IMDb > Carriers (2009) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
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
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Carriers More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 8 of 13: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]
Index 123 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Carry On

Author: thesar-2 from United States
15 March 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It would be very hard to put a new twist on the age-old zombie/disease genre that's been flooding the cinemas for many years now. I enjoyed Dawn of the Dead (2004), 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later but they can only go so far.

So, with the low, LOW budget of Carriers, you'd expect them to rehash everything previously done, except with no special effects. Thankfully, they relied on simplifying everything and the performances.

Apparently there was some outbreak of a somewhat air-born virus that give people rashes, sickness and eventual death and the movie picks up with 4 survivors on the road to a hideaway beach resort. We have brothers Danny (Pucci) and Brian (Pine) who are in tow with females Bobby (Perabo) and Kate (Van Camp) and they have "Rules" on how to survive in this now all-but deserted wasteland of Earth. Not rules like in Zombieland. This ain't no fun 'N' games.

Neither is self-appointed leader and ass-hole Brian. As dumb as he is in this, you pray he gets this mysterious disease and die off before the conclusion. (You see a little of his arrogance in Star Trek (2009), but nothing compared to his performance here. He should be worried about being typecast. Unless, of course, he really is this bad in real-life.) The movie contains a lot of usual zombie/end of world/infectious disease scenes, emotions and general amateur "militants" trying to restore order, so it's not the most original story. Yet, on such a small budget, it seems real, suspenseful (at times) and they show enough examples of small-town America devastated to satisfy the target audience.

It's not perfect, but feels real enough to suggest a rental for those Chris Pine and/or disease-end-of-world viewers.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Sometimes choosing life is just choosing a more painful form of death

Author: Siamois from Canada
27 December 2009

Four people somewhere in the southern US are trying to survive and avoid infection from a deadly virus that has no cure and which has already decimated most of the population. This movie is not an action film nor is it a tale of adventure and heroism. Rather, it is a bleak drama and an observation of human nature when one's very survival is at stake.

Most of the time Brian leads the group and maintains the harshest stance against "softening up". He likes to taunt his younger brother Danny who has benefited from a higher education (which is now useless in this desolated world). Bobby is Brian's girlfriend and often stands up against Brian's tough act. Finally, Kate is the quiet girl, a schoolmate of Danny (who is obviously infatuated with her). The dynamics between these four characters are often golden. It is interesting to see where each of them place the bar depending on the situations they face.

The movie can be best summed up by this review's title. At one point in the film, a doctor is about to end the life of infected children. When someone attempts to stop him, he says: "Sometimes choosing life is just choosing a more painful form of death"

But throughout this movie, this sentence will keep on taking new and different meanings if you really ponder each and every situation our foursome face. The true horror of this movie is that there is no clear course to take, that the choices they face will harm them one way or another, be it their mind, body or their soul.

The four main actors pour their heart into this movie and the script is great but a better director and even better actors could have turned this into a classic. As it is, it's still damn good. It reminded me somewhat of The Day After and especially, The Trigger Effect.

Strongly recommended!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A gripping search for survival.

Author: Michael O'Keefe from Muskogee OK
18 December 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Written and directed by Alex and David Pastor, this intense and gripping thriller is about a lethal virus beyond anyone's expectations. Four college age friends set out to find refuge that is uncontaminated by a deadly virus spreading across the country. They will soon discover they may be more dangerous to each other as they find more survivors in a world where there is now no laws or rules. Trust can come at a high price and survival will be for the smartest and fittest.

Slow drama with very little gore, although there is the obligatory shocking images. The acting could have been worse. Starring are: Chris Pine, Piper Perabo, Emily VanCamp, Lou Taylor Pucci and Christopher Meloni of TV's Law and Order.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Made by the ignorant for the ignorant

Author: Namron7 from United Kingdom
30 January 2014

I'm tired of these 'science fiction' films which are made with no reference to junior science. It's very annoying, and it spoils all the other worthy stuff such as good acting, plot, direction and production. A scientific adviser would cost what....$500 per day? For, what.... two days? Why not invest in that so as to avoid obvious nonsense such as:

1. There was no point in quarantining the father and daughter in the back of the SUV. The whole SUV was infected, and Chlorox would not make any difference. Nor would polythene and masking tape

2. There is no point in differentiating the degree of potential infectiousness of either daughter or father, in that that the father is fine to run about but the daughter isn't. I find this ironic in view of the film's title

3. The gun the father is given is a MAJOR vector for infection when he passes it back again (they stand back from him though - like he is a leper, LOL!)

4. Dust masks are not effective barriers for either viruses or bacteria

So it's a fail from the word go. An ignorant film, made by the ignorant for the ignorant.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Excellent movie, not slow at all

Author: vikpk
11 December 2009

I beg to differ from the general air in the comments here: the movie is not slow at all. "Slow" is a movie that bores you. This one keeps you at the edge of your seat. Not because the scenes are a packed with special effects and extraordinary cuts and camera angles. Better yet -- the writing, the directing, and the acting are good; the story is well told and does not hang on the bare thread of blown up bodies or cannibalistic excesses (if you have seen the pathetic dog "Zombieland" you would know what I mean).

I especially appreciated the original start of the movie. The first scenes show young people driving in a car and there is no hint that they are running away from a disease of Biblical proportions. Missing is the typical intro: "The world has been hit by a deadly virus..." etc. or some scenes of devastation to introduce us to the context of the story. Just the opposite - as the plot unfolds one is even shocked to realize that these people are desperate to escape with their lives...The joyfulness which emerges, from time to time in the protagonists' behavior is not out of place, it enhances the eerie atmosphere of a world at the edge of its existence.

The characters have to make decisions that are so well motivated by the good writing, acting, and directing, that one cannot but begin to think and question why people are doing what they are doing. What is the source in human nature the brings forward compassion or cruelty? Should we treat or abandon the sick and helpless? Do we have a moral obligation to care for the dying or to survive at any cost? The movie is a good depiction of the cold calculated view of life many take in these days we live in.

After all the so called "slow" pace is just appropriate, it sets the right mood. The makers of the movie succeed to connect with their audience on a deeper level than blowing up bodies and eating flesh. Thus the "slow" pace lets the viewer digest what is going on on the screen and lets him think about it. This is a film made by intelligent and sensitive people.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Worth seeing for sure

Author: BeGre92 from Belgium
5 December 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have to say this movie is pretty good. Yes, Off course it's not your daily zombie film, but it's original. At the end, i said to myself that it was a bit boring and ordinary. But this is what makes it special. OK, It's not Superman saving the day by shooting down 100s of zombies to then save humanity, NO. But this was realistic. If this would happen to us in real life, these situations would be possible. You can call it a Drama/Thriller. The scene that struck me most was with the daughter, that is sad. Each roll has it's good-written personality.

I would recommend to see it, as long as you know what your expecting.


Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Parthetic film making

Author: thebogofeternalstench from New Zealand
20 November 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Chris Pine-can't stand the guy, but I hired out Carriers as I was told by many people it was a 'really good movie', so I thought I'd give it a go even tho I didn't believe them.

What it actually turned out to be was-absolutely $hit. No surprises there then.

It is a god awful BORING movie. Its a bout a bunch of stupid idiots on a road trip who are trying to do what.......find fuel......look for wildlife??? There is a viral pandemic/virus/whatever (wow, how original), i really didn't care as the film bored me to tears.

The film consists of these people bitching and fighting and the film goes absolutely nowhere. A few of them die, (GOOD) including Chris Pine (EXCELLENT). Still, what a bore fest.

Carriers is hyped up as a really entertaining movie when its actually the complete opposite. Crap film making, crap film.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

The most horrible movie i have ever seen

Author: taltes from Israel
23 December 2009

i have to say, i saw a lot of horror films, but never one like this.

a lot of people argue about this film nature, if it can be called horror. I say, yes, it is. apart from all the thrilling moments that your sitting as far as you can from the screen and lower the sound cause its just too frightening, the whole agenda of this film is scary as hell.

to compare this to a zombie film is a crime. if i search for an example for this film, i compare it too outbreak. unlike outbreak this film is so dis-Hollywood, it presents to you the human nature at its worst, the worst dilemma's you can think about, the ultimate fear of disease and death and a lot of other big conflicts of life, but in a realistic manner, no monkeys, no army cover-up, no great heroic moments, just plain reality.

in the past years horror had relate itself with cheap and cheesy acting, story-line, effects and off-course, a lot of fake blood and chopped human organs. but this movie just shows how a horror film should look like.

i have seen a lot of horror movies, although its not my favorite genre, and nothing really scares me. yes, i might jump a bit from time to time when the music surprises you while someone does something unexpected, but not real fear that creeps into you, that you beg for the characters not to do what their about to. no American film has frightened me in a while, maybe some Japanese or korean, but this one, its just terrible.

anyway, best horror movie i have ever seen.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

saw this at frightfest

Author: pregno1970 from cyberspace
12 November 2009

This was easily the best film at frightfest.I absolutely loved it!

Chris Pine ( Captain James T Kirk himself!) gives a terrific performance in this haunting horror drama which is genuinely

It does what so many movies ( romero's diary of the dead, 28 weeks later, the zombie diaries etc) tried to do and failed. It captures the horror of being one of the uninfected after a massive and lethal pandemic. I was on the edge of my seat at times. |The saying it's those who are left behind you should feel sorry for was never more apt. Well worth a watch...there were some dogs at frightfest this halloween(umbrage, paranormal activity, wrong turn 3) but this made up for them

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:


Author: BA_Harrison from Hampshire, England
5 March 2016

A highly contagious virus has wiped out the majority of the human race. Four survivors—Brian (Chris Pine), his girlfriend Bobby (Piper Perabo), his younger brother Danny (Lou Pucci), and Kate (Emily VanCamp)—attempt to get to the coast where they hope to ride out the pandemic at the deserted beach-side hotel where the brothers spent their holidays as kids.

I love apocalyptic horror films that deal with virulent diseases wiping out humanity, the fear factor heightened by the very real possibility of such an occurrence. Carriers uses such a scary set-up, but fails to capitalise on its potential with a weak script that goes nowhere over the course of its 84 minutes. The photogenic-but-bland characters travel to their destination, encountering a few predictable obstacles on the way, but there is nothing substantial to grip the viewer.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 8 of 13: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

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