s3276169 Strewth, its another Australian, zombie film and not a bad little film at that.Plague makes rather clever use of an Australian outback setting. Its harsh, stark, landscape, is a metaphor for the choices a small band of survivors of a plague pandemic face. They can either adapt to the harsh realities of their stark, new existence or perish. This is the premise this film is built upon. It defines the dynamic that develops between the survivors, who gradually start to fall into two obvious categories; those who are determined to live and those who, sooner or later, are destined to die. The decisions made by the survivors, are not judged in moral terms but instead, have a Darwinian quality, where only the strong survive.There's is then, a little naked savagery about Plague. As in nature, some die because others make ruthless choices, that aid in their survival. This primal quality is reflected in the zombies. They are not your garden house, moaning shufflers but instead, are imbued with a predatory menace and slathering, screaming, ferocity. The acting in Plague is reasonable. What I did like is the manner in which each character is presented as a real person, as opposed to an over the top caricature. The decision to downplay the characterizations lends this film a sense of authenticity others in the same vein lack. All in all, I like Plague. Its not an exceptional film but given its modest setting and low budget its an above average effort that shows that much can be accomplished with very little. Seven out of ten from me.

jerryslabber I watched this movie based on the rating and because I like a decent post apocalyptic film. This was anything but a decent film, no matter the genre! Certainly not worthy of a 6.7 rating! The way the characters acted/reacted were so far from reality it is actually frustrating! Plot was practically non-existent and the dialogue was laughable! The ratings for this film are clearly not deserved so I came back to see if I could see what I suspected what went on here (with the rating it received). So here I was scrolling through every review. A lot were bang on, rated 1 star and warning others how bad the film actually is, but then came the reason(s) I watched this waste of time in the first place! A dozen or more reviews (and I am sure dozens more who gave a 10 rating!) claiming masterpiece, great film making, amazing psychological thriller etc etc etc. So unfair to mislead IMDb members like this, very selfish and void of any integrity! Several of these so called reviews were from family members! You can determine this by their IMDb ID's! Same names as the directors! LOL LOL! I don't know which is dumber, these friends and relatives with their obvious false reviews, or the script and direction of this cliché ridden boring mess! Only reason to watch this film would be to later come back here afterwards and read these reviews. Hilarious!

marfrie56 Seemed as though a LOT was taken from The Walking Dead. Not saying that anything was directly lifted from the TV Series - maybe there are just so many plot devices you can muster for a zombie thriller - but still, I've seen it all before. But having said that, it was darned scary - much more so than The Walking Dead. I lost my fear of those walkers somewhere in season 1 because you see so much of them. Here, they (the zombies) are used much more judiciously, therefore - to much greater effect. The interpersonal dramas were good. The creepiness factor was good. The bleakness of the outback, all the sets, the actors, it was all good. Just the ending seemed to me to not work well, and the way the characters changed at the end. Other than that, engaging throughout.

PhoenixCongo This movie was so dumb I have no idea how it got funding, why the actors appeared in it unless it was to make the rent. The girl gets raped while her bitch boyfriend lays on the grass and cries like a coward, this after he held a gun to the man's chest who eventually rapes his woman...its so stupid, badly written. The guy can shoot his female friend who is infected but can't shoot the man dragging off his woman. Can point a gun at a soldier outside the farm while his woman is getting raped inside the farm. John can kill the soldier, but couldn't put a bullet into the soon to be rapist throat before the lunatic rapes his girlfriend? And then after taking a rifle from a soldier, and shooting the rapist, the rapist is able to get a shot of at the girl. After all that, still the woman feels safe to travel with John? I wish she shot the rapist and then shot John, and drove off. The woman is nothing but a screaming prop. She deserved better as an actress and as a character. Movie is dumb. Dumb. Dumb.