Venomous (2001 Video) User Reviews

Venomous: Paint by numbers outbreak movie

[Platypuschow · 4/10 · 26 October 2017]

I like Treat Williams, I think he's always been a very underrated actor relegated to a b-movie career. Alas this film is a prime example.

All about an outbreak of a virus spread by rattlesnakes and a crack medical team trying to contain it.

But you know the drill, they aren't just up against the snakes no no they also battle the evil government who want to handle the situation differently which would result in a larger loss of life.

Predictable stuff, you'll have seen it done before and better but it has its moments.

For crying out loud though do pets have to die in every single film? This one is particularly merciless in that regard.

The Good:

Treat Williams

The Bad:

Opening scene was unnecessarily sad

Not pet friendly....

"Outbreak" with rattlesnakes

[moviebee · 3/10 · 1 June 2002]

This was a movie very similar to "Outbreak". Its an OK movie, its entertainment. But it doesn't score that high points with me. Not that bad acting though. The movie had some strange events which I must conclude as errors. Like meeting cars on a closed road for example. You're always one step ahead of the plot.

A neat horror flick with a trick

[myersan · 9/10 · 28 September 2002]

I thought this was gonna be your typical brainless horror flick with the usual anti-establishment drivel to entertain the masses but lo and behold, it weren't so bad! The great unwashed will enjoy it but so will the average filmgoer who wants a bit more for his few bucks. Rattlesnakes get a bad break here but Treat Williams' character deals with them with respect and there is none of this revulsion that "Jaws" had for the sharks - guess we learned a lesson - Mother Nature does have a balancing act somewhere. The usual military stereotypes are villainous but redemption is at hand nonetheless. Enough of my philosophizing, get your popcorn and enjoy this movie. Do not watch it on TV - too many commercials will ruin it, rent it or buy it instead. Out here in HK, I paid $20HKD or about $2.50USD - not bad at all!! ha ha A pleasant surprise - enjoy.

Plays like a made-for-TV movie, strictly AVERAGE

[Burmese Python · 7 March 2002]

As you might be able to tell from my nickname, I am a snake NUT. So, viewing this movie was essential for me, no matter what the quality of the film was SUPPOSED to be. Going in with my eyes wide open, I was aware immediately of two things: 1. The movie is VERY low budget, and 2. The effects were, for the most part, very realistic.

While I can't say that the movie fails to entertain, it does have problems. The acting is average at best, the plot is predictable, and the style of filming is very much like a made-for-TV movie. Think of a Stephen King ABC Mini-Series, and that sums up the film's style.

That said, what the movie does right also impressive. There is no computer animation, and at no point do any of the slithering baddies of the film do anything "supernatural". The reptile action is very plausible, a refreshing change from other recent pictures like "Anaconda" and "Python". What the film also does right is not take itself too seriously. There is not a lot of over-acting, and no character in the film seems beyond belief. One thing I also appreciated was the fact that the snakes are treated as a menace, but not as villains.

Where "Venomous" fails most notably is its lack of ability to build suspense. There is one particular scene that stands out among the rest, but aside from that golden moment, little else is particularly chilling.

I have read reviews of this film that call it a copy of "Outbreak". While there are several similar elements, "Venomous" does stand well on its own. The running time is nearly an hour shorter between these two movies, and "Venomous" does a good job of character development. It also focuses more on the carriers of the virus than the virus itself.

"Venomous" also relies on stock footage more than once, perhaps to keep the overall budget down. I will be general here not to spoil any of the film's moments: There is one crash scene where the vehicle crashing is TOTALLY different from the one in the previous shot. Watch for it with your remote in hand, it is amusing that the film makers thought no one would notice.

My overall opinion? Rent before you buy, and only buy if you really like snakes.

OH DEAR.

[mr_pivac1985 · 24 February 2003]

Ok why does Treat Williams waste his talent on such terrible movies, He is much to good of actor to be in this film.

This film is quite possible the worst film I have seen this year. Trust me if you see this film at your local video shop, then run as far away as possible.

Mr. Williams please try and keep away from these type of films.

2/10

.... If you lived in a hole

[cerastes · 4 May 2002]

This is one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen. It is completley unbelievable, the actors are terrible, and the plot is dumb. Not to mention horribly written.

On to the good stuff: Rattlesnakes, mutant or not, DO NOT STRIKE OR SEEK OUT HUMAN PREY. Ever. Nor can they kill you with a bite to the ankle. Also they do not rattle non-stop. That is a defensive mechinism. On the box there is a boa constrictor, and there were no boa constrictors in the entire movie. I find that very misleading. There were, however, corn snakes and vipers within the movie that are A) Not poisonous and B) not a rattlesnake!

This movie was a lot more fun to comment on, then to watch. I wasted $3.25 I will never get back, and two hours of my precious years I have eternally lost.

Great fun.

[ruskinlacelady · 9/10 · 31 January 2008]

If you're a fan of disaster movies, you'll enjoy this one. Acting by the principal characters was excellent, except for Anthony Denison who couldn't act his way out of a paper bag. He provides the comic relief, and the lines he had to recite were ludicrous. An interesting subplot between the two principal characters carries the movie. If you like to watch the science in these movies, there's an error in the premise. You don't get antibodies from the snake venom. You get them from the bloodstream. But it wouldn't have been half as fun watching them try to draw blood from a snake as to milk it for venom. This movie was great fun to watch.

A wooden 'Outbreak'-like production. But not nearly as good as 'Outbreak'.

[Breumaster · 4/10 · 18 December 2019]

The bad military has made up a bad virus again. This time rattlesnakes provide the infection by biting people. People that look very normal after the bite, but later get a kind of flu. It could have been a funny mockbuster, but the movie takes itself too serious. Every story part is told by the main characters. Not by acting, by telling. So you can watch it by being told what happens - it's like an audiobook with pictures. The characterplay is a little wooden, the story too long winded. On many points happen logical mistakes that can't be missed by the eye. I won't watch this twice.

Great story needing better "direction" -- a remake w/refined plot will be a winner!

[robkell-909 · 5/10 · 18 July 2011]

I am compelled to write about this video now that I've just finished watching it. This is a movie I would recommend others to watch at least "once."

This is not a classic, but it has a good story line and several subplots. It could very easily have become a tear-jerker. I disagree with people who say that the acting was bad. The acting was better than the "direction" (directing) in my opinion.

In the hands of better director(s) and a bit of a more refined plot, the video would have received much better reception.

Personally I vouch for a remake with the above enhancements.

not that bad

[cujo2 · 27 June 2004]

Cheap made by the book snake flick. Nothing recommendable except it can hold attention for the running time. Please stay awake for the ( not mentioned) explosions ripped out of delta force 2 , the colombian connection ( the helicopter that shoots the lincoln) and Tony denison who played Luca in crime story.

All known actors are just here to collect their months rent and the movie doesnt know if it wants to be a thriller or a horror, the snakes - allthough pictured widely on the box- are just a small part of this film.

But besides all this it is worth a watch, uncle treat is always good even in cheese flicks like this, just be ready for a cheap outbreak clone and not for a snake movie.

Really bad

[kathyfilm-1 · 1/10 · 11 February 2006]

I love Treat Williams, but I think even he knew that this one the snakes couldn't even digest. Can we say 'ripoff'? Almost right out of "Outbreak", except the only good thing about it was that Treat was in it. I wasted $2.00 buying the VHS. I'm so happy it wasn't more. Overly cheesy, very predictable, badly directed, terrible continuity (really didn't have any), and worse with the script. Arrgh.

I feel pain every time I see one of these movies and wonder who I can hit up for a budget. I'm sure I can do much better. Much. Somebody give me 1M and I'll give you a wonderful movie or two.

Oops, IMDb wants ten lines of text for the comments, so I have to fill this in a bit.

Don't watch it, don't buy it, don't rent it...run, as fast as you can from this movie. It might cause vomiting, gagging, laughter, or anger.

Snake lunging for throat...Rent that baby!

[Dr. Gore · 20 February 2004]

*SPOILER ALERT* *SPOILER ALERT*

The video box cover for this one is amazingly similar to the cover of "Silent Predators". Both covers have a giant snake head lunging at you. I don't know who's ripping off who. I do know that I will rent any movie with a vicious snake attacking me.

Snakes crawl around town biting people and infecting them with their toxic venom. The snakes are "Venomous". The doctor is looking for answers and everyone is stonewalling him.

Don't be fooled by the drooling giant snake head on the video box cover. This is not a horror movie. This is a medical thriller that just happens to have nasty snakes as the source of the infection. "Venomous" is a competently made B-movie. It didn't hurt me too much. But I was hoping for more horror in my giant snake head movie. Instead I got Doctor Do-Right and his quest for a snake bite cure. Not the snake movie I was hoping for. 3/10.

A town is terrorized by venomous snakes as a result of a runaway experiment.

[sdee79 · 2/10 · 19 May 2006]

Apart from the fact that there are a lot of "cheap" shots of rattlesnakes popping their heads out of a hill and snarling in anger during earth tremors, I found story to be weak and the acting barely mediocre. Other scenes are barely credible if at all like when the good doctor is looking for a rattlesnake specimens he walks a short distance down an underground tunnel, picks a few rattlers and out of nowhere, his return path is covered by snakes. Undaunted, our hero calmly shoves them aside with his foot while above ground, the good citizens are killed by single snakes that seem to wait inside the house beside toasters to pounce at the unsuspected.

Yup, it's THAT bad

[agremlin82 · 1/10 · 25 February 2014]

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

Put down the remote, back away slowly and nobody gets hurt!!! OH-MY-GOD!!! I Personally love Treat Williams movies, but after seeing Venomous, it's quite clear that his agent needs to be fired. The acting from just about all is bad..., really bad. The script is hideous, or dare I say "Venomous". Still, I was transfixed with this train wreck of a movie and had to see just really how bad it could get. It's quite fair to say that I wasn't disappointed. The Horror...

Although I wasn't expecting Othello, I also didn't expect a script written by Butters from South Park. This was award winningly awful. Just some of the problems I have of the script and there are quite a few, but I limit my disdain for these 6: (1) Gas masks protect you from gas, not a living biological contagion. (2) If you have military soldiers standing guard outside a door to say, a hospital and someone fires a handgun within that hospital, they will react, very quickly and very violently and not standing like human doorstops with live weapons. (3) In the moron family's attempt to run the roadblock they almost collide with oncoming traffic on the way out, yet a few hundred yards down the road they find the road is a complete dead end. A few questions there is where did the oncoming traffic come from on a dead end road and if you're a resident in that area and you're making an escape from the military quarantine, what kind of idiots plan their escape down a dead end road? (4) Another reviewer mentioned the hundreds of snakes simply materializing behind Treat on a floor that was clear seconds before, but Kudos for Mr. Williams actually handling what appears to be a live snake, although it could have been chilled before hand to slow it's defensive reactions to being picked up in the tunnel, but in that scene he enters what looks to be an old abandoned mine in a dirt clearing, the entrance of it made with old wood pylons, yet seconds later he's in a well maintained concrete tunnel which includes electric lighting and modern pipes running along the wall as if he's in a modern building. (5) The initial research center where the snakes were housed is blown up, yet the snakes 10 years later appear beneath a decades old garage in a completely different town. Doesn't it seem strange they'd crawl who knows how many miles beneath the surface to this remote town and had never come up once where the original high-security holding facility was? and "The Biggie" (6), I was expecting the snakes to show up on the helicopter in the end to dispatch the Bad Guy, but when filmed during take off the floor was absolutely clean. No place for a reptile to hide and all of a sudden, they're wrapped around the guys feet. Additionally the helicopter seems to transform from a small 5 seat A Star with landing skids to what appears to be a much larger HH-3 Pelican with wheels instead of skids during the explosion and crash. Not even did they spring for file footage of a similar type aircraft crash. This is like a volkswagen beetle turning into a 8 passenger van.

Jeeze, come on!! This was obviously a very poor rip off of Outbreak's script. At least Outbreak had a modicum of science behind they're script. This was just awful. My sincere condolences to Mr. Treat Williams. He, as well as the viewing public deserve better.

Terrible!!

[miggimus · 1/10 · 25 March 2006]

This is really a terrible film! It seems that the authors can't tell the difference between "e-coli"(..a harmless bacteria found in all of us...) and "Ebola" (.. a deadly virus!)!! Dear producers, please,please, next time at least do your homework before spending so much time and money on such a weak script! I mean, to mistake a common bacteria for a dreaded virus is like not being able to separate a horse from a grapefruit. A few decent actors desperately try to keep the level up, but in vain. Roles are as stereotype as ever. Good guys are good, bad guys are bad. Not during a single second is the viewer in doubt of what is going to follow. Unfortunately this is a film filled with erroneous facts, obvious hints and a very shallow story. For anyone with a minimum of scientific education the film is a complete joke. The music is hammered out on the same synthesizer throughout the film, and leaves that unmistakable scent of a "low budget" film. I feel very sorry that I rented this film.

A lot of logic missing here.

[steph868-936865 · 1/10 · 22 February 2021]

I like Treat Williams but this movie is not very good. Also they killed a dog for no reason. A very cute dog. Gertrude deserved better.

A Fun Romp with the Snakes

[pswnsk · 8/10 · 10 November 2020]

Yes, this is a B-type movie...no doubt about that. And it has scenes similar to "Outbreak" because, well, it's a movie about an outbreak. This one just happens to have some snakes too.

It is also well filmed, well paced and has some character development and humor. Is some of the dialogue silly or campy? It is a disaster slash monster flick; of course it does.

All in all it's not as bad as the haters say it is.

Not enough snakes!

[arghzombie · 3/10 · 28 April 2020]

Not... Enough... Snakes... And also snakes not big enough! More snakes!!

Attack of the rattlesnakes

[TheLittleSongbird · 2/10 · 1 August 2019]

Have said more than once about not having anything against low budget, as there are plenty of films that don't do a bad job with limitations, providing that actual effort is put in. Do like creature features, whether lots of fun, genuinely scary or turn-brain-off-at-the-door, again providing that signs of trying is evident. And Treat Williams is hardly talent-free, but he had been deserving of better projects for a while, and still is.

Something that doesn't change here with 'Venomous'. There are far worse films overall around, far worse low-budget films and far worse creature films. That still doesn't mean that 'Venomous' isn't bad, it is, very bad and really cannot make any excuses or defense for it. Really did try and take it for what it was and what it tried to be, have always done that for everything, but the flaws are far too many and they are far from big ones.

Williams does do his best with his material, which is well beneath him (lots of cheesy dialogue and a character that one struggles to get behind), and compared to everything else he comes off serviceably.

Everything else is executed ineptly. None of the rest of the acting is remotely good, it doesn't even come close to weak level. Tony Denison is beyond irritating in particular. They do have to work with a script that is all awkward cheese and no venom and characters that are all blandly sketchy and annoying, with seemingly few logical thoughts in their brain, but considering that Williams managed to do something with what he had those things shouldn't be excuses really for how bad the acting is. The direction is barely existent.

Furthermore, the story is truly ridiculous and not very interesting. It's coherent, but it's just lazy and silliness gone overboard. All the fun is sucked out as a result and there is no tension and even less suspense. The low budget show painfully, there is a lot of amateurish stuff here visually with the effects looking like they were done as an afterthought with the little remainder of money left. There is nothing scary, entertaining or even interesting about the rattlesnakes, they are just there with nothing to them.

All in all, very bad. 2/10

Rather weak overall creature feature

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 4/10 · 18 March 2017]

After a strange series of attacks, a small-town doctor and his staff find that a military cover-up involving a deadly virus transmitted through venomous snake bites released by a terrorist attack and disturbed by seismic activity forcing them to come together to stop them.

This here was a decent if decidedly unimpressive offering. Among the few positives here is the fact that there are quite a few scenes with the snakes here that really plays up the advantage of using the real animals. The fact that the scenes involving them are quite fun, from the first scenes of them biting on the civilians and the outbreak that causes the different quick-shot attacks that are carried out in the houses around town which are quite nicely handled in instigating their need for the quarantine. There's a great deal of these scenes that work throughout here due to the others carrying out the need for the real-sized snakes which has the nice lead-in to the different action scenes in the finale where there are all sorts of big fun to be had with the military ambush tactics and the big ambushes trying to get their plan under control. However, this is all that really works here since this one doesn't really have a whole lot to really enjoy and has a ton of flaws. Among the biggest ones is the fact that there's just not a whole lot the film can do with the rating featured here as it really neuters the possibilities for action within here. There's not a whole lot of vicious or graphic kills throughout here and the most blood shown is in a series of test-tube vials so it really leaves a lot of chances of to the sidelines which makes it feel rather weak. There's also the films' incredibly weak and obvious low-budget tone here which comes off quite apparent in the final half but is still a big deal throughout here, giving this one the kind of weak-toned and out of control with how it carries out these elements. Along with a distinct lack of action and confined sets, the film's biggest action scenes here are all stock footage scenes taken from other movies that includes several car chases taken to escape from the authorities and to later escape from the confined area and it containing action scenes and explosions taken from other films that really seems obvious with the change in audio and video quality during these scenes that highlights the pilfering. The film's last flaw is the fact that the actions could've been avoided had the nonsensical cover-up never occurred as everything that happens from the outbreak of the virus to the town quarantine and the snakes getting loose is due to their cover-up of the tests and the snakes being there. These here really hold this down.

Rated PG-13: Violence, Language and scenes involving strong suggested child violence.

Amazing in many ways

[chris-norman-04 · 10/10 · 8 April 2006]

I voted a ten on it because I easily earned my moneys worth on it, a whole 2 Bucks. Thats right. I've seen it twice now, and soon to be three times. I bought it because the movie looked terrible on the cover and the contents were even more terrible that I could ever have dreamed or hoped for. I am doing one of my last ever collegiate papers on this movie.... because the movie was SO bad. I would love to have a spoiler in this section but to be honest, there is nothing to really spoil unless you were really thinking that this movie could be at all good. I can tell you one thing though.... the climax, you know when you have just seen it because you will be thinking "was that the climax?" Completely horrible movie that i love.

Haven't we seen enough of this?

[DerRalf · 4 March 2002]

Frankly spoken I don't expect much of a good movie, especially if it is labelled 'horror'. All I want is a tiny bit of original material. Venomous fails to deliver any of that.

The story is taken from 'Outbreak' only without that movies' style and class. The special effects range from dull to not existent, and even the few twists this story contains are given away without any thought at all.

The idea of a virus spreading through snake bites seems intriguing, but in this movie there are far too many questions left unanswered.

Who are the terrorists in the beginning? What did the snakes feed upon the following years (without spreading the virus?).

The only surprise was German actor Hannes Jaennicke as supporting doctor. I didn't think of him speaking English so fluently.

If You want my advice for what it's worth. Don't pay for watching this movie. Go and rent "Outbreak", you will not regret it.

Amazing waste of time

[finnerss · 1/10 · 23 November 2002]

There are lousy movies, there are terrible movies and ten levels down there is Venomous, it might become a new definition for absolute waste of film, money and time. Dialogue more than in the nose, incredibly unbelievable performance, one of the poorest directions I've ever seen, it's amazing this movie is not signed as an "Alan Smithee" film. The music goes with the plot, absolutely unimaginative. Foreshadowing comes a mile before you get to the scene you've guessed long ago. I believe it's a waste of time to add more reviews, but after reading the "best movies go straight to video" comment really struck me as misleading to say the least. Probably the reviewer is the writer himself. I've seen college stuff that is a thousand times better than this film, and I'm talking about the worst projects! If you're in for a good laugh at how some movies can get to be stupid, rent it and prepare to laugh. The sheer mention of John Carpenter in the review is insulting. John Carpenter is good at its job. This pseudo-filmmaker is an obvious relative to some producer or investor.

A Truly Bad Movie

[thancocksc · 1/10 · 18 March 2014]

This is a decent candidate for worst movie of the decade, century, etc. My wife and I watched the whole thing with our jaws hanging down, shocked at how bad it was. It has become a reference point: We now compare other bad movies to "Venomous" and vote on whether it is under or over the very low bar that it sets. If you actually watch it, be forewarned. And check out the army guy in the helicopter hanging out & threatening to shoot the local citizens, although he never does and the copter looks more like a evening news helicopter than a military chopper. I like Treat Williams, he is a very capable actor. I cannot for the life of me understand why he would agree to do this movie unless it was simply for the money. But one thing the creators got right is the title, "Venomous," because it is really lethal. You watch something like this and think, jeez, I could do something this good without even trying hard. Yes, this movie puts the "b" in bad, the only redeeming factor is that we didn't have to pay to see it.

Actually a good movie!

[Movie Nuttball · 10/10 · 23 August 2005]

Venomous is a very good film that has a good cast which includes Treat Williams, Mary Page Keller, Hannes Jaenicke, Catherine Dent, Anthony John Denison, Geoffrey Pierson, Brian Poth, Nicole Nieth, Christal Chacon, Jim Storm, Rick Hurst, Melissa J. Hayden, and Marc McClure! The acting by all of these actors is very good. Williams is very good. The special effects and thrills is really good and some of it is surprising. The movie is filmed very good. The music is good. The film is quite interesting and the movie really keeps you going until the end. This is a very good and thrilling film. If you like Treat Williams, Mary Page Keller, Hannes Jaenicke, Catherine Dent, Marc McClure, the rest of the cast in the film, Action, Mystery, Thrillers, Dramas, and interesting Snake films then I strongly recommend you to see this film today!