O Forasteiro 2

Who the Hell are you? I'm Steven Seagal playing Jonathan Cold, hired assassin, out to stop a group of terrorists from destroying Los Angeles with a compact nuclear device.

We get the usual mumbled laboured dialogue from Seagal, the slow motion movement. A stunt double was used for many scenes and the usual rule is, if it moves, it's the double.

I didn't find the supporting cast as irritating compared to other Seagal flicks. John Pyper Ferguson and Julian Stone make reasonable bad guys while Tamara Davies is easy on the eye and puts in a competent performance as Seagal's sidekick.

The filming is good, the plot is sensible, well sort of, and there is lots of shooting if you like that sort of thing.

Overall this isn't the worst Seagal film. The first and last 20 minutes are pretty good even though the middle section drags quite a bit.

Here I was buying this DVD online figuring Seagal couldn't bomb again.I saw his last 3 movies and they stunk,this one was a total waste of industry money.Seagal needs to hang it up,yo Steve just go away,your wasting your time and my money.In this one it is so obvious he's not doing his own stunts,let alone he's not even doing any of his own moves,it's so bad you can even catch a glimpse of the stunt doubles face.Seagal looks like he's gain 20 extra pounds,he waddles.The way this guy is churning out these movies is a shame!If you want a true action star who is older get anything Jackie Chan i promise you will not be disappointed.I never write these comments ,it's just I feel the need to warn people about spending there money on this junk.

Don't waste your time. This is simple-minded hackwork not worth noticing, unless you're a fan of necrophilia and thus enjoy the sight of Seagal, the walking corpse. He IS a sad spectacle, so there may be some twisted entertainment in watching his bloated, tired carcass wander through another cheapjack thriller that he's paid to plug himself into for what's left of his foreign market film sales value. Strange to see a former aikido master become such a lethargic hulk, so physically immobile from personal dissipation that he can't (or won't) engage in even the slightest fight scene on camera.

Otherwise, the film is just the usual Eastern European terrorist nuke stuff with lots of slimy operators playing each other off and brandishing an endless supply of guns for fire fights that somehow never involve Seagal even being grazed. His slow-moving Zeppelin-like bulk is somehow coated in God'sOwnMiracle Armor that wards off all contact with lead, knives or fists.... or acting ability.

Black Dawn (2005), The Great one is back in this recent effort(kind of an ironically bad word to use) which follows Johnathan Cold once again as this time he springs a terrorist from prison and appears to be helping in an upcoming attack. It was smart to try to make us guess whether or not he was on the bad side, but come on, we all KNOW he wasn't. I think that if he was, the movie would have been nine times better. The car chase, some decent gunfights and the presence of character actor Timothy Carhart elevate this above a one, but it is still very, very poor. People complain about Foreigner and Out for a Kill, but they both look like Oscar winners compared to this wretched piece of excrement. Steven Seagal is about in HALF of it and even that's a stretch. The fight scenes are NOT him leading me to believe we should give up on seeing the big guy fighting again. His screen presence is a draw, but not when he ain't on the freaking screen. At least he looked like he enjoyed Today You Die and did some fights himself. People, as a Steven SEagal fan, I know you want to see this. But trust me, he may return with a good movie like Belly of the Beast or Into the Sun, but this isn't it. I know you want to see it, but please trust a fellow fan and don't. You'll feel more secure in you're seagal liking if you don't.

Seagal returns in a sequel to possibly his worst movie!! Seriously!! Who thought this was a good idea??

I'm a bit confused, this movie has Jonathan Cold (Seagal) going undercover to stop a group of terrorists before they bomb Los Angeles. Was it ever disclosed in the first movie, he is ex CIA?? I do not think it was,but they all sort of blend together after Glimmer Man.

This was Seagal's 4th movie of 2005. Considering in his prime he pretty much released one movie a year (you can stretch it to 11 movies in 10 years if you go from 1988 to 1998) This was his 9th movie in 2 years.

And they are getting worse. This was a real slog to get through, I didn't enjoy the first one, but this is worse!! Ludicrous beyond words, badly acted (Tamara Davies is an exception) awful effects and just a waste of everyone's time, I can't even be bothered to write this review.

The blame can not fall at the directors feet, as the film is apparently infamous for Seagal not being involved in any of the fight scenes due to his leaving the film 18 days into a 30-day shoot. The director shot fights with stunt doubles and scenes that were to involve Seagal were replaced by his co-star in the film. That explains why Tamara Davies appeared to be the lead in this movie.

I do not think that is 100% accurate as some of it is clearly Seagal. It least there was no voice dubbing this time.