The Hot Zone

Folks, c'mon. What happened to watching a show for entertainment value? It's "based on," not a documentary.

Stop getting bent out of shape and just watch it. Or don't. I liked it. Especially coming from a book, there is always going to be a high level creative license involved to create the drama, suspense and fear.

Hot Zone: Anthrax explores aspects of the 2001 anthrax scares in ways I never heard at the time. I felt they gave away the conclusion a tad too early, and the timing feels weird (it apoears the investigation is happening weeks or months after 9/11, but in reality the investigation didn't conclude for 7 years). However, most of the acting is wonderful! A few anachronisms were distracting, like a Keurig, wall-mounted flat screen, and center-parted hairstyles were big misses for a 2001 setting, whereas Hot Zone series 1 was better about time period accuracy.

Read the book when it came out and it scared me pretty badly. The series started out well but as we got to the last few episodes everything that could go wrong did for overly dramatic effect. The situation with Ebola is scary enough without the overly contrived situation. Additionally Liam Cunningham as Wade Carter started out doing American accent but by the end of the series sounded like he just got off the ship from Ireland.

"The Hot Zone: Anthrax" is not quite as good as the first season about Ebola, mostly because there is a lot of "War on Terror" politics portrayed here, and you really cannot count on any of it being accurate because the primary government officials are depicted here like cartoon characters. "That's our guy; he's guilty! Tell the media!" The editing is also not as tight and some dialogue is cringe-worthy. But all of that is somewhat redeemed by the outstanding performances by Tony Goldwyn and Daniel Dae Kim. Tony completely embodies a socially-awkward Ivins, and Daniel exudes a calm yet confident authority. Their performances keep you going, however the ending is a bit rushed. The creators take too much liberty with "inspired by true events" so that they don't have to delve into the real excruciating details of this moment in American history.

The cast is excellent, but they can't save the bad writing and worse pacing. I read the Richard Preston book back in 1994, and again last month when I heard about this miniseries. The book is an accurate accounting of the real events of 1989, and it's an edge-of-your-seat exciting read. This miniseries takes the same event and manages to drag it out with unnecessary backstories, wooden dialogue, and a dozen cliches. Then there are the blatantly incorrect representations of protocol in a lab environment. (I was in the medical field in 1989, and we did have strict ppe protocols.) My advice is to treat this as pure fiction, loosely based on the facts of the actual events. Get the true story from the book.