An 80s Action Movie but Worse?
I struggle to give this move more than a 4 because it really is just barely superior to a passable movie.
Seagall should purportedly be putting his martial arts prowess on display, but a good chunk of this film, even so early in his career, is just a bunch of gun fights. Of physicality, we get him implausibly and bizarrely just dodging shotgun firings a bunch of times (where do these people keep all these giant shotguns and why? Do they just not like handguns? And how is it they don't know how to shoot someone? So many questions) and this lame and equally implausible wrist lock that not only looks like it came out of an amateur self-defense VHS or professional wrestling match, but doesn't look that impressive.
And I think this movie is finally where we see why. Seagall makes the unfortunate decision to remove his shirt and he's rather flabby, clearly not a dedicated athlete or martial artist. So, shootouts and choreographed choke holds it is.
Unlike Seagall, the plot is bone-thin. He goes into a coma due to corrupt police working with a corrupt senator, a nurse falls in love with him due to his "nice package", and the rest of the movie he's trying to get revenge on the rotten cops.
I give it a 5 because, while it does have a low-budget direct-to-VHS mentality, it actually looks like there are good production values for this one. They travel all around LA and lots of people break a lot of props and set pieces in the action sequences. Also some of the scenes, like the scene in the hospital, are acceptably exciting.
Honourable Mentions: Murphy's Law (1986): quite similar in plot to this one - a cop gets chased around by the mob and police. Except this movie was interesting. It was set in the dark and gritty world of the 80s and had an compelling sidekick in the form of a young female thief. There were also creatively grotesque scenes of violence. And, perhaps best of all, there was Bronson. Silly Seagall could never match that granite face and casual confident approach to action.
Seagall should purportedly be putting his martial arts prowess on display, but a good chunk of this film, even so early in his career, is just a bunch of gun fights. Of physicality, we get him implausibly and bizarrely just dodging shotgun firings a bunch of times (where do these people keep all these giant shotguns and why? Do they just not like handguns? And how is it they don't know how to shoot someone? So many questions) and this lame and equally implausible wrist lock that not only looks like it came out of an amateur self-defense VHS or professional wrestling match, but doesn't look that impressive.
And I think this movie is finally where we see why. Seagall makes the unfortunate decision to remove his shirt and he's rather flabby, clearly not a dedicated athlete or martial artist. So, shootouts and choreographed choke holds it is.
Unlike Seagall, the plot is bone-thin. He goes into a coma due to corrupt police working with a corrupt senator, a nurse falls in love with him due to his "nice package", and the rest of the movie he's trying to get revenge on the rotten cops.
I give it a 5 because, while it does have a low-budget direct-to-VHS mentality, it actually looks like there are good production values for this one. They travel all around LA and lots of people break a lot of props and set pieces in the action sequences. Also some of the scenes, like the scene in the hospital, are acceptably exciting.
Honourable Mentions: Murphy's Law (1986): quite similar in plot to this one - a cop gets chased around by the mob and police. Except this movie was interesting. It was set in the dark and gritty world of the 80s and had an compelling sidekick in the form of a young female thief. There were also creatively grotesque scenes of violence. And, perhaps best of all, there was Bronson. Silly Seagall could never match that granite face and casual confident approach to action.
- fatcat-73450
- 31 oct. 2025