Fire with Fire

Josh D. is not built for a role like this. He might be good at the romantic stuff he does, but as a lead in an action packed movie like this, it feels like he's a fish out of water. Or a fireman without water. Both not ideal in any case. Rosario Dawson is good as always, but she doesn't have much to do. Even the charismatic Vincent D'Onofrio, who's the best of the bunch in here, has more presence than our lead actor. Not to mention a almost perfect phone call with our main guy.

The action scenes are very good. There will be blood so to speak. It doesn't skip on the violence. It does skip on the logic part ... but that's not the reason you chose to watch this movie. It's entertaining enough, if you generally watch a lot of movies. Do not rent this because of appearances by the Jacksons (Curtis (50 Cent) and/or Rampage). They're not really long enough in the movie. And their story line isn't really thought through either. Anyway ...

The plot has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese. Bruce Willis should be ashamed of himself for being in such drivel, obviously he just did it for the money.

Sorry, but I can't bring myself to give it any stars at all.

"I need you to trust me" - this is how our hero manages to save people from burning buildings.

Unfortunately there is nothing he can do to save this movie.

As a lover of American cinema, I have seldom seen so much bad acting and writing in one film.

The premise of a fireman going on a murder spree to fight for the love of his life, whom he met in witness protection program, is so dumb its painful to watch.

He is magically transformed into an killing machine after shooting a few rounds in the forest with his love interest, Rosario Dawson.

Every character seems to be made out of cardboard, Bruce Willis is at best a (poorly) supporting actor.

50 Cent is on screen for a total of 40 seconds, and I suspect it is a redeeming quality that we are spared seeing more of him.

Vinnie Jones is the usual British bulldog, apart from the fact that his ass is kicked by a fireman (this scene is so dumb, it made me cringe)

Vincent D'Onofrio is the only actor that is able to make his character slightly interesting as the antagonist.

Trying to build a climax our fireman hero resorts to arson to save his love, It would have been a perfect turkey if they could have written in a scene with the dialog "everything going to be alright now"

Maybe they did, at this point I actually left - so I would not know.

Apart from an obviously decent budget, high production values - there is nothing here worthy of a box of popcorn.

I need you to trust me, watch something else.

Okay, so 'revenge films' are nothing new. Ever since Charles 'Paul Kersey' Bronson lost his family to muggers, normally peaceful citizens have been taken to the streets in films to dish out a helping of vigilante justice. This is one of those films.

Here we have a firefighter who witnesses a gangland hit and has to go into the witness protection scheme. Trouble is, the people he's set to testify against find out where he's hiding, therefore forcing him to 'get them' before they get him.

And it plays out as you might imagine (assuming you've seen any of the other hundred or so revenge movies). You may notice I'm not going into great detail about the storyline. That's because there isn't really much to give away in terms of plot. It's just a revenge film. And it's not that bad. It's the sort of film you rent over buying and probably shouldn't pay too much attention to the minor plot holes here and there.

I didn't mind it and certainly didn't think I'd wasted an hour and a half watching it. However, the thing I was hoping for was to see the firefighter using his firefighting skills to flambé his tormenters. In fact... I thought that was the whole point of the film, i.e. he uses what he knows to start fires with which to exact his revenge. As it turns out he just buys a gun and shoots them.

Oh, and Bruce Willis is in it, too. But then it was never released in the cinema and Bruce seems to have a clause in his contract that states he must never appear in a film that's actually given a theatrical release.

Anyway, as I say, rent this before you buy. It's not bad (especially for a straight-to-DVD movie), but could have been a little better.

http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/

Similar recent action flicks with decent actors that were worse:The River Murders(3/10), Set-up(3/10), Takers(4.5/10), and Elephant White(4/10).

Donofrio is actually really solid as the villain here.

The story is very straight forward, but the brutality of some of the violence is quite nice. They really earned the "R" rating here, and that's always a nice thing when it comes to films like this. After all, there's nothing worse than the clean PG-13 version of these types of films.

I thought some of the power struggles between the villain and the cops came off pretty well. We get the sense that the villain here is practically untouchable, and that aspect of the film has a realistic edge.

The films has it's issues though. The lead character is poorly developed and a budding romance is glossed over like a 2 minute cliff-note.

This is borderline 5-6 for me, but I'm sticking with 53/100! That doesn't round up to 6; 6 really would be generous.

I was blown away by how many big supporting faces were in this film. Somebody dished out quite a lot of money on this cast. Too bad the script squanders the cast with suspect writing and a mail-list of decent actors that have one line in the film.

I actually felt like I got my money's worth here, but I only spent .50 for the 3rd choice out of the redbox.

Considering the excellent cast - it's a bit of a disappointment. BUT, considering the straight-to-video action write-off nature of the release - it wasn't half-bad. It was only 44% bad:)

You might like this if you liked:Death Sentence(about even, I thought Death Sentence was severely over-rated, 5/10), Set-Up(much worse), Elephant White(worse), Law Abiding Citizen(about even)or The Last Lullaby(better).