अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंSharon Bell is back, this time she must stop a terrorist plot to smuggle Nazi nerve gas.Sharon Bell is back, this time she must stop a terrorist plot to smuggle Nazi nerve gas.Sharon Bell is back, this time she must stop a terrorist plot to smuggle Nazi nerve gas.
Tommy Chang
- Kidnapper
- (as Thomas Chang)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
This got to be on of the worst movies ever. The plot was terrible, the action scenes boring and the whole thing totally crap. Good action films makes you forget that some things are unrealistic, like having 100 bullets in a gun. This movie is not like that at all. Here it just seems silly. And the ending is crap as well.
The only good thing is Lance Hendriksen who can actually act, otherwise do not waste your time on this movie.
The only good thing is Lance Hendriksen who can actually act, otherwise do not waste your time on this movie.
****SPOILERS**** Like in the first "No Contest" Sharon Bell, Shannon Tweed, saves the day with her fancy foot-work and a number of swings from a steel pole in this outrageous action movie set inside a locked museum with her little sister Bobbie,Janye Heitmeyer,the museum curator lending a hand.
There's an interesting sidelight to the movie between the two sisters and why Sharon is so hard and unfeeling when it comes to little Bobbie which stems from the two girls childhood. Bobbie finds that out from Sharon at the end of the film which was nicely done.
Sharon filming her latest action movie at the Hollman Museum where a gang of art thieves take over the place and hold everyone hostage. Lead by world renowned art collector Eric Dane, Lance Henriksen, who in reality turns out to be Eric Dengler the son of the Berlin Museums, during the time of Hitler, curator and fanatical Nazi Manferd Dengler.
The film deals with a number of valuable artifacts looted by the Nazis during WWII that in return were stolen by the Red Army at the end of the war. Later after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 the artifacts were smuggled out of Russia by Dengler to the USA and brought to the Hollman Museum gallery.
You begin to wonder why Dangler would want to steal the very expensive items that he already had in the first place? Is he crazy? Locked in the museum with only an identification card by Bobbi able to unlock the doors Dangler for some insane reason activates a globe-like bomb with a secret nerve gas developed by Nazi Germany. This unusual device can not only kill everybody in the museum but burn the sheet that has the formula for an antidote to it? now you know he's crazy.
Sharon who escaped and hid from Dangler and his hoods takes out Dangler's girlfriend Lisette, Fiona Highet, in what looked like a hall of balloons, not mirrors. The fast swinging Sharon has it out with the powerful but a little bit off-the-wall Dangler associate and fellow thief Falco, Kevin Jubinville,in about a half dozen battles that took up the entire movie.
With time running out and the nerve-gas bomb about to explode Sharon confronts Dengler who's holding her movie director Jack, Bruce Payne, hostage on the main exhibition floor. With her having the card to open the door to save everyone that's still left alive by getting out of the place before the bomb explodes.
Nowhere as good as the original "No Contest" but you have to say that Shannon Tweed is some knock-out. The villain in the film Lance Henriksen is a far better actor the the villain of the previous "No Contest" Andrew Dice Clay. Even though he's nowhere as funny, intentionally or unintentionally, as the famous Diceman.
What I thought was supposed to be the highlight of the movie the final confrontation between Sharon and Dangler was a bit disappointing. Dangler gets locked in an exhibit air-tight glass enclosure and i vaporized by the exploding nerve-gas bomb. The poor guy was out of bullets so he was not even able to blow his brains out before he disintegrated.
There's an interesting sidelight to the movie between the two sisters and why Sharon is so hard and unfeeling when it comes to little Bobbie which stems from the two girls childhood. Bobbie finds that out from Sharon at the end of the film which was nicely done.
Sharon filming her latest action movie at the Hollman Museum where a gang of art thieves take over the place and hold everyone hostage. Lead by world renowned art collector Eric Dane, Lance Henriksen, who in reality turns out to be Eric Dengler the son of the Berlin Museums, during the time of Hitler, curator and fanatical Nazi Manferd Dengler.
The film deals with a number of valuable artifacts looted by the Nazis during WWII that in return were stolen by the Red Army at the end of the war. Later after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 the artifacts were smuggled out of Russia by Dengler to the USA and brought to the Hollman Museum gallery.
You begin to wonder why Dangler would want to steal the very expensive items that he already had in the first place? Is he crazy? Locked in the museum with only an identification card by Bobbi able to unlock the doors Dangler for some insane reason activates a globe-like bomb with a secret nerve gas developed by Nazi Germany. This unusual device can not only kill everybody in the museum but burn the sheet that has the formula for an antidote to it? now you know he's crazy.
Sharon who escaped and hid from Dangler and his hoods takes out Dangler's girlfriend Lisette, Fiona Highet, in what looked like a hall of balloons, not mirrors. The fast swinging Sharon has it out with the powerful but a little bit off-the-wall Dangler associate and fellow thief Falco, Kevin Jubinville,in about a half dozen battles that took up the entire movie.
With time running out and the nerve-gas bomb about to explode Sharon confronts Dengler who's holding her movie director Jack, Bruce Payne, hostage on the main exhibition floor. With her having the card to open the door to save everyone that's still left alive by getting out of the place before the bomb explodes.
