Section 8
- 2022
- 1h 38m
IMDb RATING
4.3/10
2.1K
YOUR RATING
After avenging the murder of his family a former soldier is sprung from prison and recruited by a shadowy government agency.After avenging the murder of his family a former soldier is sprung from prison and recruited by a shadowy government agency.After avenging the murder of his family a former soldier is sprung from prison and recruited by a shadowy government agency.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
There is the basis of a decent film here, yes it has all been done before but the opening half hour or so is all pretty engaging (although you do feel they just let Mickey Rourke do and say whatever he wanted).
Then it started to get a bit silly, and then very, very silly. To the point it is barely making sense and they are having to have characters have one sided conversations on telephones to gloss over plot confusion - It just lost all credibility for the sake of slightly better writing.
That said it is clearly made on a budget and it goes well to hide some of this, clearly the whole film is shot in L. A. but watching it does a good job of making out that its characters travel around the US and beyond. The action scenes are fine too, sometimes a bit confused to follow but this actually gives it a bit more authenticity, I felt.
The cast are pretty good overall though two or three are so one dimensional, due to the writing, that they don't come off so well. Its a shame the last half hour or so wasn't as well made as the first and that it feels it needs to have plot twist after plot twist.
Ultimately its better and has a lot more to offer than you might expect, even if it is a bit disappointing overall.
Then it started to get a bit silly, and then very, very silly. To the point it is barely making sense and they are having to have characters have one sided conversations on telephones to gloss over plot confusion - It just lost all credibility for the sake of slightly better writing.
That said it is clearly made on a budget and it goes well to hide some of this, clearly the whole film is shot in L. A. but watching it does a good job of making out that its characters travel around the US and beyond. The action scenes are fine too, sometimes a bit confused to follow but this actually gives it a bit more authenticity, I felt.
The cast are pretty good overall though two or three are so one dimensional, due to the writing, that they don't come off so well. Its a shame the last half hour or so wasn't as well made as the first and that it feels it needs to have plot twist after plot twist.
Ultimately its better and has a lot more to offer than you might expect, even if it is a bit disappointing overall.
I was sure about giving 5 stars until the last third of the movie. This is a very old-fashioned action movie, peppered with geil emotions and shows some artistic blend. In the '80s, this would have been a very good movie. In the '90s, it would still compete with some good Steven Segal and van Damme movies. But we are in 2022. Dolph Lundgren and poor Mickey Rourke should already stay away from cinema... but I guess they still live in the '90s at heart.
There are a couple of big plot-holes, and there are a few silly moments. E.g. If one is out of bullets, then just gets in the car to take a long trip, how come that when gets out of the car, the magazine is again full?
Or: you sit in the Toyota to catch the bad guy who just left with his GMC. And you just literally have two red wires hanging out underneath the dashboard, so within a few seconds you already have a running car. You don't even need the ignition key with the radio chip that is needed for a Toyota to communicate wirelessly with the onboard CPU to start the car (the so-called anti-theft system).
This movie would have worked in the '80s but not in 2022, sorry.
So in conclusion: There was some potential in this movie, there were some good watchable parts in it. There were some plot twists, yes. And the lead actor is quite good. Really. He did a great job, and would deserve something better in the future.
But the rest of the actors were really bad. The whole story is a big cliché that you must have seen several times.
My conclusion is that you don't lose anything if you don't watch it. This movie is a grain of salt less than entertaining.
There are a couple of big plot-holes, and there are a few silly moments. E.g. If one is out of bullets, then just gets in the car to take a long trip, how come that when gets out of the car, the magazine is again full?
Or: you sit in the Toyota to catch the bad guy who just left with his GMC. And you just literally have two red wires hanging out underneath the dashboard, so within a few seconds you already have a running car. You don't even need the ignition key with the radio chip that is needed for a Toyota to communicate wirelessly with the onboard CPU to start the car (the so-called anti-theft system).
This movie would have worked in the '80s but not in 2022, sorry.
So in conclusion: There was some potential in this movie, there were some good watchable parts in it. There were some plot twists, yes. And the lead actor is quite good. Really. He did a great job, and would deserve something better in the future.
But the rest of the actors were really bad. The whole story is a big cliché that you must have seen several times.
My conclusion is that you don't lose anything if you don't watch it. This movie is a grain of salt less than entertaining.
I watched this on New Years Day, feeling a little tired and rough and wanting B Movie action nonsense, I was disappointed as all I got was nonsense.
Do people who write, produce and direct this, actually talk and interact with people in real life? Because the script and acting, is not how people talk to and act around others.
I expected better of a movie with Scott Adkins in. He's B Movie Action Royalty. Ryan Kwanten cannot carry a film, I doubt he could carry the bins out. Dolph Lundgren is used too little and Mickey Rourke is virtually unrecognisable anymore.
Anyway, it was disappointing, shambolic and too messy to enjoy.
Please do better.
Do people who write, produce and direct this, actually talk and interact with people in real life? Because the script and acting, is not how people talk to and act around others.
I expected better of a movie with Scott Adkins in. He's B Movie Action Royalty. Ryan Kwanten cannot carry a film, I doubt he could carry the bins out. Dolph Lundgren is used too little and Mickey Rourke is virtually unrecognisable anymore.
Anyway, it was disappointing, shambolic and too messy to enjoy.
Please do better.
I didn't have a bunch of expectations going in, but I like Lundgren and Rourke enough to give this movie a shot. I admit to not seeing some of the plot twists coming, and that was great. I also agree with the other reviewers about the silliness of some of the movie, the endless lack of ammo, and bad shooting. However, it is for entertainment, and I was entertained. I like that Lundgren had a part to play in the behind the scenes in this movie, and overall it was engaging enough for me to keep watching it. I wouldn't watch this movie twice, but I enjoyed it watching it once. Just don't look for academy award winning anything, but the veteran actors do a fine job fleshing this movie out.
An unrustling narrative, devoid of any worthy substance, relying on the expected norms of the genre, bringing nothing new, or original to the screen.
Packed up with the fight, war, and action celebrities, missing Arnold or Sylvester-type charismatic and charming characters, makes the hole thing a bore.
The film starts with an unrealistic fight sceen from Afghanistan where the Afghan soldiers speak in the middle eastern dialect, instead of the Afgan Arabic. The US moves into the neighborhood knowing it's a setup, in humvees with all windows open letting the fresh air and bullets in. Ultimately, getting many killed.
Usually, viewers find predictability in scenarios where many other films explored the same thing with a number of similar outcomes. This is one of those you will say I knew this was going to happen.
Packed up with the fight, war, and action celebrities, missing Arnold or Sylvester-type charismatic and charming characters, makes the hole thing a bore.
The film starts with an unrealistic fight sceen from Afghanistan where the Afghan soldiers speak in the middle eastern dialect, instead of the Afgan Arabic. The US moves into the neighborhood knowing it's a setup, in humvees with all windows open letting the fresh air and bullets in. Ultimately, getting many killed.
Usually, viewers find predictability in scenarios where many other films explored the same thing with a number of similar outcomes. This is one of those you will say I knew this was going to happen.
Did you know
- TriviaThe photo of Ryan Kwanten's characters father that Mickey Rourke is mourning is a real photo of Joey Rourke, Mickey's brother who died of cancer in 2004
- GoofsOpening sequence takes place in "Mosul, Afghanistan". However, Mosul is in northern Iraq.
- ConnectionsReferenced in I Must Break This Podcast: Section 8 (2022)
- How long is Section 8?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $5,000,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 38m(98 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content