Contagion

Steven Soderbergh’s variation on Hollywood disaster films is conceived as the exact antithesis of all of the attributes of the classic form of this genre established by A-level studio spectacles in the 1950s and definitively codified in the 1970s. At the same time, however, the aim of the film is not to subvert the genre, but rather to come up with a form of the genre for the era of extensive availability of information, so that it can again function effectively and arouse horror and tension in the audience, as compared to Emmerich-style popcorn tripe. The necessary foundation for this is provided by Scott Z. Burns’s masterful, intelligently constructed and information-packed screenplay, which is based on scientific knowledge and experience from the epidemics of that time (and therefore greatly corresponds to the real pandemic of 2020, unlike the naïve, fantastical scenario of, for example, Outbreak). (05/16/2020)

People will always wonder why I'm terrified of public transport, that I don't touch any of the handrails and every coughing person scares me, and that I wash my hands more thoroughly than a doctor before entering the operating room. All credit to you, Steven Soderbergh, you did it. A virus lurks around every corner, a simple handshake or use of a credit card becomes a mortal danger, tens, hundreds, thousands and hundreds of thousands of people die... And I'm not bored by any of it. Contagion is actually a classic disaster film, of which there used to be many. Just like When Time Ran Out, The Towering Inferno, The Swarm and others, this film is full of familiar faces who (understandably) attract the audience but also do a disservice to the script. Thanks to their performances, we are in fact interested in those characters who would otherwise be completely ordinary, and it doesn't matter that none of them is the main character. The plot, which unfolds according to the expected pattern (contagion-dying-antibodies-question mark), looks mundane, but also feels pleasantly dramatic and somehow heavy thanks to the cold and unsettling direction, cinematography and music. It's a great pity that Contagion isn't at least half an hour longer. The sophistication of the story and the characters would certainly have benefited from it, and the film would perhaps have gotten rid of the somewhat rushed ending. Otherwise, there is nothing to complain about. (02/18/2012)

Contagion is high-quality filmmaking craftsmanship in the typical Steven Soderbergh fashion, with the intelligent idea of a global catastrophe and how to deal with it, topped off with attractive characters. Rather than “ordinary people”, the film focuses on characters who are in a position to deal with this problem directly and who, through their vulnerability, are also shown as ordinary human beings. The “chemical” atmosphere is emphasized by progressive electronic music without a single emotion. There could be more powerful moments and the best parts should not have happened at the beginning. The explanatory ending is sloppy. Overall, Contagion is a decent alternative to disaster movies as we know them from Emmerich and such :-) (10/13/2011)

Soderbergh doesn’t give a shit about the audience. Zero emotions, little tension, full of stars but without any of them shining too much on screen. Contagion is simply an unbiased and detached look at a global pandemic, and it’s actually that austerity and inhumanity what brings to the surface the horror and hopelessness of the situation. It probably only needed to dig a bit deeper into the issue, the last half hour felt too short. 7/10 (12/16/2011)

Typical Soderbergh, a cold, atmospheric (music, camera filters), surgically precise film. Contagion basically imposes nothing on us, it just shows the possible origin of an infection (banality) and its consequences in the context of human infection (captivating). This is followed, of course, by other things like hysteria, looting, religious problems, ethnicity, basic needs, etc. Perhaps a slight advantage for the director is the fact that he’s working with a topic so interesting in itself that even if the film wasn’t that good, its potential to captivate would still sweep away the shortcomings. Essentially, a film that is impossible to tear away from. (01/01/2012)