O Defensor - Protegendo o Inimigo

Two interesting facts – it's Lundgren's first movie as a director and Jerry Springer plays the president of United States. Dolph has to protect the president from the terrorists. That's all the plot . Well , not really , the movie makers do try to tell us some kind of story , but is just boring and predictable . The big twist ? Some people want to keep war going because it's a good business . Unless you're as intelligent as Forrest Gump that shouldn't be a surprise to you. Also Lundgren's back story seems to be made only to make the movie longer. It doesn't have any connection to the main plot whatsoever.

The movie is mostly one shootout after another in big castle. The characters have no personality . The acting aside Springer is non-existent. There is plenty of action but it's so empty because the meager plot that exists makes such little sense.

Only for die-hard Lundgren fans. I give it 1/10.

To be fair- I loved him in the Rocky 4 and Creed II. So from the early days until now. He was upgraded to B-Level actor! But I have to give this one a 2/10. Once you see Jerry Springer- 2 stars is all you get from me!

I must BREAK YOU!

And the time has shown that the movies both directed and starred by Lundgren are usually better than those he just starred (with the exception of Rocky and The Expendables, however). The plots have more advised scenes are there are less stupid or unrealistic moments characteristic to all low-budget thrillers. And Lundgren just likes East, whether the Far one (South Asia), Middle one (Arab countries) or the closer one (so-called Eastern Europe)... Here, the action takes place mainly in Romania, with the strong links to the Arab peninsula. And several twists and turns - and definitely plenty of gunshots, explosions and dead bodies... And a political mess in the background.

Dolph Lundren is good as always, but it was a surprise to see Jerry Springer as the US president. And not bad at all! The other characters were not especially catchy.

Watch this 1'20" minutes creation if you like Lundgren, nothing to be ashamed about.

I did not like that movie. Probably because it did not offer anything new or interesting – just shooting – there wasn't even a good scenario. As far as the soundtrack goes – it sucked as well with exception of the song they played at the very end.

At first I thought that the movie will be interesting as is started with an operation in Iraq – and you know all these terrorist references which seem to be modern these days. But as the story unfolds I have lost my interest and was hardly keeping myself awake till the end of it.

I guess I am not really into action films, but even if I was – I doubt that I will like the way the Defender is filmed. There was only one idea which seemed to be true – that some people have interest to keep the wars in the world going. That's why I am going to give two pints for this movie and a warning that seeing it can be a waste of your time.

Dolph Lundgren stars as Lance Rockford, a secret service agent who protects a politician from a terrorist group called "The Patriots" who see the President's view on terror as underwhelming to say the least. So Dolph is thrown into a fight where nothing is ever as it seems. I generally review these type of movies when I see them on TV because I generally don't see straight to video movies. For instance I reviewed Bridge Of Dragons because I saw it on HBO some night awhile ago and I happened to have my notes. I actually rented The Defender because I saw that it had Jerry Springer in it and the thought of him as the President of the United States had me curious to say the least. I was expecting a movie of magnitude ineptitude and was indeed surprised to see that Lundgren was a competent director and that the action sequences were fairly well staged and suspenseful. The story was (As expected) stupid and full of plot holes but I for one found this to be far better than I expected it to be.

* *1/2 out of 4-(Pretty good)