Mercenaires

So .. the American military (ie Billy Zane) entrust the rescue of a US ambassador somewhere in Serbia (where else !) to a rag bag of British mercenaries (we mustn't forget the word "elite" here !) led by an investment manager from Brixton , London !

They walk around somewhere in a wooded area at night talking loudly ... knowing that only the cameraman and soundman are listening .

We know who the top bad guy is because he wears an eye patch , of course ! More walking in illuminated woods at night follows , while the bad guys are torturing everyone they can find !!

Now this is where it gets exciting ... the investment manager (turned actor / cameraman & producer) from Brixton , decides to attack the bad guys , based in a shabby building ... not to be confused with the American Embassy say , and liberate the hostages . Armed only with Kalashnikovs (don't ask !) the good guys liberate the American hostages including the one-eyed bandit.

Here , excitement reaches a zenith ! After firing many blank bullets and more flashing lights , the liberators go back to the woods with the Americans and a captured bad guy ! Surprisingly, the woods are very well lit .

Anyway , the producer / actor investment manager tries to hit on the only female with them . But eventually Billy Zane is there with the obligatory coffee to welcome what is left of the rescuers !

There is a lot of trees in this film , but little daylight.

Breathtaking , don't yo think ??

This movie fell apart within the first 10 minutes of the viewing. If you are going to make a military film, at least research it before production. ACU patterns were wrong, and weaponry were not standard issue. For an example, the Humvee shown in the film is actually a cameo painted Hummer h1, the civilian version of the Humvee. Silly, silly movie that I highly discourage.

The acting was a discouragement to see. Awkward prone positions and shooting positions made actors look like they were playing a game of air soft. There "marines" were not properly shown how to shoulder their weapon nor how to properly engage targets using their iron sights.

Overall, this military thriller looked like an amateur film that any 12 year old with a Sony camcorder could re-enact. This film at best belongs in a high school film festival. What a shame.

"No Andy...they are wrong." After a military coup occurs in the Balkins the U.S. ambassador is in trouble. An ex S.A.S. serviceman is picked by Colonel Tourida (Zane) to lead a rescue mission. I have to admit that I like war movies, but like the new batch of western movies lately they seem to be either really good or really bad. It seems that some people assume that if you put a guy in cameo with a gun in a movie people will flock to it regardless of plot. I am not one of those people. To me just because it's a war movie doesn't automatically make it good. This one was very slow and didn't seem to have a point. I lost interest quickly and started to forget what I saw. By the end I was just glad it was over. But on the other hand not everyone thinks like me and many will like this. I just couldn't get into it. Overall, compared to the recent war movies like "Beneath Hill 60" and "Age Of Heroes" this is not nearly as good. I give it a C-.

I am a film reviewer so frankly I don't care that the lead actor, Mr Fucilla, is, according to the Guardian newspaper, a merchant banker who believes he can bypass training as an actor and has bought bought his way into a project. I don't care that the director was a unit driver called Barry Leonti (according to IMDb) and reinvented himself as a director, called Paris. I don't care about the fact that MERCENARIES advertises itself (on Wikipedia) as being shown at the Cannes Film Festival in 2011 when it wasn't (I was there and there is no official record of it in any competition). What I care about is what I see when I pay my money and watch what is on the big or small screen in front of me. And unfortunately, in this case, it would not be an exaggeration to say it is an absolutely unwatchable mish mash mess. The starting problem is the fact that no attempt has been made to put it in the right geographical setting. Even low budget films need to make an effort, though. Srebenica? This has clearly been set in the local park. This in itself is bad but when you throw a clearly unconsidered plot and script in to the mix then you have problems. Derivative, would be putting it mildly. Where is there any attempt at being original. Low budget is no excuse for making no effort. Quite the opposite - it is the absolute opportunity to do something original. Clearly, Billy Zane, sticks out like a sore thumb, bring the pay check face on the DVD cover (though, as many reviewers have pointed out - even he has disowned the film by refusing to be on the DVD cover). The dialogue just seems to have been thrown together and the acting is a mix of amateurism and half-heartedness - it's difficult to tell what could have been made of this if the script had not been so bad.

Ultimately it is a sad old mess and reflects really badly on the struggling UK film industry. This is not what is needed in the industry, it will just drive investors further away from investing in films. What a sad, missed opportunity. Let's hope this film can be quietly forgotten and the UK film industry can provide us with some low budget, quality, original films again.

Rather than watching this film, I felt as if i was being subjected to it. I have seen thousands of film, both high and low budget, and I can quite honestly say this is one of the worst I have watched. The only thing more terrible than the script were the actors' performances. Although, the actors aren't fully to blame as the casting choices were the true root cause of the film's problems. Not one character was believable as having served in the SAS or any military unit, they couldn't properly hold weapons or implement any semblance of military tactics.Beside from the countless military inaccuracies; the plot was unoriginal, unbelievable and totally boring.

Avoid this movie, it is absolute rubbish!