Nowhere as good as the original "No Contest" but you have to say that Shannon Tweed is some knock-out. The villain in the film Lance Henriksen is a far better actor the the villain of the previous "No Contest" Andrew Dice Clay. Even though he's nowhere as funny, intentionally or unintentionally, as the famous Diceman.
What I thought was supposed to be the highlight of the movie the final confrontation between Sharon and Dangler was a bit disappointing. Dangler gets locked in an exhibit air-tight glass enclosure and i vaporized by the exploding nerve-gas bomb. The poor guy was out of bullets so he was not even able to blow his brains out before he disintegrated.
You get for what you pay, and l paid £1 for this in London, it`s not the best film l`ve ever seen but it certainly isn't the worse...
It's nice to see Bruce Payne as a `goodie` for once, Lance Hendrikson did a competent job and Sharron Tweed was ok, the story line..well we have seen it all before but what do you want..it`s a cheap film..and it passed time on while l was doing something else, thats how l like to see films...
It was ok, the story was l thought strong one...well written...pity all the acting did not match it..
But as l say you get what you pay for...
6/10
It's nice to see Bruce Payne as a `goodie` for once, Lance Hendrikson did a competent job and Sharron Tweed was ok, the story line..well we have seen it all before but what do you want..it`s a cheap film..and it passed time on while l was doing something else, thats how l like to see films...
It was ok, the story was l thought strong one...well written...pity all the acting did not match it..
But as l say you get what you pay for...
6/10
Shannon Tweed is back fighting terrorists, but this time Lance Henrikson fills in for both Rowdy Roddy Piper and Andrew Dice Clay. I prefer the first one, even though I like Henrikson as an actor. This one is tedious to sit through and not nearly as fun as the film that preceded it. The fights are put together in such a haphazard way that those are boring as well. Giving a casual glance to both the writers on this film, I shouldn't be surprised at how bad it was, as neither writer has done ANYthing even remotely good. Skip the snooze-fest. Rent the original instead, or better yet just watch the vastly superior Die Hard for the upturn time.
My Grade:D-
My Grade:D-
The first 'No Contest' had a bunch of recognizable faces, a decent budget and a simple charm. This action sequel sorely does not. Shannon Tweed returns as Sharon Bell and after the events of the first film has parlayed her success into an acting career.
She and a few crew members of her latest film find themselves at a museum near closing where Sharon's sister works. Scouting it as a potential filming location. Who else happens to be there? Lance Henriksen as the well known art collector Eric Dane. This flicks pretty obvious bad guy. I don't think I have to spell out the rest, but it turns out he's not who he seems, they're trapped inside and there's a biological weapon involved.
The story is weak and makes little sense if you think about it. Lance is one of my favorite actors and he can easily do bad guys justice but this script ain't it. While Tweed pulled off the action heroine the first time out, it's nowhere near as believable or exciting to see her do it the second time. The meager subplot with her sister is paper thin too.
Stuck in the "museum" for 95% of the time, everything feels cheap and rushed. Borderline boring. Definitely lower budget than the original. What little action there is doesn't satisfy and Bruce Payne (memorable as the villain of the Wesley Snipes flick 'Passenger 57') shows up in a wasted appearance.
In other circumstances, I would have tuned into a flick like this just for Henriksen. I actually turned out to be both surprised and entertained by the original 'No Contest'. Which made this piece a letdown in more ways than one.
She and a few crew members of her latest film find themselves at a museum near closing where Sharon's sister works. Scouting it as a potential filming location. Who else happens to be there? Lance Henriksen as the well known art collector Eric Dane. This flicks pretty obvious bad guy. I don't think I have to spell out the rest, but it turns out he's not who he seems, they're trapped inside and there's a biological weapon involved.
The story is weak and makes little sense if you think about it. Lance is one of my favorite actors and he can easily do bad guys justice but this script ain't it. While Tweed pulled off the action heroine the first time out, it's nowhere near as believable or exciting to see her do it the second time. The meager subplot with her sister is paper thin too.
Stuck in the "museum" for 95% of the time, everything feels cheap and rushed. Borderline boring. Definitely lower budget than the original. What little action there is doesn't satisfy and Bruce Payne (memorable as the villain of the Wesley Snipes flick 'Passenger 57') shows up in a wasted appearance.
In other circumstances, I would have tuned into a flick like this just for Henriksen. I actually turned out to be both surprised and entertained by the original 'No Contest'. Which made this piece a letdown in more ways than one.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाReleased theatrically in Japan.
- गूफ़When Eric Dane goes to shoot Steven Ivory in the leg, he first pulls the trigger but the gun doesn't fire. On the second attempt, it works.
- भाव
Jack Terry: [taking to Eric via a walkie talkie] Dengler?
Eric Dane: Yeah?
Jack Terry: Clearly you have a problem with your identity. Let me give you a tip. In the roulette of life, I'm Vegas.
Eric Dane: You're Vegas? Well, I'm the Jackpot! Jackpot!
- कनेक्शनFollows No Contest (1995)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें