Against the Dark Movie Review
Directed by Richard Crudo
Starring Steven Seagal
Available on dvd Feb 10, 2009
Recently a lot of 80's and early 90's action stars have started to make a comeback. Stallone recently did with the new Rocky and Rambo entries. Jean Claude just had JCVD and this year Dolph Lundgren will be back with The Expendables and Command Performance. This vampire movie, Against the Dark was rumored to be Seagal's big comeback film. Sigh...... it is not. There have been a few gems sprinkled throughout his recent career but a majority of them just like this movie are plain human feces. Seagal plus horror seems like such a big mismatch that I thought this movie would at least be a *sob.i.g. It wasnt. It was just a **sob.i.b. Where do I even start to rip this a new one?
The story is a super simple cliched plot. A virus outbreak has occurred and has turned almost everyone into a vampire/zombie hybrid that kills people and eats their guts. They are really virus infected cannibals. The only vampire traits they have are the pointed teeth and they hate the daylight. Of course if you get bit, then you turn into one and your friends have to kill you. So the movie follows a group of people that are trying to survive and run to safety. A separate group of hunters led by Seagal are roaming the streets killing the vamps and trying to find any surviving humans before the area gets nuked by the government. Obviously since Seagal is a bad ass, he finds the humans in time and leads them to safety before they are toasted.
Its almost hard to even called this a Seagal film. He's probably in it maybe 15-20 minutes of screen time and maybe one minute of dialogue added all together. Majority of the kills are him slicing the infected up with his sword or the occasional shotgun blast or pistol kill. I did manage to chuckle a few times with his non acting one liners or the martial arts performed by him or some of the other hunter crew. There were several cheesy scenes with slo motion action with dramatic music on top, that ended up more pathetic than funny.
I cant really think of many redeeming about this movie besides some of the make up and gore effects. Nothing fantastic but it was at least competent for this type of low budget movie. The cover art is pretty cool and it has a funny ass tagline. "He lives by the Sword, they will die by it." I cant recommend this movie to anyone but Steven Seagal completists. His great comeback will have to wait. Please someone approve Under Siege 3! On a scale of 1-10 I give this a wrinkled forehead 3.9 out of 10.
*so bad its good :-)
** so bad its bad :-(
Directed by Richard Crudo
Starring Steven Seagal
Available on dvd Feb 10, 2009
Recently a lot of 80's and early 90's action stars have started to make a comeback. Stallone recently did with the new Rocky and Rambo entries. Jean Claude just had JCVD and this year Dolph Lundgren will be back with The Expendables and Command Performance. This vampire movie, Against the Dark was rumored to be Seagal's big comeback film. Sigh...... it is not. There have been a few gems sprinkled throughout his recent career but a majority of them just like this movie are plain human feces. Seagal plus horror seems like such a big mismatch that I thought this movie would at least be a *sob.i.g. It wasnt. It was just a **sob.i.b. Where do I even start to rip this a new one?
The story is a super simple cliched plot. A virus outbreak has occurred and has turned almost everyone into a vampire/zombie hybrid that kills people and eats their guts. They are really virus infected cannibals. The only vampire traits they have are the pointed teeth and they hate the daylight. Of course if you get bit, then you turn into one and your friends have to kill you. So the movie follows a group of people that are trying to survive and run to safety. A separate group of hunters led by Seagal are roaming the streets killing the vamps and trying to find any surviving humans before the area gets nuked by the government. Obviously since Seagal is a bad ass, he finds the humans in time and leads them to safety before they are toasted.
Its almost hard to even called this a Seagal film. He's probably in it maybe 15-20 minutes of screen time and maybe one minute of dialogue added all together. Majority of the kills are him slicing the infected up with his sword or the occasional shotgun blast or pistol kill. I did manage to chuckle a few times with his non acting one liners or the martial arts performed by him or some of the other hunter crew. There were several cheesy scenes with slo motion action with dramatic music on top, that ended up more pathetic than funny.
I cant really think of many redeeming about this movie besides some of the make up and gore effects. Nothing fantastic but it was at least competent for this type of low budget movie. The cover art is pretty cool and it has a funny ass tagline. "He lives by the Sword, they will die by it." I cant recommend this movie to anyone but Steven Seagal completists. His great comeback will have to wait. Please someone approve Under Siege 3! On a scale of 1-10 I give this a wrinkled forehead 3.9 out of 10.
*so bad its good :-)
** so bad its bad :-(
Trailer (low spoilers)
No comments:
Post a Comment