20s Movie Review - Avatar: Fire and Ash

Director: James Cameron
Genre: Action/ Adventure/ Fantasy/ Science Fiction
Runtime: 197 minutes
Year: 2025
Starring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldaña, Sigourney Weaver, Stephen Lang, Oona Chaplin, Kate Winslet, Cliff Curtis,  CCH Pounder, Edie Falco, Giovanni Ribisi, Joel David Moore, Jermaine Clement, David Thewlis

Description: Jake (Sam Worthington) and Neytiri’s (Zoe Saldaña) family grapples with grief, encountering a new, aggressive Na’vi tribe, the Ash people, who are led by the fiery Varang (Oona Chaplin), as the conflict of Pandora escalates and a new moral focus emerges.

Review: “Avatar: Fire and Ash” is the third installment in the “Avatar” franchise. Director James Camerom proves that Pandora is far from revealing all its secret. Whereas its predecessor immersed us in  the serene beauty of the oceans, this third film confronts us with the raw, destructive, and paradoxically beautiful power of fire.

It almost goes without saying, but the CGI is once again groundbreaking. The introduction of the Ash People – a Na’vi clan that lives in volcanic areas – provides a completely new color palette. The contrast between the glowing lava and the ash-gray skin of this new tribe is visually stunning. The action scenes, especially the confrontations in the ash clouds, are so fluid and detailed that you forget you are watching an animation.

We see that not all Na’vi are “good”. The Ash People, led by Varang, bring a much-needed nuance to the story. Their anger and thirst for revenge mirror humanity, blurring the line between hero and villain. This gives the film an emotional depth and a sense of menace that we haven’t felt to this extent before.

The core of the film remains the family. The dynamic between Jake, Neytiri and their children has matured. The consequences of their earlier losses weigh heavily, and the film takes time for mourning and internal conflicts. Zoe Saldaña’s acting is heartbreaking; her anger is almost palpable.

“Avatar: Fire and Ash” is more than a technological masterpiece; it’s an epic drama that dares to play with darkness and moral ambiguity. With a running time of over three hours, not a minute feels wasted. The middle section is a bit predictable, but the explosive finale more than makes up for it. I believe there is still two more movies in the making, and I’m in up for it.

Rating: 4/ 5

00s Movie Review - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Director: Michel Gondry
Genre: Drama/ Romance/ Science Fiction
Runtime: 108 minutes
Year: 2004
Starring: Jim Carrey, Kate Winslet, Tom Wilkinson, Kirsten Dunst, Mark Ruffalo, Elijah Wood, Jane Adams, David Cross

Description: When their relationship turns sour, a couple undergoes a medical procedure to have each other erased from their memories forever.

Review: What I would call this genre? Science Fiction/ Romance maybe? “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” explores the value of painful memories. Joel and Clementine are in a relationship, but when things turn bad they decide to erase each other from their memory. Director Michel Gondry and screenwriter Charlie Kaufman created a visually striking, dreamlike film.

Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet should not be matching, but they do. Perfectly so. Carrey shows a surprising subdued side of himself, while Winslet brings color and energy to the film. It’s a unique, sometimes chaotic film about the complexity of love and the resilience of the human spirit. It prompts reflection on whether erasing painful memories is desirable.

I think we can say the “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” can be considered a modern classic. I believe everyone who loves cinema should see this film at least once.

Rating: 5/ 5

10s Movie Review - Collateral Beauty

Director: David Frankel
Genre: Drama
Runtime: 97
Year: 2016
Starring: Will Smith, Edward Norton, Kate Winslet, Hellen Mirren, Keira Knightley, Naomi Harris, Michael Peña, Jacob Latimore, Ann Dowd

I WATCHED THIS MOVIE FOR MY 2025 MOVIE CHALLENGE.
WEEK 9: A FILM WITH EDWARD NORTON
 
Description: Retreating from life after a tragedy, a man questions the universe by writing to Love, Time and Death. Receiving unexpected answers, he begins to see how these things interlock and how even loss can reveal moments of meaning and beauty.

Review: For advertising man Howard, there are three main abstractions in life that he not only proclaims as a pep talk to his co-workers, but reveals themselves to himself after a tragic loss. He writes letters to each of them: love, time and death. And he gets answers.

It’s orchestrated by his best friends and co-workers, who can no longer watch how Howard is drowning in his grief. They hire three actors, to portray love, time and death. And talk to Howard about the letters he has written.

It’s a thoughtful act, but it feels like more of a way to save their company then to actually help their friend. There is so much misery to digest that cramming it into barely an hour and a half is impossible. Many scenes feel rushed and unfinished. And there is also this plot twist, that I kinda saw coming.

“Collateral Beauty” has an interesting premise and the film is filled with amazing, talented actors. Unfortunately, the film feels rushed and many characters are given background stories, but are left underdeveloped. Some of the actors are underused and didn’t really have much do to with their characters. Director David Frankel did so little with everything that he had and turned it into an over-sentimental forgettable drama.

Rating: 2,5/ 5

Movie Review - Avatar: the Way of Water

Director: James Cameron
Genre: Action/ Adventure
Runtime: 192 minutes
Year: 2022
Starring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Stephen Lang, Sigourney Weaver, Kate Winslet, Cliff Curtis, CCH Pounder, Joel David Moore, Edie Falco,
 
Description: Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) lives with his newfound family formed on the extrasolar moon Pandora. Once a familiar threat returns to finish what was previously started, Jake must work with Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) and the army of Na’vi race to protect their home.

Review: It has been thirteen years since James Cameron revolutionized motion capture animation. “Avatar” was a prestigious project in every conceivable way. Such revolutions are becoming increasingly scarce as technical possibilities grow. But “Avatar” still works and is even one of my favorites movies of all time. And the wait for “Avatar: the Way of Water” is finally over, and boy did it pay off.

Jake Sully is now a real Na’vi, though the five fingers on each hand betray his human origins. He and Neytiri have started a family and are now the parents of four children. Meanwhile, villainous Quaritch has been resurrected as a Na’vi and is ready to take down Jake. This means that Jake needs to protect his family and move away from their beloved home.

“Avatar: the Way of Water” is over 3 hours long, but it’s not a punishment. The focus is not on Jake and Neytiri, it’s on their children, mainly the two sons and their eldest daughter. Because we already got to know Jake and Neytiri well in the first film, it’s a fresh take to focus on different character now. And you get to know them pretty well.

Like the first film, there is also a lot of focus on the emotional layers. This time mostly the family connection. And it can hit hard. Environmental issues are also dealt with, which made an impact on me before and again in the second installment.

“Avatar: the Way of Water” is definitely worth the wait, it is a beautifully looking film with a good message and strong family dynamics. It doesn’t reach the level of “Avatar”, but is very close.

Rating: 4/ 5

TV Show Review - Mare of Easttown (Mini Series)

Season: Mini series
Genre: Thriller/ Crime/ Drama
Number of episodes: 7
Year: 2021
Starring: Kate Winslet, Julianne Nicholson, Evan Peters, Jean Smart, Angourie Rice, John Douglas Thompson, Joe Tippett, Guy Pierce, David Denman

Description: A detective (Kate Winslet) in a small Pennsylvania town investigates a local murder while trying to keep her life from falling apart.

Review: We have known for some time that HBO creates quality series and “Mare of Easttown” is another absolute hit.
Seven hours of about an hour long you can watch this fantastic series that never gets boring. This detective series seems to have taken inspiration from British and Scandinavian genre series, because it has that same feel and quality. “Mare of Easttown” is one of the better shows I have seen this year.
Mare Sheehan is a small-town detective who is torn apart by the death of her son and the fact that she has been searching for a missing girl for a year. Her family seems completely broken, but they are not dysfunctional. On the surface they seem hopelessly divided and don’t really like each other either. But when you dis a little deeper, you see much more love and togetherness.
Mare lives with daughter Siobhan, her grandson Drew and her mother Helen in the same house. The film doesn’t have any wild car chases or action sequences, there are no picture perfect characters. We meet real people with flaws and imperfection. “Mare of Easttown” seems to be taken from life and captivates from beginning to end.
HBO has managed to created another amazing series. Kate Winslet, who plays the titular Mare, does an excellent job. There is little to be said for her acting. She carries the show and truly convinces you in everything she does. Winslet is surrounded by an equally amazing cast: Jean Smart as her mother Helen, Evan Peters as her partner Colin Zabel, Angourie Rice as daughter Siobhan and Julianne Nicholson as Mare’s best friend Lori.  
The plot of “Mare of Easttown” is not that special, but the way it is played out, including the wonderful and surprising conclusion, makes this series a little gem. And it doesn’t need another season, because Mare’s story has been told and the mysteries have been unfolded. I can truly recommend “Mare of Easttown” for anyone that likes a raw, realistic detective drama with lots of surprising plot twists.

00s Movie Review - The Life of David Gale

Director: Alan Parker
Genre: Drama/ Crime/ Thriller
Runtime: 130 minutes
Year: 2003
Starring: Kevin Spacey, Kate Winslet, Laura Linney, Gabriel Mann, Matt Craven, Rhona Mitra, Jim Beaver, Melissa McCarthy

Description: A man (Kevin Spacey) against capital punishment is accused of murdering a fellow activist and is sent to death row.

Review: David Gale is an ardent opponent of the death penalty. From his position as a renowned professor, he reaches quite a few people with his message. To this end, he is also a member of the non-profit organization Death Watch. One day, however, circumstances throw a spanner in the works. Gale is accused of raping and murdering his fellow activist Constance Harraway and ends up on death row himself. Three days before his execution, Gale agrees to an exclusive interview with reporter Elizabeth “Bitsey” Bloom. Bitsey soon learns that there is more to the assignment than she had imagined and that this man’s life is in her hands. Risking her life, she makes frantic efforts to piece together the shocking events surrounding the murder before it’s too late.
The death penalty has been a hot topic of political and social debate for decades, particularly in the United States. This is one of the few countries where the death penalty is still actively practiced. “The Life of David Gale” unmistakably has a political message and its position is against. However, this is not thrown in your face. The film is not a political pamphlet. The message is cleverly integrated into the overall narrative.
Kevin Spacey plays the titular David Gale and was third choice after George Clooney and Nicolas Cage. In retrospect, this is a stroke of luck, as Spacey is convincing and intense as ever. He puts down a layered character, keeping you in the dark for a very long time about his morals, motives and what exactly happened. Kate Winslet must meet a high bar to reach this level, but this experienced actress certainly holds her own. She is a bit more one-dimensional and less colorful than Spacey, but Spacey character simply gets more room to explore. After all, in the end, everything revolves around David Gale and the other characters are the extras needed to shape the whole thing. For a thriller, it is important that it is exciting. “The Life of David Gale” surely succeeds at that. The journey is just as important as the destination, but that twist is really good. As a thriller, the film doesn’t really excel cinematically. But because of the strong cast and overall story, the film is one to remember.

Rating: 3/ 5

00s Movie Review - The Reader

Director: Stephen Daldry
Genre: Drama/ Romance
Runtime: 124 minutes
Year: 2008
Starring: Kate Winslet, Ralph Fiennes, David Kross, Susanne Lothar, Alissa Wilms, Florian Bartholomäi, Friederike Becht, Matthias Habich

Description: Post-WWII Germany: Nearly a decade after his affair with an older woman came to a mysterious end, law student Michael Berg (David Kross) re-encounters his former lover (Kate Winslet) as she defends herself in a war-crime trial.

Review: It is 1958. The fifteen-year-old student Michael Berg meets a mysterious middle-aged woman who works as a conductor for the city streetcar. There is something behind this Hanna Schmitz’s grump looks: although she refuses to talk about herself, she likes to listen to Goethe and Doris Lessing. Michael presents the passages to her. Perversity is lurking, but a bizarre form of love emerges from Hanna’s sexual advances. But then suddenly she’s gone. Eight years later, Michael, now a law student, suddenly hears that Hanna is on trial because of her past as a camp executioner for the Nazis.
Although it remains uncomfortable to see the darkest page of the Second World War reduced to emotional films about lost memories and stranded loves, a moral breakthrough sounds from the revival of the Holocaust film in the 2000s. Earlies in 2008, there was “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas”, after the acclaimed children’s novel with the same title, mainly taught a young generation what the horrors of the Holocaust were. In “The Reader”, the adaptation of Bernard Schlink’s bestseller, Stephen Daldry focuses on a more mature audience with a theme that has remained untouched in Hollywood until 2008: the collective guilt of Germans and a second generation struggling with their parents’ crime.  
The topical but also somewhat transparent themes that Schlink cited in his novel led to a renewed riot about the issue of German guilt. The film, on the other hand, does nothing more than just briefly touching the subject. Heavily set court scenes. What would you have done? It doesn’t really focus on it and ultimately the story has nothing to do with the moral core of Hanna Schmitz’s crimes.
In “The Reader”, the question of crime, punishment and penance also fades because the chosen plot lines mainly want to show insight into the aftermath of a scheming love. Kate Winslet won an Academy Award for her role, when there were better contenders that year. And this is definitely not one of her best performances. The film wants you to sympathize with Hanna’s character. But you simply never do.
To me it remains annoying that Hollywood thinks it can best capture the most horrible and reprehensible crimes with sentiment and beauty.

Rating: 2,5/ 5

10s Movie Review - Insurgent

Director: Robert Schwentke
Genre: Adventure/ Science Fiction
Runtime: 119 minutes
Year: 2015
Starring: Shailene Woodley, Theo James, Miles Teller, Jai Courtney, Naomi Watts, Ansel Elgort, Kate Winslet, Maggie Q, Zoë Kravitz, Ray Stevenson, Octavia Spencer, Suki Waterhouse, Daniel Dae Kim, Mekhi Phifer

Description: Beatrice Prior (Shailene Woodley) must confront her inner demons and continue her fight against a powerful alliance which threatens to tear her society apart with the help from others on her side.

Review: The fact that many have had enough of the seemingly endless stream of Hollywood movie sof successful YA books is not incomprehensible. However, the current young adult hype has a pleasant downside: the similarities of the many productions force comparisons to be made. For example: “The Divergent” series is very easy to compare to the series of “The Hunger Games”. Both series have a lot in common in terms of story and design, but where “The Hunger Games” addresses some relevant contemporary issues, “Divergent” has no much to offer than what can be seen on the surface. The latter inadvertently contributes to the foundation of the throne on which “The Hunger Games” currently sit.
However, when the first film released in 2014 was it turned out to actually be pretty good and quite enjoyable. After all, “Divergent” was a lot better to digest than “The Host” or “Mortal Instruments” and also a lot more lucrative, even if it was not a resounding success. Enough basis to film the remaining books of Veronica Roth’s trilogy. Because there’s no time to waste, the film’s first follow-up is released just one year after the first.
At the start of “Insurgent”, Tris, her boyfriend Four, her brother Caleb and former opponent Peter appear to have been blamed by the responsible oppressors for the massacre that ended the first film. This leaves them nothing but fugitives through post-apocalyptic Chicago, constantly searching for new hiding places. That brings them to some factions that haven’t been seen before, as well as to the Factionless, which turns out to be not nearly as helpless as previously suggested.
Although this second part still doesn’t reach the level of any of “The Hunger Games” movies, “Insurgent” is on many points a good quality film. Now that all the explanations are behind us, the story movies into a higher gear, resulting in a pleasantly smooth movie that hardly repeats itself in the first part. There is plenty of visual spectacle, but fortunately the characters all get a little more to do this time as well. Not every development works equally well, but thanks to some fine surprises, replacement director Robert Schwentke holds the viewer’s attention well. Perhaps the most pleasant element of “Insurgent” is that it’s not just another typical interlude that only serves to set things up for the grand finale. This part is mainly about the aftermath of the previous film and the makers don’t seem to want to occupy themselves too much with future films. This means, among other things, that some plot lines are already neatly ended and some characters disappear from the stage for good as a result.
I think “Insurgent” did a pretty good job in continuing in this series.

Rating: 3/ 5

10s Movie Review - The Mountain Between Us

Director: Hany Abu-Assad
Genre: Drama/ Adventure/ Thriller/ Romance
Runtime: 103 minutes
Year: 2017
Starring: Idris Elba, Kate Winslet, Beau Bridges, Dermot Mulroney, Linda Sorensen

Description: Stranded after a tragic plane crash, two strangers (Kate Winslet, Idris Elba) must forge a connection to survive the extreme elements of a remote snow-covered mountain. When they realize help is not coming, they embark on a perilous journey across the wilderness.

Review: Neurosurgeon Ben is on his way to perform a very complex surgery on a young patient. Photographer Alex is about to get married. Both are stranded on an airport, when their flights are cancelled due to the weather.
Alex manages to rent a private plane and overhears Ben, who is in a similar situation having to be at his location the next day. They board the plane together, but their pilot suffers from a stroke and they crash. They end up in a snowy landscape, with no people or towns nearby. Ben and Alex don’t know each other, but are forced to survive together.
The pilot didn’t survive, but his dog did, so Alex and Ben have a companion. With minimal supplies and a couple of chocolade bars they two have to decide if they wait for help or look for help by foot.
Director Hany Aby-Asad used the book “The Mountain Between Us” by Charles Martin, as its inspiration. It’s an ambitious project, while the screentime is filled with only two characters and a dog. And he got lucky with Kate Winslet and Idris Elba as his stars. “The Mountain Between Us” is beautifully shot. And the first half of the film I really liked. Ben is the stronger of the two, so he has to make sure Alex makes it through. But as soon as the two are on an equal playing feel, so to say, you realize hos old fashioned this story actually is. Alex becomes this ‘damsel in distress’, when she is in fact a very strong woman on her own. And Ben is ‘the knight in shining armor’, who will make sure that he will get her of that mountain.
And what bothered me the most: this is supposed to be a survival movie, right?. I really loved this part. Why does there have to be a love story? From being a good and solid survival tale, it turns into a mediocre romantic drama. With a very cheesy ending I might say.
I was so disappointed in this film. Not because of Elba and Winslet, they are great. But the direction the story takes is just so lame.

Rating: 2/ 5

100 Movie Challene 2016 - 78: Triple 9

Director: John Hillcoat
Genre: Action/ Drama/ Crime
Runtime: 115 minutes
Year: 2016
Starring: Casey Affleck, Woody Harrelson, Kate Winslet, Aaron Paul, Anthony Mackie, Norman Reedus, Gal Gadot, Teresa Palmet, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Clifton Collins Jr.

Description: A gang of criminals and corrupt cops plan the murder of a police officer in order to pull off their biggest heist yet across town.

Review: Just like in other big American cities, the police in Atlanta works with codes. The 999 code means that a cop has been shot. A group of bankrobbers is about to cause a triple 9.
Michael Atwood has to return a favour to some Russian mobsters. In his group there are the two Welch brothers and two corrupt cops. Irina Vlaslov, leader of that Russian mob, calls the shot. On the other side of town detective Jeffrey Allen is dealing with this gang and tries to get his cousin Chris to get ready for it.
“Triple 9” doesn’t have many surprises. Not in the plot, motives or backgrounds. And there are too many characters to actually make them interesting or deep enough. The atmosphere is perfect, but the screenplay is the problem. The movie doesn’t interest you from beginning till end.

Rating: 3/ 5

Oscar Prediction 2016

I'm going to give it a shot again. The nominees for the 88th annual Academy Awards were announced and I've been predicting the winners for a couple of years now. So this year is no different. Some really great nominees this year, but as usual I don't agree with every all the winners. So, here are my prediction on who will win and who I think should win the awards.

Best Motion Picture of the Year

Should Win: "Mad Max: Fury Road"

Would Win: "Spotlight"

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role

Should Win: Leonardo DiCaprio for "The Revenant"

Would Win: Leonardo DiCaprio for "The Revenant"

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role

Should Win: Brie Larson for "Room"

Would Win: Brie Larson for "Room"

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role

Should Win: Sylvester Stallone for “Creed”

Would Win: Mark Rylance for “Bridge of Spies”

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role

Should Win: Rachel McAdams for “Spotlight”

Would Win: Kate Winslet for “Steve Jobs”

Best Achievement in Directing

Should Win: Alejandro González Iñárritu for “The Revenant”

Would Win: Alejandro González Iñárritu for “The Revenant”

100 Movie Challenge 2015 - # 44: Divergent

Director: Neil Burger

Genre: Action/ Adventure/ Science Fiction

Runtime: 140 minutes

Year: 2014

Starring: Shailene Woodley, Theo James, Miles Teller, Kate Winslet, Ansel Elgort, Zoë Kravitz, Ray Stevenson, Maggie Q, Ashley Judd, Tony Goldwyn, Mekhi Phifer

Description: In a world divided by factions based on virtues, Tris (Shailene Woodley) learns she's Divergent and won't fit in. When she discovers a plot to destroy Divergents, Tris and the mysterious Four (Theo James) must find out what makes Divergents dangerous before it's too late.

Review: The young adult film has, in a short period of time, settled down in Hollywood. Movies like the “Harry Potter” series and “The Hunger Games” series started this all. The movies, mostly adaptations from books, focus on young adults. Friendship, love and the battle between good and evil are central themes in these stories. “Divergent”, based on a book by Veronica Roth, isn’t an exception.

In a futuristic Chicago, five factions fight for power over the city. The factions are divided based on virtues: abnegation, candor, amity, dauntless and erudite. The choice for your faction is made when you’re sixteen. Tris is at that point in her life. Is she going to stay in the faction she grew up in or will she choose another faction? During her test something unusual happens. It appears she doesn’t fit in any of the faction. She is divergent.

