Paul Magne Haakonsen
When I found "Pandemic" I was a bit hesitant to sit down and watch it, because it had Tiffani Thiessen in the lead role, and for some reason she will always be associated with playing Kelly in "Saved by the Bell" and Valerie in "Beverly Hill 90210". But I still decided to give it a go, because the synopsis did sound interesting enough.Sure, the storyline is fairly generic and has been done many times before in other similar movies. The storyline is about a rampant disease that is out of control and threatens mankind. The future of mankind hangs at the balance in the hands of a very select few people determined to save it all."Pandemic" was entertaining actually for what it turned out to be, and despite being such a generic storyline, there were actually some enjoyable moments throughout the course of the movie. And the storyline actually was entertaining, although it has already been seen before in other such disease movies. The movie is not without its flaws, trust you me, but I will let you pinpoint them by yourself.My initial reservations towards Tiffani Thiessen were actually put to shame, because she really performed quite well here in this movie, and proved that she has indeed stepped out of those "Saved by the Bell" and "Beverly Hills 90210" shackles. It was somewhat odd to witness French Stewart in a serious role such as this, and he did feel like a fish out of water. Faye Dunaway and Eric Roberts also made some short appearances in the movie and actually did flavor up the movie with their grace and charms."Pandemic" is nowhere near being a masterpiece, nor is it an innovative or revolutionary movie in the disease genre - if there is such a genre. But it still turned out to be entertaining and enjoyable.If you have about almost 3 hours to spare, got "Pandemic" at hand, and have nothing else to do, then perhaps do sit down to watch it. Who knows, you might actually just find it surprisingly enjoyable as I did.My rating of "Pandemic" is 6 out of 10 stars.
Paul
Having experience in making movies, my son and I really enjoyed this film for its continued suspense, drama, and plot twists, except for the very last scene. The movie strongly led you to believe that there would be reconciliation between the lead male and his estranged wife and son. But for some inexplicable reason, during the very last scene, the lead male character suddenly shows interest in the female lead character where there was no previous romantic connection between them. This last scene completely spoiled an otherwise good movie. I would have rated this movie an 8 out of 10 if it was not for the terrible ending. What were they thinking?!
parhat
Given any good story you need a good topic, premise, plot, focus and character. Given a story of scientific and legal in nature a writer must have good familiarity in these realm. He has none of it. It's a made for t.v. show. Given a good story line, most amateur writing will focus on too many characters, in this case, a wanted criminal, a rifle crazed man, a rogue FBI agent, two politicians competing for power, an all powerful CDC officer who don't really have a power, and the not too serious emergency response team. Characters are cardboard cliché', a plot whose ending found a cure for her daughter who got Riptide? The premise is too unbelievable, the plot lacks focus. This writer should watch more blockbusters. Originally one of the best movie Rwanda Hotel had too many characters, until the writer found out and decided to focus on one man. Most movies are focused on relatively few major actor not exceeding 2-3. Take Something's Gotta Give, Jerry Maguire, Rain Man, Die Hard, for example focused on relatively few characters, mostly 2-3 making up 80% of the movie screen. And those characters are a strong one, take the Dark Knight, the Joker, Batman, Superman, Snow White, etc. Given the basics, there is problem about the lack of understanding protocols and laws. The CDC, just can't walk around everywhere, certain laws have to be considered when an act of quarantine is considered. For one thing, the first law is Title 42 United States Code Section 264 (Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act) gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) responsibility for preventing the introduction, transmission, and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and within the United States and its territories/possessions. The second issue of the President, by Executive Order, which is Under the procedures required under the PHS Act, the list of diseases for which quarantine is authorized must first be specified in an Executive Order of the President, on recommendation of the HHS Secretary. By amending the list to include types of influenza that either cause or have the potential to cause a pandemic. As to the knowledge of Tamifl and ways or eradicating the virus, where are sanitation procedures, in place? The seriousness of quarantine, the authority's control over the situation, the closing of public places, the media frenzy into the area, the military action in closing off the area, instead of CDC giving the "idea" of closing off the region. The sudden shock of death. The movie is like there is fire in the house, and people are walking out of the house while they are sleepwalking. If there's any problem about making movies, it's the crappy writing I see all the time. To prevent this I believe that each scenes or plots are organized into modules where parts can be deleted, and characters are focused only 2-3 character through an entire time line of events, and the methodology of quarantine control, should ignore the obvious solution such as vaccines, someone who is immunized to the disease, and other cliché's so common in virus plagued. And in any T.V. drama, people should start being more serious of the circumstances instead of just waking in their sleep. In any event H3N7 virus and other things are interesting, but sanitation, and organized quarantine procedures the writer has difficult understanding the magnitude of the problem, as in most t.v. shows I have seen. To make a good story, the character must huff and puff until the house is blown down. It doesn't start by just sleep walking around the house either.
saintcecilia
I should start by confessing that I didn't last the distance on this movie - I bailed when we got to the traditional gooey sentimental bits - but I can't resist a good disaster movie. This was not one of them.The start was not promising. Note to producers - if you want to show someone just coming out of the water from surfing, make sure there's something more than a six inch break in the background. There's actually very little surfing in far North Queensland because the Great Barrier Reef stops the swell from coming in. Second note to producers - there is no way you could get from far North Queensland to Sydney by car in 8 hours.After that, things got a little better. A bit of character establishment on the plane (so we care about them later when they keel over) though I do wonder why there only seemed to be one stewardess. The landing, unloading of body and passengers and the setting up of the ERC was all low key and convincing. The hovering media rang true but I cannot believe that the Head of the CDC would be so incompetent at handling them.Then it started to get gooey and silly. Gangsters being broken out with no security to be seen. Nieces having to take taxis and thus getting the virus because career-oriented mothers and aunts can't spare the time to pick her up (and can I say that the niece got to the coughing up blood stage remarkably fast). Touching farewells between FBI colleagues - "Hey, you're going to die (maybe he didn't), it's been nice knowing you."That was when I gave a less than touching farewell to this movie.
