IMDb > Pandemic (2007) (TV) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Pandemic
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Pandemic (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 9 reviews in total 

18 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

Q: How many clichés can you cram into a movie? A: The sky's the limit!

2/10
Author: willshagya from Ireland
21 November 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First of all, I'm not sure if I remember all of the clichés, so please feel free to add to the list.

Before I start listing, let me say that this is one of the worst movies I have seen in quite a while - and I do watch a lot of movies. If the whole idea behind this movie was to just cliché to cliché to cliché until eternity - they certainly made the best movie ever! But, let's just get on with it and do the list (in no particular order): 1. The dips**t gun nut white supremacist who has watched too many Rambo movies.

2. The Australian who cares about nothing else than surfing.

3. The rogue law enforcement officer (in this case FBI) who breaks the law in order to uphold the law.

4. The national guard being completely out of their depth.

5. The law enforcement officer (same as #3) who's estranged from his wife and doesn't have enough time for his son.

6. The (almost Die Hard type) villain who f**ks everything up and in the end gets caught by the guy from #3,5.

7. The relative of one of the people in charge (in this case the niece of one of the CDC heads) who gets infected, but is saved in the end.

8. The political quarries between the big boss and the little big boss (i.e. governor and mayor).

9. The opportunist who just wants to make a fortune, no matter what.

K, that's all I can remember right now, but that's probably due to the fact, that I subconsciously tried to erase this 'thing' (I just can't bring myself to call this a movie) from my memory, even while I was still watching it! Oh, there's one more person who really ticked me off - the obsessive compulsive photographer, who just made me wanting to take the camera off her and use it to beat her into a bloody pulp with it!!! Sorry, I'm not a violent person, but AARRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

By the end of the 3 hours . . .

1/10
Author: cwoliver-1 from California
3 November 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

you'll realize that the characters didn't really die, but the movie did. In fact the movie was DOA. This movie misses the mark in so many ways I can't count them. It was nice, however, to see French Stewart in a semi-serious role.

Overacting abounds with little believability in any character. I just wasn't convinced that this story was real. The story idea wasn't a bad one but the writing was stupid. The doctor saves the day by coming up with a treatment and immediately applies it to her niece. No board/peer review or informed treatment? I guess ethics is no longer a required course in med schools. The technical effects were also wanting - when they put Kayla's niece on "a respirator" it turns out to be a simple continuous-feed oxygen mask. I could go on but I won't waste anymore time with examples - watch and see for yourself.

While I'm willing to suspend disbelief, the movie can't ask that I suspend ALL disbelief forever. And that's what Pandemic does.

1 out of 10

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

About as inventive as the telephone book

2/10
Author: saintcecilia from Australia
5 November 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

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.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Forrest Gump meets Outbreak.

1/10
Author: Darren Clark from Sydney, Australia
10 October 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What can one say, the idea was there, the execution wasn't. This made for television disaster flick lacked intensity. A person with bird flu type symptoms dies on board a plane from Sydney to L.A. The plane, passengers and crew are quarantined, this is all fine. The passengers are moved off the plane to waiting buses, there is little supervision at this point letting a passenger get away. Mistake 1. No government agency would allow such a potentially deadly virus to escape like this. The E.R.C has people with and without bio suits entering and exiting through the same door, Mistake 2. You would enter through one door, change into protective equipment, then enter the quarantine area. you would exit through decontaminating showers and change into new clothes in another area, or you would just spread the infection. The National Guard uses a few wooden barriers to block the road during the quarantine allowing the quarantine to be breached twice. Mistake 3. They would have had armoured vehicles across the road as mobile barricades, every National Guard unit has more than a few. The passenger that escaped walked through the airport, how many people had just got off planes and were catching domestic flights to elsewhere in the U.S? Mistake 4. The virus would have shown up in other cities as containment was breached, just as it did in other cities around the globe. There is a lack of urgency by all those involved, particularly the CDC. How did the head of the CDC, who was taken hostage by the convicted drug smuggler before it was found that Tamiflu was ineffective, know the timing of the drug transport for the drug that was found to be at least partially effective? In such a situation, where was the armed escort? Where is USAMRIID in all this? Would the Federal Government really sit on it's hands and let the locals really stuff this up? Surely there are protocols in place that would have been activated, or are U.S authorities really this stupid? Watch this Movie at your own peril.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Framework only.

Author: Daniel and Svetlana from Kilauea, HI
23 December 2011

This might have been an interesting movie. The storyline of a pandemic spreading like wildfire may be a cliché, but when done well, could have been decent. Unfortunately, I saw this movie and simply had to laugh at things that were not taken care of anywhere near a "real world" scenario. For instance, if you were trying to keep 6 million people in one place, you'd use more than a single wooden 2x4 painted barricade across the road.

An interesting premise, but that's all it is - a premise that went into production as a "movie" without any further thought.

The B-list-at-best cast certainly doesn't help.

I grade it as 3/10 for being bad enough to be laughable, but not make me throw things at the screen.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Well done movie with an ensemble cast

6/10
Author: subxerogravity from United States
21 April 2015

It seem like a low budget version of the Steven Soderbergh picture, Contagion Like the Soderbergh movie, it has an ensemble cast, but not as all-star as Contagion, unless your huge fans of Tiffani Thiessen(I was more into Jesse Spano), French Stewart of Third rock and low budget movie icon, Eric Roberts. Faye Dunaway is also in the made for TV film.

The cast of characters have to deal with a virus coming from Australia that landed in Los Angeles. Pandemic is quite long which make me think that it may have been a miniseries packaged on DVD as a movie, but in a way that help to weave out a full fledge story without having to worry about missing a few elements of the story and the subplots, which were compelling.

Thumbs up for me.

Was the above review useful to you?

100% generic, but still enjoyable...

6/10
Author: Paul Magne Haakonsen from Denmark
10 May 2017

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.

Was the above review useful to you?

A great movie RUINED by the final scene!

4/10
Author: Paul from Canada
3 September 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

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?!

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

Writer is Poorly Informed

4/10
Author: parhat from Bangkok, Thailand
26 June 2009

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.

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

Ratings Awards External reviews
Parents Guide Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history