Seagal returns in a sequel to possibly his worst movie!! Seriously!! Who thought this was a good idea??
I'm a bit confused, this movie has Jonathan Cold (Seagal) going undercover to stop a group of terrorists before they bomb Los Angeles. Was it ever disclosed in the first movie, he is ex CIA?? I do not think it was,but they all sort of blend together after Glimmer Man.
This was Seagal's 4th movie of 2005. Considering in his prime he pretty much released one movie a year (you can stretch it to 11 movies in 10 years if you go from 1988 to 1998) This was his 9th movie in 2 years.
And they are getting worse. This was a real slog to get through, I didn't enjoy the first one, but this is worse!! Ludicrous beyond words, badly acted (Tamara Davies is an exception) awful effects and just a waste of everyone's time, I can't even be bothered to write this review.
The blame can not fall at the directors feet, as the film is apparently infamous for Seagal not being involved in any of the fight scenes due to his leaving the film 18 days into a 30-day shoot. The director shot fights with stunt doubles and scenes that were to involve Seagal were replaced by his co-star in the film. That explains why Tamara Davies appeared to be the lead in this movie.
I do not think that is 100% accurate as some of it is clearly Seagal. It least there was no voice dubbing this time.
I'm a bit confused, this movie has Jonathan Cold (Seagal) going undercover to stop a group of terrorists before they bomb Los Angeles. Was it ever disclosed in the first movie, he is ex CIA?? I do not think it was,but they all sort of blend together after Glimmer Man.
This was Seagal's 4th movie of 2005. Considering in his prime he pretty much released one movie a year (you can stretch it to 11 movies in 10 years if you go from 1988 to 1998) This was his 9th movie in 2 years.
And they are getting worse. This was a real slog to get through, I didn't enjoy the first one, but this is worse!! Ludicrous beyond words, badly acted (Tamara Davies is an exception) awful effects and just a waste of everyone's time, I can't even be bothered to write this review.
The blame can not fall at the directors feet, as the film is apparently infamous for Seagal not being involved in any of the fight scenes due to his leaving the film 18 days into a 30-day shoot. The director shot fights with stunt doubles and scenes that were to involve Seagal were replaced by his co-star in the film. That explains why Tamara Davies appeared to be the lead in this movie.
I do not think that is 100% accurate as some of it is clearly Seagal. It least there was no voice dubbing this time.