IMDb RATING
3.6/10
4.6K
YOUR RATING
A father and son working as security guards for an armored truck company encounter a team of would-be robbers while on a bridge. They become trapped and must come up with a plan to escape an... Read allA father and son working as security guards for an armored truck company encounter a team of would-be robbers while on a bridge. They become trapped and must come up with a plan to escape and ensure their survival.A father and son working as security guards for an armored truck company encounter a team of would-be robbers while on a bridge. They become trapped and must come up with a plan to escape and ensure their survival.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Josh Whites
- Echo
- (as Joshua David Whites)
Martin Bats Bradford
- Match
- (as Martin Badford)
Laney Taylor
- Sara
- (as Laney Stiebing)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I will start off by saying, nobody from this film will be gracing the red carpet at the Oscar's. If they do end up there then it won't be for the performances in this film.
Patric and his son are armoured van drivers. They get ambushed by Sly's crew. Most of the film is set on a bridge with Patric and son trying to survive, Sly and his crew trying to get into said van.
I've given it a five, I could've gone to six if I was feeling generous. It isn't great but it entertained me for an hour and a half. I never considered turning off after ten minutes, which is rare these days.
If you've nothing else to watch then give it a go. If your expectations are low then you won't disappointed if you hate it!
Patric and his son are armoured van drivers. They get ambushed by Sly's crew. Most of the film is set on a bridge with Patric and son trying to survive, Sly and his crew trying to get into said van.
I've given it a five, I could've gone to six if I was feeling generous. It isn't great but it entertained me for an hour and a half. I never considered turning off after ten minutes, which is rare these days.
If you've nothing else to watch then give it a go. If your expectations are low then you won't disappointed if you hate it!
I thought Armor was well cast, but that is almost the only good thing I can say about it. The plot had holes in it large enough to drive an armored truck through. Unstable plastic explosive wouldn't be my first choice of what to take on a heist. Bullets flying, grenades exploding, vehicles engaged in a game of low-speed bumper tag on conveniently deserted roads, yet no one notices any of it. Shoot-outs on a bridge over what is presented as a number of hours, yet not a single car passes by until it is conveniently needed. It also arrives at the perfect time. Houses are near to the so-called 'action', easily within earshot, yet no one phones in about the explosions or gunfire. Roads going through the Nevada desert see more traffic. Stallone spoke often but did little. I suppose that's to be expected at this stage of his career. Not bad, but not good either.
The whole film strained my sense of incredulity and really disappointed me. There was no sense of realism whatsoever. Watch it if you don't have anything else to fill your time; just don't expect much from the experience.
The whole film strained my sense of incredulity and really disappointed me. There was no sense of realism whatsoever. Watch it if you don't have anything else to fill your time; just don't expect much from the experience.
Phew, this film is not easy to sit through. The characters are utterly interchangeable, and the storyline couldn't be simpler. Then, at the 32-minute mark, the horribly bad CGI effects hit, with every weapon and explosion clearly coming straight from a computer. The visual cringe was so intense that it burned into my retina, and at that point, I knew the film wasn't going to get any better.
It's puzzling why Sylvester Stallone even agreed to be in this. It feels like a cash grab, using his name and face to draw in an audience. The film's lack of substance and reliance on cheap effects left me wondering if anyone involved cared about the final product at all.
Given everything, I can't bring myself to rate it higher than 2/10. It's hard to find anything redeeming about it, and I certainly won't be watching it again.
It's puzzling why Sylvester Stallone even agreed to be in this. It feels like a cash grab, using his name and face to draw in an audience. The film's lack of substance and reliance on cheap effects left me wondering if anyone involved cared about the final product at all.
Given everything, I can't bring myself to rate it higher than 2/10. It's hard to find anything redeeming about it, and I certainly won't be watching it again.
Alright ... I know some peoples may say its a bit of in bad taste as Bruce Willis may had known he was sick and just decided to make as many movie (and dollars) as he could before it was too late, but he often had low effort performances in low budget DTV movies in the last 7-8 years of his career and that whats Stallone in this remind me.
Don't get me wrong. I love Tulsa King and i do think Stallone can still be pretty good on screen even tough he is approaching 80 years old. Of course at one point at that age the action roles may dry up, but he still has presence. He still look cool and badass.
But this movie... it just feel like they knew putting his name on it would sell it because otherwise NOBODY would had watch this.
The movie is not horrible ... Its not an action movie at all, more like a "thriller" (and i use it loosely) and there is some interesting parts between the father and son dynamic. But despite these characters being somewhat likable, you wonder how they could stretch this into a 90 minutes movie.
This could had been a 40 minute short (or an episode of a TV show) and it would had made sense. But the plot is way too thin to go 90 minutes and there is obvious flaws you gonna spot on the bad guys not being able to break in.
Very minimal use of CGI but you can spot it very easily when it happen, wich show the budget was VERY low.
If Stallone's name was not on it, this movie would had hardly be rent or bough by much peoples. Fan of him or not, you can skip it.
Don't get me wrong. I love Tulsa King and i do think Stallone can still be pretty good on screen even tough he is approaching 80 years old. Of course at one point at that age the action roles may dry up, but he still has presence. He still look cool and badass.
But this movie... it just feel like they knew putting his name on it would sell it because otherwise NOBODY would had watch this.
The movie is not horrible ... Its not an action movie at all, more like a "thriller" (and i use it loosely) and there is some interesting parts between the father and son dynamic. But despite these characters being somewhat likable, you wonder how they could stretch this into a 90 minutes movie.
This could had been a 40 minute short (or an episode of a TV show) and it would had made sense. But the plot is way too thin to go 90 minutes and there is obvious flaws you gonna spot on the bad guys not being able to break in.
Very minimal use of CGI but you can spot it very easily when it happen, wich show the budget was VERY low.
If Stallone's name was not on it, this movie would had hardly be rent or bough by much peoples. Fan of him or not, you can skip it.
After just watching Tulsa King, i thought yea why not i saw sly was in the credits and Tulsa King was right up my street, but this has got to be the worse movie ive ever saw Sylvester Stallone star in its got that Jason Patrick (From Lostboys 1987) in it as well the plot was bad i mean really bad,the acting was extremely poor with all partys involved especially from sly which hurt as im a fan of hes .the special effect's were like some thing out of Roblox what all the children love to play, been a memeber of imbd for about 15 plus year but i have never wrote a review before but this movie was that bad i just had to. Peace love and that good stuff !!!
Did you know
- TriviaThe only other time Sly's played an antagonist was in Robert Rodriguez's Spy Kids 3-D: Game Over in 2003. Also in Death race 2000 against David Carradinein in 1975.
- GoofsArmored money transports rely heavily on GPS tracking systems to enhance their security. If something goes wrong - whether it's an accident, an attack, or an unexpected stop - GPS data helps emergency responders understand the situation and get to the vehicle quickly.
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Armored
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $665,598
- Runtime1 hour 29 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content