NOTE: Every photo on this page was taken on Kodak ColorPlus 200, developed at a professional film lab, and scanned with an Epson V600
I have to say that I didn't expect to like this film. Everything I had seen called it out as inferior and after some research it's obvious why. ColorPlus 200 is actually Kodacolor VR 200 from 1982 and discontinued in 1986. It's been re-branded and re-released mostly overseas to compete with Fuji C200. It's a harder film to find in the US as a result but you can special order it from most film labs where it's typically a few cents cheaper than Kodak Gold 200.
The film behaves a lot like you'd expect for a film that as discontinued in the mid 80's. The film's resolution is very poor with large easily visible grain. The film has surprising dynamic range with surprisingly accurate color if a bit desaturated and warm I've become quite fond of the look and really my only complaint is the poor resolution. This film is soft. It's significantly softer than Kodak Gold 200 which isn't a particularly high resolution film to begin with. I like the look though as it convey's a specific period of time with the look.
I would completely believe you if you told me there were photos from the 80's and not ones I took within the last year. The film has such a distinct look that I can't get enough of. To be clear though you don't need to shoot this film to get these colors. It's easy enough to simulate this look and feel in post so using the film just for the look wouldn't make much sense. To me it's the combination of both the look and the tactility of film that make it so enjoyable.
Given the old formulation of the film stock I would expect it to be a poor performer when pushed or expired. The large grain would become even larger and the gentle colors would be lost by oversaturation and excess contrast. In my experience though this film wants to be shot at box speed or even slightly slower than box speed like 160 ISO. The film needs light to thrive otherwise the negative characteristics are going to probably be displeasing.
With the low cot of the film I think there's no reason to not try it. You might find you really like this film as I have. Make sure you temper your expectations as this is no Portra or Ektar for sure. Hell on a technical level Kodak Gold 200 is superior in almost every way, costs only slightly more, and is much easier to get in the US. Keep this in mind as you are effectively shooting a 40 year old film stock. Don't be afraid though - jump in and give it a try.