OUT OF REACH review!(Contain Spoilers)

yudansha

TheGreatOne
EVERYTHING is in the contract...

In such a field you don't just go by word of the mouth. The contract is everything. If the contract requires you to stay behind in case of something then the person who signed the contract MUST go and do otherwise no payment will be received.

Another thing that could be happening is the time issue. As you know, time is money, and with these late DTVs it seems like the crew is very inefficient (I mean a perfect example is the VERY late release of the trailer which wasn't much of a trailer anyways). The film might get a sloppy start and some may think "oh it's ok, we'll catch up later" ... but then it spirals out of control and before you know it, you've gone beyond the budget and still need more time ... Then, it's all rushed at the end ... and since the dubbing is done at the end, you can tell that it's rushed and I don't know how patient Seagal is (but from what I've read he's not very patient) and when it comes to such frustrating things he just might brush them off to let someone else do that work...
 

lee nicholson

Well-Known Member
The fact of the matter is this, WARNER BROS have the financial clout to take SEAGAL to court, if he reneiged on any post or pre production duties. Remember the rumours about SEAGAL being forced to film his own death scene on EXECUTIVE DECISION. And look at EXIT WOUNDS, what other movie (or director) has forced SEAGAL to lose weight......or walk?
I think these new (independent) companies are either scared of SEAGAL or don't have either the time, professionalism or money, to either finnish, see-through or the capital to force SEAGAL to give 100% in recent movies?

peace
 

ORANGATUANG

Wildfire
TDWoj said:
I think it's pretty clear he's just putting the minimal effort necessary into making these low budget films. If post-production re-recording is necessary, he's not bothered about it. "Let someone else do it" clearly seems to be the rule of the day.

But really: how much of this nonsense does he expect his fans to swallow?


Heather - yeah, a big pussycat - the "See? Aren't I adorable? Come over here so I can rip your legs off" kind :D

WOW!!! Now they are some pussycat thanks TD, but some how i will give that an miss thanks, i can see fine from way over here thanks..
 

Storm

Smile dammit!
Yeah i got it last week also.Seagal is looking a lot older these days. I guess it comes to us all. The plot was good,with a clearly defined villain who was well played. Unfortunately,the action was threadbare,much less than BOTB and OFAK.
The girl was great in her role,hoping Steven would save her and the Polish cop was very nice;).I was disappointed the narration was meant to be Steven,but obviously not his voice.
The only action of note was the final fight with Matt Schulze,who i really liked in the role,but the sword fight was short and not great.Only in that final scene did it look like him and not a stuntman!
All that aside,i enjoyed it as a film,but not so much as an action film. More action in the next one needed.
Sidenotes...
The black CIA guy is well known here from his roles in comedys like Desmonds. And the Schulze's boss who appeared briefly is also another stalwart of British tv. Maybe the non-US locations and actors are putting his main fanbase off eh?
 

Clement3000

aka The Phoenix
Out Of Reach Review FROM Imdb

User: fiendish_dramaturgy
Date: 27 August 2004



Summary: Good story. No delivery.
As a fan, I fully understand Seagal's Zin lifestyle and his need to share with the world how unfair life is under the NWO rule.

However, there is practically none of his trademark kick @ss akido
style, and by the time the movie does deliver, it's too little too late. This was, on the other hand, a compelling story with focused
directing and talented acting. It just held virtually none of the
bone-crunching, neck-snapping action you expect from a Seagal
film. And what was WITH the voice change in this movie? Seagal's voice was on again, off again throughout the entire film. I was not amused. All in all, it was a good story. It was simply the fact that this is not what I expect when I sit down to a Steven Seagal movie. Because of the above facts, I have to rate it thusly.

If you're a fan of Steven Seagal, it rates a 9.2.

If you're a fan of Steven Seagal's akido-styled movies, it rates a 2.3.

If you're a fan of anti-establishment plot-lines, it rates a 6.3 from...

the Fiend :.

