Change Your Image
Roland_of_Gilead_1031
Reviews
Out for a Kill (2003)
Pretty much interchangeable with the rest of Seagal's recent films...
This is Michael Oblowitz's second venture with Steven Seagal. After seeing the way it turned out, I can only hope that the guy returned to his alternate dimension or transformed back into a pumpkin or something. This is almost exactly the same as The Foreigner with the exception that it takes place in China. It's actually better than The Foreigner, too. A lot better. (Note that this doesn't translate to "good".)
Okay, bad news first: the terrible jump-cutting and inexplicable speeding up of the film are still here, but seem to be less prevalent than before. There's still no preparing you for the scenes with the villains, though- every time it shows the bad guys sitting around and mumbling in Chinese, the scene opens with a high-speed zoom-in to the head honcho while he jerks around bizarrely like an epileptic Bobblehead. The first couple of times this is sort of cute, but by the tenth or twelfth repetition you're ready to feed the DVD to your dog.
Fortunately, the crack-addled editing doesn't intrude into the fight scenes nearly as much, making them actually somewhat entertaining. Seagal's back to fighting with his hands, which is the only way to watch him- anybody can blow away goons with a gun, but Seagal's got a certain chop-socky charm. Too bad the fights are much slower and less creative than in the past. One scene has our boy battling a Chinese guy who has the unexplained ability to cling to walls and runs around on all fours like a cat. And don't forget the ending- what shapes up to be a high-octane final fight fizzles out into one of the most rushed conclusions I can remember.
For every entertaining scene in this film, you'll find ten that make you question the sanity of not only Seagal and "Hounddog" Oblowitz, but the entire film-making industry as well. Hopefully Mikey doesn't learn how to count to three.
Half Past Dead (2002)
The mother of all beer movies...
I have an honest question for all of my friends and other people who had nothing but negative things to say about this flick. Actually, I have several questions, but they all come down to one in the end: what were you expecting this to be?
Seriously, think that one over. The movie is called Half Past Dead, for Christ's sake. Can anybody honestly say with a straight face that they expected this movie to be anything aside from utter crap?
It honestly doesn't even matter what the storyline or setup of this film happens to be. It makes no difference who the actors are, what they say, or what they do other than shooting at each other and yelling loudly. The dialogue could have been completely in Mandarin for all I care. People and things getting blown up are what I expect to see in a movie titled Half Past Dead, and damn if this movie doesn't deliver just that.
I don't remember much of this flick. I think it had something to do with Seagal and Ja Rule getting arrested for shoplifting at the Hobby Lobby and getting sent to Alcatraz Island. Then the guy from Boyz in the Hood (Morris Chestnut, definitely the high point of the movie) shows up with some goons and locks down the prison, Under Siege style. There's also a woman running around and beating up everybody who was probably meant to be hot, but ends up looking very masculine. That's a shame, because she looks gorgeous elsewhere.
Anyway, call together some friends and grab a few cases of your favorite beer, because this is a hilarious and action-packed flick that's perfect for a Friday night. Highly recommended.
Belly of the Beast (2003)
As generic as the title suggests...
Steven Seagal movies exist in a pop culture vacuum. They cannot be judged against any other films in existence. They're such an acquired taste that to compare them to movies with other actors is almost pointless. In a sense, Seagal movies are very nearly critic-proof. What can I do, complain that Ticker just wasn't on the same level as Jaws?
Anyway, if you've seen pretty much any other direct-to-video Seagal venture lately, you know exactly what this one is all about- a distant and emotionless man with a shady history must take the law into his own hands and rescue/avenge his wife/daughter/Neopet. The movie is virtually indistinguishable from others he's released in the last few years.
Honestly, if you played this film alongside The Foreigner and Out For a Kill, you'd have one hell of a time telling them apart. All of the usual elements are there: bad acting/dialog, distracting music, and annoying editing. Jesus, the editing... has the slow-bullet effect been exhausted yet? Has anyone NOT used this in a movie? It's only used once or twice in Belly of the Beast, but it's played out to a ridiculous point. I'm still waiting for the day when technology will have advanced far enough to enable Seagal to smile or even laugh with the help of CGI.
You already know if you'll like this movie or not, unless in the case that you haven't seen a Seagal movie. If this is true for you, go and find Out for Justice, Above the Law, or Marked for Death. Any of these are far preferable to this monumental waste of time.
The Patriot (1998)
Where's the action???
