Toxin

For some reason I always enjoy seeing Vinnie Jones. I don't know why. His movies and performance are getting worse every time, but I still watch them. And the movie has Danny Glover, of Lethal Weapon fame. How could this go wrong?

Easy. Vinnie is a minor thug of no consequence, Glover acts worse than a wooden plank - not kidding here, there were planks that didn't make me cringe in this film - and the hero of the story is Taylor Handley, from Dawson Creek, playing a bad ass soldier coming from Afghanistan. Yet it goes further than this: the CGI is painfully bad, the dialog is pathetic, the direction is worse than non-existent, it's suicidal and the acting of everyone involved is abysmal. I mean, the best actor of them all by far was C.S. Lee, Vince Masuka from Dexter. That should tell you how bad the whole thing was.

And yet, if this would have had an intriguing premise, brought something new to the table, added at least some element of tension, horror, drama or at least comedy, inadvertent or not, I would have been OK with its existence. Instead it is a completely worthless enterprise. More effort has been put into fake comments on IMDb than in any part of the film.

Bottom line: avoid it like you would a toxin that is actually a virus that grows spores on the walls of buildings.

The guys that left the other poor reviews were being kind.

If you are yet to watch this then don't, for the love of God please don't!

But I'd imagine that you are just here to confirm that the film that you've just wasted an hour and a half of your life watching really is that bad and that other people thankfully agree with you and you're not going mad.

Apparently I have write ten lines for my review to be considered valid by IMDb. Bugger, there really isn't anything in this film I want to write ten lines about, the other reviews have already captured pretty accurately just what a stinker this is.

I often come on here looking at reviews and overall average ratings before deciding on my next film to watch. And I thought I'd give this a try based on having a few known and established actors. And that it has one one the worst average ratings for a budget film I think I've ever seen that I've looked at.

Yet another example of even if below an average film that the IMDb average review rating seems well off. I mean, what the hell are people comparing such films to in order to give such low ratings?. If you want to see a £50-£100 million plus budget film go and see 1 than watch these budget films yet judge these against Hollywood films with countless times the budget. People should try to judge films far more fairly based on a number of criteria.

However, that's not to say this is a great film as it's far from that. A reasonable passable effort at best thats made the best use of getting known and established actors on board that clearly carried and probably influenced the performance of the supporting actors. A shame no budget is stated as always nice to try and base a review against its budget.

At first I thought the film was some ten minutes short (maybe a higher than normal budget to the main stars might explain this). But in reality and on reflection it could easily have been several minutes shorter again due to scenes that had no place in the film and look only to have been put in to pad out the production to get to a minimal film length production.

Had this been several minutes shorter, pointless scenes cut out and more a one off TV special this would have been and felt a much better production. Overall story is not the worst for these films, but not great either.

Sadly another film that had potential yet fell well short even if using established and known actors. Acting overall was good to decent, but more a feeling of more a showcase film for upcoming actors and film makers to showcase their talents alongside established actors.

How this movie got funding it is a mystery to me . To put it mildly movie is awful . Bad acting ,bad script ,bad directing ,no special effects, plot insults your intelligence ,characters insult your intelligence . It is like they got together one afternoon and decided to make a movie ,they shot it next day and this pile of S#%t is the result .It amazes me to know that in 21st century they can not find a decent script nor gather enough creativity to make something better than this . They made better indie movies than this in 60s and they had worse equipment less money and less talent . It would be greater pleasure to be sodomized for 80 minutes than to be forced to watch this "movie" again.

I should had turned it off the moment i heard "What took you so long"/ "Yeah is nice to see you too" I can't believe that dialog is still used. I honestly felt like i was watching the bloopers version or perhaps the deleted scenes all roll into a movie. I hate to be so critical but I have to admit that when I saw the budget of this movie was 500K it did bother me. You could feed so many families and instead you make this movie. I do feel bad for the camera director in this film. He was probably biting his tongue from saying anything the whole time he was filming. I'm sure at one point he asked himself "Why did I sign up for this?" after all the camera work was practically the only decent part of this movie. Even Danny G's acting wasn't convincing. I dont believe i could've kept my mouth shut if i had been involved in this project. How on earth did this film cost so much. That's what I want to know?