Review : Flight Of Fury

nomis

New Member
Yes, it was ten times better than Attack Force, but still pretty Bad. Irritating voice dubs, bad actors around seagal, irritating stock footage (annoying battleship all the time !), there is much action, but not the kind of action the real Seagal fan wants. The showdown has one scene with seagal using a pipe, nice, but nothing spectacular, kinfe battles are dark and real fast, hardly to follow. In the beginning of the film a grab, neck hit with the hand, in a store where some robbers are, just one short grab and arm twist. And after 50 minutes or so, a (the coolest scene) scene where Seagal breaks a leg and an arm of one guy. It's way to little to enjoy in the 90 minutes. About 2 minutes of fighting with the hands. Seagal is again not much on screen, he looks better though, lost weight. I've enjoyed Shadow man and Mercenary for Justice some more, because those films had at least great Steven Seagal Martial art scenes and great filmed too. Flight of Fury is watchable, but not a real good Seagal film.
 

Tourmaline

Crystal Scabbard
Not Half Past Bad

Those who relish negatively reviewing Seagal's films, an perhaps understandably, had a field day with "Attack Force", are going to be quite dissappointed with "Flight of Fury", because it is in fact a pretty decent film. If Seagal had hit a low with "Attack Force", then he has reedeemed himself quite a bit with this new film and restored his credibility and integrity to a respectable degree. Interestingly enough, it is the same director, just an infinitely better film. The story logic is coherent and well paced, Seagal looks fitter and healthier than he has in recent memory, the use of stunt doubles is minimal, if at all, the editing is quite good, the soundtrack is classically themed and effective, the fight scenes are not extensive but well done and fullfilling, with Seagal in better form than we have seen him in a while, the supporting cast is quite capable. Also, although there is some voice dubbing. This time, there is a small amout of voice dubbing, but the dubbing is done well enough so that it sound almost exactly like Seagal, and it is hard to discern the difference. The buzz was that this film was quite superior to his recent films and although I approached it with some trepidation, I can attest to the fact that this film is a welcome surprise, and is a quite entertaining and well made action film. I suppose the truest review would come from someone who I watched this film with, and who is not a particular fan of Seagal to begin with, and yet admitted that compared to Seagal's recent offerings, that this film was "impressive" and "good enough for theatrical release," which I must agree with. Given a more substantial budget, and a more capable director, Seagal could even do better, but this film was not half bad, or not half past bad should I say. I recommend it.
 
Inconsistency has been the problem in the past, and I think it will be a problem in the furure. These productions are probably so rushed that the outcome for them would be 50/50.

We had Belly of the Beast, which was good, then we had Out of Reach, was bad, then we got Into the Sun, back up again, then we had Subemrged, way, way down.

Since then, the only bright spot has been Shadow Man. Mercenary for Justice had some decent action, but the movie was all over the map (bad directing, editing, screenplay, acting). Attack Force was more than bad. I had trouble sitting all the way through it, and I'm a pretty forgiving movie fan.

Moral of the story: we're gonna have to take the good with the bad...
 

suziwong

Administrator
Staff member
Flight & Fury from Vern !!

FLIGHT OF FURY
Starring Steven Seagal
co-written by Steven Seagal

Well, it pains me to admit it guys, but Steven Seagal may be in a small rut here, at least movie-wise. Everyone knows his heart is in playin the blues right now, yet between guitar solos he's still poppin out 3 movies a year. I'm definitely not counting my man out yet, especially with him directing PRINCE OF PISTOLS still a possibility. But after MERCENARY FOR JUSTICE, SHADOW MAN, ATTACK FORCE and now FLIGHT OF FURY all in a row, I feel like he's not at his highest potential of achievement right now. Somebody forwarded me his tour rider for some reason (somehow people got the idea I was obsessed with Steven Seagal) and I noticed he's drinking Red Bull, not his own Steven Seagal Lightning Bolt energy drink. So that might be part of the problem.

Don't get me wrong, these movies all have their moments, and they almost always seem a little more interesting the second time I watch them. But most human beings aren't that dedicated, so I have no choice but to recommend FLIGHT OF FURY (which comes out this Tuesday) only to serious Seagalogists like myself, and then only for educational purposes. This only has traces of the various Seagals we love, such as the badass from OUT FOR JUSTICE, the holy warrior from ON DEADLY GROUND and the crazy weirdo swordsman from BELLY OF THE BEAST, OUT OF REACH, etc.

That said, there are a number of things he mixes up here to keep things fresh. While it starts typically with him escaping some kind of government plot to wipe his mind, we soon find out that he's the world's best Stealth pilot. I might have to go through my files but off the top of my head I'm pretty sure we've never seen Seagal fly a plane before - the closest we've seen was getting sucked out of a plane and plummeting to his apparent death in EXECUTIVE DECISION. Which in my opinion doesn't count. (He did fly a helicopter in BLACK DAWN though.) Anyway, this is the first time we get to see Seagal in the RIGHT STUFF style slo-mo pilot stroll towards the camera.

Another thing that's unusual, Seagal's character doesn't have a last name here. Everyone calls him John. It's unusual to go by first names in a military setting, but John is just a likable guy I guess. I was worried that the end credits would give him a last name (IMDb claims he's "John Sands"), but I was happy to see that the credits just call him John. One name, like Prince, or Vern.

