• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Submerged - review

suziwong

Administrator
Staff member
#21
KROM said:
Sometims his voie is dubbed or is a problem with the sound editing. I want to say again that the cinematography is really nice, but the visual effect are crap like the poster design too. By the way i don't understand why Steven accept so bad poster art design for his latest movies.

I don't understand too !! Seagal is sleeping I hope he will wake up very soon !!! :D

Dear Assassin187,

Welcome to the Steven Seagal Unofficial Site and enjoy !!

peace

suzi
 

Mason

Well-Known Member
#22
Craig Robertson said:
Not another movie with the dubbing. :(

Doesn't sound too good either. :( Will still watch it though.
I agree...I hate when they dubb Seagal's voice .. that is just .. well .. none acceptable.
 

Vern

New Member
#23
Hey, thanks everybody for not getting mad at that review I wrote on The Ain't It Cool News. I hope some of you will like the movie more than I did. But I just didn't think it cut the mustard.

About the action - there is maybe more action than in some of the other straight to video ones (definitely The Patriot) but not with Seagal involved in all of it, and not martial arts. Mostly guns and explosions.

On the positive side, I re-watched OUT FOR A KILL recently and I noticed alot of things I didn't catch before. This will sound pretentious but there's some bold uses of color in that movie. Mainly in the scene where the house gets blown up with his wife in it. Watch closely, the flashbacks even use the color/black and white gimmick used so well in SIN CITY recently.

I'm still an OUT FOR JUSTICE man though.

thanks,

Vern

http://www.geocities.com/outlawvern
http://www.lulu.com/outlawvern
 

Administrator

Administrator
Staff member
#24
Vern said:
Hey, thanks everybody for not getting mad at that review I wrote on The Ain't It Cool News. I hope some of you will like the movie more than I did. But I just didn't think it cut the mustard.

About the action - there is maybe more action than in some of the other straight to video ones (definitely The Patriot) but not with Seagal involved in all of it, and not martial arts. Mostly guns and explosions.

On the positive side, I re-watched OUT FOR A KILL recently and I noticed alot of things I didn't catch before. This will sound pretentious but there's some bold uses of color in that movie. Mainly in the scene where the house gets blown up with his wife in it. Watch closely, the flashbacks even use the color/black and white gimmick used so well in SIN CITY recently.

I'm still an OUT FOR JUSTICE man though.

thanks,

Vern

http://www.geocities.com/outlawvern
http://www.lulu.com/outlawvern
Thanks for the review Vern. I agreed with quite a few points from the review of 'Into The Sun' from Ain't It Cool.

We too can't understand why the dubbing occurs. There is really no need for it. :( Can't wait to see the movie though, more action sounds good. :)
 

TDWoj

Administrator
Staff member
#26
Kcs said:
Such a movie is a 15 million dollar business and a product of 100+ experts, they all share their knowledge and experience. I'm sure that every decision the creators take is the best possible. However the actors are only a part of the process, so we shouldn't blame them for those decisions which they didn't influence, and which decisions' reason are not known by us.
Steven chooses his own projects. It's also his choice about how much effort he puts into his projects, and it's clear that he simply can't be bothered especially for the low-budget things he's been doing. His voice is dubbed by a stand-in because once the film is in post-production, they can't get him to come back and re-record the dialogue if there was a problem with the original. As for the lack of action, well, I suspect that he's in no fit physical condition to do his own fight scenes any more; and I also suspect he just doesn't want to (been there, done that, etc. etc.).

On some level, I can't actually blame him for that - he's basically making the same movie over and over and over again, and how many times can you do the same thing without getting tired of it? On the one hand, he's painted himself into a corner with making these types of action movies, but on the other hand, there is still a lot he could do with them. The only people convinced that wire-fu is what the public wants are the studio executives. I think more realistic fight scenes, without the flash of wirework, where you see real skill involved, would probably be a lot more fun to watch.

Low budget films with directors who can't direct and a supporting cast of no-names are not helped by the fact that the scripts are awful beyond imagining. I don't know where these scripts come from or what his criteria are for choosing them (other than he has to work) but his choices indicate he seems to have lost the knack of picking a good project. Either that, or he's getting bad advice from somewhere, and I'm fairly certain it isn't his agent that's leading him astray.

