Attack Force (Video 2006) Poster

(2006 Video)

User Reviews

Review this title
110 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
Horrible!
supertom-327 November 2006
Attack Force has a horrendous title, and can almost certainly be judged by it's awful cover, because the film is horrible! A mish-mash of plot lines, a choppy mess, and a horribly stagnated pace, make the film hard to watch start to finish. I managed this and I'm proud. As a fan of Seagal's work (mostly of his old days), it's painful to see him star in such tripe. True Seagal's last half dozen movies or so, have sucked a lot, but some of them at least had some redeeming features. Attack Force is a mess. From conception to delivery this film has undergone many changes, from an alien plot line, to the current one about a highly addictive super drug, about to be unleashed on the Romanian (the film has several settings, none of which are Romanian, but all look like Romania because they are in Romania!) populace. The film is tacked together with little regard for whatever state the original shooting script was. Plot-holes and loose ends are abound in the film that's for sure. That's been a problem in Seagal's last few films as well, but never has the result been so boring. There's a whole plot line about the water supply being poisoned with CTX (that's the drugs cool name) that is never resolved!

Of course in recent years the plot's haven't been the main draw in the Seagal canon so there was a big onus on the other departments, especially the action. Before I regard the action though, all the other departments are poor. The direction is poor, or perhaps better put, made to look poor. Who knows how director Michael Keusch originally intended this film? Between him finishing his job, the re-shoots by stunt man Tom Delmar, and the editing, a coherent auteur vision is completely lost. The best way to describe the film is that it's just all over the shop! The cinematography is dull, nearly inducing sleep, while the droning score (sounding like it was produced on the cheapest of cheap synthesizers) does nothing to excite matters. The cast too are poor, unable to salvage anything here. Seagal looks bored beyond recognition, and is dubbed through much of the picture, clearly when plot-points are being changed. He looks tired and overweight, and lethargic, unlike he's looked in previous pictures too (remarkable as the aforementioned have been key complaints in Seagal's recent pictures). The only redeemable cast member is Adam Croasdell as one of the villains, doing a slimy Brit routine. He seems to be a throwback to the alien plot line, because he's playing it inhuman. He seems like a cross between a body snatcher and a vampire (ditto to the lead villain played by some hot chick who appears on occasion, seemingly waiting for her husband… Dracula).

Finally the action. Well it's poor. Poorly conceived, poorly shot. There's not much either, and there's even less featuring Seagal. Stevo doesn't really bring out the stunt double here, because there's so little to do. There's even a lengthy (repetitive and boring) action scene on the hour mark that inter-cuts occasionally with little flashes of Seagal's stand in because clearly Seagal wasn't there while the scene was being shot, and they wanted to have him feature in the action scene. Seagal eventually appears in person to shoot two guys in the head. Seagal has a producers credit here and a script credit, but from what I understand the film has been altered behind his back to the current state it's in. Seagal will apparently not be working with these people again, or with Castel Studio's who continue to deliver horrifically sub-Nu-Image (that's saying something), material.

Overall this is one to avoid if you are not a Seagal fan. Seagal fans can also be safe in the knowledge that the big man probably won't want to do anything this bad again. Unfortunately his next film which has already been shot, with the same people, promises to be even worse than this. *
83 out of 94 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
wow Steven has sunk to a new low even lower than Submerged
xcoreninja26 November 2006
Okay like most Steven Seagal fans I know I not going expect a masterpiece every time he makes a film but I do expect the film to at least have some sorter budget. The main problem with the copy I watched was the terrible over dubbing I know that in some films this has to be done and I accept that but when they overdub with a totally different actors voice and keep doing this thru out the film it does take the magic of overdubbing away. Also the sets seem to be built with no care as in one scene the sliding glass top in a top secret lab has a massive crack going thru it. I was truly disappointed with this film and only hope Stevens next project will be more finished off before sending the film out for buying/renting. The story of this film had me wondering if I was watching a sci-fi film or not some parts seemed alien like but they never fully explained what was going on I found it very confusing.
39 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A horror movie disguised as an action film.
drss19426 December 2006
I buy or at least watch every Seagall movie. He came out with a handful of good movies then descending into poor stories, bad camera work and a walk-thru persona, he nearly lost me. A few movies ago he remembered how to make a decent movie. Now he's forgotten again. This film is seriously dark (on any level you care to name). There is a lot of slash & gash going on here with no discernible purpose unless it's meant as a warning against the military.

Seagall may have had a stand-in for many of his scenes as it was often too dark to tell and someone else's voice was used most of the time. Sadly the only interesting character was the bad guy who killed his guard to escape custody & then proceeded to raise havoc all over the place. Okay since when do we place an armed guard in the holding room with a prisoner? Anyway this bad guy was at least colorful, and very focused. There's lots of gore if you like that king of thing. It looked to me like the bad guys tore the same gash every time. I'm just glad they didn't suck the blood from their hapless victims. I harken you back to my summary. Basically it is a horror movie disguised as an action film.Dec 6,2006
28 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Dreadful - Have Moist Wipes and Anti-Bacterial Lotion on Hand b/c You'll Feel Like Shi'ite After Watching This
EdgeofEpic5 December 2006
I'm a huge Steven Seagal fan. Hell, I probably weigh as much as he does although I don't have the street cred to sport the frizzy-mullet-ponytail. Having stated my own bias and affection for America's favorite corpulent stage and screen hero, it is with a heavy heart that I must declare this to be his worst movie ever. I'm not sure he could make a movie any worse than this.

In his defense the major problems with this film seem to occur in post-production. It's painfully obvious that this movie was supposed to have a different storyline. That results in woeful voiceovers in which Steve's voice doesn't nearly sync up with that of the dubbed voice. The editing is pisspoor and overall this starts bad, gets even worse, and by the end you'll wish you had rewatched The Da Vinci Code instead. Yes, it's that bad.

After this I don't know what to expect from Steve. My friends still laugh at me for listening to his CDs. Is it time I start checking out some of the Van Damme direct to DVD nutty logs? If you are tempted to watch this movie, rip your eyeballs out and flush them down the toilet. A lifetime of darkness is better than 89 minutes of this.
80 out of 90 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
How to waste 12 million dollars.
argentobuff4 December 2006
I look around in the video store still in shock how Steven Seagal with his track record of Bad action movies can still have 3 movies hit the shelves in less than a Year.Attack force being the 3rd no less promised the first-time entrance into the Sci Fi Genre for our ever widening Seagal.Visions of bad movie entertainment flashed before my gullible eyes.Sadly this is not the case one bit with no entertainment and a movie as bad as they come.

Seagal rebounded a tiny bit with the Trashy-but enjoyable Shadow Man last time we saw him.However Attack force has to be his absolute worst movie ever!Don't argue for out for a Kill,Ticker,or even Black Dawn folks.This is the bottom of the Septic tank here.

Anyone who says this is Steven Seagal's return to form should be forced to write a 100 page essay on the word Taste.

Seagal is yet another agent/I'm a supreme bad-ass yet again named Lawson wants revenge for the killing of his Team that leads him to a nefarious plot to distribute a really bad drug to the unsuspecting public.Not to mention the dealers are not from around here.

The whole Production from Directing to the acting is poor.Was this movie shot in the Dark?Its gotta be the most poorly lighted movie since Howling 2.The action is terrible and very badly done.

The Producers have also unwisely decided to do what the fans hate the most:throw in stunt double after stunt double and horribly dubbed Steven Seagal.Who seems to show little enthusiasm here.Can ya blame him?

While it has been said that Attack Force was not the movie Stevie signed on for(originally Harvester)and surely has to be better than Attack force.The post-production tampering has not made it more coherent and made Seagal look worse.I feel bad for Directer Michael Keusch and writer Joe Halpin as they are gonna be judged forever for the ill-advised production re-shoots.

So Now This leaves Seagal in the impossible position to come up with something to atone for this mess.But after seeing how bad Attack Force has turned out do we really want him to make another movie?
69 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This is awful.
watchinuwatch7 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The movie is boring, the characters and scenarios are unrealistic, unbelievable, the action is hilarious. This movie is a big mess. It almost seems like when the action music kicks in, the most impressive stunt is running. Either voice is dubbed over with Mr. McGregor or steven sang too much and it changed his voice. There is way too much dialog in this movie, and extremely bad acting on everyones behalf. The movie is great sleep therapy. The fighting is laughable. The eye shape shift effect on the evil designer drug addict females was decent. The main villain was a joke and his character was poorly developed. The main villain was used to explain the story through interrogation, he would just throw random plots in such as (spoiler) "CTX (his designer drug)is going to be in the water supply" which is never addressed in the conclusion or even mentioned again in the movie. This movie is highly recommended to pass.
18 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Attack Force Just Trash
bait_cover21 January 2007
The DVD was a joke, the audio for the first few minutes was terrible with sound out of sync and Segals voice not even his!!!! Pathetic! When the audio sync was better in about 5 minutes the poor plot, lines and actors should get another job because the movie business is not where any of them should be.

While Segal had some good movies in the early days the latest ones are a joke and should be a an embarrassment to him and the company that made it.

If Segal was the one that handled this he better return to having another party run the show, because he has no talent what so ever in this.

This film is a complete embarrassment to all involved in its production and a disgrace to all who viewed it. I turned it off in about 20 minutes.

I will be asking for my money back at Block Buster! Mark from Ontario, Canada
32 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I can't take it anymore
comblitz11 December 2006
drss1942 really took the words right out of my mouth. I loved Segal's early films and feel like the only one who is still faithful to him. I just saw this movie (ok, fell asleep about 90% through, so I didn't see the end). When I woke up and saw I was at the DVD menu, I was thankful I didn't subject myself to any more of that movie and didn't dare find out what happened at the end. There was something strange about the voice of Segal and others. Kinda reminded me of the original Mad Max where the voice were dubbed, but in the same language (Australlian is English, right? :) Anyway, if I had 10 thumbs, they'd all point down right now for this Segal injustice.
28 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Steven Seagal makes yet another piece of total crap
dilbertsuperman28 November 2006
How do you spell washed up fat Italian who can barely pull off a martial arts move without needing some heart medication? In this movie we see Steven Seagal at his lowest level of accomplishment- since his career started it has been a steady decline into pathetic over indulgent behavior that has scuttled his career. In this movie it looks like most of his training consisted of ordering the fetuccini alfredo at his restaurant every day.

He is fat, slow and very old looking in this movie, hardly a martial arts action hero, more like a laughing stock clown.

It's time for Steven Seagal to retire- this movie is about 2 hours of reasons why.

Plot: fat Italian guy with a big reputation on the force gets wind that a crime group may be playing around with a drug designed by the military to create the ultimate warrior response. This pretense, although pathetic and laughable, gives opportunity for some over the top fight scenes that include blasting through walls like a comic book.

Did I mention this movie totally sucks and Steven Seagal is a complete joke? yeah. I did.
48 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Is Steven Seagal dead?
Quebec999 December 2006
I tried restarting the movie twice. I put it in three machines to see what was wrong. Did Steven Seagal's voice change? Did he die during filming and the studio have to dub the sound with someone who doesn't even resemble him? Or was the sound on the DVD destroyed? After about 10 minutes, you finally hear the actor's real voice. Though throughout most of the film, it sounds like the audio was recorded in a bathroom.

I would be ashamed to donate a copy of this movie to Goodwill, if I owned a copy. I rented it, but I will never do that again. I will check this database before renting any more of his movies, all of which were (more or less) good movies. You usually knew what you were getting when you watched a Steven Seagal movie. I guess that is no more.
30 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Seagal's best movie.
PathetiCinema13 July 2010
This movie has everything you could wish for from an action epic. Nice.

It has Seagal walking around in the dark and mumbling while wearing a black plastic looking knee length jacket. Gone are the nice black leather knee length jackets from his previous movies. Anyway, the knee length leather plastic jacket has to fight of hordes of junkies with a taste for junk. They attack with great force and a lot of people end up slightly dead. However, Steven Seagal's black knee length plastic jacket comes to the rescue and he mumbles at them and they all collapse. Nice.

Production values are high for this one. It must have cost at least a hundred dollars to make. Nice. Seagal really pulled out all the stops here( and all the jackets) and I recommend it as his finest work.
25 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Def worth The Rental
njbono-16 January 2007
OK I gave a higher rating then the movie is really worth, but just getting the laughter from this film is worth it.

The action is standard Segal action, lots of fighting and butt whipping. You can really see what this film intended to be originally - obviously an alien movie.

I love the parts where it goes from Segal speaking his lines, to John Wayne speaking Segals parts. I mean its just so funny.

So if you are looking for one of Segal's best movies this isn't it, but its funny as heck.

