Born to Raise Hell

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".

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.

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 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.