CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
4.3/10
3.8 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Un jefe del crimen que dirige una ciudad del suroeste necesita la ayuda de su antiguo sicario para hacer frente a una nueva amenaza para su imperio.Un jefe del crimen que dirige una ciudad del suroeste necesita la ayuda de su antiguo sicario para hacer frente a una nueva amenaza para su imperio.Un jefe del crimen que dirige una ciudad del suroeste necesita la ayuda de su antiguo sicario para hacer frente a una nueva amenaza para su imperio.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 1 premio ganado en total
Big U. Henley
- Lathrell
- (as Big U)
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Continuing my plan to watch every Steven Seagal movie in order, i come to Force of Execution (2013)
When I seen the cast I hoped for so much more. Ving Rhames is much too fine of an actor to be trapped in such rubbish, Danny Trejo also has a role as a cook. It had the potential to at least work out as an enjoyable, fun, simple, straightforward action flick, as the plot is surprisingly ok, but it is handled so badly, that it's hard to be interested, let alone care. In fact, it is really hard to care for any of the characters in this, since none of them are sympathetic enough (I think it is Bren Foster's Hurst we are meant to root for) and they are not really given a decent enough background. Apathy is the worst thing you want your audience to feel.
For his part, Seagal (now sporting the jet black goatee) is the head of a New Mexico criminal empire, but because he is Seagal, he has to be an ex something, so he is an ex government agent with high level military training!! He plays the kind of underworld boss that spouts zen wisdom, but will still have his protegé beaten to within an inch of his life. Once again, Seagal had to be the omnipotent leader, and he had to be a good guy despite being a crime boss, and he couldn't let anyone, especially not Bren Foster, get over on him, even if he was playing a bad guy.
There isn't really much more to say heare.
When I seen the cast I hoped for so much more. Ving Rhames is much too fine of an actor to be trapped in such rubbish, Danny Trejo also has a role as a cook. It had the potential to at least work out as an enjoyable, fun, simple, straightforward action flick, as the plot is surprisingly ok, but it is handled so badly, that it's hard to be interested, let alone care. In fact, it is really hard to care for any of the characters in this, since none of them are sympathetic enough (I think it is Bren Foster's Hurst we are meant to root for) and they are not really given a decent enough background. Apathy is the worst thing you want your audience to feel.
For his part, Seagal (now sporting the jet black goatee) is the head of a New Mexico criminal empire, but because he is Seagal, he has to be an ex something, so he is an ex government agent with high level military training!! He plays the kind of underworld boss that spouts zen wisdom, but will still have his protegé beaten to within an inch of his life. Once again, Seagal had to be the omnipotent leader, and he had to be a good guy despite being a crime boss, and he couldn't let anyone, especially not Bren Foster, get over on him, even if he was playing a bad guy.
There isn't really much more to say heare.
This movie doesn't even have gratuitous violence - just stupidity. I'm sad that Ving Rhames and Steven Seagal have sunk so far from their heyday performances.
There's no pre-story, no explanations of what's going on in the beginning. It seems that the director wanted to have a movie with lots of fight scenes to hide the lack of story. They even ruined that, as Steven Seagal can't fight anymore, and that's noticeable. Also, the other kid may be able to move, but the fights look like they were scripted by a 5 year old.
Oh, and I'm tired of the "whisper voice" that Seagal has done for way too many years. Boring.
I may have only spent $1.20 to rent it at Redbox, but that was a complete waste of money.
There's no pre-story, no explanations of what's going on in the beginning. It seems that the director wanted to have a movie with lots of fight scenes to hide the lack of story. They even ruined that, as Steven Seagal can't fight anymore, and that's noticeable. Also, the other kid may be able to move, but the fights look like they were scripted by a 5 year old.
Oh, and I'm tired of the "whisper voice" that Seagal has done for way too many years. Boring.
I may have only spent $1.20 to rent it at Redbox, but that was a complete waste of money.
