उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

'BORN TO RAISE HELL': Two and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

Another generic Steven Seagal action film, in this one he plays an Interpol agent caught in the middle of a Russian and Gypsy street gang war in Eastern Europe. Seagal also wrote the script while veteran stuntman and actor Lauro Chartrand makes his directorial debut. Another up and coming martial arts star Darren Shahlavi co-stars as the movie's villain. The action scenes are decent but the story is tired and dull. If you're an action junkie and or Seagal fan you probably won't be disappointed though.

Seagal stars as Samuel Axel, an Interpol agent recently put on assignment in Eastern Europe. He's also breaking in a new partner, a rookie named Steve (D. Neil Mark) who's also expecting a child. The two are a part of a special task force investigating gun and dope smugglers in the Balkans. Their prime interests are a Gypsy gang leader named Costel (Shahlavi) and a Russian gang leader called Dimitri (Dan Badarau, who shares a striking resemblance with Marlon Brando). When things get messy Axel is forced to resort to unconventional measures in order to get the job done.

Like I said Seagal is credited for writing the script but it's basically just parts of a dozen other movies pieced together. The story is irrelevant and about as forgettable as they come. The action scenes are entertaining none the less. A much better fight scene could have been choreographed between Seagal and Shahlavi though. What we get is routine and could have been filmed with anyone opposite Seagal. What a waste of talent! Still the movie was made for just $10 million and say what you will about Seagal's career but his movies continue to be profitable successes. This is just one of many that will soon blur in with all the others but during the 90 minutes I spent watching it it was mildly entertaining.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: http://youtu.be/Ie33IbZzmi0

Another ill-distinguished action odyssey from big man Seagal, in which an age-old storyline involving rival gangs of gangsters and one dedicated cop is spoiled by dumbass direction and some of the worst editing you'll ever witness. Yes, it's another low rent movie in which a great deal of could-have-been-good action scenes are spoiled by dizzyingly bad, sea-sickening cutting.

Seagal has more of a hand in this than usual, having written and produced as well as starred (although, as is the norm for the actor these days, sometimes the hand isn't his own: the body and voice doubles are back in force). This time around he's an imported American cop, wearing a flak jacket and leading a police squad through some grimy streets in scenes probably inspired by his own TV show, STEVEN SEAGAL: LAWMAN. Along the way he contends with Brando-lookalike Russian mafia man Dimitri and a particularly vicious rapist/murderer gypsy.

The supporting cast and locales are entirely Romanian, and a great deal of scenes take place in strip joints where women parade around in their next-to-nothings and Seagal glowers at anyone who comes close. There are the requisite goons to be dealt with, along with walking clichés (the partner who finds out he's about to become a dad) and a 20 year-old girlfriend who awkwardly frolics with the star in the sack at one stage. Not a good look, man.

Steven Seagal plays a member of an international drug task force located in Romania. The movie develops a clear direction when a guy he captures on a routine drug bust makes a deal with him and tells him about a sadistic and somewhat psychotic drug dealer named Costel who finances his buys by breaking and entering the houses of young rich couples whom he has some sort of deep resentment for. As well, he tells him about the gangster Costel is doing business with; a man named Dimitri. Seagal's character tries to bring them to justice as an antagonistic relationship escalates between the two men.

Seagal, with some kind of cowboy accent, I dunno, unnaturally black hair, and barrel-chested, is still frisky; still breaking any body part you're stupid enough to throw at him. I thought the movie was a solid action film and worth watching if you like shoot 'em ups. I've always thought that Seagal (and some other action stars of the like) practiced a kind of "slight-of-hand martial arts" aided by camera angles and editing. You really don't see what happens, just some hand movements and/or foot movements that may or may not have made sense and then the bad guy crashes to the floor. I'm pleased to say that there were some clear exchanges in this movie.

For anybody who cares: In my mind this movie is a "guy film". Seagal wrote in a sweet young thing for himself (And who can fault him? Ahhh, the perks of being both actor and writer) but her role was not that significant. The most time they spent on the screen together was maybe "5 minutes" ---if that. They talked a little about their relationship; how work was coming between them, or something like that. I dunno. I might have nodded off. Then after that "supposedly" they made love. There was some fading in and out of images; a hand here, a hand there. She was partially clothed and he was fully dressed (ready for action, I guess, but not that kind). Then after that we never see her again. The scene seemed almost obligatory.

Now if it were me, and I was both actor and writer, I would have written in a prolonged love scene with this charming girl (life is too short folks, opportunities must be seized). I would have shown that I was not only good with my fists, but also with my----. Well, I'm boring you. Sorry. Boloxxxi out. Love.

I use to be a big fan of Steven Seagal but the these latest movies specially this one are so crappy that i had to write this. I mean there is no story (beside the obvious) that catch you.

The director must have been a student doing a school work or something. Its that bad. Sometimes you just wonder how can someone like Steven Seagal end up in a B movie like this. And its just plain annoying to see Steven Seagal behave like he's 25 year. I love sexy scenes and naked babes but for him to date a 20 year girl like that feels unnatural and Weird to me.

The only part i like was the few minute of fighting.

Among B-movie action heroes, Romania has become recently popular. In addition to Seagal, e.g. Van Damme and Lundgren have also found some subject matter there (one of the poorest NATO countries with respective issues, and a cheap place for filming...? Well, Bucharest is an okay and grand capital). Anyway, the plot is unpretentious as usual, although Seagal shows more oral and less fighting skills, but shooting-fighting- chasing scenes are still catchy and clichés used do not become ridiculous or boring (with the exception, perhaps, Seagal's erotic scenes with much younger woman). Scenes towards the ending originate from the principle "enemy of my enemy is my friend" and are not too credible.

In any event, the movie is watchable, if you are not a Seagal's hater; for the others, to grin and mock, you better choose some other movie - Born to Raise Hell is not among Seagal's worst, sooner the opposite.

After seeing A DANGEROUS MAN I almost said I'm through with Steven Seagal movies but then I decided to pick up this one in the hope Seagal could be redeemed, it turns out this film was one of his more solid DTV efforts aside from the fact that it was still flawed, it had the dubbing problem but not as much as his other films, Seagal's fight scenes were edited a bit fast although there were shots that showed him actually doing the fight scenes and Seagal wears a thick coat to hide his weight now I regarded that as one of his trademarks so I didn't really give that much thought.

The best moments of the film were the shootouts, they were very well done and also pretty tense, something I haven't seen from a Seagal movie in a long time, the acting was surprisingly good this time even from Seagal himself but there are two other actors that stand out, Darren Shalavi who was ideal for the part of the villain and Dan Badaru who plays a Romanian gangster out to get revenge for the death of his wife and son.

Also now that I thought about it, this film features a brief love scene between Steven Seagal and a woman possibly young enough to be his daughter but she does look legal and very attractive, after seeing that scene and remembering Seagal also wrote the script, I reckoned this is one of the interesting things about being a writer and an actor, you give your own character a story and a hot little number and you add a steamy love scene between the two of you, now that's a different kind of fantasizing right there only Seagal puts it down on paper and it gets put on film with him in the scene, "sigh" some guys have all the fun.

Overall, its one of the better Steven Seagal DTV entries but it is way too flawed to measure up to the caliber of a Steven Seagal classic like UNDER SIEGE.

Watching a Steven Seagal film is a bit like going to eat something you know is not really good for you and has passed it's sell by date, but somehow,you still can't resist taking a bite. I am no expert on the film career of Mr.Seagal, but in everyone of his films that I have seen, he appears to play the same person. In this film Steve is transported to Eastern Europe to take on a Russian Drug Dealer called Dimitri and another gang led by a very unpleasant fellow called Costel. Dimitri is supplying drugs to Costel but it soon develops that these two fall out, with very unpleasant consequences to follow. The job for our hero becomes personal when Steve's partner is killed and the usual gun fights and fist fights ensue. In between all the action there was a tender moment between Steve and his girlfriend, however, as Mr.Seagal is not in the first flush of youth he might well be advised in the future to avoid love scenes with topless young women,as it looks a little unattractive. Born to Raise Hell is basically the usual Steven Seagal movie under another name, but nevertheless, I enjoyed it.

I am feeling satisfied to watch justice and revenge being served. It brings fulfillment to my somewhat wounded and empty heart, at least it fills part of that hole. Also I liked that unlike in most movies here we could see justice being served to female gender too, without any censorship or stereotype. I liked high presence of action, strong and unique characters, and graphics. Emotional. High level of relationships. Only some parts are bit too typical and boring, so can't give it more than 8 stars rating. The best is Steven, he looks and sounds the best, wise choice of words and wise moves, he should be our idol.

Continuing my plan to watch Steven Seagal movie in order, I just watched Born To Raise Hell (2010)

I have enjoyed some of his recent dtv movies, but this is a step back. It started out ok for the first hour, then just went down hill and by the end I was looking at my phone. It is predictable, ludicrous and often dull. It has few ok action scenes but it's all just the usual Seagal dubbed and doubled nonsense.

The movie also ends with yet another rather anti-climactic fight, which lasts all of 90 seconds and is completely one sided favouring Seagal.

The once glorious (well I'm sure some still believe that to be the case) Steven Seagal might be lingering in direct-to-DVD haven, but these enterprises sometimes provide the goods, that's if you're not expecting much. But then again there are some just plain and dull outings and for me this European stint "Born to Raise Hell" fell in to this group. Seagal feels like nothing more than a bit player and a bored one too. Spending more time sitting about, pondering, having a heartfelt chats or if he has to - walking from 'a to b' to shoot someone or casually crack some bones. So when it comes to the explosive bursts, they do lack any sort of punch or adrenaline despite the seedy scene. Here he plays a streetwise American Interpol agent assigned to a drug / weapon trafficking task force in Eastern Europe. This is one rather generic action drama, which thinks it's tough, but comes across as violently spiteful and sluggishly paced with a bogged down script. The director keeps it rather kinetic with the filming techniques, being slickly dressed up with sped up visuals, slow motion and titled camera angles. The performances are nothing to write home about, but the cast do acquit themselves well enough. Not terrible, but a very ho-hum Seagal vehicle.

"I like your style".

Chapters 80 and 90 are probably the golden age of Seagal, so to speak. This film could almost have been missed in every way.

There were so many things wrong here.

The very first thing that struck me in the eyes was in some places very bad imaging technique and surgery.

Added to this is a very minor aspect.

This time could have been better used. The number of stars shown on this site did tell quite honestly about the level of the movie.

I have to admit it sometimes sounded like Seagal had an emotion while talking ... I know, I probably just dreamt that right? Can't have happened ... no I must have been wrong ... all kidding aside though, most will not watch a Seagal movie, because of the acting. It is the action and probably the nudity too. And you get enough of both of those here, if that's important to you.

Now he swears a lot and there is some grey area between good and evil ... I guess that is what it tries to convey. Also Seagals character is supposed to be the know it all ... the way he talks to his fellow police men (and women I reckon) actually should make them hate him ... very disregarding, very condescending ... but I guess that is what some will like. Also him swearing a lot - what I've said that already? Well you've (likely) seen him in movies like this already so we are good ... watch at your own peril.

Seagal in Born to Raise Hell seems almost identical to Seagal as himself in his reality series. In some ways this might be a good thing. It means that the film acknowledges that there is no point in asking him to play act stereotypes anymore, like he did in his last film A Dangerous Man. Here he's just being himself. Something else which makes that a positive is the simple fact that the movie isn't really about him. It's more about a drug war between cops and Eastern European mafia. Seagal is just one cop out of a handful. As a screenwriter, Seagal chooses to write him self out rather than in, and subsequently we spend more time with the mafia.

The fight scenes come with a crunchy sound mix, and they allow us to see more Seagal than Stunt man, but they reek of bad editing. the people who direct movies like Born to Raise Hell are not qualified for anything except music videos. this movie implements a very miscalculated Goddardian style of cutting, and a severe overuse of slow motion. We don't need to see a guy ripping a bedroom apart for jewels at five frames per second.

The last scene is kind of touching (at least for a Seagal movie). It was around that part when I realized that the movie is not really about Seagal. That and the fact that we only here his name about five times. I don't wanna mislead anyone however. Born to Raise Hell will probably do the job for whatever fan base the old man has left. He's done better, but he's also done way worse.

For a Steven Seagal movie it's not to bad. That's the nicest thing I can say about "Born to raise hell". There's really no plot (read the summery, that's all you need to know) and the acting is, well, I'm no expert but I've seen better.

As usual Seagal is a cop. And an martial arts expert. And yes, he is a hero. There's also a lot of shooting. He applies street justice to the bad guys. As usual. Now and then Seagal speaks with a soft voice and uses the F-word and profound language. By now you're thinking: "Hey, I think I've seen this movie." True. If you have seen any Steven Seagal movie before you don't have to see "Born to raise hell". There's nothing new in it.

The best thing about the movie is actually the camera work. There's some shots, especially in the action scenes where the camera is in slow motion or "fast motion", there's stills in black and white etc. That's the freshest thing about the movie and keeps it some what interesting. For a Seagal movie that is.

But if you like Steven Seagals previous work you won't be disappointed. It's a traditional Seagal movie.

As anyone who has followed Seagal's career knows, some of his later movies have been less than fabulous. The reason for this, as far as I can see, is post-production editing. It appears that post-production editing in these movies has been done by inept morons who wouldn't know an action movie if it roundhouse kicked them in their minuscule balls, punched them hard on their weak chins, and then ripped out their tiny hearts.

Anyway, BTRH has (thankfully) been released without having been neutered, and is a rock-solid action movie, with decent direction, plot and characters. The basic tale is an old one, but is well done. And it's great to see Mr. Seagal do what he does best (battering, maiming and killing) without the over-the-top slowmo fight scenes, or utterly unconvincing stand-ins (another post-production stupidity, designed to add a few seconds to the running time).

I watched The Expendables the day after watching BTRH, and BTRH was, in my opinion, a better movie.

An aside: this movie, and a few other of Seagal's movies, really would have benefited from being a little longer. I would have liked to have seen a little more back story of the main characters.

I wish I could meet Steven Seagal, not only to ask for his autograph but also to sit down with him and discuss what's made his recent string of movies so disappointing for even a devoted fan like me. I would use BORN TO RAISE HELL here as an example, being sure to compliment the film's strengths but also making clear to him exactly what about it sucks. I'm not so naïve to believe that Seagal is in total creative and technical control of each of his features, but perhaps I could convince him to take a more hands-on role in their production and perhaps aikido-chop the idiots who are truly responsible for the lackluster nature of some of these movies.

The plot: An international drug task force operating out of Romania, headed by ex-Interpol agent Samuel Axel (Seagal), sets its sights on bringing down the operations of a deadly and sadistic gang of drug traffickers...

People who don't like Steven Seagal by default are going to hate this movie. Seagal occupies most of the scenes (perhaps still making up for his absence throughout most of AGAINST THE DARK?) and his character is boisterous, arrogant, and most of the other characters cow to him in one way or another. Surprisingly, I found myself appreciating this: a supercilious Steven is still more fun to watch than the detached, bored-looking dope he played for a while in movies like FLIGHT OF FURY. However, whatever effort he seems to have made for this film is marred by extensive dubbing of his voice - something not present in his movies to this degree since the picture I just mentioned. There aren't any other real technical snafus to be seen, but further post-production add-ins like nonstop slow motion, freeze-frame shots galore, and way too many time-killing collage scenes continue to have the movie feeling more like Seagal's trash pictures of yesteryear, moving him further and further away from the high standard he had achieved with URBAN JUSTICE.

The action scenes are composed mostly of boring shootouts, but there are a couple hand-to-hand encounters which, while not too flashy, feature Seagal doing just about all of his own moves and getting some good aikido throws in. There's also an impressive instance wherein he kicks a thug so hard that the man flies about six feet through the air before crashing through a bench. These lead up to the finale with martial artist Darren Shahlavi, who had been running around the rest of the picture as the necrophilic, drug-dealing main villain. This is where things get *really* disappointing, to the point of costing my rating an entire star. Shahlavi had consistently delivered great physical performances in the past, and one of his most recent movies at the time - IP MAN 2, released on the same day as BORN TO RAISE HELL - featured him in some very good fights with Donnie Yen and Sammo Hung; in this one, however, he has one very brief fight halfway through the film before getting absolutely manhandled by Seagal during the climax. The fact that Shahlavi had just been in an internationally-acclaimed martial arts masterpiece makes this ugly and one-sided encounter more disappointing than Seagal's similar exchanges with Gary Daniels and Byron Mann: at least they didn't have any recent major successes behind them to live up to.

At this point in our conversation, if I had been able to speak freely and if the rumors concerning Seagal's temper and ego were true, I figure he'd either have left the room in disinterest or he would have me by my throat. I'd quickly try to point out that the acting is decent in general and, despite being shot in Romania, the film's cinematography is less grey than I expected and pretty fun to look at...but would this be enough to save me? It certainly isn't enough to save the movie, which I fear can be shelved along with the growing number of failed DTV outings starring the Buddhist Bonecrusher. I doubt that I'll ever actually have this conversation with Steven, but I'm still holding out on the hope that he's going to get back on the horse and make it worth being a fan of his again; when this one came out, it really wasn't.