Die Unbarmherzigen

Somebody wrote in a comment on this film, that it offers real suspense ("a real heart-thumper"). I didn't experience anything like that. The plot is so full of wrong clichés it almost hurts. The film really managed to lose it's believability right from the start. A married couple doing war games in an official marine training where everybody acts like in kindergarten and finally being "shot" while kissing each other - come on. The acting of the main characters is also awkward. though one must admit for their defense that they couldn't have done much better with such a script. Please don't let your kids watch this film, like recommended elsewhere. It's full of unnecessary scenes of brutal violence. I watched this film on TV (luckily i didn't pay for it) and it did a good job in bringing me to sleep. The only thrill I had was the hope the flick would get better to the end (where do the 5/10 stars come from?). Well, it didn't...

For all the countless cheap thrillers to come out of the 1980s (and I've probably seen a few too many myself), this film has some things that make it stand out. First of all, good acting. Amy Madigan is convincing, engaging, and doesn't embarrass herself. She's the main reason this film works. Second, the direction. Mario Azzopardi made a career out of B-movies, but he doesn't go too over the top. There's certain lapses in logic, but the staging of the scenes and overall structure really brings you in. Finally, the plot. For an action film, "Nowhere to Hide" is neither particularly overblown nor utterly non-plausible. Despite later events that feel a bit untrue, the set-up is believable. And that's what matters. I also enjoyed Vic Sarin's cinematography, full of deep, warm tones.

It's the breathing space that matters in this film. The quiet scenes in a hotel room, or the long build-up centering around the Daniel Hugh Kelly character. Michael Ironside adds a certain touch to the third act the grounds the story in a way few action flicks are even concerned with. It's not as if "Nowhere to Run" is a masterpiece, but I think it qualifies for a much better position than it holds. It's almost unseen, and by those who've seen it, mostly forgotten. With countless action films of less than a tenth of this quality being constantly churned out, you could do worse than a film as compelling as this one.

I read a few different reviews praising this movie as the thinking-persons action movie with a strong female hero. It did have a strong woman in the leading role, but it also had atrociously bad writing and a believability factor of zero. Stick to Ripley or even Geena Davis in The Long Kiss Goodnight to see women kicking butt with the best of them.

My one line summary of compelling was done tongue in cheek. The only compelling aspect of this movie was waiting for it to get better! Which it doesn't. Unfortunately this movie set low standards, then failed to achieve them. The concept is poor, the acting poor, the directing poor. Watch it at your peril.

Let's start with the kid. He is really unnecessary to the plot, what little there is. I mean it seems his only purpose was to hang onto a piece of evidence, which just as easily could have been found by Amy Madigan, thus sparing the audience this kid in a catatonic state throughout the film. I could also do without the General being involved, since his motivation is never explained. Why not just have a big nasty corporation cheating on the quality of their helicopters? I also could do without the numerous ridiculous moments, such as changing a tire in the middle of a car chase, simply so it could continue. What I wouldn't do without is Michael Ironside, since he is by far the best thing I noticed in "Nowhere to Run". - MERK