MovieChat Forums > Outbreak (1995) Discussion > Contagion (2011) vs Outbreak (1995)

Contagion (2011) vs Outbreak (1995)


which is better?

reply

Outbreak is more entertaining though highly unbelievable.

Contagion is realistic and thus scary in that regard. It’s the better film too.

reply

Realism doesn’t make a film better. Superhero film? I hate them but most people don’t.

People like and care for cinema will see how Outbreak is better than wannabe documentary Contagion.

reply

I didn’t say realism makes a film better. Didn’t even allude to it.

Just stated that I felt Contagion was scarier due to the realism and in a separate sentence that it was a better film in my opinion. I liked Outbreak too and think it’s a good film.

reply

I understand

reply

Contagion is WAY better in my opinion.

reply

I Am Legend

reply

Contagion 8/10

Outbreak 7/10

reply

Contagion is a good, well-made film, but I watched it once and have never felt the desire to revisit it. While it IS good, it's also depressing and not much fun.

Outbreak takes itself less seriously and is an over-the-top popcorn movie, and as a consequence is a lot more fun and rewatchable than Contagion. As I said, I've watched Contagion once. I've Outbreak twice just in the past two or three years and I was thinking earlier that I'd kind of like to watch it again. It's a great mid-90s action thriller of the sort that we don't get much of anymore.

reply

Both were terrible films. Contagion was more ridiculous because it pretended to be serious, and only garnered new attention because of the supposed coincidence with Covid. I can't stand any of the actors, and the script was just dumb: kidnapping someone to get a fake vax sent to a village?! I never liked Soderbergh.

reply