AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
3,7/10
1,6 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaA group of U.S. Marines are sent to rescue a captured U.S. Marine and a Filipino Captain while stopping a group of Al-Qaeda-backed local rebels from launching biological weapons.A group of U.S. Marines are sent to rescue a captured U.S. Marine and a Filipino Captain while stopping a group of Al-Qaeda-backed local rebels from launching biological weapons.A group of U.S. Marines are sent to rescue a captured U.S. Marine and a Filipino Captain while stopping a group of Al-Qaeda-backed local rebels from launching biological weapons.
Joe Mari Avellana
- Gen. Romero Panlilio
- (as Jose Mari Avellana)
Jerry Corpuz
- Pvt. Amador Magtuto
- (as Jerry Corpus)
Reiven Bulado
- Pvt. Don Tubayan
- (as Raiven Bulado)
Avaliações em destaque
this was probably one of the worst war movies i have seen in a really long time. from the very beginning it had the feeling of wanting to be a "saving private ryan" type film, but in my opinion, never made it past a re-enactment of one of those commando war hero computer games. very bad acting and continuity mistakes all throughout the film made it very clear that they weren't trying very hard to produce a quality film. it was difficult watching these guys recite their lines instead of actually acting. i was tempted to just turn it off, unfortunately i did finish it and will never get those 90 minutes of my life back! so, do yourself a favor and go rent saving private ryan, tears of the sun, or pretty much any other war movie in place of this one. you can thank me later.
It's not a Hollywood war movie so don't expect big explosions or lots of military gear, but it looks pretty decent. The action...well it looked more real that the standard Hollywood movie, it was like a very good documentary ( I know it's not one, but still...).
The acting : well there were no "deep thoughts / lines" so not much to show for the actors and since most of the lines spoken by the "enemies" were in their native language it's hard to judge that.
There were no "bullet time/close-ups", no sound coloring or open wounds, but it looked exactly how it would like when ppl start shooting/fighting.
It isn't Black Hawk Down or Jarhead or even Apocalypse Now but it IS a solid movie about a bunch of marines doing their job and then going home ( no US patriotic bullshit etc. ).
The acting : well there were no "deep thoughts / lines" so not much to show for the actors and since most of the lines spoken by the "enemies" were in their native language it's hard to judge that.
There were no "bullet time/close-ups", no sound coloring or open wounds, but it looked exactly how it would like when ppl start shooting/fighting.
It isn't Black Hawk Down or Jarhead or even Apocalypse Now but it IS a solid movie about a bunch of marines doing their job and then going home ( no US patriotic bullshit etc. ).
Back in the 1960s, the likes of director Eddie Romero churned out endless WW2 films in the Philippines, all of them sub-par and displaying a distinct lack of talent. In the 1980s, cheap American studios and directors like Cirio H. Santiago reignited the genre with some more enjoyable, RAMBO-inspired blow-em-up pieces of spectacle. All has been quiet for a couple of decades, but now THE HUNT FOR EAGLE ONE seeks to bring this defunct Filipino war sub-genre back to life.
Unfortunately the best part of this production is the opening credits, in which we learn that Roger Corman served as the producer and good old Cirio H. Santiago was co-producer. Promise indeed! Sadly, THE HUNT FOR EAGLE ONE turns out to be a throwback to the '60s-style war films rather than the '80s-style, and a right chore it is to sit through too.
The film is badly written and horribly directed, with all of that choppy editing and bad, distorted direction that was a scourge of the 2000s (it helped spoil many a Steven Seagal-starring DTV flick, for example). Characterisation is nil and the endless battle sequences are low budget and largely uninteresting, failing to draw viewers into the scenario or action. There are precisely three familiar faces on show here: a tired Rutger Hauer, delivering a minor cameo; a bored Mark Dacascos, in a role which could have fitted anyone; and Theresa Randle (BAD BOYS), who once had a career of sorts in the 1990s, not that you'd know given her performance here. Avoid this one like the plague.
Unfortunately the best part of this production is the opening credits, in which we learn that Roger Corman served as the producer and good old Cirio H. Santiago was co-producer. Promise indeed! Sadly, THE HUNT FOR EAGLE ONE turns out to be a throwback to the '60s-style war films rather than the '80s-style, and a right chore it is to sit through too.
The film is badly written and horribly directed, with all of that choppy editing and bad, distorted direction that was a scourge of the 2000s (it helped spoil many a Steven Seagal-starring DTV flick, for example). Characterisation is nil and the endless battle sequences are low budget and largely uninteresting, failing to draw viewers into the scenario or action. There are precisely three familiar faces on show here: a tired Rutger Hauer, delivering a minor cameo; a bored Mark Dacascos, in a role which could have fitted anyone; and Theresa Randle (BAD BOYS), who once had a career of sorts in the 1990s, not that you'd know given her performance here. Avoid this one like the plague.
I don't remember much about this movie, other than it seemed like a very cheap production and the acting was awful. The film quality seemed B rate. It's one of the few movies that I can ever remember falling asleep during or turning off before it was over. Just bad, bad, bad. If you can catch this on regular television than maybe, but otherwise don't waste your money like I did. Luckily I only rented this, if I had gone to the theater and wasted $8-$10 I probably would have puked.
Rutger Hauer being the lead actor in a movie in 2006 should have been a dead giveaway. I knew better. War movies tend to be my favorites but this was just pathetic. :(
Rutger Hauer being the lead actor in a movie in 2006 should have been a dead giveaway. I knew better. War movies tend to be my favorites but this was just pathetic. :(
1dig
Beware of this stinker. Do not even rent it, You will be better off for something to do if you talk to your lamp light bulb. They show some shots over and over. the plot is the type we have seen before. but this so called movie takes it to so many lower levels, you will want to turn it off. Acting was as bad as the movie and filming of it.
Do not waste your time on this one.
Just so you know. I have only left comments for bad movies 2 times and good ones 6 times. The others (lots of them) have been OK enough not to have to say any more than others that have made comments.
If you feel the need to spend money on something, buy your worse enemy a gift. That will be just as bad as this movie.
Enjoy
Do not waste your time on this one.
Just so you know. I have only left comments for bad movies 2 times and good ones 6 times. The others (lots of them) have been OK enough not to have to say any more than others that have made comments.
If you feel the need to spend money on something, buy your worse enemy a gift. That will be just as bad as this movie.
Enjoy
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe character of Major Aguinaldo may be a reference to the first Philippine President General Emilio Aguinaldo.
- Erros de gravaçãoWhile walking in the jungle after Jennings patches Aguinaldo's broken leg, the gash and blood on Aguinaldo's head switches from the left side to the right side of his forehead in one shot.
- Citações
Gen. Frank Lewis: The Pentagon can kiss my ass.
- ConexõesEdited from O Ataque dos Águias (2003)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 28 min(88 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente