IMDb-BEWERTUNG
3,0/10
1232
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuA group of ruthless masked terrorists kidnap the Prime Minister's daughter, fortifying themselves in an underground car park rigged with explosives. A crack SAS team are sent in and must tak... Alles lesenA group of ruthless masked terrorists kidnap the Prime Minister's daughter, fortifying themselves in an underground car park rigged with explosives. A crack SAS team are sent in and must take the building one level at a time.A group of ruthless masked terrorists kidnap the Prime Minister's daughter, fortifying themselves in an underground car park rigged with explosives. A crack SAS team are sent in and must take the building one level at a time.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
Kylie Maron-Vallorani
- Katherine
- (as Grace Vallorani)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Zara Phythian is the responsible for all the stars this review awards the film. She is more physically capable than the men supposedly playing S.A.S, and has more of a screen presence than all of the villains in the film combined. I hope she goes on to do far more, in work that is far more deserving. As for the rest... where do I start? This film was clearly made by a team where the quality was second to anything else. Script, story, logic, even effort, seems so lacking. Much like their "white collar hooligan" films, the sequel was in the works before this one even came out. So that sure isn't by public demand. Looking at the other reviews on here, the public has spoken. If the sequel picks up the slack left by it's predecessor it may surprise us all, but the track record of work does not suggest that will be the case.
So many movies just thrive on mass killing and lack of discretionary use of language to click with the norm of the times. He Who Dares happens to be no different.
To me it did not appeal from the word go. And here are the reasons.
Even a 10 year who has played Call of Duty or Battlefied series of games can tell you that you do aim down the sight and not fire from the hip. Wish the actors were told that.
Secondly now a days there is this new blood thirst in many low budget movies where the villain or the bad guy is glorified by mass murdering in order to achieve his goal. And when all the revenge is built psychologically speaking the valiant hero or one of the survivor in this case, kills the supposedly bad guy with one bullet, leaving the unsatisfied lust in the mind of audience that was generated by the storyline where the bad guy was the angel of death. Seriously ??
The movie is pure waste of time and resources.
To me it did not appeal from the word go. And here are the reasons.
Even a 10 year who has played Call of Duty or Battlefied series of games can tell you that you do aim down the sight and not fire from the hip. Wish the actors were told that.
Secondly now a days there is this new blood thirst in many low budget movies where the villain or the bad guy is glorified by mass murdering in order to achieve his goal. And when all the revenge is built psychologically speaking the valiant hero or one of the survivor in this case, kills the supposedly bad guy with one bullet, leaving the unsatisfied lust in the mind of audience that was generated by the storyline where the bad guy was the angel of death. Seriously ??
The movie is pure waste of time and resources.
I've seen some bad films in my life and this ranks up there with the worst of them.
The lead villain over acted so much, he was almost good, he probably has potential if he had a better film to act in.
I was a bit confused at first that I was watching some sort of GCSE media studies project, if that was the case, I might have given it a C...... But it wasn't, I'm really angry with myself for watching this the whole way through, should have gone with with gut instinct and quit after 30 secs.
Nonsense story, plot holes all over the place, extremely am dram acting, massive thumbs down. Half a star!
The lead villain over acted so much, he was almost good, he probably has potential if he had a better film to act in.
I was a bit confused at first that I was watching some sort of GCSE media studies project, if that was the case, I might have given it a C...... But it wasn't, I'm really angry with myself for watching this the whole way through, should have gone with with gut instinct and quit after 30 secs.
Nonsense story, plot holes all over the place, extremely am dram acting, massive thumbs down. Half a star!
The film in itself isn't half bad ..silly silly mistakes the worst being the main character is a Major...Who on his uniform is ranked as a corporal . This sets the tone for the film as very poorly executed.
The idea behind this film is good even if stolen from an old movie. Simon Phillips is about the only think that stopped me from walking out. The way the SAS is shown is a joke, didn't even get the uniforms correct let alone their standard operating methods. Sure some might say this doesn't matter but watch "Act of Valour" or "Special Forces" both much better movies. The acting in "Acts of Valour" was poor but much more watchable than this is because the special forces team are shown correctly. They apparently even used some ex-seal members. It doesn't look like they even did any research for this let alone consultant ex-members. Once again a lazy approach ruins a potentially great movie.
Wusstest du schon
- VerbindungenFollowed by Downing Street Down (2014)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is He Who Dares?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizielle Standorte
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- London Falling
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 1.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 22 Min.(82 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen