Germ (2013) User Reviews

Cannibalistic virus action not scary enough

[SnoopyStyle · 4/10 · 15 December 2013]

A satellite crashes near a small town in the middle of the woods. Something from space came with the satellite, and starts to turn the townfolks into cannibalistic freaks.

This is an indie with freaks running around attacking people. It could be a scary watch if it's done right. This one isn't right. It tries to have that kinetic feel, but the camera work doesn't accentuate the action. This is not '28 Days Later'. The camera is not aggressive enough. There is a lot of blood, a lot of killing, a lot of running, and not enough excitement.

In addition, the movie starts excruciatingly slow. It's 25 minutes before anything interesting happens. It's even longer before we get the first kill. That's way too long for a modern horror movie.

I'm not put off by the low budget. In fact, I think they got good value for their money. The acting is pretty good for a low budget horror. Even the little kids put in good performances. But the directions don't show any sparks or originality. There is nothing special here, and there are too many glaring problems.

The Action Is the Key to This Movie

[Uriah43 · 5/10 · 29 November 2013]

A satellite carrying a space-born virus lands near a small town which turns those residents nearest to the impact into raving zombies. Soon the people of the town are caught up in a life and death struggle with no immediate help coming in the near future. Anyway, so much for the plot which is hardly original. Add in the fact that this was a low-budget film and one could probably understand why my expectations were somewhat jaded. However, I was mildly surprised as the directors (J.T. Boone and John Craddock) managed to make the most out of what they had and were able to produce a decent enough zombie picture. Most of this hinged upon the fact that the action was so dominant that the lack of costly special effects and the unknown actors were subordinate to it. That said, there isn't much here that will excite bloodthirsty gore hounds. Again, the action is the key to this movie. Now, would I have preferred a bit more gore? Yes. But I suppose I can't reasonably fault anybody for putting a priority on action instead of gore. Especially since the decision resulted in a satisfactory movie overall.

Ugh

[gavin6942 · 3/10 · 2 May 2014]

The military's attempt to shoot down an orbiting satellite unleashes a space-borne epidemic on a remote, small town.

You can change the name of your film from "Germ Z" to simply "Germ" in order to try and hide the fact this is a low, low, low budget zombie film with a no name cast and crew... but we will still figure it out. The fact Netflix recommended it to me while simultaneously saying I would give it less than two stars is a mystery... but they got me to watch it, so well played.

Saying I hated it would be unfair, because there are so many worse films out there (have you seen "Hell's Threshold" yet?). But I sincerely hope I never have to watch this again.

Worth seeing

[sebpopcorn · 18 June 2013]

A satellite crashes bringing with it a virus that turns people into people chomping cannibals. All of this takes place around a sleepy small American town protected by a very young deputy sheriff.

I thought it was a pretty good movie, or at least a nice fast moving one most of the time. There's plenty of action and the effects were pretty good and so was the acting.

The camera work is annoying in places though. For some reason it wobbles around wildly when two people are talking but is steady in the action scenes. In some scenes actors nearly vanish off the screen for lack of a tripod.

There's also all that military hardware just sat around as scenery. I would have thought a dozen or so soldiers would give a horde of zombies a run for its money, it's a shame we weren't shown that or more of the hazmat guys freaking out about the situation.

Well nobody likes a long review so I'll just say I liked it and if you like zombie movies and that kind of thing this is a pretty entertaining movie and definitely improves from its shaky opening.

One bad low budget film

[trentpatterson518 · 2/10 · 8 September 2013]

Tried to watch this one, but talk about boring. It takes 40 minutes before anything happens. There are not really any likable characters in this film, because there is really no character development. As for the special effects, if you can catch any, are bad. It cuts away anytime someone would get shot or bitten so you never really see anything. Acting seems forced and not natural, not that it should be expected as Oscar material. All in all I wouldn't recommend this, the film cover is deceiving. I would generally stay away from any low budget zombie flick, some are good but the majority are awful. **/10. Stick with George Romero's films. Which contain plenty of gore and great special effects.

An uninspired zombie film set in central New York

[krachtm · 4/10 · 17 April 2014]

The plot: After a satellite falls in central New York, the hapless townspeople are transformed into ravenous zombies.

As far as zombie film plots go, this is hardly an original one. I doubt most people watch direct-to-video zombie films for original ideas, so we can probably overlook this issue. Less forgivable is the acting and directing. After the first ten minutes, I was ready to turn this off, but I decided to give it a chance. After all, this was made not too far away from where I live, and I was curious what a Syracuse-area zombie film would look like.

I'm happy to report that the film does get better after the first excruciatingly bad minutes, but it's still an uphill battle. We're introduced to quite a few characters, none of whom are especially interesting or memorable. The acting is about what you'd expect for a direct-to-video zombie film, but it should be more-or-less tolerable for genre veterans used to lowering their standards.

Once the zombies appear, the pace quickens a bit, but the action scenes are really no more interesting or memorable than the characters. Zombies siege a house, zombies siege a car, zombies siege a police station -- these are not quite inspired scenarios. If you're just looking for a bit of zombie action and low budget gore, this will hold you over until the next direct-to-video zombie film arrives, but there's little recommend about this particular entry in that crowded arena.

For a film that I originally thought was unsalvageable and boring, it eventually did turn into a slightly more interesting film. The problem is that it never really peaked any higher than mediocre. I doubt anyone outside of the central New York area will be as amused by the novelty of its setting, and this is really the only reason why I finished it. If you really want to see New Yorkers terrorized by monsters in low budget horror films, Larry Fessenden, Jim Mickle, and Larry Cohen are better choices.

Unimaginitive

[leanne-dan · 1/10 · 11 September 2013]

Although the movie takes 40 minutes before anything actually happens, it makes a poor attempt to introduce the characters to the viewer.

The sheriff looks about 17, the deputy sheriff looks about 50 and it seems he is a jack of all trades as he is also the local doctor and pathologist.

Apart from the terrible acting and poor dialogue, it is difficult to relate to any of the characters as they are so 2 dimensional.

The storyline doesn't go anywhere, the effects/makeup are poor, and the ending in particular is downright pathetic. Confusing timescales and lack of direction makes for very dull viewing, this movie seems as though it was just thrown together by kids in a few days. Also, if you were expecting gore etc, look elsewhere as the camera pans away whenever anyone gets shot or bitten.

Has Potential

[exoteric88 · 5/10 · 2 August 2014]

I agree with reserved, but positive opinions. This movie has potential for some of the settings and scene direction, as well as some actors' acting. For the budget expectations, this movie shows promise to those involved on many levels. Granted, some of the actors make you cringe, but that happens. As for the overall movie itself, it is an acceptable addition to the zombie genre. Some negative reviews suggest that those reviewers didn't even bother to watch past the first few minutes but merely passed judgement. If you're looking for up and coming, this would be the movie to see, rate, and find talent to recommend. If you're looking for Hollywood polish from every angle and related clichés that comfort you look elsewhere.

THE OTHER BAD NEWS

[nogodnomasters · 4/10 · 27 July 2018]

This is "Andromeda Strain" plus zombies. There are a limited number of characters in this film that involves a small mountain community. I managed to like one of the characters, the deputy with a sense of humor. The rest of the characters lacked depth and dialogue. The film moves slow for the first half and I was fairly bored up until that last 20 minutes. The plot while simple was haphazard. There is plenty of blood splatter.

Not Fangoria's best film, a disappointment.

Parental Guide: F-bomb. Near sex. No nudity.

Bad Acting, Awful Story, Rotten Movie!

[darad · 1/10 · 23 March 2014]

I don't know how anyone who wasn't paid off had anything honestly positive to say about this movie. Supposedly there's a Forest fire started from a satellite that was shot down for what reason, I don't know. You never see a fire, only smoke that looks like a barbecue nearby. Using the old stand by over used plot, the crashed satellite unleashes a germ turning people into you guessed it, flesh eating zombies!

Before you even consider wasting your time, take my word and put on anything else, even a plain old light bulb or perhaps find quality entertainment looking up at the ceiling and counting specks. I've found the back of my eyelids would have been a better alternative.

Thanks to the success of "The Walking Dead" a slew of cheap rip-off zombie movies are coming out quicker than zombies out of Atlanta's woods. This is about at the very low end of that bunch. It's not exciting, scary or interesting, only annoying because it lures you in thinking maybe, just maybe you might see something different. Well, you don't.

Space borne bacteria yield ultra-fast zombies.

[suite92 · 1/10 · 6 April 2014]

The 500,000 USD budget was not money well-spent.

A meteor crashes into a satellite, which falls to Earth. It releases a germ which causes cannibalism in its victims, including military responders and locals alike.

Parts of the satellite crash in the countryside in western New York. Local firemen investigate, and find gooey stuff on satellite pieces.

About 25 minutes in, the first zombie appears. Sigh. There are lots of zombies who meet their ends from shotgun blasts at close range.

Will the outbreak be contained? Will any of the early characters survive? Will any explanation be given other than 'stuff happens?'

------Scores------

Cinematography: 5/10 Occasional exposure mistakes, too many doses of shaky camera, way too much of the idiot biking in the woods while listening to her MP3 player. Blood effects range from poor to terrible. A woman barfs inside the deputy's cruiser, mostly onto the inside of the windshield. In one shot it's yellow; in the next it's blue, but still yellow on her mouth. The end credits were badly done.

Sound: 4/10 I could hear the dialog; this was a mixed blessing. The music was very amateurish. The plus 4 was mostly for the song during the end credits.

Acting: 0/10 Marguerite Sundberg, Michael Flores, and Mark Chiappione were irritating on the one hand, not interesting on the other hand. The actors who played the military were the worst.

Screenplay: 0/10 Close to the worst example of unrelenting bad dialog I've seen in the last year. None of the characters were worth caring about. The involvement of the military was of some importance at the beginning, then was dropped. The ending was not much of an ending.

Germ Z part 2!? Pleeeeease!!!!

[morganshades · 10/10 · 30 August 2019]

Will there be a part 2 where Max is alive still ? How Return of the Living dead is 1&2,with Michael Flores still!! Its good enough gore to me and there are all good and gorey as long as the guts and intestines come out,heart,but not waiting to the end like some nowadays,slow and boring,but not most nor this one!!

Definite Guilty Pleasure

[hudsonda4 · 7/10 · 26 April 2014]

Why am I rating this so high? I wish I knew. If you've read my other reviews then you know I'm a fairly harsh critic of new movies in the horror genre. That's not my fault, I just grew up with awesome horror movies that could scare the crap out of you and had a decent storyline with good acting.

The acting was definitely sub par. The zombie source is very unoriginal. The action scenes weren't all that good.

There were definitely cliché moments along with a bunch of scenes we've seen in other zombie movies. The gore scenes weren't even done very well. I could go on and on.

But seven stars............? The movie had a nice flow to it, something rarely ever seen in a B zombie flick. I'm not sure if there was supposed to be a bunch of comedy in this movie since it isn't billed as a comedy/horror, but it had me laughing out loud at some points and even talking at the screen. Maybe that's why I liked it so much?

If you can stand B horror with some good moments that may be unintentionally funny but still make you laugh and shake your head this is definitely the movie for you. But don't go into it expecting a lot of scares, there were none in this movie.

