'Outbreak' - High-Def Digest Review

[Attebery]

Peter has revisited some mid-90s nostalgia in the form of 'Outbreak.' He says the movie is kinda fun, but this is a pretty bland Blu-ray, with fairly good video and audio, but zero supplements. Give it a rent.

Full review here:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1653/outbreak.html

[RandellG]

Me own, me like, no N8 you can't have it

[DeathShrike]

First of all the movie is rated R. Second of all, Outbreak is no way an AIDS metaphor! As the review mentions it is inspired by the Ebola scares. The fictional Mutaba virus doesn't bare ANY resemblance to AIDS and neither does the hysteria surrounding it match the AIDS hysteria, even at it's fever pitch. I have no idea where the idea of the film being about AIDS would even come from. The virus travels at first by direct contact and then becomes airborne. AIDS is only transmitted via bodily fluids. This review says the AIDS reference is "implicit". How? Nothing in the movie resembles even the stereotypes of AIDS, let alone the actual facts of it. If anything the movie is preying upon general fear of disease, and super-viruses, but certainly not AIDS in particular. The fact that AIDS is never mentioned in Outbreak is not proof that the movie is "implicitly" about AIDS! The reason AIDS is not mentioned in the film (and the reason Ebola IS), is because AIDS has no relevance to the plot (while Ebola does)!

[davcole]

I found it a great movie but these reviews are scaring me. After the disappointments in ERASER's picture quality and UNDER SIEGE 2's lack of TRUEHD, i'm leery of purchasing another of these discount titles.

[Cinema Squid]

Not that it matters too much, but AIDS is indeed referenced briefly in the movie near the beginning - in the sequence where they go through the different isolation levels of the USAMRIID facility at Biosafety Level 3 (Anthrax, Typhus, H.I.V.). Technically, Peter is correct that it's not uttered, however, since it's just referenced in onscreen text.

The Japanese audio/subtitle situation is a little odd since these tracks are physically on the disc, but are not selectable from the disc popup menu nor from my player.

[alkalinesi]

ok just watched this movie on blu lastnight. yea the picture or sound wasnt the greatest. but how are you gonna rate the overall movie 3 stars? my opinion, this movie is done so well and the actors are great. awesome movie. terrible review.

[weaponX]

I watched this the other night and I was pleasantly surprised. Yeah, the audio and video are not great, but it does get the job done. Plus, this movie is just fun. Better than the three stars. I rarely read the movie review portion of HDD's reviews and I wish I didn't read this one. Oh well, everyone has their own opinion.

besides, for the $10 I paid for this, I couldn't go wrong.

[cheez avenger]

Originally Posted by DeathShrike

First of all the movie is rated R. Second of all, Outbreak is no way an AIDS metaphor! As the review mentions it is inspired by the Ebola scares. The fictional Mutaba virus doesn't bare ANY resemblance to AIDS and neither does the hysteria surrounding it match the AIDS hysteria, even at it's fever pitch. I have no idea where the idea of the film being about AIDS would even come from. The virus travels at first by direct contact and then becomes airborne. AIDS is only transmitted via bodily fluids. This review says the AIDS reference is "implicit". How? Nothing in the movie resembles even the stereotypes of AIDS, let alone the actual facts of it. If anything the movie is preying upon general fear of disease, and super-viruses, but certainly not AIDS in particular. The fact that AIDS is never mentioned in Outbreak is not proof that the movie is "implicitly" about AIDS! The reason AIDS is not mentioned in the film (and the reason Ebola IS), is because AIDS has no relevance to the plot (while Ebola does)!

*psst* Peter is the reviewer. He gets things wrong most of the time. It's his modus operandi .

[bfellow]

Wow for first time I rated PQ higher at 3.5/5 and AQ at 4/5 but I guess 3/5 I can partly agree on since a surround system rarely will get any work from this film.

At least its not like Twister BD where EE and DNR erased details of people's faces that you can see on DVD.

[davcole]

It's been a long time since i've seen it but I remember scenes like the explosion at the beginning of the film and the helicopter chase scenes as being sonically impressive on the DVD.

How are those sounds on the BD?

[HD 335]

I watched this last week and was disappointed in the PQ, soft on quite a few scenes and some of the shots with of the forest reminding me of Predator. I think 3 stars is spot on.

[Dealer6871]

I saw the movie last weekend and enjoyed it. Sure it's not a Tier 1 title, but I wasn't expecting it to be for $14.99. The picture and audio however, were a step above the DVD release. Besides, Dustin Hoffman and Morgan Freeman are two of my favorite actors.

[deviationer]

Originally Posted by alkalinesi

awesome movie. terrible review.

That seams to be the running theme at this site.

[DeathShrike]

Originally Posted by deviationer

That seams to be the running theme at this site.

I wish DVD/Blu-ray sites would focus all of their reviews on the discs themselves. I could really care less what a DVD expert thinks of a movie artistically. But even on the PQ/AQ front some of these reviews are ridiculous! I still have trouble getting over Kenneth's Perfume review, where he somehow managed to overlook the consistently disastrous black levels that other reviews mention, to give it a near perfect PQ rating. I just don't know when to trust the technical reviews on this site. I should just ignore the artistic ones anyway. I don't know why I didn't in this case.

[robertc88]

Don't agree with the AQ especially. This sounded very very good. Nice detail throughout and dialog not strained whatsoever. I'd say 4.0 and I have the lowly Onkyo SR605. Even my GF was impressed.