User reviews

"Sometimes being a good Marine means coming in last." Evan Albright (Weber) has just arrived for his new assignment guarding an American Embassy located in the Kingdom. His ego and attitude don't endear him to his fellow soldiers or commanders. When someone comes into the building he is guarding and things erupt outside everything changes. Now, him and the little group of guards must not only protect those inside the building, but the entire Embassy itself. This is a movie that tried so hard to be like 13 Hours, and actually wasn't terrible. Considering the budget restraints this movie had this was actually pretty decent and worth watching. It never became overly cheesy or laughable even though it came close a few times. This is becoming one of the best B action movie series' and it didn't try to do too much, which actually helped the movie. This is nothing comparable to 13 Hours, but for what it was it was entertaining and very watchable. Overall, worth watching and is pretty entertaining. A low budget 13 Hours that is worth your time. I give this a B.

This movie was bad on so many levels.

1. unrealistic, the "freedom fighters standing in mid open places, with 5 guns pointing and hooting at them and they don't get hit, after like 100 bullets go past them, and if they had missed at least they would hit the people behind with how center clustered they stood. as well as standing in the middle of a hallway, no cover. not hit once, not before you give the "guy we don't trust" a gun to prove himself, then they drop like flies.

2. When the movie uses the name jar head 3... claiming to be a sort of sequel down the genre.. At least follow the premise from the other movies. Jarhead 1, damn good movie, you follow the protagonist, you get to experience what he feels and how he perceived things, you are in the story, good job! Jarhead 2. Little worse than the first but stile decent enough for entertainment, it follows somewhat the lines of the original.. then you got this thing.... Just going thru all the action movie stereotypes, just as if the director had a list in front of him that he had to check every box on as he made the movie... At least the two first movies tried to be realistic, opposed to just pure classical action movie setup, that no one wants anymore.

3. The comic relief, the douche bag, and the black hype up guy, and the annoying guy who are useless... WHY ALL THESE STEREOTYPES? seems like the director, just check every box again...

4. The literal second the last guys die... the rescue comes in, nonchalantly, not even trying to secure the area in case more enemies comes in... I mean, if the rescuers, were so close, that the second the propane tank had exploded and the dust settled, they could walk in... then one would expect they were within firring range to help shoot right? or at least lob a grenade.... So poorly made, in terms of realism.

5.the plot was weak...

Imagine a war movie without one single hand grenade. Unreal? Yep, Jarhead 3 is this movie. Boring characters, cliché story, zero creativity. I would have never imagined that I would say 'I prefer any Michael Bay movie instead of this' but here it is, I am saying it.

Even pistols fire fully automatic. Targets get hit, the walls behind them never get damaged. Just fun if you like fully automatic shooting, Rambo style.

So pretty much this movie was nothing but action... I forced myself to watch Jarhead 3... First Jarhead movie was great, well written funny yet serious. The second one was too serious and stole lines from movies like V for Vendetta. The 3rd one they just said screw it to a story and just had non stop fighting for 2 hours straight. Made me think of wanting to make a movie and title is the third installment then make it just after the intro nothing but action to confused the people and end the movie with the hero saying some sly line like "Your logic is flawed murdering innocent people. You are not a hero to your people but a murder." then the villain saying "I see my error of my ways I surrender." right in the middle of a tense action scene.

The guns seemed to have unlimited ammo, and I realized the blonde girl was most likely CIA since she knew how to shoot right from the get go.

I would never consider this movie to anyone I know to save them 2 hours of their life... Sad part is I watched Jarhead 2 and 3 which had nothing to do with the original plot of Jarhead which was actually written by a man who spent time in Iraq during desert storm/desert shield.

Like the title on my review. This is a good action flick. Don't compare it with 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi, or the first Jarhead. Yes. There are some never ending magazines, you know those 30 rounds containing a 100 or more. I would guess a few Marines would coment on a lot going on here. But. To knock of some time, watching decent action movie it's worth it. The acting is decent i would say. It's worth watching, is all i'm saying.

This isn't a film, it's a stupid laddish bullet-fest and nothing more. Guns, guns, and more guns, unleashing a million rounds, making lots of noise, and completely bombing.

Or is it Jars? No wait that is not what they mean right? Either you are as cluelesss about war in general like I pretend to be or you may find my joke distasteful. Hopefully you can forgive me. The movie itself that has nothing much in common with the original Jarhead movie (which I have to rewatch, but I remember liking a lot), is closer to the 13 hours movie. For better or worse.

But I do like Scott Adkins and if you are here for some action (shooting, war scenario and whatnot), you could do worse. The stunts and the action are decently done to say the least. Not much story, not much in character development - but I don't think anyone expected anything in that department! No pun intended ... solid overall, if you have low expectations.

This movie is awful!!!

The acting is atrocious. The chick playing the 'office girl' is one of the worst actors I have ever seen!

If you are watching this for Adkins...don't, no fights.

The last 10 minutes are literally a recruitment video for the dumb.

You would have to be drunk on red white and blue to think this movie was any good.

I like action movies with little to no cgi, lots of rounds and explosions, believable characters, and a good plot- this 'flick' delivered it all to me. Scott Adkins drew me in, if there were more hand to hand, a little more tech, it could have rated higher. For we, it was gripping from end to end.

I really enjoyed it. I wanted action with some back up story and acceptable acting. I got that and more. Acting was pretty good, with some good actors. A ton of nonstop action and a good story and kept me on the edge. I think some wanna-be soldiers expected absolute perfection and that just does not exist.

Action 10/10. Directing: 7/10. Acting: 7/10. Script: 7:10.

Would like to watch more movies like this.

--- I got nothing else to add. Just watch the movie! Never understood all the amateurs whose reviews consist of "trailer" type scenario. Why?! If I wanted to know more about the movie, I can watch the trailer and not read it!

It's not often I turn a movie off and don't finish it, but I did with this one. How do you make a military movie, but have absolutely no military guidance in the acting? At about 20 minutes in when they do the training scenario, they fly past every room without clearing them. Then Albright head shots the terrorist holding the HVT without having his weapon shouldered properly or even looking through the optics. That was enough to know this movie was all Hollywood and no military accuracy.

Don't waste your time

I often wondered why some actually not bad or even serious movies would insert a totally unnecessary cast, a comic-relief like jerk in the screenplays to completely ridicule and ruin them. The worst outcome is putting such clown figures in an action movie. We had seen Bruce Lee's martial art Kung-Fu movies stupidly arranged such totally unnecessary and inappropriate role and degenerated those supposedly suspenseful action movies into not quite serious enough ones. This "Jarhed 3" was another victim by such stupid arrangement in its screenplay, allowing a totally unnecessary character, Blake, played by the annoying Filipino American, Dante Basco, to mess up with and almost ruined it soon as this jerk-like guy holding a camcorder, appeared on the screen.

I am not so sure about the connections between the screenplay writer(s), the director, or even the executive producer(s) with Dante Basco, but one thing I could definitely assure is this sore-thumb like character completely torpedoed this, by general standard, not too bad, albeit quite serious action TV movie. Of course, there are many flaws and loopholes inherited from the screenplay's scenario and plot, but except this jerk-like stand-alone Blake character, all the other players did their jobs quite seriously. The clown character in a serious U.S. Embassy is not just possible but unthinkable, that stupid arrangement simply and totally ruined the believability of this movie, even there were many settings, furniture, bullet-proof windows and glasses were so vividly and realistically destroyed.

The Chinese got an old saying to describe such inappropriate careless arrangement that doomed the outcome: "A whole well-prepared pot of porridge is ruin by just one piece of small rat dropping", Blake/Dante Basco, is indeed that piece of rat dropping.

This movie is a pain to watch. Totally unrealistic weapons and gun fights. Poor cinematography. I have seen better acting in a pantomime. Do something better with your time! Play Call of Duty! It is more realistic than this movie!

No wonder that, in a recent war games exercise, the US forces had to call a halt after being comprehensively beaten time and time again by the British Royal Marine Commandos. If Jarhead3 portrays how badly US embassies are protected by US Marines then there's no hope for any of them! 😃

You don't have to be a fan of Jarhead series to enjoy Jarhead 3: The Siege.Directed by William Kaufman a good but underrated action movie director starring Charlie Weber as the lead role and Scott Adkins as the supporting role but still awesome nonetheless.The acting is fine for the most part but when it come to action scene if you familiar with William works you know how good it is.The gun fight is so intense and bloody that guarantee keep you on the edge of your seat.

Spectacular and noisy film about an attack to USA Embassy. A group of marines must protect the American embassy located in the Middle East when it is besieged by enemy forces. The country is one of the most dangerous places in the world, and nations have pulled their diplomatic offices out of the country in fear of an attack by militants. Among them is Corporal Evan Albright (Charlie Weber) , a rootless young man who signed up to save the world and experience a bit of action. Embassy in a seemingly safe Middle Eastern capitol, relegates his unit to wrangling "gate groupies" protesting outside the compound and honing their marksmanship by playing video games. So Albright and his team are caught off guard when well-armed and well-trained militants launch a surprise attack aimed at killing an informant in the embassy. Heavily out-gunned, they will have to muster all the courage and firepower they can as their once routine assignment spirals into all-out war.

Conventional elements in the screenplay as heroism, comradeship, are based on a story devoid of sentimentality and balanced by a genuinely complex examination of courage in the field. This thrilling film contains noisy action, violence, shootouts and high body count. Precisely, 'action' is the key word of this film, the second sequel to 'Jarhead', the film released by Sam Mendes in 2005 that dealt with the Gulf War starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Peter Sarsgaard, Jamie Foxx . Little remains of the plot of the original film and only Dennis Haysbert (President Palmer in the series 24) reprises the role of Commander Lincoln. Of the rest of the casting, the names of television's Charlie Weber, Sasha Jackson, Dante Basco, Romeo Mille and special mention for Scott Adkins, a prolific actor in the action and fight genre, such as Expendables 2, One Shot, Debt Collectors or Bourne Unltimatum, stand out.

As a trivia, add that the plot is very similar to that of 13 hours: Secret Soldiers of Benghazi, this one was released commercially, while this Jarhead 3 went direct to DVD or television premiere. The motion picture was was routinely but professionally directed by William Kauffman. He's an expert on thrillers and action movies, such as: ¨The prodigy, The Hit List, Sinners and saints, One in the Chamber , The Marine 4: moving target, Daylight's end, Warhorse One, Lazarat, The Channel , Metralla¨, among others.

The saga Jarhead is made up of: ¨Jarhead¨ (2005) by Sam Mendes with Jake Gyllenhaal, Scott MacDonald, Peter Sarsgaard, Jamie Foxx, Lucas Black. ¨Jarhead: Field of fire¨(2014) by Don Michael Paul with Cole Hauser, Stephen Lang, Bokeem Woodbine, Esai Morales , Jesse Garcia, Jason Wong, Josh Kelly.¨Jarhead: The siege¨ (2016) by William Kaufman with Scott Adkins, Charlie Weber, Dante Basco , Romeo Miller, Erik Valdez, Sasha Jackson, Dennis Haysbert. ¨Jarhead: Law of Return¨ (2019) with Devon Sawa, Amaury Norlasco, Amos Taman, Nicholas Aaron, Robert Patrick .

I never saw the first 2 Jarhead movies. I watched this one because Scott Adkins was in it. Turn out he has more than just a cameo but he ain't the star of it, and if you expect to see usual Adkins martial arts, you may be disapointed. That said, the movie is pretty entertaining. There is plenty of action and i was in it for the whole time.

Sure we seen this story before, i remember a Van Damme movie that was very similar, so there is nothing really original but its low budget action movies done right. Grab a few beers, some pop corn, enjoy the fun.

Are you here for Scott Adkins? Prepare to be disappointed. This isn't his usual bad, B movie with a payoff in the shape of some glorious ass whupping. There are zero kicks or punches thrown by Scott in this movie - those with a keen eye for detail should know something is off as soon as he shows up wearing well-fitted jeans (which do, ahem, fit him very well). Also, Scott is not the main character, so don't expect too much screen time with him.

The obnoxious, pretentious, cliche, 18 year old douchebag dialogue is terrible. The Reese Witherspoon lookalike with a hairdo that seems to be held together by an entire can of hairspray is annoying and just plain awful. (Her IMDB bio boasts of the famous acting coaches she's worked with ((I stopped reading after the first few rows)) - I hope she kept the receipts cause she should go get her money back.) And the camcorder guy? Don't even get me started on him.

As for all the firefights.. Pretty unrealistic scenarios made worse by details like the sound of shooting still going even after the person visibly stopped shooting.

Other than a few minutes of SA in tight jeans and the soothing voice of the AllState guy (also a side character), this movie is pretty awful. (It's really a 2/10, I gave an extra star for the former.) If you're a completionist, give it a watch. If you're looking for a good B movie, this isn't it - go watch something like Avengement instead. <3

Movie starts good, average movie with main character not being taken seriously. Apart from the fact that bullets don't leave any wall damage and zero bullet holes, characters are REALLY bad. Especially that "office chick" and the camera guy "Blake" Starting with the girl, her character is so annoying and the fact that a random office girl suddenly has the courage to grab an AK47 And just straight go balls mode killing trained jihad soldiers it's straight up nonsense, can't believe they thought this was good and realistic. Then we have "Blake" average annoying character who contributes nothing to the plot itself other than being the "funny" dude. Straight up bad. Better watch Jarhead 1 or even Jarhead 2.

PD: Movie effects are down bad.