disgusting, overrated, pointless

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

An ancient pestilence called The Scourge has been set free in a small town after being entombed in a church's masonry for a century and a half...We start off with a bit of promise because of a wild naked man. That always sparks my interest. But sadly, that was probably the best part of the film.Is the actress who plays Lydia the worst actress ever? Possibly. But then again, the skateboard chick is pretty bad, too. These poor performances are unfortunate, because with better ones this might have been a decent movie -- indeed, we have more than passable blood effects and while the film is a tad heavy on the CGI... it is not the worst CGI you will see this year.But seriously... How many times can you say "sweetheart" within five minutes? We need a script doctor.

Let me start off by saying I didn't love, like, dislike, or hate Scourge. It left me with a very indifferent feeling. Let's start with the pros. The concept behind Scourge is really cool and almost a fun idea. The effects and camera-work were well done. Some scenes were especially better than others (For example a scene in a mall involving an "infected").Here are the cons. The acting is wooden and it's hard to get into the story when your characters take dramatic pauses after they say something that's supposed to keep you in suspense. The acting was especially horrid from the ladies in this movie. The story never get's as exciting as it should be because the script is so boring it leaves you wanting to watch an action packed movie as opposed to a slow-burn psychological horror. It tried to be a gory and action packed horror movie that was also psychological and slow burn which in my opinion failed because the two styles clashed.I'd say skip it if you see it at stores and pick something up you'll know you'll enjoy. Even though it's technically sound it can't save awful actors and a lifeless script. Wait for it's syfy run.

Scourge starts during 1871 in a churchyard in a small town called Harborford in Washington where an ancient evil is seemingly trapped for good. Jump forward about 150 years later & Harborford the town is still there, unfortunately after a spot of arson the local church has been burnt to the ground much to the dismay of local fireman Josh (Mensah Iruoje) who has the task of shifting through the rubble. While doing this he uncovers a small chamber from inside which something attacks him, the once trapped ancient evil known as the Scourge is loose. The Scourge enters & possesses people, it eats their guts & then moves onto the next person. Local Sheriff Durst (Russell Ferrier) blame local bad-boy Scott Miller (Nic Rhind) after he makes advances on his pretty niece Jesse (Robyn Ledoux) & his present girlfriend Lydia (Marina Pasqua) is the first victim of the Scourge found. Scott & Jesse team up to prove his innocence & rid the world of the Scourge once & for all...This American Canadian co-production was written, co-produced & directed by Jonas Quastel & while I wouldn't say Scourge is any sort of masterpiece I didn't think it was all bad & certainly better than I was expecting although saying that I had zero expectations so that isn't saying that much. I had a choice last night, I could have either watched this Scourge or the South Korean monster flick The Host (2006) & after I saw Scourge went on for 90 minutes & The Host went on for 120 my mind was made up & I have to say I don't regret my decision since this was alright. The pace is good although not that much happens (the majority of the film features nothing more complex than the Scourge creature moving from body to another for no real apparent reason), the character's are better than one might expect & the body hopping creature plot is quite effective although it's not a patch on the likes of Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) or The Thiing (1982) which feel very similar to Scourge in the way they play out. There's not to many why's or explanation's given & a lot of the plot is fairly basic & undeveloped or simply glossed over, if this Scourge needs to feed so regularly how did it survive trapped under a church for 150 years? Why don't those who it burrows into know that the Scourge is in them after they have just seen it enter them? Why didn't the geezers in the opening scene set in 1871 kill the Scourge? So while Scourge might have been more satisfying had the makers fleshed a few of the ideas out & developed a little more of a coherent back-story I can't really say it's a bad film but at the same time I am not sure if I can describe it as a particularly good one, it's certainly better than I had expected but that's no recommendation in itself & I can't say it's any better than average so I won't.The film has a fairly nice slick look about it & there's a nice shot right at the start where the camera pans down the side of a church at night in the pouring rain right to the bottom, to be fair it looks better than most straight-to-DVD releases, particularly in the horror genre at least. The gore levels are low which doesn't help it, a guy is punched in the face & his jaw half rips off, there's some peeling skin & a bit of blood splatter but little else. There's no nudity unless you count the beefy black firefighter dude who takes a shower. The CGI computer effects are quite good actually, the actual effects on the Scourge creature are impressive & the thing looks good with it's mouth full of sharp teeth & lots of tentacles flapping around. The exploding cop car looks terrible though.Although set entirely in Washington state Scourge was filmed in Nanaimo in British Columbia in Canada on a budget of about $1,500,000. The acting is decent enough from a cast none of whom I recognise from anything else at all.Scourge isn't the best body possessing styled horror film ever but it isn't the worst either, I didn't dislike it but at the same time I didn't exactly love it. Watchable if there's nothing else on telly & you can bag a copy going cheap or better still rent it. Could have been worse for sure but then again it could have been better.

IMDb's synopsis for SCOURGE reads far better than the movie itself. An ancient evil is accidentally released in our time and jumps from body to body as it goes about doing something or other. I was never sure what. A young man is suspected of a string of murders, which actually is the thing jumping from body to body (through the belly button, I might add) and leaving each former victim dead dead dead. The creature is a close copy of the alien creature from THE HIDDEN, which also leaps from body to body as it goes about its business, which involves eating a lot, driving a very fast car, trying out sex for the first time, and running for president. At least that creature had a purpose. This one doesn't seem to know what it wants. The creature effects are not bad, but the acting is from hunger and there's little plot. I watched this on DVD one day and SPLINTER, about a parasite that attacks and absorbs people's bodies, on TV the next day. Watch SPLINTER instead. Or THE HIDDEN, which I first saw in the movies and consider a semi-classic, even if it is a knockoff of ALIEN and THE TERMINATOR.