I do wonder, why would the studio think this would be better then what they had. What moron thought this up??
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh.. My.. God..
cybergrunt30 August 2008
I feel blessed to own what is known as the worst Steven Seagal movie ever made. I knew I was on to something special when Steven opened his mouth and someone else's voice came out. By the middle of the film my eyes were beginning to hurt and I was almost falling out of my chair with uncontrollable laughter.

Steven is Steven (with an ever changing voice) and totally unbelievable in his role (as always). Who the hell lets people with bad nappy-hair pony tail mullets into the Forces anyway? He also always writes himself into totally unbelievable love interests with women at least 20 years his junior. The supporting actors all look like they've been shot in the dark - btw, did they shoot this movie in the dark with just a penlight torch for lighting?

This is truly abominable in every way possible. Invite all your friends around and make a social event out of it - this one's truly special.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A poor attempt at a horror movie
KHayes66620 February 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I think its time for Seagal to go quietly into the night. What I have just seen makes all his direct to video releases in the last few years look like his early 90's smash hits in comparison.

A secret bio lab is making a new kind of drug that jacks up a human's adrenaline system to the point where they become psychopathic killers or something. Somehow Seagal is supposed to stop the infection or its the end of the world...or something. Seagal also went through hit squads like jellybeans, every time I look up he was commanding a new face so it kinda got hard to follow character development as well I know Steven's athsma prevent him from yelling at the top of his lungs but even so why is he constantly being dubbed by people who sound nothing like him? Usually the films plot and action sequences can save it from being a total waste of time but this was not even close. Like I said, it was more of a horror movie with a lot of blood and shank stabbing rather than straight up fighting. The problem was it wasn't really scary and Seagal looked completely out of place because the infected people were supposed to have speed of light movement yet the 40 year old 280 lb Seagal killed them all singlehandedly? I guess the lone highlight of the movie was the first 20 minutes where the new recruits ask Seagal to come to the strip club with them.

2 out of 10
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Seagal is dubbed
ChatosLand9 November 2017
Attack Force IMDb rating 2.8 / 10 at the moment. This is my first review so let's see what happens.

If you are reading this text you might be a hardcore Seagal fan and most likely will enjoy also this film. But the other people...

If you don't like Seagal movies at all this will probably score a 1-2 for you.

You like only Seagal classics? This will be disappointing (2-4).

But would you like to hear 75% of Seagal's lines dubbed and sounding like Danny DeVito? This film is just the right for you and easily a 9 or 10!!

I enjoy trash cinema and basically every Seagal movie but I have to say ATTACK FORCE is pretty bad. One of the worst I have seen from him. And that is what makes ATTACK FORCE good. Many Seagal movies are very forgettable and some of them are even quite boring (especially his direct-to-video stuff). But ATTACK FORCE is an exception. It has some supernatural themes and Seagal is dubbed so badly that you will remember this film.

I put ATTACK FORCE on my list called "Critics may not love these movies". Check that out if you like trash cinema: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls033200094/

My rating for Attack Force, 5/10.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
What the...?
DigitalRevenantX72 May 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Plot Synopsis: Three members of an US Special Forces team are killed in their hotel room by a woman they had brought with them for some fun. Their boss, Commander Marshall Lawson, tries to track down the killer, only to find that the woman was infected by CTX, a substance created by a covert arm of the US military in order to turn ordinary people into mindless killers. With government agents after him, Lawson teams up with the scientist who created CTX in order to stop the spread of the substance.

The Review: After the modest success of his debut film ABOVE THE LAW, Steven Seagal has spent the early half of the 1990s making action films, his career reaching its zenith with UNDER SIEGE. Like most action heroes of the era, Seagal's popularity dropped down a couple of notches (he tried to regain favour with the public by making a couple of films where he attempted to reinvent himself as a crusader for the environment), resulting in his career becoming stuck in a rut. Aside from a couple of modestly budgeted action flicks, Seagal found himself in the same arena as his arch-nemesis Jean-Claude Van Damme – the DTV market.

Starting with THE FOREIGNER in 2002, the third era of Seagal's career began. From The Foreigner right up to FLIGHT OF FURY, Seagal made a whole heap of B-grade action films where he played a government agent (or ex-government mercenary, secret agent or CIA spook) out to avenge a friend's murder, stop terrorists from committing some nefarious scheme or unravel a government conspiracy. In all these films, Seagal goes about dispatching evildoers with brutal aikido moves & / or gunplay (in real life, Seagal is quite a crack shot with a pistol) while wearing a long black leather coat that he never takes off (possibly in a vain attempt to hide the pot belly he gained). Most of these films do not make any attempt to advance Seagal's career or even elevate themselves above the flood of DTV action films that have come out in the early-to-mid 2000s. Of these, Attack Force is the worst.

On a technical standpoint, Attack Force is pretty standard stuff as far as these things go. The action set-pieces are competently conducted, although they do tread on absurdity, with people being thrown through brick walls. Seagal does the usual rounds of being a military Special Forces commander with access to a top-secret military operation, something that is only hinted at, slicing his way through baddies with a pair of blades attached to his wrists.

Where Attack Force fails is in its scripting department – the story featured here is only the start of the film's woes. Seagal might be a decent action star but when it comes to writing, his characters range from absurdly defined stereotypes to faceless ones. Here the flaw is at its most magnified, with Seagal writing himself into a deep hole by featuring some real half-cocked military conspiracies involving some kind of drug that turns people into mindless killers; some fine examples of 'faceless' intelligence agents out to silence Seagal by sending entire strike teams after him & his men; a central villain who is not seen until the very end & so forth (don't get me started on the film's title, which is ridiculously generic to say the least).

While some of Seagal's films also featured banal writing, most particularly The Foreigner, they also had something else to offset these problems (usually plenty of plot twists & some real clever kills on Seagal's behalf, as well as slick direction by the various directors involved). Here none of those things apply – Attack Force is not only stuck with an incompetent writing team & poor direction but reeks of laziness as far as the story goes – not only is the villain's motivation for committing his evil plan ill-defined, the hero's motivation for tracking the villain down is attributed to mere coincidence – Seagal's team is killed by a hooker who has been infected by CTX by Adam Croasdell's villain as part of an experiment. There are also some unnecessary digital effects of victims having their eyes blink sideways, which doesn't make a lick of sense biologically.

When it comes to acting, Seagal goes through the motions with the same one-dimensional performance that he has made a career out of, but minus the self-righteousness that he displayed in most of his films. None of the other actors make anything even resembling a performance or even an impression. Speaking of Seagal, I noticed something strange – Seagal has had his voice dubbed over in half the scenes. Rumour has it that the film's plot was changed after shooting had ended. This makes the film quite dishonest.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
As impressive as Seagal's hair piece
Chris_Mac_2518 March 2018
Seagal stopped trying after Exit Wounds

It looks as though all it takes to get him to sign on for one of these straight to DVD disasters is a decent budget for a buffet where he can contribute to his ever expanding waistline

The money spent on catering for this mess obviously detracted from his wig budget, as his frizzy mullet is sadly neglected.

Half his lines are clearly and poorly dubbed, and the lines he did deliver are breathless from the effort required to keep himself from falling over

The most amusing aspect of Seagal is the flattering and svelte pictures of him that grace the DVD covers
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Waste of time
The Shadow Sweeper3 March 2008
Okay, first off, Seagal's voice is dubbed over for like 50% of the film... Why? Because apparently there were rewriting the script and story as they were shooting and they need to change his dialogue for story continuity as they have multiple versions. From the very beginning, you just scratch your head because the overdubs are not only distracting, but they make no sense.

That said, the story still sucked and doesn't make any sense at all. When I got the the end, I was just scratching my head cause the movie was so pointless and the ending didn't even make sense.

Avoid like the plague. This movie made me stop watching Seagal straight to video movies cause they just get worse and worse.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Not so good.
kyle-mcdonald10 May 2009
Well let me say that I have always been a Steven seagal fan and his movies are usually great but this just don't measure up to the rest. This in my opinion is very stupid I did not like it all. The biggest reason I don't like it is because it is very flawed and to me does not make much sense. The acting is very bad even Steven seagal does not do good acting, The rest of the actors I can see because they just do direct to video movies. It does not follow a straight storyline everything happens at once so that why it doesn't make much sense. Ther is barely any action in it at all and in order to make an action movie good you usually need action in it. The special effects are very bad and you can tell are fake. So all in all this has to seagals worst movie of all so if you want to see a Steven seagal movie don't rent this one just pretend it does not exist. So just avoid this movie.

