Even if my opinion about the first series was mixed I decided to give the second one a chance. Indeed some of the topics covered fascinate me : Survivalism, security versus freedom, deadly virus, conspiracy… However I didn't like how the latest was pictured in the finale. Abby the host kidnapped by government scientists wasn't surprising at all. It's not that I was expecting the writers to go all The X-Files on us but they could have at least found a more original story arc. I really enjoyed the film Outbreak when it was released in 1995 but a lot has happened since then. In fact the idea itself is not bad it's just that the characters are quite predictable. I think the major issue is that they let us know who is lying and who is not. They should let us imagine things instead of serving us with cold and old dialogs. I don't want to be told who the bad guys are. I want to discover it by myself.
Hopefully the other arc, involving all the other characters, was far much more interesting. Their story started right after Greg was shot. They were caught in a twister of emotional and action scenes. I found the visual effects quite impressive and they really contributed to make the scenes believable and even more dramatic. However it's definitely the acting that convinced me the most. Indeed Zoe Tapper's performance as Anya was as good as in the first series. It's inspiring to see so much charisma on screen. Al was also excellent but I was slightly disappointed by Greg. His hallucinations were far too vivid when their design should have reflected his distress and health. As for Greg and Sarah one of their dialog was really sharp. It was a direct reference to what happened to one of them but the character who said it didn't know what it implied.
To sum things up I hated the conspiracy theory arc but enjoyed the survivalist one. But I don't think I'll watch the second episode because I couldn't take an other half hour of Abby the lab rat. Even the actress acting was questionable so now watching it or not is up to you.