Worst zombie film since "What's Eating Gilbert Grape"

[captaincameron · 2/10 · 10 April 2014]

And, if you've seen Gilbert Grape, you might recall that as zombie films goes, it stinks. This one at least has zombies. Fast ones--like 28 Days Later zombies. Yes, technically they weren't zombies in that film, but technically this film is a piece of trash. Generic plot--satellite crashes to earth, some people turn into zombies and try to eat others. I didn't time it, but it seemed like about a month and a half before you actually see a zombie. Perhaps only half an hour or so. Characters flat. Well, a couple of bouncy ones but the $75 or so that each actress was overpaid was not enough for them to show flesh. Storyline flat. Zombies--fast, but nothing original. Violence--blurry. Lots of gunshots, lots of biting. Nothing unusual. But it's not the lack of originality that makes this film fail. It is this film's utter and complete failure as a film that makes it fail.

Zombies!!!

[morganshades · 10/10 · 29 August 2019]

With having the hots for Michael Flores as Max Brody the deputy,I like the meteor,toxic liquid with green smoke to get zombies animated,it became one of my faves,I only love zombie movies more,not much into vampires cause vamp movies got to be cheesy with werewolves kinds,tacky!! Zombie movies with this kind delivered for me!! I cry when he gets turned down by Brooke and she only loved him cause he was gonna turn,the way he talked to her made me melt,and cry!!! The way he won't give up and how he looks,not being fake,hope he's like that in real life and wish he lived in my town!! Anyway I loved it!! Is one of the perfect ones !! I know bad acting when I see it and this was not one of them !!!!

Its a OK film

[bob_wilson11 · 6/10 · 28 June 2014]

Low budget for sure!!

But I would have to say its probably realistic as it would probably be in real life.

I think we get spoiled if a major studio isn't involved that will spend 100 million plus on a special effects full movie with big name actors!

This is a little film but I felt Like this could happen to my town and I would act the same way these people did!! Its not the best acting movie but I enjoyed it more than World War Z !. So I guess it makes me nuts,still look at the Night of the Living Dead, it was made for all most nothing and it had a no name cast and a very low budget and it still was a hit and fun to watch today . So give it a chance its slow in spots. As I said its probably how real people would do if this happened to a real small town!!

Good movie, not a typical Zombie movie,

[vlwaldo-679-715885 · 9/10 · 16 June 2013]

I thought it was a very good movie, I recommend it to anyone that likes Zombie movies. With the title "Germ" I was not sure what to expect. But it is not your typical Zombie movie where people come back from the dead. But they do infect each other by a bite. And yes they eat people, Gross. I would have given it 10 stars but how I feel about a movie is much determined by the ending. And I hated the way it ended. But looking back I guess it does leave it open to make another movie. That would be nice because they left many loose ends. Many questions. At any rate, I give it a thumbs up I would watch it again, I can't say that about to many movies. So take a chance an watch it.

Low budget but done very well. Enjoyed

[Jester222 · 7/10 · 13 December 2020]

Deserves a higher score for sure. May be a low budget film but the acting is very good. Likeable characters and a fairly entertaining script.

Some nice gore effects, cheaply done but effective and nice amount of blood.

Couple of small continuity errors aside this was a very well directed Infection/zombie film. Far better than most and was kept gripped throughout. Nice pacing, no parts dragged and dialogue and actions of the people believable.

I'd even like to see a sequel.

One of the funniest part I've seen

[jasonslatestemail · 8/10 · 17 November 2023]

When the heavyset girlfriend of her boyfriend got mauled by a pack of zombies is asked to give a bite mark comparison to the sheriff.too brilliantly funny!

And the look on her face of disbelief is so believable.had me in stitches.feel it could have been a little more reserved I every so often want to rewatch it just for that skit.

One of the heaviest zombie shooting movie I've seen.they shoot so many zombies it's almost unnerving and mundane.

It could have been a little more reserved in over the top zombie shooting but most scenes are well done.

I feel knowing everyone got bit made the shooting effort of killing zombies in the movie a wast of effort.

Should have let the sheriff and his gal get away.

Who ever made this was a fanatic for shooting zombies. LOL.