Piège à grande vitesse

This was pretty good actually, despite having some production problems(word has it that they were thinking of bringing Gary Busey's character back from Under Seige I-yeah, right-off the exploding Sub? Not likely...)But anyways, this worked well for me. I enjoyed Seagal, showed a bit of humour here in places, thought the train gave it a decent closed in setting, liked both Kurtwood Smith and Everett McGill doing what they do best. (Smith has played the worried Pentagon staffer before too, about the same way...) My impression of Bogosian was that he was a bit too wired at times in his portrayal but it worked just the same. Overall an enjoyable if not great action film, the sort Seagal should have made more of.

**1/2 outta ****, nothing great, but alright.

The first 'Under Siege' film was a classic. No, not in the 'Godfather' or 'Empire Strikes Back' kind of way, but in terms of simple nineties action films to eat popcorn to, it was a classic. And an unexpected one at that. Therefore, a sequel was trotted out in the hope that the second film would catch the audience's attention, too. It didn't. Not that it's that bad.

Steven Segal plays... well, much the same character he plays in all his films – the no-nonsense, bad-guy-slaughtering, tough-man who gets caught up in all sorts of dangerous situations. This time he just so happens to be on a passenger train heading through America when a load of terrorists hijack it, threatening New York with total destruction thanks to an on-board control to a top secret satellite-weapon.

The first film was set on a large military destroyer boat. Therefore, when Segal did his thing killing bad-guys, he had a bigger playing field (kind of literally!) to run around in. A boat is a damn sight better setting for an action film where the hero is constantly hiding and on the run from a small army of hired mercenaries. A train is not. He never really seems to hit his stride until the film is practically over.

Yes, he does his general hiding and stalking of baddies, but the whole affair leaves you wondering how he hasn't been caught by now. The second half does pick up the pace a bit – if you don't mind overlooking the various over-the-topness of it all and general plot holes that come with one man taking down an entire elite army battalion.

Plus there are less secondary characters for Segal to interact with. His niece is a captive, so she has little to do but kneel down and play the part of 'damsel in distress.' Segal's (train porter) sidekick is annoying and the baddies are kind of over-the-top in a pantomime kind of way.

Overall, 'Under Siege 2' isn't bad. It just isn't as good as the original and therefore not even nearly as good as all the other mad nineties action blockbusters. If you like action films and you come home late at night and see this is on TV, you may watch it all the way through. It's the kind of film that you can watch while doing other things.

Yes, the earthquake beam from space (heck, the whole story line and all of the villains too) are totally unbelievable. Frankly, if you can find a "believable" action movie, I have a beach house in Arizona you might want to buy. Yes, the production values were not the finest.

But -- if you like watching the hero exterminate the bad guys, few do it with the style of Seagal. Like Jet Li (yeah, I am old enough to remember Bruce Lee the original, and Chuck Norris), he is one of the few action heroes who is a real martial arts guy, and he moves so fast and fluidly it is hard for the eye to follow, but fascinating to watch. This is brainless entertainment, full of hilariously cheesy B-movie one-liners you can laugh at ("Assumption is the mother of all f-ups!"), often bad acting, a story line you could describe in one sentence, and zero character development.

There are worse ways to spend 90 minutes. Believability is for films that take themselves seriously. Seagal is more like stand-up comic straight man meets Aikido ace. At least he handles a handgun like someone who has actually fired one.

Steven Seagal reprises his role as a one time SEAL team captain, a counter-terrorist expert who had to rely only on his personal skills in order to survive, and protect the hostages... He happens to be on the Grand Continental passenger train traveling from Denver to L.A... Seagal joins the only family he has, a 'cute kid' named Sarah (Katherine Heigl) after her parents died in a plane crash...

Seagal has an electrifying screen presence... Seeing him in action is similar to appreciating modern art...

The train is hijacked by a team of 'ugly men' with guns... Their chief, Travis Dane (Eric Bogosian), is a high-tech mastermind, who fakes his own death in order to gain control of a top-secret nuclear satellite... For this crazy technical genius, technology can be used for beauty or debasement, and 'until you plug it in, you just can't tell.'

Dane's henchman Penn (Everett McGill) is a soldier of fortune freak, whose relationship with his boss resurfaced during Desert Storm...

Morris Chestnut's focus is on humor and breath-taking sequences...

Geoff Murphy's film is incredibly entertaining, combining action, martial arts, and dark sense of humor...

DIE HARD aboard a train, there will be more, a couple I guess, in the future; Aboard a train, I mean. Because you had DIE HARD rip offs on all kind of transportation or facilities, except a pet cemetery or a taxi cab...That said, I prefered this one to the first Andrew Davis' opus, I don't know why...This Geoff Murphy's movie is not better, but maybe the bodycount was a bit easier. Bodycount of the villians wasted one by one, that's the main interest for this kind of film. And of course in the end, you have to obtain the exact count. If not, let's admit it is a bit boring. I have seen action flicks where the more the bad guys are killed, the more you have bad guys!!!! Yes, a good action film, worth seeing, despite it is of course lousy, forgettable.