Gun Kelly is doing movies playing mostly himself or guys similar to him. His "character" is that tall skinny tattooed white boy that all the suburban girls go for in order to make dads angry, but I liked him in the movie. The role he played in the film Nerve was a lot better for him. This is more proving that he can act (sort of)
Showing the monster in this movie turned out to be pretty corny. They have these scenes in which the main characters are poking around an infected's neck trying to figure out a way to remove the parasite, which gives you the Hebe geebees, cause it does look like something nasty you could find on your own body, and when we see the thing, it's not that it was not impressive and horrifying...at first, but it gets corny.
Overall, the movie was a quiet run around, that is interesting while your watching it, but leaves you with nothing afterwards.
http://cinemagardens.com