Fiendish Overall Average= 5.93


 

Clement3000

aka The Phoenix
Negative Review!

davideo-2
Wandering the forests...

Date: 29 August 2004
Summary: Complete toilet,but sadly exactly what I've come to expect from Seagal nowadays...

STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs

Billy Ray Lancing (Steven Seagal) is a former CSA agent turned survivalist who exchanges letters with a polish girl named Irena (Ida Nowakowska) who he is sponsoring through a foster program.However,when the lettters suddenly cease,his suspicions are aroused and he goes searching for his pen pal.It is from here that he learns that Faisal (Matt Schulze),a sinister criminal,has taken Irena and a host of other girls hostage to be used in a human trafficking programme.With the assistance of Special Agent Kasia Lato (Agnieszka Wagner) and street pick-pocket Nikki (Jan Plazaski-I checked on the IMDB homepage,and I'm aware that this is a female actress,but I'm sure I heard Seagal refer to him as Nikki at least a couple of times in the movie,so,I don't know who else to put as playing him!),he sets out to stop this forthwith.

To be honest,I'm really not sure why I even bothered renting this in the first place.By rights,I went off Steven Seagal a long time ago.I don't think this is an especially surprising thing.It's easy to see that his career is basically over now,his best days are now well behind him and that he's really only making any new films to pass the time.It's just,I dunno.......as I said,I pretty much knew what to expect,and maybe that was the thing.Seagal's last few DTV productions have all been the same sort of thing,and maybe a weird sort of addiction for them has set in.I actually thought this would be a good movie to rent and fall to sleep to...

Well,on this level,I suppose you could say I was pleasantly surprised on a few factors.But,as you know,a few ain't much.And these pleasantly surprising factors would have to be good things.And they are,well,only a few things.Matt Schulze (and even Nick Brimble in the cameo he occupies) are surprisingly engaging villains,with some pleasant depth invested in them,as well as being offered some good lines by the script.Plus,in one or two scenes,where he learns of the fate of the girl,Seagal offers something verging on depth that get us on the edge of our seats.

At just 82 minutes,this ranks as the shortest Seagal film ever (though it doesn't necessarilly feel like it!).And maybe this could be a contributing factor to another problem.The story has no depth to speak of!The bond between Seagal and the girl is not portrayed movingly enough,and so it's harder for us to care whether he saves her or not.That's not to mention the amount of plot holes and goofs it contains.And,one could say Seagal is showing a similar lack of effort to the script-writers.Once again as in his last effort,the atrocious Belly of the Beast,at various segments in the film,his voice is dubbed.Seriously,this voice gives him the accent of some refugee off that TV series Dragnet,with a cloying New Yorker accent as opposed to the pony-tailed one's distinctive Michigan voice.That's not to mention the fact that it gives the film the feel of one of those Bruce Li movies from the 70s.Seriously,it really says something about Seagal when he feels the scripts he picks are so poor he doesn't even want to use his own voice in them.

And if you're tuning in for action,you'll be seriously disappointed.For a film that bills itself as such a genre,it's practically non-existent,with hardly any explosions springing to mind,and very tamely filmed shoot-outs and martial arts sequences.

It would be a point to say that the acting's insufferably poor as well,but then the obviously low budget allocated to the film seems to have only been able to hire no name Polish actors to play all the parts which require english to be spoken,of which they all only seem to have a very basic grasp of,most prominently in the case of the boy actor,who noticeably speaks probably fewer words than Kurt Russell in Soldier and comes across as very forced when he's trying to convey an emotional scene (I certainly don't remember the script making any reference to him being a mute,that's for sure!)

However,I feel brighter things may be on the horizon.I hear Warner Brothers are going to be behind Seagal's next project,Into the Sun,and it would be nice to see that one get a theatrical release.As for this one,yeah,use it to fall asleep to.Just don't lose too much over the good stuff you do miss.**​
 

Clement3000

aka The Phoenix
So Many Nice Reviews (Please insert Sarcasim)

ismailbarackilic
Istanbul,Turkey

Date: 25 August 2004
Summary: Just Bad !!!

I was waiting a long time for a new Steven Seagal mouvie. Okay, there was a film called Belly Of The Beast. But I hate that film at my first watch and I'm still doing. So first I was very happy when I heard about Out Of Reach. I thought that this film could be a hard packed action mouvie. But after watching Out Of Reach I was shocked- how could I waste my time with a film like this. Okay, the fight(s) in the first 20 minutes are good. But after that the film is gonna boring. The action scenes are very bad. Especially the final fight is the WORST FÝNAL FÝGHT I'VE EVER SEEN. And I think the actors around Steven Seagal aren't very good. I mean the most of them are displaced. At the end there is one thing I like to say: the film gives a very bad image about Turkish people. This is not right and not fair.
 

aikidoboynj

"Lookin fit Nelson"
Oh where or where did Nicolo Toscani go...I think he met up with Mason Storm and John Hatcher. They must have flew away or something because I'm starting to wonder who this guy is these days. Everyone seemed to be a fan of his earlier stuff maybe because it was actually good.
 

Abby

Member
I think it was a horrible movie. It wasn't even his voice most of the time. I hope his next one is much better!!! I was very very disappointed!!!
 

suziwong

Administrator
Staff member
Clement3000 said:
ismailbarackilic
Istanbul,Turkey

At the end there is one thing I like to say: the film gives a very bad image about Turkish people. This is not right and not fair.
[/indent]

I am sorry but Yes he is right !!!!! FOR THIS REASON I WILL NEVER FORGIVE MR.SEAGAL !! TURKEY AND TURKISH PEOPLE DOESN'T DESERVE THIS !!
sincerely

suzi
 

Jampa

New Member
Hey, come on Folks, cheer up.... ;o)

In any story, the bad guy has to be "something"... French, English, Australian or Turkish, whatever... OOR doesn't make such a terrible reputation to Turkey and/or the Turkish people, it doesn't say that the whole country or the whole people is bad, does it? Are you too young to have seen "Midnight Express"? THAT was bad press for Turkey... It does not seem really important to me what nationality the bad guys are, in OOR, the important thing is that there are people all over the world that are willing to *buy* a human being, and not all the bad guys in there are Turkish, right...?

The movie is about the fact that there are sick people who sell human beings to the highest bidder, and that these people are influent and widely respected public "figures" - I like that statement, it has merit, now it is just too bad it did not have more depth and more ample means.
I for one also liked the final fight scene, whether it was well constructed or not, there are a few shots that I found esthetically quite beautiful. But maybe that's because I prefer to see the good sides than (just) the bad ones....?

Also I don't understand what it is, in "Belly of the beast", that one should hate that much... or hate at all. That's not a *great* movie <G>, right, but I've seen many that were much worse and I still don't "hate" them.

It feels like there is a lot of rancor in many posts... why is that? I was a big fan of Elvis when I was young <G>...but still, I did not watch ALL his movies... because I knew I would not like them, and if I happened to see one I thought little of, I did not say "Omygod What has become of Elvis?!? What's wrong with this guy now?!?" - I told myself "Omygod Why can't someone write him a role he can actually play decently, if they really wanna have his name on the poster?".

You know what, Folks? Why don't you all get together and write a script for Mr. Seagal? Something intelligent and well taut...? I bet you you won't be able to agree on what you wanna get him to do in there... and even if you do and you find someone who accepts to "invest" the $$$$, I am not 100% sure that ***he*** will feel like accepting the role... I guess it might depend on what you manage to agree on... <G>

Jampa - who taught her Daughter it is best not to talk about someone when all one feels like saying about him/her is negative things
 

suziwong

Administrator
Staff member
Jampa said:
Hey, come on Folks, cheer up.... ;o)

In any story, the bad guy has to be "something"... French, English, Australian or Turkish, whatever... OOR doesn't make such a terrible reputation to Turkey and/or the Turkish people, it doesn't say that the whole country or the whole people is bad, does it? Are you too young to have seen "Midnight Express"? THAT was bad press for Turkey... It does not seem really important to me what nationality the bad guys are, in OOR, the important thing is that there are people all over the world that are willing to *buy* a human being, and not all the bad guys in there are Turkish, right...?

Dear Jampa,

Yes I know "Midnight Express" and yes it was another bad one.
It was totally wrong !!!! it was invented !!!!

I wrote these before several times and I am repeating. I mean bad guys can be Turks we have no objection to that OK !!Can be mafia,etc... !! we have no objection. But when he mixes the Turkish Consolate, this is unacceptable. Turkish consolate was used as a market place for selling young girls. There was no reason for using Turkish embassy in this movie. Did you understand what I mean ??

Finally Mr. Seagal was prejudiced approach to Turkey in this film.
I will never forgive him anymore.

sincerely
suzi
 

Jampa

New Member
Hi, Suziwong,

Do you think ambassadors, consuls and diplomats are better humans than the "average" folk?

In your country do you never read nor hear of some dirty stuff that "happens" where a diplomat is involved? Well, I did hear and read about it, cases where some ambassadors were "employing" some undocumented persons at their beautiful homes, in my "own" country, ill-treating them, NOT paying them or paying them starvation wage, making them work 12-18 hours a day, and this to their families and "relatives" knowledge of course... Is it only in my country that the medias dare talk about it? And for one that we do hear of, how many is there really, that we never hear about??? And do you think that what happens here in my country does not happen in yours? or that the Turkish diplomats and other highly "respectable" people are better than those of some other countries?

Why would it be a sin to "mix" a consulate, of whichever country? Would you have found it more, or less "unacceptable", if they had "picked" France, Switzerland, Japan, whatever...? They could have picked *my* country's consulate, I would not make a fuss about it, because *I* do realise that it could just as well happen in one of my country's consulates, like in *any* other country's consulate *any*where in the world. Let's face it, there are wackos everywhere, and the color of their passports is not what matters.

Should they have "invented" a country in order not to "shock" anybody's "patriotic feelings"...? but then there would still be people who'd think that because of this or that little "detail", the script-writer (scriptor?) actually meant to "accuse" such and such country...

Did you find it "shocking" when "Hard to Kill" was depicting an American *Senator* as being the one person behind the murder of a couple AND their child, amongst other "deeds"?

Then where's the difference? what is it that makes it so "unacceptable"? Sh*t happens here and there but not in Turkey? Is there anything in the movie that says that only a Turkish could do it?

And also, why do you write "But when he mixes...." ? Who is it the "he" refers to? Do you think Mr. Seagal said "Okay, I'll play the role but I want the bad guy to be a Turkish man"...? or did *he* write the story...?

You also write (twice...) that you will "never forgive" Mr. Seagal for "prejudicing" etc.... Okay, you are allowed to feel whichever way you feel, and express it, too, but it sounds like you are taking it personally, and accusing him *personally* of "targetting" Turkey and the Turkish people. That really bothers me... I think if he was a racist we'd know it by now, and IMO thinking that he may be a racist is implying that he is stupid and dishonest. Is that what you think? Could you be a "fan" of someone of whom you'd think so little? I couldn't.

Also: "TURKEY AND TURKISH PEOPLE DOESN'T DESERVE THIS !!" is a weird statement in my view... What does it mean? Have you made a list of those who would be more "deserving" in your eyes...?

I'll ask you a simple question: Would you feel better if the movie had taken place in Europe, and the consulate the one of the USA...?

As to "Midnight Express", I'll tell you something: my ex is Turkish. He loved the movie, and when I asked him if he thought it was kind of realistic he said it was very realistic. Should I tell him that he's nut and he does not know what he's talking about, because *you* say that "it was wrong"? I won't do that, because he's got some pretty good reasons to *know* exactly what he's talking about.

But again, I'll say that they (Please note I wrote *they* and NOT *he*) picked a *Turkish* consulate like they'd have picked *any* other consulate, and what should shock us is not which country was "picked" but that it does indeed EXIST at all, anywhere... I bet you some wealthy businessman or respected diplomat of my country made a few high bids <G>.

Why don't you try and watch it again, and insert ... "Swiss", "Belgian", "Japanese" or "Whatever" in place of "Turkish" in front of the word "consulate"...? Then you'll see that it doesn't change the message. There is no "hidden message" about the Turkish people and/or their country, they are NOT the target.

Jampa - intending no offence to anyone
 

suziwong

Administrator
Staff member
Dear Jampa,


May be you are right some points but some people or some countries tolarate little less. I don't know is he racist or not but yes I heard some rumos he doesn't like Turks but I didn't believe at the beginning. Yes, I am thinking he did it on purpose. He was producer in this film and of course he knows what he does. He is very wise man.
Doesn't have to like us but he doesn't know anything about Turkey and Turkish people. A little detail we never say to each others "essalumunaleykum" because it is not Turkish word. But all the Turks talked this way. Turkish people don't use "fez". So they could at least made a research about Turkey so I am calling it prejudices. I hope you are right and I hope it is not a personal.
Of course these are my personal opinions I like Mr. Seagal, I respect him but I didn't like the prejudiced approach of a person who claims that he is someone who liked humanity and people. I am sad and I am very sorry !!!

Finally lets close because I don't want to discuss this matter any more.
Please forgive me. Thank you very much for your opinion.

sincerely
 

Administrator

Administrator
Staff member
It's a split second between hit or miss.

What that tantalizing tagline has to do with Steven Seagal’s latest Direct-to-Video opus, Out of Reach, I have yet to figure out. Clocking in at a brief 86 minutes, it should probably read “a split second from Start to Finish”, except for the fact that Seagal really knows how to slow things down, way down, for added Drama, I guess. He’s the only person that could make a gripping, action-drama about the vile, underground, human trafficking crisis in Europe as funny as his tongue-in-cheek Mountain Dew commercial… unintentionally, of course. Sadly, it was this very same commercial that kind of renewed my interest in Seagal’s work. The man is literally responsible for about twenty-five percent of the wall space at Blockbuster these days, with titles such as Half Past Dead, Out For a Kill, The Foreigner and Belly of the Beast. After watching , I see why these are never rented out.

Seagal plays Billy Ray Lancing, a former CSA(?) agent living as a survivalist, deep in the woods. He is presented to us as a kind man and nature lover, as he frees a trapped falcon and nurses the bird back to health. We find out that his compassion isn’t limited to animals, as he is also the sponsor of an orphaned girl, Irena (Ida Nowakowska), in Poland. They write letters back and forth to one another, and he sends her secret codes to try and decipher. Gee, I wonder if that will play a role later in the movie? To show the bond between these two, their correspondence to each other are often read aloud in voiceover. Hilariously, Seagal, the actor PLAYING Lancing, doesn’t even do the readings of the character’s letters!

When he gets a letter from the orphanage saying that Irena can't write to him anymore, he becomes suspicious and travels to Poland where he stumbles upon a human trafficking network, run under the cover of the United Allied Nations. Faisal (Matt Schultze), the leader of this underground organization, has kidnapped all the girls from the orphanage and intends to sell them into a life of (implied) sexual slavery. He seems to share a secret past with Seagal, whom he often refers to as “The American.” It’s amazing what is implied in this movie, since it’s all so despicable, like when Faisal and Irena play chess and then he drugs her juice. Nothing is shown or said after that, but there has to be some depravity going on here, people.

Prepare to suspend your disbelief, as Seagal continues to search for Irena, even though he’s not even sure she’s in trouble and amazingly, Irena leaves him a trail of secret messages even though she doesn’t know he’s looking for her. He eventually goes to the police, where he is partnered with a female cop, without even disclosing that he is a retired espionage agent. The Aikido fights are all shown in slow-mo and the action scenes are generally unimpressive. The final fight with Faisal is probably the best in the movie, as it’s a sword duel, a la Lone Wolf and Cub, where both warriors run past one another, then stand with their backs turned until someone falls over dead. Speaking of Lone Wolf and Cub, Seagal is so big at this point that he could probably play a decent Ogami Itto, so Aronofsky, if you’re listening… why not tap the big guy for your new Lone Wolf and Cub project?