During an off-the-books test flight of an experimental Stealth jet called the X-77, one of John's former students (and the world's second best Stealth pilot) steals the jet and sells it to terrorists in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, John is locked up for having a stolen car when he kills a bunch of armed robbers in a gas station. The military gets him out of jail in exchange for going with a young pilot named Jannick and an asset named Lisa to steal back the X-77 before terrorists use it to drop biological weapons. If this sounds familiar to you, you must be a Michael Dudikoff fan, because this is a remake of the 1998 Dudikoff picture BLACK THUNDER. The plot is the same, most of the character names are the same, but for some reason they didn't credit the original writer (he just gets a special thanks at the end). Apparently he didn't even know about this movie until he saw it on IMDb.

Anyway, the movie shows early promise with the scene where he happens to be in a gas station mini-mart when it's getting robbed. In the HARD TO KILL days he used fancy tricks to knock these type of guys unconscious. He broke some bones but he purposely didn't use his gun. At this age though he straight out executes the mother****ers. He punches through glass to steal one guy's gun, then unloads it into him, slides across the floor and shoots 1 or 2 other dudes full of holes. Once he's out of bullets he faces the last robber, a guy with a switchblade. He puts down his gun and puts up his hands, but then produces his own knife and starts waving it around like it's a fencing match. He's clearly using some fancy knife fighting style that will shame whatever crude stab the dude was planning on doing. Then he just throws the knife in the guy's neck. I loved this scene. At first it made me laugh because it looks so funny and then it impressed me because I realized that it really was a pretty good move. The knife fighting style comes up again later. I hope he's not leaving his samurai sword phase from INTO THE SUN and OUT OF REACH, but this is a nice one too.

When the cops show up he's in a room full of bloody corpses, but he tells them in a dubbed voice to watch the security tape. There's alot of dubbing in this one, not just for Seagal but for a couple of his military superiors too. For this one they chose unusually GODZILLA-esque voices and even one guy that sounds exactly like that scene in THE ADVENTURES OF PEE WEE where he says "paging Mr. Herman." Most of the dialogue is really plain too, which fits the dubbing style. My favorite attempt at a colorful line is when an admiral or something discusses the biological weapon that might infect the entire world within 48 hours: "This is no naval or air force matter. This is global. The whole damn kit and caboodle."

One stunt I never seen Seagal do before, he rolls under a truck and holds onto the undercarriage. But then when a security team checks under the truck with mirrors he has somehow reappeared on the roof. That's some ninja ****. There's some pretty harsh aikido near the end too, and Seagal uses his trademark gun style where he supports an entire rifle with one fully extended arm, or sticks a gun around a corner and fires without looking.

But of course alot of the action this time is plane related. The X-77, by the way, is special because it has "active stealth" where it turns invisible for a while. Not like Wonder Woman invisible, with a little Seagal floating around, but Predator invisible, so you just see a little glimmer here and there but mostly see nothing. Unfortunately, invisible is not exactly the most cinematic image, especially if all it does is fly. Maybe if an invisible plane could pick up objects and carry them around or drink water or smoke or something, that would be cinematic. But this is just a plane. Who are you fooling, planes? Leave the invisibility to the hollow men.

In some ways the movie seems more competent than the last one, ATTACK FORCE. For example, we know they knew what the plot was before post-production, because it was already available on DVD as BLACK THUNDER. But in other ways you gotta wonder what the hell they were thinking. For example, most of the movie takes place in Afghanistan, but one of the characters is a woman who walks around in a silk bathrobe most of the time. I don't care if it's post-Taliban, no woman in Afghanistan is gonna answer the door in a silk bathrobe. Luckily, they are in some part of Afghanistan where everybody is westerners, and she is able to seduce the terrorists' second in command for a lesbian make out session.

Anyway, we'll save the more detailed analysis for a more scholarly forum, but let's just say most people won't find this one of the better Seagal pictures. If you are new to his DTV works you are better off with BELLY OF THE BEAST, OUT FOR A KILL and OUT OF REACH. In those days I was begging everybody I knew to watch these movies, but with these latest ones it's just something I do in the privacy of my own home, you can't push it on anybody. I kind of enjoyed it myself, but you know how I am.

Thanks, buds
--Vern

------------------------------------------------------------
 

Mama San

Administrator
Suzi, my little friend,
Where in the world did you get "this"?
Is he talking about this forum? He has
been a member here since June, 2004.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Anyway, we'll save the more detailed analysis for a more scholarly forum, but let's just say most people won't find this one of the better Seagal pictures."

Just who does this "man" (and I use that term loosely) think he is??
Our members are fans of Steven Seagal and he may or may not be, I don't know! But it is for sure (by his statement) he is not a friend of our forum!!!

"Save the more detailed analysis for a more scholarly forum?" Really??
I didn't like the film and I said so and so did several others. There wasn't
one "good" reaction to Attack Force that I found!

Just my opinion? I'm not the least bit interested in his so-called opinion
of us, if indeed we are the subjects of that statement!! I just checked and
he hasn't been around this forum since May, 2005!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Suzi, my little friend,
Thank you for bringing this "statement" to our attention!
Love ya' soooooooooooooooooooooooo much!!! :)
God bless,
Mama san
 

suziwong

Administrator
Staff member
I understood what you think.. I brought this up to learn about the ideas of the members.. Yes he is member..
with my Love soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo muchhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !!




Mama san;173185 said:
Suzi, my little friend,
Where in the world did you get "this"?
Is he talking about this forum? He has
been a member here since June, 2004.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Anyway, we'll save the more detailed analysis for a more scholarly forum, but let's just say most people won't find this one of the better Seagal pictures."

Just who does this "man" (and I use that term loosely) think he is??
Our members are fans of Steven Seagal and he may or may not be, I don't know! But it is for sure (by his statement) he is not a friend of our forum!!!

"Save the more detailed analysis for a more scholarly forum?" Really??
I didn't like the film and I said so and so did several others. There wasn't
one "good" reaction to Attack Force that I found!

Just my opinion? I'm not the least bit interested in his so-called opinion
of us, if indeed we are the subjects of that statement!! I just checked and
he hasn't been around this forum since May, 2005!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Suzi, my little friend,
Thank you for bringing this "statement" to our attention!
Love ya' soooooooooooooooooooooooo much!!! :)
God bless,
Mama san
 

ORANGATUANG

Wildfire
Mmmm and what other forum is that?..ohhh you mean that one well iam going to be clever enough not to listen to utter bull and make up my own mind how soon people forget that there is alot more to steven then just his acting/ music...you just gotta find it..
 

Littledragon

Above The Law
Just letting you know there were tons of Flight Of Fury at my local video store, I got my copy I will watch it and give you my full review as always..
 
Received my Flight Of Fury today and thought it was good,altho anything Steven is in is ok with me.As long as I get to see my man I'm happy.But seriously it is a good movie.Enjoyed it very much.
 

Littledragon

Above The Law
My Flight Of Fury Review!!

Wow has it been along time since I reviewed a new Steven Seagal movie. The last Steven Seagal movie I reviewed was Shadow Man on June 11, 2006. But wait wasn't Attack Force after Shadow Man, that is correct. However there was not one, I repeat not one Attack Force in any rental store near me nor being for sale, and from all the reviews on how terrible Attack Force was I didn't bother buying it from online. However as the Seagal fan I am I did order Attack Force from Amazon a couple days ago and will should be expecting it soon.
So lets talk about all this hype, all this hype and positive reviews of Flight Of Fury, hype is correct because alot of you members enjoyed the movie, however in my opinion it was the kind of overrated hype that kind of gets your hopes up to me. Well I just finished watching Flight Of Fury and what is my first reaction, I am satisfied. Not pleased not estatic, just merely satisfied. The last Seagal DTV I felt really excited and after watching felt a sense of exuberience was Mercenary For Justice, not because of the plot or overall movie but it was that rare form of excellent short little fight scenes we had. I can not say the same about Flight Of Fury, alot of short hand to hand combat scenes but it went so fast I could barely see any of it. To be on a more positive side I felt overall the movie was entertaining, it had its many flaws as well as every DTV release but this movie was not bad, a little let down by the members here on the site for hyping up the fight scenes so much but the way I watch fight scenes of Seagal is from a professional martial artists approach and not just from an average male or female movie fan who likes action. So anyway here goes my review..

Plot:
The plot was very straight forward and very easy to follow, I think to simple in this case and once again a bit silly on how the movie jumped right away into the story. I think the beginning leading up to this whole stolen stealth plot it just went way too fast and was way to cliche, wow I have used cliche many of times when I have been reviewing Seagal's DTV releases. But anyway the plot was a typical B movie plot, nothing fancy nor complicating, yet nothing impressive. The plot had kind of an Under Siege feel to it but in a much worse way, this almost felt like the DTV release version of a spin off of Under Siege 1 and 2. The plot was very simple and in Seagal movies I like to see more locations in the film to make it more energetic, the location was kind of dull for me and even though I was supposed to vision a middle east hangout wit terrorists it felt so much like a movie set, even though it really was, you just didn't feel convienced that you were really there where you were supposed to be if you know what I mean. So in the end the plot was not bad, nice and simple not confusing, could have been a little more exciting but I just feel the majority of action movies that have a plot with airplanes or stealths are very boring because I do not like to see planes chasing each other around in the sky, especially when you know it is a b dtv movie and they are just flying behind a green screen or using stock footage, the plot here and film production did not allow us the audience to be in the zone and moment in the film where we could use our imagination I think due to the fact it was too simplistic.

Acting:
When I see Seagal acting I am not looking for an oscar performance or a golden globe type of profession when Seagal acts. Seagal is a good actor, period. However I want to see Seagal's trademark acting. His charisma, his confidence, his defiance, and his classic I don't give a **** about you one liners. This film had none. Shadowman had a couple, Mercenary For Justice had more one liners and classic Seagal dialogues, Flight Of Fury had none. When the general was in Seagal's face yelling at him or whatever Seagal just replied with a simple yes sir. What happened to that confidence, that attitude, that wit, that defiance we saw with Seagal's character in such films like Above The Law when he gives his speech to Fox that you guys think you're above the law but you ain't above mine. What about the scene in Exit Wounds when he defys his captain to have a sit, and the scene in Fire Down Below when he states lets face it I don't believe in your authority. I miss that attitude and character in Seagal. The only little Seagal moment I had was at the very end when he said he should have kicked the bad guy's ass and kill him or whatever. There was no trademark acting Seagal in this movie. Shadow Man and MFJ had a couple really nice one liners this movie had absolutely none, I didn't see the real Seagal character. It seemed he was a little un enthusiastic when he was holding the AK-47 one handed and just shooting it without aiming, etc.. I didn't see his precision that he once had when he was handling weapons. However I will not say that for the whole film because the short scenes with him handling the pistol and razor was quite impressive. The other characters had horendous acting, especially the white co pilot of Seagal, cliche, cliche, and more cliche. His acting sounded so darn cliche. The acting of the cast was absolutely terrible, you could just hear from their tone in their voices that they had no emotion or tried to bring out the best in their character but horribly failed, I thought the acting was really one of the worst jobs out of all the DTV releases.

