IMDb RATING
5.1/10
4.6K
YOUR RATING
An ex-MI6 agent is thrown back into the world of espionage and high stakes to uncover the shocking truth about operations conducted by unknown secret services.An ex-MI6 agent is thrown back into the world of espionage and high stakes to uncover the shocking truth about operations conducted by unknown secret services.An ex-MI6 agent is thrown back into the world of espionage and high stakes to uncover the shocking truth about operations conducted by unknown secret services.
- Awards
- 13 wins & 9 nominations total
Anna Butkevich
- Tatyana
- (as Anna Butkevych)
Julia Bol
- Sasha Stepanenko
- (as Yuliia Sobol)
Florin Stancu
- Richie Thai
- (as Stancu Florin)
Sergey Kalantay
- Zelenko
- (as Sergiy Kalantay)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Scott Adkins is always watchable, but the man has a few turkeys in his back catalogue and unfortunately, Legacy Of Lies is one. He plays Martin Baxter, a former MI6 Agent living with his 12 year old daughter in a dingy Peckham flat. He works as a bouncer and has a side hustle as a cage fighter, but is also a broken man, tormented by the memory of a mission gone bad.
Then one day, the daughter of a dead friend turns up asking for his help. Before he can even answer, bullets start flying and Baxter winds up in the middle of an intricate spy web, trying to retrieve a MacGuffin that could bring down the Russian Government.
This is definitely more Bourne than Boyka, but it misses the mark. There's a couple of cracking action scenes in here, including a nightclub shoot out and a short but memorable punch-up with Leon Sua, but otherwise it drags. The final confrontation on a bridge is disappointing and the film is so unsubtle, there's literally a scene where one character turns to face the camera and explains the title.
It's not terrible, but it's not amazing either. Legacy Of Lies is okay. It's all right. And credit to the cinematographer, Kiev looks amazing. But if you're an Adkins fan, this is way down on the list of his essential movies.
Then one day, the daughter of a dead friend turns up asking for his help. Before he can even answer, bullets start flying and Baxter winds up in the middle of an intricate spy web, trying to retrieve a MacGuffin that could bring down the Russian Government.
This is definitely more Bourne than Boyka, but it misses the mark. There's a couple of cracking action scenes in here, including a nightclub shoot out and a short but memorable punch-up with Leon Sua, but otherwise it drags. The final confrontation on a bridge is disappointing and the film is so unsubtle, there's literally a scene where one character turns to face the camera and explains the title.
It's not terrible, but it's not amazing either. Legacy Of Lies is okay. It's all right. And credit to the cinematographer, Kiev looks amazing. But if you're an Adkins fan, this is way down on the list of his essential movies.
There's enough Adkins fights and action to hold you over until the Isaac Florentine directed "Seized" gets released. This isn't a Florentine or Jesse V. Johnson flick but, if you're an Adkins fan, a true fan, you'll like this movie.
Scott Adkins is back with another DTV Action Thriller & this time he plays an Ex-Spy for the British government who walked away from it all after a secret mission went terrible wrong & we meet him 12 yrs later as a troubled dad with his smart 12 yr old daughter & he works in a swanky club as a bouncer & cage fighting on the side to earn some cash & Adkins is good again in another solid role that shows he's a fine solid actor as well as a fantastic gifted fighter.
Legacy of Lies is a basic Spy Action Thriller but actually looks really slick & Cool with nice lighting & smooth, fast fighting scenes that are apart of todays Action genre & mostly it's a pretty good little Thriller.
Adkins movie daughter in this is ok'ish, abit annoying sometimes & adds nothing to the film except the motivation for the events he's forced into later when his past catches up with him & we get the usual basic old "Buddies" of his that are still Agents & are all Assholes lol, the Awesome Adkins glides through the low-budget film beating up & shooting everyone & that's fine by me as that's what we expect from Adkins & the Action genre but the film is watchable only once.
I think Scott Adkins is way underrated & can & has done way better films.
Adkins is Awesome as usual but it's just a very basic & generic DTV Action Film.
Adkins is Awesome as usual but it's just a very basic & generic DTV Action Film.
Scott is a talented action star and has been in many films over the last 20 years, always playing the same type of character, and never seems to improve his acting ability.
Perhaps it's the directors and poor scripts but after a while you realize that it's him. He's just as good as he's ever going to get and that's average and all the movies where he is a lead look the same.
Perhaps it's the directors and poor scripts but after a while you realize that it's him. He's just as good as he's ever going to get and that's average and all the movies where he is a lead look the same.
Legacy of Lies seems to have everything you'd need to make such darkish spy thriller. Exotic locations, seriousness, corrupt parties, family ties, desperate circumstances and a McGuffin to run for.
Problem is, even despite having the right components, they forgot to buy the glue. And decided to slap those components together with wet dirt, instead. Which, of course, isn't sufficient.
Most of the movie is about fetching a briefcase with "files" and apparently a nerve agent (gotta put exotic poison name in your movie, right). Why is it of any importance, isn't really clear, aside vague clues shown on TV screens around the movie every now and then.
The dialogues are very short and functional, with little to no drama, so characters only say what they have to say. Basically, as if they're reading plot points off a list, rather than actually having conversations. And attempt at having any drama (musings of mission gone wrong in the past) is so cringeworthy, it'd be better if they didn't do it at all.
Actors are nice to watch. They all feel interesting enough to be a part of something memorable.
Then there's action, the spectacle of the show. And sure, it's plentiful and well-executed. Camera angles work, shots are long enough and so on. But then, there's big ugly thing in the room that ruins it all --
Audio. Every gun sounds muffled. Soundtrack feels like random generic action soundtrack, with no tension and release, never stops and doesn't follow what's happening on the screen even by smallest bit. Which makes it super weird and out of place. Rather than giving rhythm to the action, and slowing down to relax, it just does its own random thing, basically turning everything into weird, incoherent soup. Same for dialogues, for example, they are often muffled or lost in background so you never truly concentrate on them. There's nearly any atmospheric sound whatsoever, cities don't sound like cities, cars don't make sound when they take off, etc. Watching this movie without sound at all would probably result in better experience than watching it drowned into really, really badly designed sound it has. I felt like it ruined entire thing.
Other problem that drags it down is concentrating on action too much. Yes, it's nice, and necessary, but in a spy movie with capital hopping, evading capture and being chased two powerful forces, what do you think is the important or exciting part?
This movie, in extremely blunt and rather dumb manner, skips over every possible bit of TRADECRAFT, characters just magically book flights and hotels under false names, acquire cellphones and weapons, get tracked to the other side of the Europe, all that'd be really interesting see... is cut out. For some reason, scenes of throwing elbows at faces and dreams of a dead woman was more important that the very essence of a spy thriller.
So in the end, you get a movie that had all the ingredients to be good, but ruined itself with extreme incompetence at cooking them.
Problem is, even despite having the right components, they forgot to buy the glue. And decided to slap those components together with wet dirt, instead. Which, of course, isn't sufficient.
Most of the movie is about fetching a briefcase with "files" and apparently a nerve agent (gotta put exotic poison name in your movie, right). Why is it of any importance, isn't really clear, aside vague clues shown on TV screens around the movie every now and then.
The dialogues are very short and functional, with little to no drama, so characters only say what they have to say. Basically, as if they're reading plot points off a list, rather than actually having conversations. And attempt at having any drama (musings of mission gone wrong in the past) is so cringeworthy, it'd be better if they didn't do it at all.
Actors are nice to watch. They all feel interesting enough to be a part of something memorable.
Then there's action, the spectacle of the show. And sure, it's plentiful and well-executed. Camera angles work, shots are long enough and so on. But then, there's big ugly thing in the room that ruins it all --
Audio. Every gun sounds muffled. Soundtrack feels like random generic action soundtrack, with no tension and release, never stops and doesn't follow what's happening on the screen even by smallest bit. Which makes it super weird and out of place. Rather than giving rhythm to the action, and slowing down to relax, it just does its own random thing, basically turning everything into weird, incoherent soup. Same for dialogues, for example, they are often muffled or lost in background so you never truly concentrate on them. There's nearly any atmospheric sound whatsoever, cities don't sound like cities, cars don't make sound when they take off, etc. Watching this movie without sound at all would probably result in better experience than watching it drowned into really, really badly designed sound it has. I felt like it ruined entire thing.
Other problem that drags it down is concentrating on action too much. Yes, it's nice, and necessary, but in a spy movie with capital hopping, evading capture and being chased two powerful forces, what do you think is the important or exciting part?
This movie, in extremely blunt and rather dumb manner, skips over every possible bit of TRADECRAFT, characters just magically book flights and hotels under false names, acquire cellphones and weapons, get tracked to the other side of the Europe, all that'd be really interesting see... is cut out. For some reason, scenes of throwing elbows at faces and dreams of a dead woman was more important that the very essence of a spy thriller.
So in the end, you get a movie that had all the ingredients to be good, but ruined itself with extreme incompetence at cooking them.
Did you know
- GoofsMartin and Lisa have British accents (London, in fact), and the former is ex-MI6, all of which strongly suggests they are British. However, Lisa tells Martin she 'wants to start school 'this fall'". No British person would say this, instead they would say 'this autumn'.
- ConnectionsReferences Scarface (1983)
- How long is Legacy of Lies?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Languages
- Also known as
- Jeux d'espions
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $4,500,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $94,583
- Runtime1 hour 41 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content