There are already two reviews on imdb.
REVIEW 1: POSITIVE
"First of all there was very little voice dubbing (sounded like JR ewing) and minimal doubles which was a suprise, loads of action but mostly gun fire with a few Seagal close combat scenes (toilet scene was comical). First war scene could have been stretched on for longer (see silly Seagal double run for to the chopper) and the ending could have had more hand to hand combat scenes instead of a rushed one.
Get rid of the silly dubbing/thin double and he could make some sort of come back."
REVIEW 2: NEGATIVE
"Did we see the same movie, mate?
Because IT REALLY SUCKED ASS!
First of all the war part was terrible, okay there were some shots that were nice but it just looked like an mid '80's acrion movie with guys falling down, bad explosions, massive unrealistic guns use, terrible special effects etc
The French Foreign Legion don't use russian T type tanks at all ( it's a para regiment no place for battletanks)
Second the whole USA part was *beep* very cheap on all fronts from acting to scenery.
And third the prison part was agian, same as the war part, TERRIBLE. Guys just walking blazing guns truw a high security prison. A water pipe right to the prison with only one little steel plate keeping people from getting in. Guards with anti tank weapons? What is next, minefields around civillian prisons? When the merc's enterd that church they were testing AK's, M60's and grenades. When they raided the prison they all got MP5's. What about that?
I've seen a lot of bad Seagal movies the past year('s) but this one is beating them at every point. What a wasted of a good action star.
Seagal should take his money and go on a nice retirement some were in Europe (he seems to like it over here)."