Action:
I was a little dissapointed with the action. Especially coming from the members here on this forum praising the action scenes so highly. Are we forgetting such movies like Above The Law, Under Siege 2, The Glimmer Man, those type of fight scenes? I guess we have, we are in a new era of Seagal where the most "REAL" action and martial arts we have seen from Seagal in a DTV was probably Into The Sun. The action was not impressive, the flying airplanes stuff was not impressive, I just don't find that kind of stuff exciting. The explosions, gun fights, seen that done thats many of times, many of times... Ok lets cut to the chase, the hand to hand combat. What made Steven Seagal famous for. How did I react to the hand to hand combat in this movie, I was dissapointed. It took for so long to see some hand to hand combat, the majority at the end, very quick, so fast you couldn't see what was going on. However I was very impressed with his knife fighting, truely an expert at that. I did not like the pole fighting scene as Craig stated just beating the guy up an down with the pole, what happened to that precision he had when he used the pole or the staff in the On Deadly Ground scene. I didn't see that at all. I did not see any originality. The knife scenes we had already seen in Under Siege, I was impressed the quickness Seagal still has with his hands, but it was way too fast and too short. There were like 3-4 very, very short hand to hand combat but nothing to impressive and it was way too dark as well as the camera angles making it extremely hard to see. Shadow Man had a couple more which were not bad, but Mercenary For Justie had great short hand to hand combat scenes, moves we have never seen Seagal utilize before, that is what made that film so great for me, was the great martial arts applied to the hand to hand in that film. So I feel the hand to hand was on the same level as Shadow Man, just more direct and less entertaining. Seeing Seagal slash through 3 or 4 villians in a second with a knife is impressive yet it leaves you wanting more. Total the fight scenes were probably less then 5 mins which is very sad when you compare his amazing fight scenes in his older films. So overall I was not too impressed with the hand to hand in the film, I wanted alot more because for this type of film there should have been longer fights, more joint locks, chokeholds, strikes to vital organs, and longe knife fighting scenes. Once again I believe the fight scenes in this film lacked the potential it could have had. In short, the fight scenes were too quick, too short, and you could not see them clearly.

Appearence:
Well Seagal looked great in this film! One of the best he has ever looked, actually the best he has ever looked since all his DTV's have been released. He looked great, he looked like he lost alot of weight, looked really tan, looked sharp, and looked kind of slim. Seagal looked great. He looked so badass with the wardrobe he was wearing. The black on black, the slick pilot suit, probably one of the best highs of this film was Seagal's look. It makes you speculate are his producers paying him more to get back in shape if Prince Of Pistols or Under Siege 3 ever does get released into theaters as what as been projected. Whatever Seagal is doing he looks much better then he did in Shadow Man and Mercenary For Jusitce, he actually looks younger in this film and in alot better shape. His appearence was very pleasing to me.

Dubbing:
Man the very first line of the film he was dubbed, the majority of his lines were dubbed however it was in a manor that the voice dubbing was so similar to Seagal's actuall voice I really didn't seem to mind. Ofcourse I was let down to have yet another Steven Seagal film where 85% of his voice was dubbed, but the dubbing sounded alot closer to his voice then the Today You Die and horrendous Out Of Reach dubbings, so in a way it was a dissapointment to hear Seagal's voice being dubbed again but since the voice sounded so similar it really wasn't a big deal to me, surprisingly.

Doubles:
Well you state two things here, doubles wasn't a big issue because he didn't use any but once or twice when he rolled under the big truck in the beginning scene and when he went on top of the truck when it was riding you can be pleased with that. Or you can argue the reason there was no need for any doubles because the fight scenes were way too short. Shorter then the fight scenes in Mercenary For Justicve and Shadow Man. So the doubles were not an issue, we didn't see that much action from Seagal, had a couple gun fights, a couple very quick hand to hand, a little car action scene and that was it. So there was not an issue with any doubles in this film.

Production:
I guess you can say the production was average. I felt Mercenary For Justice and Shadow Man had a much better production. There was so much obvious stock footage, probably the most stock footage ever in a DTV Seagal release. Alot of the camera angles and effects I was not found of, a couple times for the fights it was too dark and the angle it was shot at was so difficult and unclear to view. I did not like the production. When Seagal was supposed to be in Afghanastan or the middle east or where ever, that dirt land looked like a place in the middle of the U.S. and the location which I stated above just did not seem convincing enough, it just felt so obvious it was a set, even though it was, it wasn't convincing enough to let the audience use their imagination and put a picture in their head saying they are in this place or this location. Not too fond of the production.

Special Features:
There were none on my DVD, just previews of some DTV release trailers and the official trailer for Attack Force was on this dvd.

