Ultime Menace

Jean-Claude Van Damme stars as a soldier who becomes the first in command after the ambassador is murdered by terrorists, along the way Van Damme comes up with a plan to get the soldiers and civilians out before the terrorists take over. Second In Command is one of Van Damme's more one note efforts. One in which reminds one of the vastly superior Sudden Death, however the problem with Second In Command is that it's just plain boring. Van Damme doesn't have really any hand to hand combat sequences and the shootouts are rarely exciting. Fellows tries to go for suspense and fails because the situation is so clichéd and the movie so uninspired. It's as if all the planning went on how to get Van Damme in the position of power and then didn't know what to do with the plot. In other words there just isn't enough plot or momentum in the story to make this all that entertaining. It's a movie that's forgettable and downright dull.

*1/2 out of 4-(Poor)

Saw this film on DVD.. Van Damme plays Sam Keenan who's just been appointed to Second in Command where's he stationed at an East European country.. There, he finds himself at a situation where the President has been confined at an American Embassy from a group of ruthless soldiers..

As things gets worse, Keenan must do all he can stop the soldiers and save the President..

For this type of film, it's a bit better than some of the other Van Damme films I've seen..

I saw another film on TV called 'IN HELL'.. I felt that this film was terrible. So shallow and not entertaining enough..

In 'SECOND OF COMMAND', we see Van Damme playing a Marine.. Something we don't usually see him play as.. But it's something that Van Damme fans would love to see..

I also believe that Van Damme should stick to good roles that fans will definitely see over and over again.. Rather than work on something that is so boring and horribly made..

It's not bad.. Pretty good movie.. I hope JCVD will do and make better films in future..

6 out of 10!

This is pretty run of the mill stuff.

Its a bit more of an understated JCVD and that's not a bad thing.

The action is a bit basic as is the plot.

Would I watch it twice? No

Did I feel like I was suffering when I watched it? No

As such an admirer of Jean-Claude Van Damme, watching him make stuff like this is really disheartening to be honest with you all. I grew up with his movies, and whilst not all of them were great, he has provided me with many hours of entertainment with classics such as Bloodsport, Universal Soldier, and Time Cop. Even recently he has really upped his game with some DTV gems like Until Death, Wake Of Death, Replicant, Assassination Games, and In Hell. But this feels like something that Steven Seagal rejected. It doesn't have much action to speak of, and when it does happen, we get a lot of frustrating shaky camera work that really hampers what little it has going for it. It doesn't help that I can't stand politics. Anything to do with it, I tend to lose interest in quickly. There are a few exceptions to this rule where I end up enjoying them, but this was bloody terrible. Jean-Claude Van Damme isn't really trying all that much here. He phones it in, but he can't overcome the weak script or poor pacing issues. I realize he has toned down his histrionics over the last few years, but this movie really lets him down. The rest of the cast do what they have to do, but none of them really stand out all that much

Final Thoughts: He's made some really good DTV gems since this awful film, but this is without a doubt one of the worst movies he has ever done. It's up there with Double Team, Black Eagle, and Derailed. Even die hard JCVD fans (I consider myself one of them!) will be disappointed by this. The lack of interest really sinks this one

3/10

"Second in Command" is the best movie that I've seen with Jean-Claude Van Damme since his early films, "Bloodsport" of 1985, and "Lionheart" of 1990." As those films, this one has an interesting plot. There's more depth to the story than the usual fare of mayhem and gore in Van Damme films. As with some other of his films in the first decade of the 21st century, this film was made solely for video release. That may say a lot about the lack of ticket sales and profits from theater releases.

This film has a huge dose of the pyro-technics, mayhem and gore. But they don't consume most of the film. Instead, there's a plot with some realism about saving people in an American embassy. The story revolves around a rebellion in Moldova and an attack on the American embassy. The freely elected president of the country is being protected there. So, this film scores much better than the usual mindless mayhem of Van Damme films.

The idea of an embassy siege is not a contrived Hollywood plot. The fact that there have been such incidents in the recent past adds a sense of realism to the film. Of course, this was made before the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack of the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya, in which the American ambassador and others were killed.

The writers may have been inspired by real incidents of the past. The most successful large rescue happened in 1991. That took place in Somalia. Armed rebellion broke out in Mogadishu in January. People from several countries made their way to the U.S. embassy. The rescue was called Operation Eastern Exit. Two huge helicopters delivered a team of 60 Marines and Navy SEALS to the compound on January 5. The choppers returned to Guam with the first 61 evacuees. Then, after midnight on Jan. 6, the main rescue took place. Four waves of five Sea Knight helicopters each evacuated the entire compound. In the end, 281 people from 30 nations were rescued through the American embassy.