One Night in Bangkok

I liked this film very much. One shouldn't compare it with Collatéral (2004), because of a superfluous similarity. The two films are very different. "One Night in Bangkok" is more than a thriller and/or an action film. It's of deeper sense, with nice dialogues, well written story, good acting, especially by Mark Dacascos, emotion and of course some action, although one shouldn't focus to that.

I do recommend it.

My vote: 7/10.

I couldn't watch this film in one hit, it was too slow. Slow paced films work when they hold your interest in character, this fell short somewhere. Plot was OK but the reveals were mistimed.It was also very staged but in a way that it was hard to maintain the suspension of disbelief. Glad I watched it to the end as it ties up nicely if dark Disney is your thing but this film missed a trick somewhere. It wasn't bad, the lead actors did well but it really needed padding perhaps a bit more money for extras...

Story was ripped from Collateral. You're better off sticking to the original with Tom Cruise an Jamie Foxx.

Basic to the point, good acting all around. Mark Dacascos is a really underrated actor. The man puts so much into his acting skills. And new comer Vanida Golten who played Fha was very good for her first role. I hope to see her in future films. Shes a very beautiful actress. Give this movie a shot.

Can't believe I watched to the end. Your first thought is, Mark Dacascos is the same age as Tom Cruise but Cruise must have alien DNA because Dacascos looks his age .. and Cruise never does. Your second thought is, if they spent more than $10K making this move, they were overcharged. Your third thought is, was there actually a script, or did the director shoot it in one day and let the actors ad-lib? And your last thought, before the credits roll, is that Dacascos gives the performance of his life, of his career, bad script and all.