All Amazon Customer Reviews (So Far) On Out Of Reach.

Littledragon

Above The Law
All Amazon Costumer Reviews (So Far) On Out Of Reach.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/A...61023/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/104-8849391-7616725

Average Customer Review:
stars-3-5.gif


Seagal's next of my least favorite movies, July 21, 2004
Reviewer: Hessian with Aggression "ryan21" (Reading, PA United States) - See all my reviews
First of all let me remind everyone that I'm a huge fan of Seagal and own almost all of his movies (except for some of the most recent). I used to buy every Seagal movie that came out to the store but now (after seeing The Foreigner) I rent all of them. While I did enjoy this movie more than The Foreigner and Out For A Kill I cannot really say if I liked it better than Ticker. It is probably almost as good of a movie as Belly of the Beast but, if I were you I'd put your money into BOTB. One thing that is an issue with me is the voice-overs. There seems to be two different people who do Seagal's voice-overs throughout the movie and that is a bummer. I could see fixing one...maybe two spots in the film but the voice editing was throughout. Even though this is an enjoyable story I find that Seagal's fight scenes (are there really only two martial art fight scenes?) aren't his usual. I was, to say the least, disappointed in the final fight scene. Other than the voice editing which I totally don't enjoy in a movie and the not so well fight scenes (the camera shots play a roll in this) this is a decent movie to rent and watch if you are a fan of Steven Seagal. Otherwise, I'm not sure why you would even be interested in this film. Steven Seagal does have a few more direct to video movies coming out in the next year or so and there is talk of one going to the theaters which I'm sure I'll enjoy.



Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)



Better than previous offerings..., July 21, 2004
Reviewer: Freth (Delaware, OH United States) - See all my reviews
While it has some minor flaws it's a quality movie. The action sequences aren't wire-fu or sped up. The story is more believable than some of his other movies and the bond he shares with a pen-pal girl is a nice touch, as well as him teaching her secret code. As in most of his other movies, he plays an ex-military/government agent that has more skill and wherewithall than any of the villians. While this concept is the same in virtually *every* Seagal movie, it's still enjoyable to watch. I do think he needs to branch out and play a different character than the same one he's played all this time. All this aside, it's decent entertainment and it's better than his last two movies.



Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)



5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

Seagal, Seagal, ... Seagal!!, July 9, 2004
Reviewer: Vlitch Godunov (Birmingham, MI United States) - See all my reviews
Is it me or does there seem to be a glut of Steven Seagal straight-to-DVD movies these days? I mean, we've had 'The Foreigner,' 'Belly of the Beast' and now the latest Polish-adventure installment, 'Out of Reach.' And as much of a 'fan' of Seagal's work as anyone can actually be, I have become accustomed to his fantasy, never-say-die screen persona in much the same way you grow used to the scars left by your youthful bout of chicken pox! Seagal's work is plot motivated for sure, the script worded a little too chessily for most tastes, the acts linked thinly at the best of times, but they are still good, honest, fun movies to sit back and crack a cold one to. In 'Out of Reach,' Seagal plays William (Billy) Lancing, a former covert agent turned survivalist who is thrown into his old line of work when he discovers that the foster program he is using to help a young girl is actually a human trafficking network. Sure, we've heard it all before, but it's the way that Seagal does his slow-mo karate moves on all the gun-totting assassins that makes it worth your hard earned dollars this time around! And, as I said before, this is set in Poland once again which is where last years 'The Foreigner' was set and trust me, his look is no different in either one! So, our man Seagal must have a two-for-the-price-of-one movie deal going on back a couple of years ago! Smart cookie! Oh yeah, of course there are fatal flaws in this film (in all his films!) - such as his supposed voice over which obviously is not his but is actually his arch enemy in the movie for some reason doing HIS dialogue! - but who cares anymore?! He sure doesn't so why should we? As stated, this is Seagal at his 'best' and so deserves to be rented or purchased as soon as possible!
 

yudansha

TheGreatOne
It's not bad, really...

I haven't seen the movie, but there's much more bad talk about it than good yet it's average review rating is 3.5 stars out of 5. I'd say that's pretty good.
 

Littledragon

Above The Law
yudansha said:
I haven't seen the movie, but there's much more bad talk about it than good yet it's average review rating is 3.5 stars out of 5. I'd say that's pretty good.


3.5 out of 5 is what I would have given it as well, sadly Out Of Reach isn't the Seagal film that I can watch over and over again like his other classics. It is just a nother Foreingor which I sometimes watch when I get bored. But it is not a Belly Of The Beast or Out For A Kill where I rarely watch.
 

Littledragon

Above The Law
Jalu said:
What's up with the voice????? :confused:


Ye I really didn't like the dubbing at some scenes, I really don't know why they did that, the bad guy sounded more like Seagal than Seagal did himself lol. It could have been a mistake though??
 

yudansha

TheGreatOne
I don't get all this dubbing stuff...

... can't he get a voice coach or something if that's the problem. It would save time and money in the long run. I don't get why dubb over an English speaking speaker with another one... Steven Seagal is an actor, and projecting his voice is one of the things that are required for an actor to do. He's not a low talker like that woman from Seinfeld, so I don't see what the problem is all the time he does these STVs.
 

Littledragon

Above The Law
yudansha said:
... can't he get a voice coach or something if that's the problem. It would save time and money in the long run. I don't get why dubb over an English speaking speaker with another one... Steven Seagal is an actor, and projecting his voice is one of the things that are required for an actor to do. He's not a low talker like that woman from Seinfeld, so I don't see what the problem is all the time he does these STVs.


I honestly think it might have been a technical error or mistake..
 

yudansha

TheGreatOne
I wasn't talking specifically about one scene... I didn't see the movie.

I'm talking in GENERAL. Why all the dubbing? Just film what he says and leave it there. Steven Seagal is an actor and what's an actor without a voice?
 

Reservoir Dog

MRKD4DTH
Yeah littledragon

I wonder if Matt Schulze's voice and Seagal's got mixed up in certain scenes. He really did sound like Seagal a lot... hmmm... Overall, though, I will say I liked the storyline the best of all DTV's. If they had cleaned up the dubbing, and added more action scenes, it's safe to say it would have been more acclaimed by the critics and fans.
 

Littledragon

Above The Law
Reservoir Dog said:
I wonder if Matt Schulze's voice and Seagal's got mixed up in certain scenes. He really did sound like Seagal a lot... hmmm... Overall, though, I will say I liked the storyline the best of all DTV's. If they had cleaned up the dubbing, and added more action scenes, it's safe to say it would have been more acclaimed by the critics and fans.


Ye thats what I said too.. I honestly think it was a technical mistake or error.
 

yudansha

TheGreatOne
Guys, you're doing good! Take a look at this!

Internet retailer Amazon.com profits up, revenues improve 26 per cent

SEATTLE (AP) - Amazon.com Inc. swung to a $76.4-million US profit in the second quarter as revenue leaped 26 per cent, prodded by the Internet retailer's offer of free shipping.

Revenue in the quarter was $1.39 billion, up from $1.10 billion a year ago. However, the revenue figure fell short of Wall Street forecasts, which called for sales of $1.44 billion.

"While free shipping is expensive for the company, it saves our customers tens of millions of dollars each quarter, and we plan to keep it in place indefinitely," Amazon chief Jeff Bezos said in a news release.

Amazon raised its revenue projections for the rest of the year. The online emporium now expects 2004 sales to range between $6.63 billion and $6.94 billion. Analysts were already expecting $6.82 billion.

"They're in growth mode, for sure," said analyst Dan Geiman at McAdams Wright Ragen.

Each figure marked an improvement over last year, when the company earned $53.4 million, 14 cents per share, on revenue of $2.18 billion.
_________

I think it's Steven Seagal's "Out Of Reach" that did it! :D
 

Clement3000

aka The Phoenix
I wouldn't be surprised if his movies helped out profits, it's such a massive company I'm sure he helped out in a very small way, but his direct to movies definatly turn over a profit, it's obvious, they wouldn't keep making them otherwise. That's why the Foreigner was the number on DTV for the first quarter of 2003 (I believe that is the correct quarter). And yes yaayyyy, go SEagal go, you rock!!!!

yudansha said:
Internet retailer Amazon.com profits up, revenues improve 26 per cent

SEATTLE (AP) - Amazon.com Inc. swung to a $76.4-million US profit in the second quarter as revenue leaped 26 per cent, prodded by the Internet retailer's offer of free shipping.

Revenue in the quarter was $1.39 billion, up from $1.10 billion a year ago. However, the revenue figure fell short of Wall Street forecasts, which called for sales of $1.44 billion.

"While free shipping is expensive for the company, it saves our customers tens of millions of dollars each quarter, and we plan to keep it in place indefinitely," Amazon chief Jeff Bezos said in a news release.

Amazon raised its revenue projections for the rest of the year. The online emporium now expects 2004 sales to range between $6.63 billion and $6.94 billion. Analysts were already expecting $6.82 billion.

"They're in growth mode, for sure," said analyst Dan Geiman at McAdams Wright Ragen.

Each figure marked an improvement over last year, when the company earned $53.4 million, 14 cents per share, on revenue of $2.18 billion.
_________

I think it's Steven Seagal's "Out Of Reach" that did it! :D
 

yudansha

TheGreatOne
Well, I posted that as a joke, although the figures are all correct...

LOL I doubt that Seagal's DTVs made a Amazon over a billion dollars in profit :D but YES Clement, "I'm sure he helped out in a very small way" !!
 

Reservoir Dog

MRKD4DTH
I wish his DTV's wouldnt make a profit

Then he would stop making ridiculous movies. I know the so-called fans say that they want to see him in movies, but then again, do you want to see him in movies that are tarnishing his reputation and career. Perhaps he would be motivated to work harder for the fans if he lost money, which is obviously the priority for him.
 

yudansha

TheGreatOne
But how will they not make profit?

Think about it. How is profit made? Who is buying the movies? It's obvious that there must be a huge world wide Steven Seagal following if his straight-to-video movies are making profit. The only way for them not to, would be if a huge number fans just suddenly stopped purchasing and/or renting them - and that I don't see happening. Your wish is not my command. :D It won't happen, but it's an interesting idea. :)
 

Reservoir Dog

MRKD4DTH
Never Say Never

yudansha said:
Think about it. How is profit made? Who is buying the movies? It's obvious that there must be a huge world wide Steven Seagal following if his straight-to-video movies are making profit. The only way for them not to, would be if a huge number fans just suddenly stopped purchasing and/or renting them - and that I don't see happening. Your wish is not my command. :D It won't happen, but it's an interesting idea. :)

It could happen. I was raised to be tight with money, but i am not going to shell out money for "Submerged" or "The Foreigner 2" until I have rented them. I rent them first anyway, that way he gets the rental profits and possibly my retail profits, if the movie doesnt suck too much. With each movie, more fans get disappointed. Obviously, most on this site will always buy first, but even suziwong was disappointed with the last one. I actually enjoyed it myself, but if Seagal's biggest fan didn't like it, the casual fans will have no problem not buying future releases.
 
Top