Not a lot happens in “Divergent”. A thin plot between political power between the different factions and the place the divergents take in that society. Friendships are made and enemies are formed. Tris has to undergo a tough training and the underdog becomes the hero. And there is also a love story. Not a lot of originality, but time does fly. This is a good sign, because the movie is very entertaining.

That the book is often better than the movie, is also the case here. I feel that some important scenes are cut down. For instance the test. It’s a very important part of the story, but it goes so fast in the film. For people who haven’t read the book, it could have gone too fast.

Shailene Woodley does a good job and is a good leading lady. “Divergent” is a movie that you can’t help to compare to “The Hunger Games”. It’s not as good, but still very entertaining and I did enjoy it.

Rating: 3/ 5

100 Movie Challenge 2015 - # 18: Movie 43

Director: Elizabeth Banks, Bett Ratner, Bob Odenkirk, Steven Brill, Steve Carr, Rusty Cundieff, James Duffy, Griffin, Dunne, Peter Farrelly, Patrick Forsberg, Will Graham, James Gunn, Jonathan van Tulleken

Genre: Comedy

Runtime: 94 minutes

Year: 2013

Starring: Kate Winslet, Hugh Jackman, Anna Faris, Chris Pratt, Richard Gere, Kate Bosworth, Halle Berry, Stephen Merchant, Live Schreiber, Naomi Watts, Terrence Howard, Elizabeth Banks, Josh Duhamel, Kieran Culkin, Emma Stone, Chloë Grace Moretz, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Uma Thurman, Jason Sudeikis, Kristen Bell, Justin Long, Leslie Bibb, Gerard Butler, Johnny Knoxville, Seann William Scott, Jeremy Allen White, J.B. Smoove, Jack McBrayer, Aasif Mandvi, Bobby Cannavale, Patrick Warburton, Jimmy Bennett, Matt Walsh, Adam Cagley, Devin Eash

Description: A series of interconnected short films.

Review: That a cast filled with Hollywood’s finest actors isn’t a guarantee for a good movie, is made painfully clear by “Movie 43”. In the US the movie got criticized and smashed by the audience and after seeing it myself I know why. It’s a comedy that simply isn’t funny, that barely has a script and has the goal to show the audience raunchy and ridiculous sketches. For instance, Kate Winslet going on a blind date with Hugh Jackman who has testicles under his chin, Halle Berry making guacamole with her boob and Elizabeth Banks who gets peed on by an animated cat. One sketch is even worse than the other.

Why all those actors and actresses (some with Academy Award wins and nominations) wanted to be in this movie, is a mystery. The movie is vulgar, obscene, nasty and especially really unfunny. You know how many times I laughed? Not once! The only reason to watch this movie is to see with your own eyes how terrible “Movie 43” is. But please, run away from it as fast as you can!

Rating: 0,5/ 5

100 Movie Challenge 2014 - # 24: Contagion

Director: Steven Soderbergh
Genre: Drama/ Thriller
Runtime: 106 minutes
Year: 2011
Starring: Matt Damon, Jude Law, Kate Winslet, Laurence Fishburne, Gwyneth Paltrow, Marion Cotillard, Bryan Cranston, Elliot Gould, John Hawkes

Description: The CDC races against time to develop a vaccine against an extremely lethal virus.

Review: It’s very clear what this film is about, the title says it all. Between all the big stars, the style of this film stays cold and sober constantly.
The plot is basically about an epidemic of a life-threatening virus, that kills almost everyone who comes in contact with it. It’s an unknown virus and it takes some time to find a vaccine. This results in panic, desperation and a manic search for a cure.
“Contagion” has several characters and follows some subplots. There is too much going on to give the characters any depth. Soderbergh wasn’t aiming for that. What he did well is showing us how people would react in a situation like this. The most interesting part of the story is where the leader of the CDC, doctor Cheever, and blogger Alan Krumwiede go head to head.
The movie is set up in fragments, which works. You feel the pressure and the panic. Although it was already explained to the viewer what this virus is, Soderbergh decided to put the cause of this virus in the last minute of the film. It feels like the movie is over-explaining itself, which wasn’t necessary. We aren’t dumb.
“Contagion” was a good film, but pretty average and not very memorable for me.

Rating: 3/ 5