Conclusion:
From the majority of the positive reviews I read from this forum I felt let down, I felt the members here over rated this film to a high point. What was it about this film that captivated you guys so much? For me Belly Of The Beast overall was an enjoyable film besides the terribble, terrible fight scenes with those stupid obvios doubles. Into The Sun was a great film for me to watch with the classic martial arts and Japanese set theme. Mercenary For Justice got my attention with the really amazing short hand to hand combat scenes, and Shadow Man I enjoyed because the film put together overall was indeed a good DTV release and an enjoyable film that kept you waiting for more. This film bored me, took way too long to get something to hapen, we saw little of Seagal when we did see him it was so quick and short we were like what happened. Don't get me wrong this is not a bad movie, I haven't seen Attack Force yet, but Flight Of Fury was a good movie, not great not bad. A great DTV release movie is like Into The Sun, a bad DTV release movie is Submerged, Today You Die or Out Of Reach. This movie falls into his top best DTV releases in my opinion I feel are, Into The Sun, Mercenary For Justice, Shadow Man, and Flight Of Fury. I liked the knife fighting scenes, very impressive, but way too short. Too little of Seagal and when we saw him it was way too quick. I expected more from this film. I watched it two times already today but it still doesn't sell me as a very enjoyable DTV release. This was just an average film. People saying it is a comeback from Attack Force, I will wait to see Attack Force before I judge it but listen folks Seagal never came back. He mad a little spash with Into The Sun but after that he really hasn't made that big of a deal. I think Mercenary For Jusitce and Shadow Man remain his best recent DTV release with Flight Of Fury very closely behind. Flight Of Fury had alot of potential and as I was impressed with some of the hand to hand fight scenes in this film, it was just too little and too short. So overall I would give this movie a mediocre: 3.5 out of 5 stars.
 

Attachments

  • t91567dlnkf.jpg
    t91567dlnkf.jpg
    15.4 KB · Views: 282
  • vlcsnap-565752.jpg
    vlcsnap-565752.jpg
    17.8 KB · Views: 277
  • vlcsnap-567810.jpg
    vlcsnap-567810.jpg
    24.7 KB · Views: 265
  • vlcsnap-576133.jpg
    vlcsnap-576133.jpg
    14 KB · Views: 298

Littledragon

Above The Law
Let me add one quick thing, I think we will be seeing alot more better things from Seagal, the way Seagal is looking he is in great shape, looking great, hopefully he is getting in shape for his next movies, and I believe he has a couple more years left making movies but there will be at least one, at least one that will make it to theaters I pray for that.
 

Littledragon

Above The Law
Chud.com Flight of Fury Review.

This Flight Of Fury review by a member from another forum sums up on how I felt about Flight Of Fury. I know every member has his or own personal opininion but I felt the majority of people who saw this film that all the glitter really was gold. I think they praised this movie more then it should have been. People who thought there was alot of action I am not too sure of what they seen, it took well over an hour in the film to start seeing some action, all that flying around in a plane and a dissapearing stealth, the fight scenes were way too quick and were not clear at all, I completely agree with this review down here:

http://chud.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98326

'Following the appalling Attack Force, chances were that Seagal could only have a step up with Flight Of Fury. To out-stink Attack Force would take some doing. Flight Of Fury is a marked improvement overall, but still in the grand scheme of thinks, mediocre. Mediocrity is seemingly an achievement for Seagal these days, a sad insight into his movie career’s decline. Where Attack Force was a hodge-podge of plot lines altered drastically from conception, to filming, to post production, Flight Of Fury keeps the plotline more simple. Someone steals a high-tech stealth fighter, planning to use it to fire chemical weapons (which we later, bizarrely discover, will destroy the whole world in 48 hrs). Seagal has to get the plane back. It’s that simple, no annoying sub-plots, and conspiracies weighing the film down like far too many of his recent works. That’s not to suddenly say the storytelling is good though, it’s pretty poor. The introduction to side characters is badly done for example.

In filmic terms FOF is bad. It’s badly acted by all involved, and Seagal looks bored to tears almost. He’s just got the look of a toddler who’s been forced to perform the school nativity against his will, and so performs with a constant grimace and air of half assedness. Can we blame Seagal though when the material is so un-ambitious and cruddy? Not really. This is the final film of his Castel Studio’s, multi-picture deal. The producers can’t be bothered to make anything remotely good, promising a 12 or so million dollar budget, and (after Seagal’s obligatory 5 million) probably pocketing a nice hefty chunk of it themselves (If the film was made for the remaining 7 million, then I’m Elvis Pressley!). So in that respect why should Seagal put the effort into a film that’s already got distribution sorted before it’s made? Fan’s though may argue, he at least owes them the effort. He’s seriously looking jaded, and the continued use of stand ins and dub-overs is further indication of this. Michael Keusch directs with some efficiency, while the cinematography is quite good, but in all technical areas (and as usual with Castel, a bog standard stunt team) there’s nothing more than mediocrity, and nothing to help the film rise above its material, and bored leading man. Again there’s a few action scenes focusing on characters other than Seagal, which in all truth we don’t want to see.

Overall the action isn’t too bad. It’s nice and violent, and on occasion we’re treated to a few vintage nasty Seagal beatings, but overall nothing special. Partly due to a poor stunt crew, and the lack of time to film anything too complex or exciting. For me, Shadow Man was a more enjoyable film, because while ignoring the incoherent, jumbled, plotline, there were more vintage Seagal moments, and more of him in centre stage. He never disappeared for long periods during the film. Seagal disappears bizarrely during one action scene here, and re-appears after, with little explanation. There’s far too much stock footage used. Using stock shots isn’t an entirely horrendous thing, but using it as a crutch is. We’re treated to countless establishing shots of naval ships, all the time, which get annoying. Plus the continuity of the stock footage is all over the place (just check the backdrops, chopping and changing).

