The Cure
Tags: revenge, murder, sadist, flashback

Plot synopsis:
Set in a small town of Stillwater, Minnesota, Erik (Brad Renfro) is a 13-year-old adolescent loner with an emotionally abusive and neglectful workaholic mother, Gail (Diana Scarwid) who hardly spends time with him. His father, who treated Erik considerably better than his mother, lives in New Orleans. Dexter (Joseph Mazzello), an 11-year-old boy who contracted HIV through a blood transfusion, is Erik's neighbor. Initially, Dexter is put off by Erik, but they become both good friends despite their differences. Erik seeks a family in Dexter and his congenial mother, Linda (Annabella Sciorra), due to his bad relationship with Gail, but Erik keeps the friendship a secret from her, knowing that Gail won't approve.
Gail discovers the friendship one night after Linda comes over to ask Erik about something Dexter ate in the boys' quest to find a natural cure for his disease. She is furious and warns Linda to keep Dexter away, but Linda, who resents her, ignores her and encourages the friendship. When the boys read an article in a tabloid about a doctor in distant New Orleans who claims to have found a cure for AIDS, they set out on their own down the Mississippi River in the hope of finding a means of saving Dexter's life.
Initially, the boys start taking a boat down the river with a bunch of degenerates, but eventually steal their money (as they were never treated well by the group) and try to hitchhike the rest of the way. When the boatmen find that their money has been stolen, they locate the kids at a bus station and proceed to chase them until they reach a dead end in a dilapidated building. Erik draws a switchblade, causing one of the men to draw a knife as well. Dexter suddenly grabs the knife from Erik, and cuts his hand to cause himself to bleed. He threatens the boatman with his blood, saying that he has AIDS and could easily transfer the disease to him (the boatman has open wounds on his arm as a result of an injury received when chasing the boys). Dexter then chases the boatmen off, threatening them with his bleeding hand. Once the two men are gone, Dexter realizes what he has done in directly exposing his blood to the outside environment. He suddenly feels sick, so Erik helps to escort him back to the bus station. Realizing that their journey must end if Dexter is to be treated, Erik resorts to calling Linda to have her pick the boys up when they arrive on the bus in Stillwater.
Once they return, Dexter spends the rest of his time in the hospital. Erik stays with Linda, knowing that not only will Gail be angry, but she will not let him visit Dexter in the hospital. Dexter and Erik prank the doctors three times that Dexter's dead. But when the third doctor arrives to check him, Dexter really has died. While driving Erik home, Linda notices a mother holding her young child while crossing the street. With the child serving as a reminder of Dexter, she pulls over and breaks down crying. Erik apologizes to her, saying that he should have tried harder to find a cure. Linda, taken aback by his comment, embraces Erik, explaining that he was the happiest thing in Dexter's difficult life. Upon arrival at home, they are confronted by a furious Gail. When Gail starts to hit Erik, Linda quickly intervenes and asks to talk to her privately.
Once the two are inside Linda's home, Linda angrily and tearfully informs Gail about Dexter's death and demands that she allow Erik to go to the funeral and be a better parent to him or she will report her abuse and neglect to Child Protective Services. Realizing all that she has done to Erik, Gail breaks down and guiltily complies.
At the funeral, Erik places one of his shoes in the coffin and takes one of Dexter's to let sail down the river (as earlier in the trip when Dexter's having nightmares, Erik told Dexter to hold one of his sneakers as a reminder that he's always by his side). This way, the shoes represent the boys' souls and their will to live.

Review: An interesting idea completely wasted in a boring film.
Some obscure television actors wanted to play in a movie and they chose this one.
I can only call it a bad career move.The basic idea of the film is that a "cure for cancer" was found.
It not only cures all types of cancer concomitantly, but it is also a single molecule, easy to produce.
The problem with this type of medicine is that it is a lot less profitable than painful drugs with side effects that rarely cure anything, therefore the evil medical corporation withholds it and instead pretends to always develop new, better stuff.It is an interesting concept that might work if explored properly.
Unfortunately we instead get a bunch of emotional "young brilliant researchers" running around the medical facility followed by incompetent bad guys while they explore their various insecurities and emotional issues.
They also explore those badly, so there.Bottom line: The Cure does a pathetic and predictable bait and switch, pretending to discuss the moral and financial angles of a real cure for cancer and instead giving us a low budget, badly acted, chase in a locked building movie..
Worst.
This is the worst "action" movie I have ever seen.
It doesn't deserve an in-depth analysis.
It took me two separate sittings to finish the movie.
I am a big supporter of independent films and this didn't match up to you tube independent films.The acting was corny, the buildups were predictable, and the smoke did not make any sense.
It started as yellow but turned into cheap fog machine smoke?I do not know what made me watch this film but it is not a surprise that it is not well known.
Trust me, do not waste your time..
A brief review.
Okay, there's a number of reviews here already ranging from horrible to mediocre.
They really should be sufficient to give you the right idea.
But on the off chance they don't...I started watching The Cure with the best intentions as I'd read no reviews.
I figured it'd be in the same vein as Contagion or REC.
This is not that film.Go ahead and watch if you wish.
Ignore the warnings presented to you.
In a digital era there's little harm in giving something 15 minutes.
If after 15 minutes the alarms in your mind have yet to ring out "Hmmm this is a bit rubbish" maybe you'll be able to manage the rest of the movie and be amongst those who'd rate this a 5..
The Cure: Good ideas, flawed execution.
I'm not a big conspiracy guy but The Cure deals with one that personally I think is very feasible.
I'm referring to the cure for cancer existing but it being more profitable to treat than to cure.The story is powerful and heart wrenching, made even more impactful by just how realistic the concept is.I was really enjoying it but was saddened to see two things take place.
One character bounces from being likeable to detestable every other scene like I've never experienced before.Secondly the story becomes a bit far fetched, I'd have rather have seen a slow burning thriller without the need for guns and explosions.
The front cover even shows it off to be exactly that, but it should have been so much more.The Cure is a USA/NZ joint venture and a passable one at that, but it should have been better.
If only they'd kept their feet on the ground.The Good:Excellent conceptCast do a decent jobMostly well writtenThe Bad:Inconsistent charactersGets a bit daft by the endThings I Learnt From This Movie:If you don't think the worlds governments/big pharma companies would/will do this you're out of your mindNot every movie need guns damnit.
The budget isn't even the biggest problem.
Sometimes I see movies, where at the end i'm like..This could have been great with a bigger budget.
This isn't that kind of film.
The story starts to get very unrealistic way too soon.
The characters make way too many stupid choices.
So I just kept thinking "Why!!!??!!" Then there's the annoying looking in the camera.
I love it when Kevin Spacey does it, but here they do it when talking to another character.
Which is quite distracting and keeps you from really getting into the movie.O yeah and then there's the sound editing.
It seems that someone sometimes accidentally hit the off switch while mid-scene.
Really quite confusing.
This is potentially the worst film I have ever seen.
Without spoilers, as there are no surprisesThere are no surprises, the actors are awful, the storyline is questionable and it was a total waste of 1,5 hours.Award for bad acting goes to this movie.I seriously recommend NOT watching this movie.
Not even the concept of it is particularly appealing.There was no point in the movie that sparked an interest in me.
Boredom and the fact that I bought the movie kept me from stopping it at an earlier stage.Awaiting The Cure 2, where the same actions will be performed by different people in a different pharmaceutical company..
Not a bad movie at all.
It's a OK movie with an OK story.I like the flashback parts in the movie which is a big plus.
Background music is good.
However, the movie lacks depth in screenplay and lots of plot hole.The actors were OK.
For the budget they have spent, we cant ask for great graphics.
A better characterization for all the actors and more screen time for CEO would have made the film better.
Its definitely not a 3.5 movie or worst movie I have ever seen.
It deserves 6 for trying.I liked it because the initial 30 minutes were gripping and I will give it a 6 for their attempt..
Worst movie ever!.
Ironically, this movie was so bad that it gave me cancer....
I mean seriously, where do I start?
Should I tell something about the terrible acting?
Or about the fact that huge explosions went unnoticed by characters in the movie?
Perhaps I should tell you something about lack of consistency?Now I can hear you thinking: perhaps I should watch this movie...
Don't!Perhaps you're thinking: This movie is so terrible that I should watch it for fun...
Don't!Can I get a refund?.
Enjoyable (ish).
I was very interested in the subject matter regarding this movie.
I do honestly believe that there are cures for cancer and other diseases, however the powers that be, do not want for these cures to be in the public domain.I wanted for this to be a good movie, such as Outbreak with Dustin Hoffman, however this really fell short of that, and to be honest I am being generous to give it a six out of ten.If you are into conspiracy then you will probably enjoy this film, as it will be the same subject matter that you read and believe in.
If you are not however then the film is not too bad to watch and as long as you keep an open mind and try not to analyse it too much, then it is a pretty good hour odd spent on the sofa.Would I purchase this at full price.
Honest answer is no.
At a budget price then yes it would be a good shelf filler.
Would I watch it again, yes maybe in a few months or more.
It would not be a movie that you could watch twice in one week, unlike some other movies..
Cure for cancer(s).
First, this film is based on a false premise to anyone who had a family member with cancer.
It is actually over 100 diseases, most of which the causes are unknown.
That's why chemotherapy is so hard on the body.
It has to kill both healthy and unhealthy cells.
In addition, many of the drugs are dozens of years past their patent.
Now imagine that in fact a drug did exists that would cure everything from the ranges starting at childhood leukemia progressing to prostate and breast cancers.
Any company in their right mind would want to make the trillions a drug like this would be worth.
Not to mention that in 7 years they could release an extended form like Ambian did with Ambian CR to avoid secondary cancers from the initial chemo and so on to extend the patent.The acting is sub-par, only the female lead shows future promise.
This is the first full length feature by Gould who wrote/directed/produced this film.
With the pounding music I wonder if he also did the sound editing as well..
Not horrible.
Not horrible.
The few reviews of this movie make it out to be a horrible blockbuster.
Take it for what it is, a movie that really should have been a documentary on the current state of the Cancer industry.
Yes its a bunch of B or C actors you've never heard of, so?
I was playing video games and watching the movie, so maybe it wasn't as bad to me because I wasn't 100% focused on it.
Anyhow the movie is true to the idea that there really is a cancer cure and its easily obtainable, yet the drug companies make billions off not having a cure, so they would do anything to kill actual progress in finding a cure.On the other hand, I'm not sure how this was made into a movie, lol.
If the topic of cancer interests you, this movie might also.
Not worth your time based on actor performances, cinematography (the entire movie takes place basically inside a lab), dialog, or strength in plot..
This held me for quite a while but the soundtrack and over-action got too silly..
The measure of a watchable film for me is how long it holds me; this one was about 60% until the soundtrack and the daft action got to me.
The soundtrack is incessant drumbeat; sometimes there are layered sounds such as "music", police siren, sounds of actors, etc.
but the music conquers all for its constant boring beat.
The action from before halfway got really silly; we were supposed to believe that some hired guns would have sub-machine guns and other weapons as if going to war, and acting as if that was the case when it was just a trio of scientists they were up against.
Really this was 2 out of 10 because of the above but somehow I was held, so there must have been something more interesting than the usual ...
possibly some reasonable acting..
Waste of a story..
Good story but not much else was great about this.
The music was mixed at 11 all the way through with little emotional nuance, and the music is way too repetitive.
It kind of ruined what good there was in this.
Absent sound design.
The casting is bad.
The actors exhibited barely any chemistry between each other.
Unimaginative shot angles.
Some ridiculous visual effects.
Bizarre continuity and pacing.
Though it did provide a few good laughs with classic B movie fodder distributed throughout.
It's a pity because if a cure for cancer were found this story depicts a possible scenario for that eventuality, that is suppression of the cure.
This movie does not help bring the realism to the possibility because it is so amateur.
My advice to the David Gould, please hire experienced professionals in their respective crafts next time you make a film.
In particular hire a notable casting director - many of your actors were not that talented or directed well and in the wrong combinations.
The two Mexican 'guinea pig' characters were the best cast actors in this film, performing with strong characterization to match their scripted roles..
Waste Of Time.
the CURE for cancer is already out there but the company wants to keep it as a secret to make more money..........this is a slow paced , no thriller , no action.....
and no suspense at all,whole movie is predictable ....
reason i gave 2 ,,,, is for the radiation suites because the were the funny outfits , how can someone cant design the radiation suit in 2014 as it should be ...
a particular scene where bad guys blow the -6 level door was simple a school project graphics ...
i laughed at 2 points ...
1 looking at the great radiation suit and blowing the door ,,,,, guns look plastic made ....
there are many things i can name them but its not worth it ..acting is awful....
story predictable........
PLEASE Don't WATCH THIS SORRY MOVIE.
Waste of time and waste of money.
An interesting idea, that was completely destroyed by brainless characters.
This movie had so much potential: A scientist discovers that her employer has the cure for cancer, but doesn't sell or publish it, because he makes more money by not curing it.The science of this movie is ridiculous in every possible aspect, but that's not the bad part.
What kills this movie is the fact, that every single character is just beyond stupid: At one point 3 PhDs discover a very small explosive device (perhaps 20g) with a 15 minute timer in their lab, close to a virus container.
Nothing stops them from just moving it to another room, away from the container, behind a desk etc.
Instead they nearly die trying to get into hazmat suits in time.Another thing that happens over and over again: Every door in the building is locked, because their key codes are disabled.
They act seriously surprised every single time and never take the codes from the bad guys.Characters in movies often do stupid things, story lines often have minor flaws, usually no big deal.
But The Cure makes it really hard not spending the entire time shaking your head in disbelief: All the "good guys" are standing right outside...
why wouldn't they just open the window and go out or scream for help?
It was still an entertaining movie, mostly because the female lead did a very good job, and it was well produced.
But at a certain point the logic and character flaws made watching just painful..
good one, but could have been better.
short and sweet, packs in a lot of suspense.
great for a one time watch.
the only thing off about it is, maybe the lack of proper directorial skill by the maker or the lack of funds.
it would have been a great movie with a few stars thrown in or some budget to produce a better exhilarating effect on the viewers.
the story is great, but not as fresh or new as one would assume or like it to be.
there is a cure for cancer found long ago, but has not been released for monetary benefit.
the story revolves around how a group of people escape a laboratory after they have found the secret of the cure and the owner o the company tries to kill them without any trace of him trying to kill them.
overall, perfect for a boring Sunday afternoon...