Overwhelming dislike - based on 17 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 17
  2. Negative: 14 out of 17
  1. An unpretentious, amusing thrill-a-minute sci-fi horror thriller / monster movie that plugs right into fears of a Y2K crisis.
  2. 50
    The script, based on a Dark Horse comic-book series, is hugely predictable, but the robot effects by veteran Phil Tippett are nastily entertaining.
  3. Reviewed by: Staff (Not credited)
    The pathogenic agent to fear, however, is the one that evidently turned every line of dialogue into inane gibberish.
  4. Reviewed by: Tom Meek
    The plot itself is a disappointingly gory concatenation of two recently forgettable sci-fi thrillers; "Hardware" and "Event Horizon."
  5. Reviewed by: Nicole Campos
    FX whiz John Bruno (Terminator 2, True Lies) makes a dubious directorial debut here, juggling monsters that are icky but not scary; an out-of-control Donald Sutherland as the tug’s Ahabesque captain.
  6. As long on adrenaline and special effects as it is short on genuine novelty and intellectual content.
  7. Reviewed by: Joe Leydon
    Curtis and Pacula are thoroughly convincing in thinly written roles.
  8. Everything in it is a cliche including the end.
  9. 25
    "Deep Rising" was one of the worst movies of 1998. Virus is easily worse.
  10. Some movies are a joy. Some are a chore. And some are sheer torture. A good example of the latter is Virus. [17 January 1999, Metro Chicago, p.8]
  11. No one is likely to claim it's a great, or even good, movie, but it does offer some guilty pleasures.
  12. Reviewed by: Andy Seiler
    The movie was postponed from 1998 and shielded from critics. (They were ot allowed to see the movie before the opening, usually a bid sign.) [15 January 1999, Life, p.8E]
  13. 25
    95 minutes of unrelieved tedium.
  14. Frankly, about 20 minutes into this dud, I was rooting for the alien beasties -- their diagnosis seemed dead-on.
  15. 20
    Until the diverting special effects take center stage, this story, about an alien intelligence that builds an army out of flesh and metal, pathetically exploits genre conventions without generating self-reference, camp, or thrills.
  16. 0
    This suspense-free, originality-deprived mess will likely be a major contender for the title of 1999's worst film.
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 18 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 6
  2. Negative: 2 out of 6
  1. Jan 13, 2012
    Il y a des films de monstres (ou l'équivalent) qui arrivent à sortir dans les salles grâce à leur budget, leur casting qu'ils offrent (ici, Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Sutherland, Cliff Curtis...) et quelques noms "sympa" au générique (James Cameron à la production, John Carpenter à l'écriture...), le tout non sans esquiver les nombreux défauts du genre (à savoir aucune originalité, surdose de clichés, personnages sans intérêts, dialogues indisgestes...). Certains s'en sorte par un sens du spectacle (Peur Bleue) ou bien par un effet comique ainsi que sa distribution (Lake Placid). Mais Virus en est bien loin, surtout avec des acteurs qui surjouent énormément, une absence de caricature pour ce genre de film question scénario (la fameuse réplique "Machin, sois prudent" est bien trop prévisible et fait pitié, l'humour ne prend pas...) et surtout pour un ensemble qui fait plus grand-guignol plutôt qu'autre chose. Juste les robots (animation, effets spéciaux) sont assez sympas, mais bon... Virus est comme le personnage de Jamie Lee Curtis : il ne sert à rien! Full Review »