Lots of top ranked actors have had to do lousy movies just for the money, and have admitted to doing so, without shame. Can't fault them for that. But sooner or later a good project does come along and the actor in question starts coming back with better and better projects.

With Steven, it's all been downhill since Exit Wounds. I know everyone was raving about Belly of the Beast being his "comeback" film, but, people, it really wasn't that good. The dubbing, the stunt doubles, the fact that Steven spent the most of the picture sitting down or otherwise immobile didn't qualify BOTB as a "Steven Seagal action movie" to me. Granted, I haven't seen Into the Sun yet (I haven't got over the squickiness I feel whenever ... (TD self-censors the rest to avoid being censored by her comrades)), but it was quite significant that those who bought the rights to it once Franchise went toes up realised there was no way it was going to make money in a theatrical release.

There doesn't seem to be anyone in Steven's camp that knows what constitutes a good project; nor anyone, even if they did know, that has the influence on Steven to steer him in the right direction. At this point, with his overall poor physical condition, I wouldn't want him to do any of his own fight scenes, anyway - it would probably kill him. And if he doesn't enjoy doing his job - making movies - he should stop, and stop inflicting this low-budget rubbish on the fans who made him a star. If he doesn't owe us - and he probably thinks he doesn't - then he owes it to himself to stop making movies if all they are, are half-assed efforts that end up shaming him.

-----

Footnote: Before all of you start jumping on me about not being a "true fan", please note the following: I really believe that if he still enjoyed making movies, we wouldn't be seeing so much rubbish. I'm just venting my frustration over the releases of the past few years because I find it really difficult to understand why someone would spend so much time doing something they obviously don't enjoy enough to want to do well. So take what I say in that context, and don't rag me about not being a "true fan". I'm a realist. That's where I come from. I know it gets up some people's noses, but at least, with me, you know where you stand - you can always get an honest response.
 
#27
I'm afraid, you don't have the point: a good project is what makes more income than the money invested in it. The amount of projects Seagal is involved, makes it clear that his DTV movies were success. And Foreigner is being continued, despite the fact that most of the critics were unsatisfied.

The second thing: Seagal is playing roles, and the movies has a director. I think we should judge a film about the things that are in it, and not about those things, that are missing from it. Casey Ryback is not Nico, Wesley McLaren is not Jonathan Cold, William Lancing is not Robert Burns, Frank Glass is not Orin Boyd.

The third thing: when an actor accepts a role in a movie, of course cannot see the movie. He has a vision about it, based on the script. But he is in the hands of the editor and the director during post-production, and I'm sure sometimes an actor is surprised seeing the final result. OOR and ITS were big WB projects by the time Seagal accepted the roles (The Rescue and The Yakuza), he has lost his weight dramatically for these pictures (see the attached picture from OOR), too bad that the budget finally wasn't as big as expected.

Doin't forget, he is still the No1 DTV movie actor, and that is a huge market. I'm sure that if the studio decided to make a Foreigner 2, they will do their best with it. And it was filmed in USA, so thse fans who hate to see locations outside USA, will have something to be happy about.
 

Attachments

TDWoj

Administrator
Staff member
#28
How much money a movie makes isn't one of the criteria for a "good movie". Bad movies can make a lot of money (Attack of the Clones comes to mind). Steven's movies make money because he still has enough of a fan base to make that possible. The problem is, with each successive project the movies get worse and worse; how long do you think the fans will put up with it?

The Foreigner had flaws, but it wasn't as bad as the critics made it out to be. But it was also the one which foreshadowed the shortfalls in all the films that followed. Stunt and painfully obvious body-doubling; voice-doubling; a mediocre script that could have been saved by a better director than Oblowitz. These are all factors that contributed to The Foreigner not being well received by the critics. These are all things that are undeniably "in" the movie.

The only reason Into the Sun escaped the usual voice-doubling was because it had a $35 million budget - as it was intended for a theatrical release, which we knew about and were looking forward to and were disappointed when it went straight to video - and Steven was probably contractually obligated to finish post-production on the film. Also, he had a level of involvement in this film he hadn't had in a very long time, and therefore he did put a little more effort into what he was doing on this film than he had in films before or since.

The films he's been making all start with the script, and, as a writer, I can tell you in no uncertain terms, the scripts are simply awful. Badly written, and in the hands of directors who haven't got the faintest idea of what they are doing, badly directed. Steven needs a firm hand when he's being directed; none of the directors in his last few efforts have the kind necessary strength to get him to do his best work in front of the camera.

Those are the things that are in the movie. And it's painfully obvious to the viewing public that, what is missing from the movies Steven is in is - Steven himself.
 
#29
TD

I agree with every one of your points and it is quite refreshing to see that you will allow yourself to be critical of certain aspects of the latest efforts by Steven Seagal. A strange thing to say, you may think, but I find it rather irritating that some people will not hear a bad word said about the big guy, when, basically, there is just so much wrong with what once was right! Basically, the only things missing from his latest straight to video efforts are anything involving a complete and coherent action film.

For me personally, it's getting really hard to justify watching a Steven Seagal movie as an action fan. Although Seagal still has a few years left in him yet, he seems determined to hang onto past glories. Or at least make an attempt to do so.

Everything about the roles he has played in his previous five or six movies is painfully routine, except that he moves slower, fights less, is stunt-doubled more and has at least half of his lines dubbed by a voice actor who doesn't even sound like him! I mean - I can do a half-decent Seagal impression - you just talk in a half whisper with a slightly menacing tone. If the guy has trouble speaking into his microphone, directors should simply cut his lines, as nothing is worse than unecessary dialogue in an action movie, particularly when it isn't even the voice of the 'star'.

Seagal's schtick as a broody ex-CIA agent who turns to spiritualism and then suddenly has to rely on his old skills for one last battle against some dude who has kidnapped his daughter/killed his wife/kidnapped a penfriend (yes, really)/ etc. etc. is definitely wearing thin with me and the bland action sequences and increasing sloppiness of his latest films, masked by a thin veneer of Hollywood polish makes watching his movies a continually unpleasant experience.

I don't really buy his movies expecting them to be good anymore - I buy them because I am a fan and the guy used to make awesome movies. I buy them with the faint hope that one day he will make a decent movie again, but each new one that he stacks up simply marked the next bad movie in a growing line of stinkers that Seagal just can't seem to steer clear of. It apparently hasn't crossed the minds of Seagal and his peers that a lean, character-driven script with high-impact screen fighting set in a simple location is worth more than all the other nonsense they continue to throw into their films. The plot needs to be kept simple, the pace of action continuous, and the stars should always look their best. If an 'action' filmmaker can't meet those standards, then they're selling their audience short and ought to find another line of work.

At the moment, if I was to recommend a decent Steven Seagal action movie to a friend, I would tell them not just to avoid his latest one, but his latest eight! If someone new to the world of Seagal saw any one of his latest eight efforts without seeing any of his earlier stuff, they would think that the movie was total sh*t. That is pretty sad, don't you think? Steven Seagal's last really decent movie was Exit Wounds back in 1999.

I'm pretty embarrassed going into a store to buy the the new Seagal movies at the moment, because they just look so damn lame! The only reason we tolerate this cr&p is because we know how good he once was and how good he could be again if he just put a little effort into his films, starred in a film with a decent script and teamed up with a good director. The true fans cling to the hope that somehow, someday, he will make a movie which is a return to his former glory days of Above The Law, Marked For Death, Hard To Kill, Out For Justice and Under Siege.

I have nothing more to say regarding this. At the moment.

GlimmerMan
 

hofmae

New Member
#30
I preordered Submerged express. I think i will have the movie about the 1. of june.

I will write a review immediately so that you can see if the movies is cool or not. I garantee if i like you all will like it too, because im a fan of classic Steven Seagal Movies and i want a lot of action and typically Seagal Scenes :)
 

TDWoj

Administrator
Staff member
#31
Hey, there, Glimmerman!

It's kind of a Catch-22 situation, as far as buying or renting his more recent movies goes. On the one hand, you want to support him and live in hope he'll do something better with the money he gets from the dvd sales. On the other hand, supporting these awful efforts just tells him that the s/u/c/k/e/r/s/ fans out there will buy anything he makes no matter how bad, so why should he exert himself to do anything better?