Overall score: ** out of **********

* out of *****
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Black Night
unbrokenmetal21 November 2008
Another Seagal cheapo shot in Romania. Almost all scenes play in total darkness which made it even cheaper than the others I guess, but it's the best thing about the movie because it adds a certain horror movie feeling. At the beginning, it seems to be only a crime story: Commander Lawson (Seagal) loses his team to a female killer. He finds out she is addicted to a new drug called CTX, a trace that leads him to the chemist Tia (Lisa Lövbrand) and the dealer Aroon (Adam Croasdell, best actor in this movie!). While the body-count is rising, everything becomes more and more bizarre and turns into an apocalyptic fight for survival. Despite the annoying hand-held camera shaking around for no purpose, "Attack Force" does have a couple of good bad moments. It just seems everyone somehow lost interest while making it. If it was more to the point, it could have been worthwhile. Maybe it lacked a stronger director to push everybody a bit and iron out the bugs?
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Segal does it again!!! A Masterpiece!!
erik412113 December 2006
Mere words cannot describe what I felt when I sat down to view an Oscar worthy performance. How he comes up with such golden gems, I will never know. In this such venture, Segal is Marshall Lawson, a man pushed to the brink after his team is wiped out by a one woman killing machine. It is up to Marshall to hunt down this evil syndicate & stop the spread of CTX, a DNA altering drug. In this movie, Segal shows off his acting ability by changing is voice throughout the entire movie. Brilliant, simply brilliant. I didn't know he had it in him. The story is amazingly well written, and his supporting cast make the movie worth watching. I don't want to give anything away, but, suffice to say, Segal does what he does best. My only regret is that I couldn't have seen this on the big screen. Bravo Mr. Segal, bravo!! Keep it up & never stop!!!
36 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Honestly one of the best cinematographic experiences of my life.
seenn16 March 2017
Steven Seagal steps up for this one for sure! He single-handed revolutionizes everybody's viewing experience with a fresh breath of action packed amazing stuff. Razzie awarded Seagal completely steps the stage up with his uncountable awards for stinkiest movies and beastly movies and amazing stuff and beast and godlike and amazingly beastly. Seagal totally steps the stage up with a breath of fresh air!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
actors could do better
p0rto30 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
If all the other actors beside Seagal did act some better, this would be a reasonable to good movie. If you are used to Seagal's typical voice, the voice-over is quite irritating and can't even seem to sound convincing. More disturbing is the fact that the dead people seem to be alive anyhow because they are still breathing (eg. woman shot in custody) and moving (eg. woman at table with head on her plate) And you even don't have to look that hard to see it for yourself! :) Indeed a quite messy movie with a lot of plot holes and but as a hardcore Seagal fan I got this movie anyway but I don't think I will watch this movie again. I want a Steven Seagal a la 'Under Siege' back!!
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Whose voice is that?
Topaz192215 May 2020
I used to be the biggest Steve Seagal fan and out of boredom, stumbled upon this movie. I should've kept stumbling because this movie is zero star level awful. One of my biggest movie pet peeves is to see the faces of the stunt people clearly and during a scene where Seagal's character is denied clearance, you can clearly see his stunt double as the one walking! Has Steven gotten so fat and out of wind that he needed a stunt double to walk 100 yards for him? What in the hell? And the scene in the cafe with the girl? Whose voice is that dubbed over Seagal's and why is it even dubbed in English anyway? Seagal is clearly speaking English and didn't need dubbing. Was he too tired to use his own voice as well? Just crazy. You'll get more excitement from watching paint dry. Just give it up already Steven, acting AND that terrible hairpiece!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Seagal's dignity went down the toilet with this
ghostman161 April 2007
Steven what have you done you have hit an all new low. It is weird since Steven's last film shadow man was directed by the same director who did this trash. Shadow man was good this was diabolically bad so bad it wasn't even funny Steven is hardly in the movie and feels like he is in a cameo appearance and when he is in the film he is dubbed half the time anyway. As for the action well let's just say the wizard of oz had more action than this trash there is hardly any action in the film and when it does finally arrive it is boring depressing badly shot so called action scenes. Seagal hardly kills anyone unlike his over films where he goes one man army ie under siege 1 and 2 and exit wounds. the plot is so confusing with so many plot holes that it doesn't make scenes sometimes. flight of fury better be good what a shame i wasted 5 pounds on this garbage 0 out of ten better luck next time
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed