Thanks for the review, Steve.steve said:Just watched Out of Reach for the first time guys and have to say it was a little better than I expected especially considering some of the negative reviews it's been getting.
PROS - Seagal was more charismatic, he had some great lines, the villain was good, a liked the cinematography, it was well edited, there were some touching moments, there were no obvious stunt doubles, it was a decent story well put together.
CONS - not quite enough action, the swordfight was a little brief especially after how much it was built up, there wasn't any really dramatic music (a la Belly of the Beast), the fights weren't quite as thrilling as expected and of course those voice doubles!
I did quite like the film overall and don't want to dog it as it was very watchable and Seagal was very trim and charismatic in it. The voice doubles (I suspect Matt Schultz himself dubbed a lot of Seagal's dialogue as it sounds like his voice) were very noticeable though and that was the major drawback of the movie. Incidentally a lot was made of Seagal saying the 'f' word for the first time in many years - it wasn't him saying it it was his alternate voice at the time.
Otherwise though very nicely shot and put together, Seagal showed a lot of personality in this one and had some great put-downs just like the old days. He always looks very smart and trim in a suit and with his hair cut. Nearly but not quite as good as Belly of the Beast but most assuredly a million times better than anything Michael Oblowitz has or will ever throw at us.
Clearly, however, you and I didn't see the same film!
By the way, his hair wasn't cut - it was tucked up in a kind of reverse, inside-out bun (but that's something a woman would be more likely to notice than a man) and looked simply awful. And he was not trim; he was about the same size as he was in The Foreigner, give or take ten pounds. (I shudder to think how big he had to have been if he'd shed 24 pounds before filming even started on this pic.)
I agree he looks good in a suit (even if his belly was straining at the buttons in most scenes).
I disagree about him being "charismatic" in it. He wasn't doing anything other than delivering his lines. They weren't badly delivered, mind you; but one can hardly say he was "charismatic". That would require energy; whatever energy he was expending, it was the minimal required to get through the scene.
The villain did nothing for me. A villain is supposed to inspire the viewer to dislike him (or like him or at least admire him) and Faisal didn't do it for me. The villains in Steven's movies are usually way over the top, and that's what makes them so much fun. Faisal was so laid-back he was practically comatose.
A couple of poorly placed one-liners do not harken back to the "good old days" of snappy dialogue, intense performance and a good, overall story. The writing in this film was mediocre at best (at least it wasn't completely putrid as OFAK was), and banal and unbelievable at worst. There were just too many throwaway lines and plot holes you could drive anti-personnel vehicles through.
That being said, you are right in the sense that it's watchable. It is - barely. But for me, it was dull, boring, slow moving, nonsensical and frustrating, in the sense I kept waiting for something to happen, and nothing ever did. The effect it had on me is like missing an important phone call. You rush to the phone when it rings, you pick it up - but the caller has rung off, and you'll never know who it was that was calling. It's an "almost" movie. And I'm afraid, for me, "almost" doesn't cut it.