It's a tough tightrope to cross. I still haven't rented or bought Into the Sun, even though it appears to be better than some of the other efforts of recent years. Out of Reach was so awful it was embarrassing to watch. Belly of the Beast was touted as a "comeback film" and it was so awful it was painful to watch. (I don't even want to discuss the sheer uber-awfulness of Out for a Kill. Not only was it embarrassing AND painful, it was like watching someone jump from a great height and there you are standing by, helplessly unable to do anything about it.)

So I'm torn. Do I want to continue supporting Steven in the lifestyle he's become accustomed to, in the hopes he'll wake up from whatever nightmare he's in on his own and bring us back the real Steven (not the old Steven - just the real Steven)? Or should I withhold my dwindling disposable income and hope that he gets a wake-up call, which won't happen unless all of his other fans follow in my footsteps (and I know they won't, since any movie Steven makes, apparently, is great, ipso facto)?

Impaled upon the horns of a dilemma, indeed.
 

ad_adrian

Twitter: adadrian
#32
i got a question is submerged dubbing with his own voice or another actor? i HATE It when its someone else it drove me crazy in out for reach

glimmer man i agree with all u say...i am embarrassed buy his recent movies 2
but i do it because im a high class steven fan...and im sick of ppl on this site not saying or hearing a bad word about steven...its just wrong
i considering my self a pretty high class fan of steven but i would neva only say good stuff about him and worship him....

tjwog i agree with most of what you say as well. it is really sad to see steven do this stuff....he doesnt even do his own dubbing...thats just really sad and it drive sme up the wall...and he cant even do his own stunts..some of them lik ein out of reach was only of him getting hit in the stomach ANYONE could of done the stuff there...a pregnate woman couldnt of done that stunt
 

DiDa

Super Moderator
Staff member
#33
A Question: How is the action in the movie? I mean, are there any aikido-fights or shootouts or explosions?
 

Administrator

Administrator
Staff member
#34
I've seen the first couple of minutes of the movie. The introduction/credits looks not too bad, but the special effects are very poor. There is a spy aircraft that looks like something out of Thunderbirds. :D

DiDa > According to Vern there is quite a lot of action in this movie. :)
 
#35
Well hello there TDWoj! :D

You know - I kinda pride myself on my cool DVD collection! So much so, that I have started sticking all the latest Seagal movies in the back of a cupboard rather than out on display! Ha ha ha!

I somehow feel like a sucker for buying his new movies, but if anything, they give me a laugh! I work as a Loss Prevention Manager for one of the larger music chains (HMV), so I do get rather a handsome discount, so it's not too bad, but even with a relatively substantial saving on each new DVD of his that I buy, I still feel rather cheated. There are far better films in the bargain bins of motorway service stations!

To be honest - Into The Sun is a marked improvement on the embarrassing dross that has been churned out late. However, it is not what I'd call a 'good' movie by any means. Still - it is worth renting at least. Out For A Kill is not even worth copying, it's so abysmal. Belly Of The Beast didn't really seem to have much of Seagal in it at all - I think I said in an earlier thread that there is even a stunt double for his arms in that movie! And when have we ever seen Seagal do flying kicks? As for Out For A Kill - the cinematography was pretty, but the rest of the movie was lame and the silly high-tech noises which happened every time a new location came up in text on the screen annoyed the fu*k out of me!

I don't know what we can do really - I only hope that Seagal stops sleepwalking through his movies, hits the gym and teams up with a decent director with the confidence to make Seagal a credible action hero in Hollywood once more.

GMan
 

DiDa

Super Moderator
Staff member
#36
Craig Robertson said:
I've seen the first couple of minutes of the movie. The introduction/credits looks not too bad, but the special effects are very poor. There is a spy aircraft that looks like something out of Thunderbirds. :D

DiDa > According to Vern there is quite a lot of action in this movie. :)
Yeah, i have seen the review of Vern. I should have read it first, before asking questions. Thanks!
 

TDWoj

Administrator
Staff member
#40
MOST of the movie is dubbed?

Steven, WHEN are you going to get your act together and actually be IN the movies you're supposed to be in? This is getting past endurance, it really is.

-TD, deciding now to save her money for something else