The film is just middle of the road. It says it all that the films best scene is a completely needless, and gratuitous girl on girl scene, with two hot chicks. Seagal even perks up briefly then too! Overall this may be one of the better stock footage based actioners out there, but that’s not saying much at all. This will please many fans, but they should bear in mind, Seagal himself would probably want to forget this one’s existence. **"
 

latinojazz

New Member
Littledragon;173238 said:
Wow has it been along time since I reviewed a new Steven Seagal movie. The last Steven Seagal movie I reviewed was Shadow Man on June 11, 2006. But wait wasn't Attack Force after Shadow Man, that is correct. However there was not one, I repeat not one Attack Force in any rental store near me nor being for sale, and from all the reviews on how terrible Attack Force was I didn't bother buying it from online. However as the Seagal fan I am I did order Attack Force from Amazon a couple days ago and will should be expecting it soon.
So lets talk about all this hype, all this hype and positive reviews of Flight Of Fury, hype is correct because alot of you members enjoyed the movie, however in my opinion it was the kind of overrated hype that kind of gets your hopes up to me. Well I just finished watching Flight Of Fury and what is my first reaction, I am satisfied. Not pleased not estatic, just merely satisfied. The last Seagal DTV I felt really excited and after watching felt a sense of exuberience was Mercenary For Justice, not because of the plot or overall movie but it was that rare form of excellent short little fight scenes we had. I can not say the same about Flight Of Fury, alot of short hand to hand combat scenes but it went so fast I could barely see any of it. To be on a more positive side I felt overall the movie was entertaining, it had its many flaws as well as every DTV release but this movie was not bad, a little let down by the members here on the site for hyping up the fight scenes so much but the way I watch fight scenes of Seagal is from a professional martial artists approach and not just from an average male or female movie fan who likes action. So anyway here goes my review..

Plot:
The plot was very straight forward and very easy to follow, I think to simple in this case and once again a bit silly on how the movie jumped right away into the story. I think the beginning leading up to this whole stolen stealth plot it just went way too fast and was way to cliche, wow I have used cliche many of times when I have been reviewing Seagal's DTV releases. But anyway the plot was a typical B movie plot, nothing fancy nor complicating, yet nothing impressive. The plot had kind of an Under Siege feel to it but in a much worse way, this almost felt like the DTV release version of a spin off of Under Siege 1 and 2. The plot was very simple and in Seagal movies I like to see more locations in the film to make it more energetic, the location was kind of dull for me and even though I was supposed to vision a middle east hangout wit terrorists it felt so much like a movie set, even though it really was, you just didn't feel convienced that you were really there where you were supposed to be if you know what I mean. So in the end the plot was not bad, nice and simple not confusing, could have been a little more exciting but I just feel the majority of action movies that have a plot with airplanes or stealths are very boring because I do not like to see planes chasing each other around in the sky, especially when you know it is a b dtv movie and they are just flying behind a green screen or using stock footage, the plot here and film production did not allow us the audience to be in the zone and moment in the film where we could use our imagination I think due to the fact it was too simplistic.

Acting:
When I see Seagal acting I am not looking for an oscar performance or a golden globe type of profession when Seagal acts. Seagal is a good actor, period. However I want to see Seagal's trademark acting. His charisma, his confidence, his defiance, and his classic I don't give a **** about you one liners. This film had none. Shadowman had a couple, Mercenary For Justice had more one liners and classic Seagal dialogues, Flight Of Fury had none. When the general was in Seagal's face yelling at him or whatever Seagal just replied with a simple yes sir. What happened to that confidence, that attitude, that wit, that defiance we saw with Seagal's character in such films like Above The Law when he gives his speech to Fox that you guys think you're above the law but you ain't above mine. What about the scene in Exit Wounds when he defys his captain to have a sit, and the scene in Fire Down Below when he states lets face it I don't believe in your authority. I miss that attitude and character in Seagal. The only little Seagal moment I had was at the very end when he said he should have kicked the bad guy's ass and kill him or whatever. There was no trademark acting Seagal in this movie. Shadow Man and MFJ had a couple really nice one liners this movie had absolutely none, I didn't see the real Seagal character. It seemed he was a little un enthusiastic when he was holding the AK-47 one handed and just shooting it without aiming, etc.. I didn't see his precision that he once had when he was handling weapons. However I will not say that for the whole film because the short scenes with him handling the pistol and razor was quite impressive. The other characters had horendous acting, especially the white co pilot of Seagal, cliche, cliche, and more cliche. His acting sounded so darn cliche. The acting of the cast was absolutely terrible, you could just hear from their tone in their voices that they had no emotion or tried to bring out the best in their character but horribly failed, I thought the acting was really one of the worst jobs out of all the DTV releases.

Action:
I was a little dissapointed with the action. Especially coming from the members here on this forum praising the action scenes so highly. Are we forgetting such movies like Above The Law, Under Siege 2, The Glimmer Man, those type of fight scenes? I guess we have, we are in a new era of Seagal where the most "REAL" action and martial arts we have seen from Seagal in a DTV was probably Into The Sun. The action was not impressive, the flying airplanes stuff was not impressive, I just don't find that kind of stuff exciting. The explosions, gun fights, seen that done thats many of times, many of times... Ok lets cut to the chase, the hand to hand combat. What made Steven Seagal famous for. How did I react to the hand to hand combat in this movie, I was dissapointed. It took for so long to see some hand to hand combat, the majority at the end, very quick, so fast you couldn't see what was going on. However I was very impressed with his knife fighting, truely an expert at that. I did not like the pole fighting scene as Craig stated just beating the guy up an down with the pole, what happened to that precision he had when he used the pole or the staff in the On Deadly Ground scene. I didn't see that at all. I did not see any originality. The knife scenes we had already seen in Under Siege, I was impressed the quickness Seagal still has with his hands, but it was way too fast and too short. There were like 3-4 very, very short hand to hand combat but nothing to impressive and it was way too dark as well as the camera angles making it extremely hard to see. Shadow Man had a couple more which were not bad, but Mercenary For Justie had great short hand to hand combat scenes, moves we have never seen Seagal utilize before, that is what made that film so great for me, was the great martial arts applied to the hand to hand in that film. So I feel the hand to hand was on the same level as Shadow Man, just more direct and less entertaining. Seeing Seagal slash through 3 or 4 villians in a second with a knife is impressive yet it leaves you wanting more. Total the fight scenes were probably less then 5 mins which is very sad when you compare his amazing fight scenes in his older films. So overall I was not too impressed with the hand to hand in the film, I wanted alot more because for this type of film there should have been longer fights, more joint locks, chokeholds, strikes to vital organs, and longe knife fighting scenes. Once again I believe the fight scenes in this film lacked the potential it could have had. In short, the fight scenes were too quick, too short, and you could not see them clearly.

Appearence:
Well Seagal looked great in this film! One of the best he has ever looked, actually the best he has ever looked since all his DTV's have been released. He looked great, he looked like he lost alot of weight, looked really tan, looked sharp, and looked kind of slim. Seagal looked great. He looked so badass with the wardrobe he was wearing. The black on black, the slick pilot suit, probably one of the best highs of this film was Seagal's look. It makes you speculate are his producers paying him more to get back in shape if Prince Of Pistols or Under Siege 3 ever does get released into theaters as what as been projected. Whatever Seagal is doing he looks much better then he did in Shadow Man and Mercenary For Jusitce, he actually looks younger in this film and in alot better shape. His appearence was very pleasing to me.

Dubbing:
Man the very first line of the film he was dubbed, the majority of his lines were dubbed however it was in a manor that the voice dubbing was so similar to Seagal's actuall voice I really didn't seem to mind. Ofcourse I was let down to have yet another Steven Seagal film where 85% of his voice was dubbed, but the dubbing sounded alot closer to his voice then the Today You Die and horrendous Out Of Reach dubbings, so in a way it was a dissapointment to hear Seagal's voice being dubbed again but since the voice sounded so similar it really wasn't a big deal to me, surprisingly.

Doubles:
Well you state two things here, doubles wasn't a big issue because he didn't use any but once or twice when he rolled under the big truck in the beginning scene and when he went on top of the truck when it was riding you can be pleased with that. Or you can argue the reason there was no need for any doubles because the fight scenes were way too short. Shorter then the fight scenes in Mercenary For Justicve and Shadow Man. So the doubles were not an issue, we didn't see that much action from Seagal, had a couple gun fights, a couple very quick hand to hand, a little car action scene and that was it. So there was not an issue with any doubles in this film.

Production:
I guess you can say the production was average. I felt Mercenary For Justice and Shadow Man had a much better production. There was so much obvious stock footage, probably the most stock footage ever in a DTV Seagal release. Alot of the camera angles and effects I was not found of, a couple times for the fights it was too dark and the angle it was shot at was so difficult and unclear to view. I did not like the production. When Seagal was supposed to be in Afghanastan or the middle east or where ever, that dirt land looked like a place in the middle of the U.S. and the location which I stated above just did not seem convincing enough, it just felt so obvious it was a set, even though it was, it wasn't convincing enough to let the audience use their imagination and put a picture in their head saying they are in this place or this location. Not too fond of the production.

Special Features:
There were none on my DVD, just previews of some DTV release trailers and the official trailer for Attack Force was on this dvd.

Conclusion:
From the majority of the positive reviews I read from this forum I felt let down, I felt the members here over rated this film to a high point. What was it about this film that captivated you guys so much? For me Belly Of The Beast overall was an enjoyable film besides the terribble, terrible fight scenes with those stupid obvios doubles. Into The Sun was a great film for me to watch with the classic martial arts and Japanese set theme. Mercenary For Justice got my attention with the really amazing short hand to hand combat scenes, and Shadow Man I enjoyed because the film put together overall was indeed a good DTV release and an enjoyable film that kept you waiting for more. This film bored me, took way too long to get something to hapen, we saw little of Seagal when we did see him it was so quick and short we were like what happened. Don't get me wrong this is not a bad movie, I haven't seen Attack Force yet, but Flight Of Fury was a good movie, not great not bad. A great DTV release movie is like Into The Sun, a bad DTV release movie is Submerged, Today You Die or Out Of Reach. This movie falls into his top best DTV releases in my opinion I feel are, Into The Sun, Mercenary For Justice, Shadow Man, and Flight Of Fury. I liked the knife fighting scenes, very impressive, but way too short. Too little of Seagal and when we saw him it was way too quick. I expected more from this film. I watched it two times already today but it still doesn't sell me as a very enjoyable DTV release. This was just an average film. People saying it is a comeback from Attack Force, I will wait to see Attack Force before I judge it but listen folks Seagal never came back. He mad a little spash with Into The Sun but after that he really hasn't made that big of a deal. I think Mercenary For Jusitce and Shadow Man remain his best recent DTV release with Flight Of Fury very closely behind. Flight Of Fury had alot of potential and as I was impressed with some of the hand to hand fight scenes in this film, it was just too little and too short. So overall I would give this movie a mediocre: 3.5 out of 5 stars.