Seagal's best days are now far behind him, but he's made a niche for himself in the DTV market. FORCE OF EXECUTION, while not one of the better movies he's made, is at least watchable and has some good action to boot. This time around, Seagal is Alexander, a crime boss with a past in government special ops. He runs a southwestern town with an iron fist, to be sure, but backed up with a code of honor. Martial artist Bren Foster plays Hurst, Alexander's chief hit-man and a protégé of sorts. They are joined in the cast by Ving Rhames, an up-and-coming gangster and Danny Trejo as a bar owner with a few tricks up his sleeve. The event that sets the plot in motion is a hit that goes bad, resulting in Hurst's "retirement," and the severe injury of his hands. Meanwhile, Iceman (Rhames) maneuvers around Alexander in order to take control of his territory, climaxing in a showdown between the two gangs. First, the good parts. Seagal is playing a type of character that he doesn't usually play, an antihero of sorts in a movie populated solely with lowlifes. There is also some decent martial arts on display, but mostly from Bren Foster. Seagal is relegated to doing his usual chops and take-downs when he isn't just using firearms. Finally, Ving Rhames gives the best performance in the movie as Iceman, lending credibility to his role as a gangster and delivering some great improvised dialogue. The rest is mediocre at best. The basic plot is paper thin, and not enough time is spent developing the three main characters. Most of the dialogue scenes are corny discussions about honor and respect, tough talking without any purpose other than to make the characters seem tougher. As far as the technical aspects go, director Keoni Waxman opts for the currently in-vogue shaky-cam, and some of the editing choices obscure the action. While this was most likely to conceal stunt doubles in some shots, it makes the action hard to follow in places, especially with Seagal. Fortunately for Bren Foster, they pulled back the camera a little bit so you can see him work. Overall this should be enough to placate Seagal fans, but everyone else should just stay away.
I've looked at a lot of reviews for 'Force of Execution' and they would have you believe that it's an absolute classic. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't expecting Shakespeare. I knew I'd be letting myself in for a B-movie with stars from yesteryear, however, all I got was a pretty sub-standard affair.
The story is all over the place with one scene after the next depicting one gangland hit after the next. Steven Segal phones in his performance and Ving Rhames just grunts all the way through it (and don't get me started on his 'fighting abilities'!).
In short, this story is a mess. The settings chop and change from one location to another, never really linking together the overall tale, let alone leaving any space for the audience to care about any of the one-dimensional characters.
Yes, I know it's a B-movie, but I was hoping for it to be entertaining. Sadly, this one's better left off everyone concerned's C.V.
http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/
The story is all over the place with one scene after the next depicting one gangland hit after the next. Steven Segal phones in his performance and Ving Rhames just grunts all the way through it (and don't get me started on his 'fighting abilities'!).
In short, this story is a mess. The settings chop and change from one location to another, never really linking together the overall tale, let alone leaving any space for the audience to care about any of the one-dimensional characters.
Yes, I know it's a B-movie, but I was hoping for it to be entertaining. Sadly, this one's better left off everyone concerned's C.V.
http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/
Review: This movie was exactly what I expected. Bad storyline, with some great action but bad acting. Steven Seagal was cool throughout the movie, like Ving Rhames who acts the same in all of his movies and the Colin Farrell lookalike who was playing the lead was a good fighter, but a dead actor. It's your usual fight for territory type movie with everyone fighting for power. Danny Trejo gets stuck in the middle of the war but he doesn't get involved in all of the violence. Personally, everyone looks a bit old in this movie, but Seagal can still kick butt which looks good on camera. I've always been a fan of his effortless way of fighting. Anyway, it's not bad for action and it's good to see the veterans on screen together, but don't expect anything out of the ordinary. Watchable!
Round-Up: No matter how big, in weight, or how old Seagal gets, the guy can fight. He has a way of making his opponent looking completely useless which I've always enjoying watching. As for the Colin Farrell lookalike, he just seems to be jumping off of walls, kicking like a mad man but it does look impressive. I'm sure that Ving Rhames is getting fed up with playing the same roles all of the time. You just know what to expect once you see his name in the cast, which is blamed on his role in Pulp Fiction. Anyway, the movie isn't as bad as I thought it would be, but it's not brilliant.
Budget: $10million Worldwide Gross: N/A
I recommend this movie to people who are into there gang war type of movies with loads of violence. 3/10
Round-Up: No matter how big, in weight, or how old Seagal gets, the guy can fight. He has a way of making his opponent looking completely useless which I've always enjoying watching. As for the Colin Farrell lookalike, he just seems to be jumping off of walls, kicking like a mad man but it does look impressive. I'm sure that Ving Rhames is getting fed up with playing the same roles all of the time. You just know what to expect once you see his name in the cast, which is blamed on his role in Pulp Fiction. Anyway, the movie isn't as bad as I thought it would be, but it's not brilliant.
Budget: $10million Worldwide Gross: N/A
I recommend this movie to people who are into there gang war type of movies with loads of violence. 3/10
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaNoel Gugliemi explained his frustrations on set about Steven Seagal in a recent interview, "no matter how many times I told him my name, he keeps calling me Hector! He is the Donald Trump of actors!"
- Citas
Alexander Coates: You wanna redeem yourself? See I don't wanna use the word "seppuku" - coz that has something to do with... folks who had honor. Which you don't have. So why don't you cut your motherfucking throat or I'll do it for you.
- ConexionesFollowed by A Good Man (2014)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Force of Execution?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 8,000,000 (estimado)
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 87,122
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 39 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the French language plot outline for Ejecución extrema (2013)?
Responda