This is the second film where....



Also, I can see where many would think Paltrow is a self entitled bitch in real life, but I heard she's actually quite nice in person. I have a friend in L.A. who does accounting in the TV and film industry. And she's had two run ins with Gwyneth and said was very sweet and quite friendly. Jon Favreau said the same thing on Howard Stern.

More like she

Yeah, I know. It was a joke. One was completely. The other, partially. I loved watching my audience squirm during this scene. Most turned away from the screen. It was quite graphic. Reminded me of "Nurse Betty".

Speaking of which:

^ Somewhere, Sue Sylvester was laughing maniacally that scene.

I think that is something that the mortician does (with an epoxy) rather than a doctor.

Anyway, just saw it tonight. It certainly does fail to achieve greatness but for a number of small reasons. I would say that it would have been better with a slightly longer run time, with more material added to both the transition between epidemic and pandemic and in the period where social order was breaking down. It ended up feeling quite rushed at the end in some ways.

It certainly is a fascinating film and the ending was quite good.

As a humorous aside, as soon as the credits started rolling, a spunky young Asian woman got up quickly and walked down the middle aisle of the theater coughing loudly. It got a lot of laughs and I was pissed for not thinking of it first.

I kept coughing on my sister during the film. We saw this the night I came back from Hong Kong.

I would also argue that Fishburne was a bit miscast in this. His performance was not substantially detrimental to the film but he was hardly the best choice.

Was that Soderbergh's voice on the phone in the opening scene?

I wanted to like "Contagion" more, as it features Steven Soderbergh at the directorial helm, and an Oscar-studded cast of winners and nominees. Overall, I think the script was too briskly paced, without as much background details to ground the story of a viral outbreak that threatens to reach pandemic levels. There are many players in the story, and the film just bounces from subplot to subplot (or character groupings) until it finally concludes. I didn't like the musical score, it tended to make the film feel too euro-pop-ish, public access station-ish at times, which didn't help things.

If you're a germophobe, this film won't help you with that condition. It'll make you think twice about touching any object out in contact with the general public.

I give it 2.75 stars, or a grade of B-.

This NYT article mentions that an hour of edited material was cut from the film:

that in HD on the BD would be nice.

Is that what you two are calling it now:

last scene was just the cherry on top for this very engaging movie

really enjoyed it but not something i'll prolly ever watch again

Pretty good and gripping, but it would've felt more at home as a TV movie or miniseries. Soderberg has pretty much turned into a videographer, stylistically. No IMAX screen can keep this from feeling like simply adequately-directed television. I'm sure the Red Epic could be used to capture cinematic images, but in the wrong hands the picture just looks insanely grain-free and crystal clear, and every shot like a little jewel box of glass reflections and lens-flares. No depth, no texture, no artistry to the cinematography. Just not appealing on the big screen.

Caught a showing today. The first opening minutes certainly pull you into the film right away and I liked the pacing. The ending was also very good. The cast was impressive and I liked how the film was edited. Even at only 100 minutes, there are a lot of things to process, particularly since it kinda jumps around so much. But that seems to have been on purpose as that is what this virus does. Definitely much better and smarter than "Outbreak". I thought Jennifer Ehle was one of the best performances, which is saying something considering all the star power in the film.

I thought there some loose ends, or things I didn't quite understand...

Contagion

6.5/10

- Gloried cameos from most of the billed actors
-
- Only person I cared about was Winslet's character
-
- Ending was one of the biggest "Really?" moments so far in 2011
- Production value is good, though
- Law, Damon & Fishbourne were good with what little the script gave them (actually Law's role was more meatier than the two aforementioned actors)
- Too many storylines - Soderbergh's thought process:
"Hey, there's a lot of characters in this script. Hmm ... "
"Aha! Let's get the most recognizable names to star in it and cram them into it!"
"Genius!"

Bottom line: Anticipation wasn't worth it. Overall a let down.

I only moderately enjoyed this. I was expecting a way bigger scale than was presented. Wasn't the casualty count in the 20 millions or higher? You wouldn't know it from anything they showed.

Yes, the scale of the film felt more in tune with "thousands of people died".

I didn't get that feeling at all. Much like 28 Days Later we only see the devastation as the characters see it. AKA localized to their environments. But even then, you saw the complete collapse of social order (no cops on the street, garbage littering the neighborhoods, gangs running amok, etc.), which to me -- along with them showing the infection in different areas of the world -- inferred the virus was spreading on a massive scale.

this film felt MORE real because we didn't see something like Los Angeles residents freaking out and rioting. Some films use scope to poor effect

Exactly.

Probably not enough money left in the film's budget from all the high-profile actors' salaries to afford sweeping sets with thousands of extras.