Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueIn 1986, David Whitman came home, contaminated his wife and child, and watched them die. Years later, he leads a hazmat team investigating an industrial accident near Budapest. One contamina... Tout lireIn 1986, David Whitman came home, contaminated his wife and child, and watched them die. Years later, he leads a hazmat team investigating an industrial accident near Budapest. One contaminated man escaped. Terrorist expert Holly Anderson is part of a unit which operates on the p... Tout lireIn 1986, David Whitman came home, contaminated his wife and child, and watched them die. Years later, he leads a hazmat team investigating an industrial accident near Budapest. One contaminated man escaped. Terrorist expert Holly Anderson is part of a unit which operates on the premise that the contaminated man is a terrorist murdering his victims. Whitman, on the oth... Tout lire
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Alma's Boyfriend
- (as Gabor Peter Vincze)
Avis à la une
This may seem like a trivial difference but at least it's a new idea, not just a recycling on any number of other movies, dating back at least to the Satan Bug in 1965 if not earlier. I'll pass up judging the rest of the film as everyone else has, but you've got to wonder about the validity of anyone's attention who apparently didn't pay any attention to the freakin' movie.
Just watch "The Carrier" roughly the same plot, made with a shoestring budget but a hell of a lot more fun than this..
Now the chase is on to catch the contaminated man. In the process we have questions. Was it the first incident and accident? And is this time an accident?
We watch the standard team of good guy hazmat team and bad guy NSA banterer as the contaminated man keeps getting away and causing havoc.
So, what is new about this film? NOTHING So, is there any socially redeeming value? NO Is the ending any message? NO
Some people like to watch the same formula over again to see the nuances of actors or scenes.
There ain't any nuances here.
Still, it could have been worse.
And one real drawback of this movie is that the contaminated man has no pathos. Although the character is scripted to be someone who should be pitied, he is not. Without the pity the movie is pointless. The other characters are so cookie cutter they are ridiculous. The subplots are convoluted and annoying. And the saddest thing is the movie is too flat to even be enjoyed as mock material. Make the movie a 45 minute short and it might be worth watching.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAndrea Osvárt's debut.
- GaffesThe doors of the lab have a radiation symbol above the text "Bio Hazard". A biohazard symbol should have been used instead.
- Citations
Karin Schiffer: As far as I can tell, he's fine.
David R. Whitman: I'd be a lot better if you stopped jamming needles into me.
Meilleurs choix
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Contamination
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 6 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 40min(100 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1