I´m with you about that his best DTV is Mercenary For Justice, because the attitude and the lot of short Under Siege fights style are cool, and I´m agree too that the last 30minutes of Into The Sun are SUPERB and very realistic.

But I´m not agree in a 50% about your Flight Of Fury review.I´ve my copy yet, but I´m still a bit lazy to write my review, I´m rewatching the film for the third time, and, although I would like to see Steven a little more, I enjoy a lot the invisible plane scenes, are cool, obviously aren´t Spielberg effects quality, but I like it.

I don´t think is a hype because is a different role for him, and that´s worth a lot.Is the same a think about Attack Force, because is different because the gore/blood/alien touch and I enjoy the last 40 minutes a lot, although I admit the movie is a complete disaster...but with very cool isolate things.

However, your 3,5 of 5 it´s OK.
 

latinojazz

New Member
Littledragon;173240 said:
This Flight Of Fury review by a member from another forum sums up on how I felt about Flight Of Fury. I know every member has his or own personal opininion but I felt the majority of people who saw this film that all the glitter really was gold. I think they praised this movie more then it should have been. People who thought there was alot of action I am not too sure of what they seen, it took well over an hour in the film to start seeing some action, all that flying around in a plane and a dissapearing stealth, the fight scenes were way too quick and were not clear at all, I completely agree with this review down here:

http://chud.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98326

'Following the appalling Attack Force, chances were that Seagal could only have a step up with Flight Of Fury. To out-stink Attack Force would take some doing. Flight Of Fury is a marked improvement overall, but still in the grand scheme of thinks, mediocre. Mediocrity is seemingly an achievement for Seagal these days, a sad insight into his movie career’s decline. Where Attack Force was a hodge-podge of plot lines altered drastically from conception, to filming, to post production, Flight Of Fury keeps the plotline more simple. Someone steals a high-tech stealth fighter, planning to use it to fire chemical weapons (which we later, bizarrely discover, will destroy the whole world in 48 hrs). Seagal has to get the plane back. It’s that simple, no annoying sub-plots, and conspiracies weighing the film down like far too many of his recent works. That’s not to suddenly say the storytelling is good though, it’s pretty poor. The introduction to side characters is badly done for example.

In filmic terms FOF is bad. It’s badly acted by all involved, and Seagal looks bored to tears almost. He’s just got the look of a toddler who’s been forced to perform the school nativity against his will, and so performs with a constant grimace and air of half assedness. Can we blame Seagal though when the material is so un-ambitious and cruddy? Not really. This is the final film of his Castel Studio’s, multi-picture deal. The producers can’t be bothered to make anything remotely good, promising a 12 or so million dollar budget, and (after Seagal’s obligatory 5 million) probably pocketing a nice hefty chunk of it themselves (If the film was made for the remaining 7 million, then I’m Elvis Pressley!). So in that respect why should Seagal put the effort into a film that’s already got distribution sorted before it’s made? Fan’s though may argue, he at least owes them the effort. He’s seriously looking jaded, and the continued use of stand ins and dub-overs is further indication of this. Michael Keusch directs with some efficiency, while the cinematography is quite good, but in all technical areas (and as usual with Castel, a bog standard stunt team) there’s nothing more than mediocrity, and nothing to help the film rise above its material, and bored leading man. Again there’s a few action scenes focusing on characters other than Seagal, which in all truth we don’t want to see.

Overall the action isn’t too bad. It’s nice and violent, and on occasion we’re treated to a few vintage nasty Seagal beatings, but overall nothing special. Partly due to a poor stunt crew, and the lack of time to film anything too complex or exciting. For me, Shadow Man was a more enjoyable film, because while ignoring the incoherent, jumbled, plotline, there were more vintage Seagal moments, and more of him in centre stage. He never disappeared for long periods during the film. Seagal disappears bizarrely during one action scene here, and re-appears after, with little explanation. There’s far too much stock footage used. Using stock shots isn’t an entirely horrendous thing, but using it as a crutch is. We’re treated to countless establishing shots of naval ships, all the time, which get annoying. Plus the continuity of the stock footage is all over the place (just check the backdrops, chopping and changing).

The film is just middle of the road. It says it all that the films best scene is a completely needless, and gratuitous girl on girl scene, with two hot chicks. Seagal even perks up briefly then too! Overall this may be one of the better stock footage based actioners out there, but that’s not saying much at all. This will please many fans, but they should bear in mind, Seagal himself would probably want to forget this one’s existence. **"

I´ve read this before in another thread yet
 

supertom

Disgruntled fan!
That was my review. I'm still surprised people enjoy FOF so much. It's not too bad, but it's nowhere near good.
 

ORANGATUANG

Wildfire
I just saw 'attack force' for the second time only because an couple of my school gals dropped by and yes the the 'dubbing' was the main pain in the ass sh.it it didnt even sound like him one of the girls just about wet herself with laughter she said he sounded like an prissy boy ...iam glad she said that because one day some one might listen and stop all the bull sh.it dubbing ...but then again who wants to get an females oppinion...loved the fancy little cutters in the movie and the boss bitch could have put up more of an fight with steven i sure as hell would have at least slapped him around abit more who knows he may have liked it..any way i will soon have 'flight of fury' then iam up to date..thanks for you review Littledragon..
 

Mama San

Administrator
Yeah! Steven Seagal....that was the only "good"
thing about Attack Force!
Hehehehe!!! If I'd wanted a comedy I 'd have
rented one!
I wonder if Steven actually knows just how bad
that film was?
God bless,
Mama san
 
Top