Second in Command

"Second in Command" is the best movie that I've seen with Jean-Claude Van Damme since his early films, "Bloodsport" of 1985, and "Lionheart" of 1990." As those films, this one has an interesting plot. There's more depth to the story than the usual fare of mayhem and gore in Van Damme films. As with some other of his films in the first decade of the 21st century, this film was made solely for video release. That may say a lot about the lack of ticket sales and profits from theater releases.

This film has a huge dose of the pyro-technics, mayhem and gore. But they don't consume most of the film. Instead, there's a plot with some realism about saving people in an American embassy. The story revolves around a rebellion in Moldova and an attack on the American embassy. The freely elected president of the country is being protected there. So, this film scores much better than the usual mindless mayhem of Van Damme films.

The idea of an embassy siege is not a contrived Hollywood plot. The fact that there have been such incidents in the recent past adds a sense of realism to the film. Of course, this was made before the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack of the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya, in which the American ambassador and others were killed.

The writers may have been inspired by real incidents of the past. The most successful large rescue happened in 1991. That took place in Somalia. Armed rebellion broke out in Mogadishu in January. People from several countries made their way to the U.S. embassy. The rescue was called Operation Eastern Exit. Two huge helicopters delivered a team of 60 Marines and Navy SEALS to the compound on January 5. The choppers returned to Guam with the first 61 evacuees. Then, after midnight on Jan. 6, the main rescue took place. Four waves of five Sea Knight helicopters each evacuated the entire compound. In the end, 281 people from 30 nations were rescued through the American embassy.

The tempo of this film is just all over the place. It pretty much instantly drops into action, but then the audio doesn't change suggesting something exciting should happen, when the following scene is just guys talking in an office. Then when action kicks in again it's brought on in a lurch, so whilst it's not surprising, it's not built up to either. The plot is okay, very 'America saves the world', or to be specific, 'Moldavia'.

The acting isn't particularly inspired and the dialogue nothing special, these again aren't helped by the audio. People talking in an empty room with nothing else to engage you with isn't too riveting. Plus, whilst the budget must have been fairly decent, on account of all the helicopter shots, etc., certain parts just come across as cheap. There are graphics, such as the army's ETA or sight through binoculars, which seem like they're more from a video game of the same period.

JCVD is the major draw here, but I wouldn't particularly say he's utilised or that this is a typical JCVD film. His martial arts aren't used for ages, and when they are, the fight scene looks a little lame due to camera shots. Many edgy shots throughout, poorly done.

Still, the ending is kind of interesting, it at least has an enticing ending (despite being predictable, the false ending is a little obvious). It doesn't do a lot right, but it's not atrocious, although I'd choose many JCVD films before this one.

As such an admirer of Jean-Claude Van Damme, watching him make stuff like this is really disheartening to be honest with you all. I grew up with his movies, and whilst not all of them were great, he has provided me with many hours of entertainment with classics such as Bloodsport, Universal Soldier, and Time Cop. Even recently he has really upped his game with some DTV gems like Until Death, Wake Of Death, Replicant, Assassination Games, and In Hell. But this feels like something that Steven Seagal rejected. It doesn't have much action to speak of, and when it does happen, we get a lot of frustrating shaky camera work that really hampers what little it has going for it. It doesn't help that I can't stand politics. Anything to do with it, I tend to lose interest in quickly. There are a few exceptions to this rule where I end up enjoying them, but this was bloody terrible. Jean-Claude Van Damme isn't really trying all that much here. He phones it in, but he can't overcome the weak script or poor pacing issues. I realize he has toned down his histrionics over the last few years, but this movie really lets him down. The rest of the cast do what they have to do, but none of them really stand out all that much

Final Thoughts: He's made some really good DTV gems since this awful film, but this is without a doubt one of the worst movies he has ever done. It's up there with Double Team, Black Eagle, and Derailed. Even die hard JCVD fans (I consider myself one of them!) will be disappointed by this. The lack of interest really sinks this one

3/10

Commander Sam Keenan is appointed second-in-command at the US Embassy in Moldavia, mere hours before the Ambassador is killed. The streets are full of insurgents attempting a violent uprising against the democratically elected president, who is now in the care of the US within the embassy. However with the insurgents laying siege outside and rescue many hours away, options for survival and limited and Keenan comes under pressure from without and within.

In a way I suppose we should see it as Van Damme returning to Europe to use his American-found fame to bolster film-making in Europe, however another way to see it is that his appeal has dwindled badly and he has taken to doing basic action films in Eastern European to squeeze every last penny out of the budget. Watching this film among others, it is hard to avoid the fact that the truth is almost undoubtedly the latter. The plot is fairly basic but in essence it is a war-zone version of Assault on Precinct 13. So what we are a looking for is a ratcheting up of tension across the film, with the silence being harder to watch than the action – which by extension is more exciting for its quality as payoff.

Sadly that is not what the film delivers because instead everything is played out as basic as you like, with minimal tension, obvious plotting, wooden acting and action that plays like they all just hoped having shots of gunfire would be sufficient to justify it as an "action film". It is never awful by any means and indeed for those trawling the cable listings looking for something to have on like visual wallpaper, you could do much worse. But this is hardly praise and all through the film I never shook the feeling of it being a cu-price low rent affair with no aspirations beyond the bottom shelf of the video store and maybe a 2am slot on a cable station. Obviously there is a limited amount of money to play with but this is only an excuse for scale – not for how good a film it is and director Fellows isn't able to do much. His cast don't help, with Van Damme on auto-pilot (without even much action to speak of for him), Cox filling a tired cliché of a female role and nobody else making an impression even if they had been given the material. The Eastern European villains are so bland and generic that even modern video games can produce a more realistic cast of characters.

Second in Command will be found on poor slots on so-so TV stations, was made in Eastern Europe and stars Jean-Claude Van Damme so really one could say that the clues are all right there for you to see for yourself. If you do decide to watch it then please note that it does live up to the low standards it suggests it will have and, while too bland to be really awful, there isn't much about it worth seeing.

This is pretty run of the mill stuff.

Its a bit more of an understated JCVD and that's not a bad thing.

The action is a bit basic as is the plot.

Would I watch it twice? No

Did I feel like I was suffering when I watched it? No