Seagal is definitely at a crossroads in his career right now, having several big budget, studio pictures under his belt (Hard to Kill, Under Siege, Exit Wounds), but currently being relegated to Direct-to-Video Hell (Ticker, Out For a Kill, The Foreigner). I just don’t get it, since we all know that Seagal is the real deal, receiving his first Aikido dan accreditation in 1974 under the instruction of Harry Ishisaka, and reaching 7th level dan in the years thereafter. Even with Out of Reach’s $20 million budget, exotic Polish locations and Po Chih Leong’s adequate directing, there is very little that makes you sit up and notice anything but the lame-brained plot devices and ham-fisted acting, throughout. Thankfully the movie is short, unresolved plotlines and all, at just 86 minutes.

The DVD:

Picture: The movie is presented in 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen. The colors are crisp and clear, except darker scenes where the black looks a little murky.

Audio: English 5.1 Dolby digital. There are no other language and no subtitle tracks. This DVD features a Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo, which sounds fine.

Extras: There are preview trailers for 4 other Steven Seagal Direct-to-Video pictures: Half Past Dead, The Foreigner, Out For a Kill and Belly of the Beast. There is also a trailer for a Direct-to-Video Thriller, titled 3 Way.

Conclusion: Out of Reach isn’t a bad waste of time, but it is a bad waste of talent. Steven Seagal really needs to start reaching deep and delivering more than just these slap-dash action flicks. I would say that Out of Reach is a definite rental for Steven Seagal fans or those anti-fans out there that just love to see the man stumble and fall through another role like this one. Personally, I’m going to see if I can catch that Mountain Dew commercial again.

Movie : ** (Out Of *****)
Video : ***½ (Out Of *****)
Audio : *** (Out Of *****)
Extras : ½ (Out Of *****)
Replay * (Out Of *****)

From DVD Talk : http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=11792
 

Clement3000

aka The Phoenix
Good & Bad

Thomas Jolliffe (supertom-3)
Marlow, England

Date: 16 September 2004
Summary: An impressive achievement considering recent years, Worst Seagal film ever!!

The second piece of Seagal action to come out this year, the second dire straight to video offering from him as well. While Belly Of The Beast had some enjoyment laughing at the over the top action this film is so painfully bad that it is almost upsetting. Now I have never been the biggest Seagal fan. Having said that I have enjoyed watching his earlier films. They were pure dumb and ultra violent films with an enjoyably pretentious moralistic attitude. Seagal had that kind of Italian American, Brooklyn tough guy thing going on, his kind of De Niro and Brando impersonation. Since Under Siege though, he has become the eco-Zen- Warrior with absolutely no personality. He was in decent shape as well, never the ripped muscle man like Arnie, Sly and Van Damme but a real man kind of size and he was very quick. The action scenes in those films were brutal and slick and we would see in full glory the aikido from Seagal. Nowadays Seagal, after one two many pies, is looking very withered and old and overweight. In modern Seagal fights the are film extremely tightly with the odd wide shot featuring his stunt double and is edited in such a way to hide the fact that he is just not quick enough anymore. Seagal looks tragically bloated and sweaty and almost repugnant. I cannot see how even the most ardent Seagal fan could be anything but devastated seeing him do films like this and looking the way he does. Somehow he still sells a movie but at this rate it won't be for long.

Out Of Reach is the worst Seagal film ever, and considering Ticker, Foreigner and Out For A Kill, that takes some doing. This is a film that even z grade action men like Lorenzo Lamas and Don Wilson would want scratched off their CV. The plot has Seagal as a former government agent who runs a animal shelter (oh my god, when will he realize he's not captain planet.). He then finds out that a young girl who he is pen pals with (isn't that a horrible picture, an old sweaty git having correspondence with a little girl) is kidnapped and sold as a slave, Seagal has to come out of retirement and stop the bad guys who are lead by Matt Schulze. The film despite being a reasonable 20 million dollar budget looks painfully cheap. The film is so lazily put to together and Seagal is so bad it beggars belief. There are so many signs that he can't be bothered and is past it, form constant doubling, lazy use of a stand in and several moments when he is clearly dubbed, probably because he whispers through the while film and you can't hear him. The only times you hear what Seagal is saying is when he is being dubbed. He really doesn't want to be their and being the big name of such a crappy little picture no-one would have told him to pull his finger out. Someone needs to slap him and tell him that for the money he his paid and that they plough into his movies his fans expect a lot more. He is currently the top earner and audience grabber of the straight to video action market but if he continues like this he will be overtaken by Van Damme and Lundgren and others below them. There are rumours his next film, Into The Sun is to be distributed to theaters by his beloved Warner Brothers but I really don't see it. It is tragic and says a lot about the industry that they could make the biggest pile of poo known to man and sell it simply by plastering his ugly mug on the front.

I watched this simply out of curiosity and merely because it was a Seagal film, these DTV stars release these films and although they are generally bad there has to be a certain minimal standard of enjoyment. Van Damme, Lundgren are keeping this up with their recent efforts, but Seagal who has the highest expectations must up his game or retire. He certainly is not convincing as a tough guy any more. *​
*********************************************************
stephen day
cleveland, england

Date: 17 September 2004
Summary: Not too bad

Out of Reach isn't half as bad as some are making out. Sure, it's a step back from the excellent and action-packed Belly of the Beast but saying it's a total loss is just plain wrong. Seagal seems to trim down around halfway through (presumably to prepare for his upcoming Into the Sun) and looks much better with his hair shortened while donning a suit. The final sword-fight is artistically shot and a nice touch. He has some of his trade-mark put-downs which harks back to the good old days and the story is a decent one with nice camera-work. On the minus side the astoundingly bad dubbing (which sounds a lot like the villain's voice) filling in for Seagal's voice is very obvious and spoils each scene in which it appears. Many of the fights are also edited too quickly and lit badly in the vein of Ticker. Being a faithful Seagal fan though I'm willing to put aside such quibbles to see the greatest martial arts hero that ever lived strut his stuff. For a post-50 year old action hero I think he's doing a good deal better than most - Belly of the Beast was great and I think if the much hyped Into the Sun is as good he'll be back in the saddle again for sure.
 

Littledragon

Above The Law
His Recent Movies Not Too Good BUT, He Is Or Should I Say Will Make A Comeback!!

Clement3000 said:
Thomas Jolliffe (supertom-3)
Marlow, England

Date: 16 September 2004
Summary: An impressive achievement considering recent years, Worst Seagal film ever!!

The second piece of Seagal action to come out this year, the second dire straight to video offering from him as well. While Belly Of The Beast had some enjoyment laughing at the over the top action this film is so painfully bad that it is almost upsetting. Now I have never been the biggest Seagal fan. Having said that I have enjoyed watching his earlier films. They were pure dumb and ultra violent films with an enjoyably pretentious moralistic attitude. Seagal had that kind of Italian American, Brooklyn tough guy thing going on, his kind of De Niro and Brando impersonation. Since Under Siege though, he has become the eco-Zen- Warrior with absolutely no personality. He was in decent shape as well, never the ripped muscle man like Arnie, Sly and Van Damme but a real man kind of size and he was very quick. The action scenes in those films were brutal and slick and we would see in full glory the aikido from Seagal. Nowadays Seagal, after one two many pies, is looking very withered and old and overweight. In modern Seagal fights the are film extremely tightly with the odd wide shot featuring his stunt double and is edited in such a way to hide the fact that he is just not quick enough anymore. Seagal looks tragically bloated and sweaty and almost repugnant. I cannot see how even the most ardent Seagal fan could be anything but devastated seeing him do films like this and looking the way he does. Somehow he still sells a movie but at this rate it won't be for long.

Out Of Reach is the worst Seagal film ever, and considering Ticker, Foreigner and Out For A Kill, that takes some doing. This is a film that even z grade action men like Lorenzo Lamas and Don Wilson would want scratched off their CV. The plot has Seagal as a former government agent who runs a animal shelter (oh my god, when will he realize he's not captain planet.). He then finds out that a young girl who he is pen pals with (isn't that a horrible picture, an old sweaty git having correspondence with a little girl) is kidnapped and sold as a slave, Seagal has to come out of retirement and stop the bad guys who are lead by Matt Schulze. The film despite being a reasonable 20 million dollar budget looks painfully cheap. The film is so lazily put to together and Seagal is so bad it beggars belief. There are so many signs that he can't be bothered and is past it, form constant doubling, lazy use of a stand in and several moments when he is clearly dubbed, probably because he whispers through the while film and you can't hear him. The only times you hear what Seagal is saying is when he is being dubbed. He really doesn't want to be their and being the big name of such a crappy little picture no-one would have told him to pull his finger out. Someone needs to slap him and tell him that for the money he his paid and that they plough into his movies his fans expect a lot more. He is currently the top earner and audience grabber of the straight to video action market but if he continues like this he will be overtaken by Van Damme and Lundgren and others below them. There are rumours his next film, Into The Sun is to be distributed to theaters by his beloved Warner Brothers but I really don't see it. It is tragic and says a lot about the industry that they could make the biggest pile of poo known to man and sell it simply by plastering his ugly mug on the front.

I watched this simply out of curiosity and merely because it was a Seagal film, these DTV stars release these films and although they are generally bad there has to be a certain minimal standard of enjoyment. Van Damme, Lundgren are keeping this up with their recent efforts, but Seagal who has the highest expectations must up his game or retire. He certainly is not convincing as a tough guy any more. *​
*********************************************************
stephen day
cleveland, england

Date: 17 September 2004
Summary: Not too bad

Out of Reach isn't half as bad as some are making out. Sure, it's a step back from the excellent and action-packed Belly of the Beast but saying it's a total loss is just plain wrong. Seagal seems to trim down around halfway through (presumably to prepare for his upcoming Into the Sun) and looks much better with his hair shortened while donning a suit. The final sword-fight is artistically shot and a nice touch. He has some of his trade-mark put-downs which harks back to the good old days and the story is a decent one with nice camera-work. On the minus side the astoundingly bad dubbing (which sounds a lot like the villain's voice) filling in for Seagal's voice is very obvious and spoils each scene in which it appears. Many of the fights are also edited too quickly and lit badly in the vein of Ticker. Being a faithful Seagal fan though I'm willing to put aside such quibbles to see the greatest martial arts hero that ever lived strut his stuff. For a post-50 year old action hero I think he's doing a good deal better than most - Belly of the Beast was great and I think if the much hyped Into the Sun is as good he'll be back in the saddle again for sure.


Well when INTO THE SUN is released that will shove up all their words from the critics mouth..
 

nc_ladywolf

New Member
I am new to this site and I don't know anyone here but have read a lot of the posts and it seems to me the people here really like Steven and are true fans {which is hard to find now-a-days on a lot of the sites I have tried.} I am the kind of Steven fan who will go out and buy one of his movies, sight unseen, just because it is a Steven movie {as I did with "The Foreigner"}. Now when it comes to "Out of Reach" I have not seen the movie yet, however I plan to buy it as soon as I get a chance. When it comes to Steven's movies I want them ALL....I even have the movie "My Giant" which he did a cameo as himself in. As of right now I have every movie he has been in but "Out of Reach". As to the topic and point of my post...out of all of his movies only one has EVER disappointed me...that was "The Foreigner", and it wasn't Steven that disappointed me, it was the "Matrix" style of filming that did it. I love Steven and always will. I don't think he ever would or could disappoint me. Thanks for letting voice my opinion.
 
Top