[go: up one dir, main page]

    Release calendarTop 250 moviesMost popular moviesBrowse movies by genreTop box officeShowtimes & ticketsMovie newsIndia movie spotlight
    What's on TV & streamingTop 250 TV showsMost popular TV showsBrowse TV shows by genreTV news
    What to watchLatest trailersIMDb OriginalsIMDb PicksIMDb SpotlightFamily entertainment guideIMDb Podcasts
    OscarsEmmysSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideBest Of 2025 So FarDisability Pride MonthSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAll events
    Born todayMost popular celebsCelebrity news
    Help centerContributor zonePolls
For industry professionals
  • Language
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Sign in
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Use app
Back
  • Cast & crew
  • User reviews
  • Trivia
  • FAQ
IMDbPro
Mission Alcatraz (2002)

Review by Wizard-8

Mission Alcatraz

Not the worst Seagal has done in recent years... but still not that good

Two rules to go by are: Movies made by Franchise Pictures, or distributed by Screen Gems, are movies to avoid. This movie was made by Franchise Pictures AND distributed by Screen Gems! Not only that, but it has Steven Seagal - it's hard to believe that ten years or so ago he was doing so well. It's a shock to see him here, with a puffy face (and torso) and his hair looking lighter. Not surprisingly, his fight scenes are directed with quick cuts and simple martial arts movies that even an amateur could pull off. He seems very disinterested by what's happening, even a little out of it. He shouldn't be surprised that it's his career that's half past dead.

The director, Don Michael Paul, seems to have no ability to direct an action scene, martial art OR weapon-oriented. He uses annoying techniques like slow-motion or fast-motion to try and be "edgy", I guess. He also has problems telling a story, with some notable gaps that filled would have made some plot points more clear. He was working with a tight budget, which explains some things like numerous close-ups and somewhat impoverished sets. (Plus outdoor locations that clearly aren't in the United States, even though the movie is supposed to be taking place there.) Still, the movie moves along with nary a slow spot, and as problem-filled as it is, it's slicker and less annoying than Seagal movies like TICKER and THE FOREIGNER.
  • Wizard-8
  • Nov 10, 2003

More from this title

More to explore

Recently viewed

Please enable browser cookies to use this feature. Learn more.
Get the IMDb App
Sign in for more accessSign in for more access
Follow IMDb on social
Get the IMDb App
For Android and iOS
Get the IMDb App
  • Help
  • Site Index
  • IMDbPro
  • Box Office Mojo
  • License IMDb Data
  • Press Room
  • Advertising
  • Jobs
  • Conditions of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Your Ads Privacy Choices
IMDb, an Amazon company

© 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.