Detective Knight: Redención

I can only assume that before his announcement that he was retiring from the film industry, (Bruce) Willis must have worked overtime to churn out a lot of films before hanging up his guns etc. I didn't immediately notice the following (but it dropped everything into place with the styling of the films unfurling) that the script parts for Bruce were kept very limited -and short- which, would assist greatly in his ability to remember his lines etc; his debilitating sickness makes it hard for him in this subject matter.. As a prequel to the first film its a no go in that it is boringly tame and nothing of value to make it an unforgettable film.

If you saw part 1 then watch this part2 to complete your interest!

Now, I haven't seen the 2022 movie "Detective Knight: Rogue", so I don't know what I missed out on here. But I have to say that the 2022 "Detective Knight: Redemption" felt like a stand-alone movie, so I guess it wasn't wholly and fully necessary to have seen the other movie first.

When I sat down to watch "Detective Knight: Redemption", I have to say that I wasn't exactly harboring a lot of expectations to the movie, since the endless stream of Bruce Willis movies these past few years have been dubious at best.

But still, since I hadn't already seen "Detective Knight: Redemption", and had the chance to do so, of course I did.

I will say that writers Edward Drake and Corey Lange put together a fair enough script and storyline for the movie. It was actually much better than I had initially feared it to be, so it was an enjoyable action thriller. Sure, this wasn't top of the line, but it proved to be enjoyable and entertaining, and isn't that what movies are all about?

It wasn't because of Bruce Willis that the movie turned out good, because he wasn't on the screen for that long really. Nay, the movie was made watchable by Paul Johansson (playing Ricky Conlan). He really carried the movie quite well.

There is a good amount of action in the movie, and that definitely helped to keep the movie afloat.

The special effects, and by that I mean the blood spray when bullets hit people, was just laughably bad. Amazing how such horrible CGI can get green-lighted.

All in all, then director Edward Drake put together a watchable movie. Not that it is a movie that I will ever return to again, but it provided enough entertainment for a single viewing.

My rating of "Detective Knight: Redemption" lands on a five out of ten stars.

It's shocking how a writer and director gets worse instead of better with every film they make. Every time I see BondIt Media Capital having funded a film (all of Edward Drake's flops), I question if BondIt is simply a money laundering front, because there's no way they're making money on all these failed films, and they seem to keep funding every flop film ever made - usually nothing better than a 3/10 rating. Once again, Drake's writing was atrocious, with convoluted and incoherent scenes and dialogue. Literally, there are scenes when various characters blab on and on about nothing. Then there's Drake's directing 90's slow-mo scenes, with faded and blurred flashbacks, that although I saw the first film, still made no sense why those scenes were needed, as they were just meaningless, random events from the first film. As usual, he also failed to direct his cast effectively, as Willis looked barely awake, and Paul Johansson was just too overbearing like he was on speed the entire runtime. I can't believe there's a third and thankfully final film of this trilogy.

Bruce Willis has only got a small supporting role, but he is still THE MAN. He is has gotta battle a group of vicious bankrobbers this time around...

Let us not forget that Bruce is suffering from a severe neurological disease which affects his voice and muscles. Considering all that, he still does a heck of a job.

I have seen ALL Bruce Willis' movies and I would recommend this movie, but only for the true Bruce Willis fans, who wanna watch all his latest work, no matter what.

This movie is actually not that bad. Seriously, I am being honest. It is a tough action B-movie. Look upon it as a B-movie and you'll have an enjoyable watch. Expect another Die Hard and you'll be severely disappointed though...

Lots of shootouts. Lots of them. And they are pretty decent shootouts. Lots of oneliners by Bruce. Pretty good photography and editing. The soundscore is okay.

All in all not bad, considering Bruce Willis is in his last years of his life and fighting a severe neurological disease.

At an (excrucially) important sidenote, let us not forget WHY we are watching Bruce Willis movies to begin with. We watch Bruce Willis movies because of DIE HARD (1988). THE ONE AND ONLY BIGGEST ACTION AMERICAN ACTION CLASSIC OF THE CENTURY.

This classic is still standing strong after more than 30 years. Millions of people still REwatch it during every Christmas holiday. Recently a petition was launched to rename Nakatomi Plaza into DIE HARD plaza.

A life time achievement award for Bruce Willis is in the making as well, so I have heard...

DIE HARD (1988) NEVER DIES but is still ALIVE AND KICKING in 2022. Let's celebrate that.

I don't regret watching the movie but it was okay I can't give it all thumbs up but it was good acting I have seen better Bruce Willis movies in the past but I can't complain too much for a guy who is up in age dealing with health issues, I will say this much it's not one of them movies that I will watch more than one time I do consider myself a somewhat of a Bruce Willis fan he made great movies he is one hell of an actor but this movie could have been better in so many ways i honestly don't know where to I didn't understand a few things about the movie I'm trying not to say too much without spoiling it for someone else.