This movie could have been a great guilty-pleasure flick. All of the essentials are there- a hero who can kick ass, a villain who's unquestionably evil yet believable (played by the unappreciated Gailard Sartain), and an intriguing plot involving mass panic in a town overrun by a deadly virus. Sadly, none of this matters in the end- there's very little fighting or action of any sort to speak of.
I don't know if anybody involved with this movie understands this, so I'll state this as succinctly as I can: nobody wants to watch Seagal in a drama. We want to see him fight. He can't act, and that's fine. I sure as hell couldn't act my way out of a Sunkist commercial. But I don't inflict my shortcomings on my nonexistent fanbase. I limit the suffering to friends and family. This movie was obviously not written with Seagal in mind.
One thing I do really like about this movie: the "patriot" in question seems to be the bad guy, rather than a reference to Seagal's character. This movie wasted a really good villain. Sartain's hypermilitant white supremacist (or whatever) was actually kind of interesting in his single-minded conviction that he was doing something good. That's something you rarely see in movies anymore- a villain simply mistaken in his beliefs. Too bad he couldn't have been used in a better film.
The movie itself is definitely not terrible- many other movies have been much bigger disappointments. If this film had had more excitement (ie: fights) it could have been one of the great ones.
The Foreigner (2003)
How does Steve-o still have fans, anyway?
This movie seems somewhat promising at first, but quickly spirals into a pointless mesh of betrayal and murder. As just about everyone who's posted before me has said, this film basically follows a series of nameless, faceless people around looking for a package. In the process, roughly half of Poland's population is shot in the chest by a guy who must smoke a carton of cigarettes in the mercifully brief 90 minute running time. I don't remember the names of any of these characters or the actors who portrayed them. All I can say is that I'm sure everyone involved has seen better days.
And what's up with the editing in this movie? Does the guy in charge of postproduction really think slowing down and then quickly speeding up the film is going to add anything to the experience? Was writing a coherent story out of the question? Keep in mind these are all rhetorical questions. I intend to forget this travesty before I even hit the "submit" button.
Exit Wounds (2001)
Tom Arnold is the GOOD news.
I remember the night this film opened. The theater I worked at received a bomb threat (supposedly in this specific auditorium) and we had to evacuate it. While it turned out to be some guy who had been turned away due to lack of ID and was thus denied seeing DMX half-naked, I still suspect the guy had noble intentions. I think he wanted to save us all.
Compared to Seagal's recent direct-to-video endeavors, this movie is not bad at all. Judged on its own merits, it's an ultimately joyless action flick with little to interest and less to excite. One of my favorite aspects of the earlier Seagal films is the anticipation that, in the end, the villain will be cornered and have his testicles stomped to jelly. Remember the end of Under Siege? Out For Justice? Marked for Death? Those are Steven Seagal movies. This is a limp attempt at reviving his career with the help of DMX's presence. Were the Muppets all booked or something?
I have to admit that this movie isn't as terrible as other action flicks I've seen. It does have Seagal's trademark Aikido (I think... it at least has hand-to-hand fighting, something that is sparse in his later roles) and penchant for ripping off arms and using them as toothpicks. There are also some fairly amusing moments of comedy. The only amusement his other recent movies provide is when you take them out of the DVD player and detonate them with an M80.
Ticker (2001)
What did we do wrong?
This has to be one of those "somebody was sleeping with somebody they shouldn't have and was blackmailed" movies. There can be no other explanation. How else can you justify Dennis Hopper and Tom Sizemore appearing in this?
There are two major things about this movie that really chap my ass. First of all, sitting in a chair and staring intently at a computer monitor does not constitute suspense. Seagal and various supporting actors do this for roughly 90% of the movie. And how about those supporting actors? I couldn't help but get the feeling that I was watching the last roles for many of these people, since Ticker is awful enough to send anyone's career into a nosedive.
My other problem with this flick involves the ending. Without "spoiling" anything (if spoiling this film is a concern to you, please have yourself chemically neutered at my expense), this has to be the most anticlimactic conclusion to a movie outside of videos that show you how to clean your VCR. There's hardly any fighting or anything. What little action there is has been shot so poorly that many of the actual fighting happens out of frame.
I could keep going. I could pull out all the doorstop comments, all the "time better spent" and "I'd rather be" catchphrases, but I think everyone on this site has made it pretty clear. If you're going to go ahead and watch this garbage anyway, do so at your own risk. You've been cautioned by others with your well-being in mind.