Damage

There's a workable story hiding in there somewhere, but it's mostly obscured by mind-numbingly cheap fights, a clichéd soundtrack and general DTV feel.

Stone Cold Steve Austin is John Brickner, a recently paroled ex-con. He is aided by Veronica (Lynda Boyd), the widow of the man John was imprisoned for killing. However, Veronica's help is not motivated by forgiveness or understanding, but rather by a need to have John help her with her own desperate agenda.

Needing money and fast, John befriends underground fight agent Reno (Walton Goggins) and his girlfriend Frankie (Laura Vandervoort). Together they enter a fight circuit hoping that the rewards of victory will solve their respective dilemmas.

The acting in "Damage" is sub-par. Here I don't evaluate Steve Austin because you aren't expecting much. Laura Vandervoort is a little bit of eye candy, but her character seems more interested in appearing scene than actually helping her man out. Walton Goggins is too old for his role and is very inconsistent. Sometimes he's convincing, sometimes very dry --- but you can never put a finger on what his character really values. Instead of helping his woman, his character seems to gamble all his spare dollars away.

Thematically the film is a Christian tract with an "original sin" subtext. Necessarily, this leads to a class warfare view of social relationships whereby everyone is either portrayed as a "master" or a "slave" due to their debts --- moral, economic or otherwise. By consequence this perpetuates the bromides that money = root of all evil, and happiness consists of a duty ethic.

And oh yeah, rich whitey is behind it all.

Many action film fans are willing to overlook genre clichés if the film has exciting fights, like in "X-Men Origins: Wolverine". But the fights in "Damage" consist of unrealistic blood splatter and mindless repetition, so it's doubtful that even the action buffs will be satisfied. Steve Austin only throws hay-makers (which rarely appear to connect),and his primary fighting attribute seems to be that he is "Stone Cold", i.e., takes a beating without getting knocked out.

The "final fight" of the film hearkens back to the cheese of mid-80's action flicks, but without the enjoyable payoff. Captive audiences should not be made to endure such a ruthless conglomeration of "YOU CAN DO IT!" aerobic workout music and extreme body greasing. It's not 1986 anymore, and there's just no excuse for direction of this kind.

The whole film is summed up by the homophobic hug given at the end:

Weak.

this is not just another brainless action movie.not that there's anything wrong with that.there's actually a story here,and a good one. there are some tender sensitive moments in which Steve Austin shows he has some real acting ability.yes there are some brutal fighting sequences,but that is not the core of the story.the core of the story is about doing the right thing,about morality,forgiveness and redemption.and that's what moves the film along.the dramatic scenes work very well here.partial credit must go to the cast,not just Austin but the supporting players as well.Walton Goggins and Laura Vandervoort are very good as well.for me,Damage is a 6/10

I feel the first thing I should do is confess that I'm not a wrestling fan - I've hardly watched the sport, and I've never seen Steve Austin in action. Obviously, he wasn't the reason why I rented this movie. What did get me to rent it was my love of B movies - I watch them all the time. This one got me interested since it promised it would have a lot of action (fighting) in it.

Now here comes my second confession - I didn't think very much of "Damage". True, it does look pretty good for what was a Canadian low budget movie. And Austin, though he's no actor, does bring to the screen a strong presence and wisely doesn't try to be very expressive in his somewhat limited dialogue. But despite all that, I found the movie to be somewhat boring. There's far too much talk, as well as multiple subplots that slow the action from coming. And when the action does come, it's somewhat disappointing. The fights are mostly filmed with the camera zoomed way in, and with somewhat quick cuts, making the action hard to follow at times. The fights are supposed to be brutal, but I never got the feeling the fighters were suffering or in pain at any time.

This isn't a BAD movie - it's just somewhat bland and disappointing, considering they got a skilled fighter and a premise that would indicate wall-to-wall action. You can safely skip this one.

I've always liked "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, he was a brilliant wrestler, one of the best in fact, but I never thought he was a great actor, to me he was just a big man who can obviously fight, so he'll always be typecast as just that, but in this I think he proved he can act, yes it's another fight film, but I think it's also more than that, its about saving a young girls life and saving his friend, the fight scenes are ok, definitely much better than some on imdb have described, i really like Walton Goggins he's a good actor, and Laura Vandervoort is gorgeous and a very good actress.

It's a decent movie, it's not the best I've ever seen, but it isn't the worst either.

Let's just say it was entertaining.

good film overall, plot was a little generic rather similar to "Fighting" the fight scenes can be enjoyable although they all seem to be somewhat similar.It's a shame there is no real training scene as in these sort of films they're really needed, the closest thing to one is a little bit of jogging which is obviously unrealistic if he actually wants to win a fight worth the amount of money he is gambling!.

It's worth a watch, they're are better movies but i wouldn't disregard this one and would certainly watch it again. So i'm going to give this a 7/10, i think maybe a small minority are to quick to criticize when this isn't actually such a terrible movie.