User reviews

Dreadful film, terrible script, editing and whats worse a waste of two otherwise fine actors in Eastwood and Stallone..

Would a directors cut save it, I doubt it unless it was a complete reshoot. What a shame.

Special effects were dreadful, storyline which it claims to have is full of holes and Scott's acting was terrible, when you think that two hollywood stars with with a list of successful films behind them couldn't save it it says a lot. If you go to the cinema to watch this I'd suggest watching the on screen advertisements and then leaving before it comes on.. the Add's would definitely be better.

OMG when I saw the 2 headline stars, I thought this should at least be watchable. I don't think i've seen a bad movie that either have been in. Jeez was I disappointed. Where do we begin? The terrible plot with more holes that you can shake a stick at, terrible script, story that made no sense and terrible acting. Literally felt like an amateur 1st time director effort. The only redeeming factor was the fit "Assassin" Willa Fitzgerald, she reminded me a bit of the assassin in the FAR superior Luc Besson produced titular character "Anna" (Excellent movie) The Jeeps in the movie are also quite cool. I guess that both Scott and Sylvester needed the cash but surely not so bad to ruin their reputations on? Hope they are not going down the Bruce Willis/Nic Cage road of cash grab low budget low quality movies.

This movie is soooo bad, it felt like watching a high school project. Acting is an absolute amateur hour, and the dialogs are top of the line cringe material. I watched 30 minutes of this garbage and i feel intelectualy violated and insulted. For someone to peddle this mess as a "movie worthy of an audience", makes me realise that they don't really care about creating quality entertainment or even about what audience thinks, they just need to put new trash in our face from time to time to keep the streaming platform memberships going. The recipe is this: 1-2 big hollywood names for top dollar, other actors for cheap, and locations you can get for a few bucks, and a trash script with a newbie director. Total budget 1-2 mil. Max. And just keep pumping that garbage out month after month.

I had the whole time the feeling that it's a comedy. A bluff, it made me laugh countless times. It was like a manual of how to NOT make a movie.

Not a single positive thing. Not a single logical thing. It is impossible for a movie script to make absolutely no sense, not even a single second.

So that's why i believe was made as an undercover comedy.

"We are here not to unleash chaos but to define it" is the most idiotic line ever written. Especially that he said it after he killed people of his own team... And also when he got a shot on the actual target of that chaos he simply didn't kill him...

Absolutely written badly on purpose.

My opinion...

I am still trying to understand why...

The ingredients are simple: lure some stars with synopsis to a project, but then put all of it in hands of bad writing, amateur direction, tons of nonsense and awful sfx, plot holes large as the local group of galaxies, drunk editing, absence of any coherence and attempts of acting (actually, what acting? True, some of the participants in this gave it a try but, alas, to no avail). Did you know that you can perform a large shootout (no one reloads even once) with a lot of explosions and noise in a relatively small town (they call it village), allegedly in Poland ("enemies" speak Russian, of course, and die like in John Wick, by dozens, being incompetent like kindergarten children), and no inhabitants even come to the window to see what happens? There's nobody anywhere near but "our heroes". The cherry on top of this mess is a strong hint on possible sequel, since this abruptly ends. God forbid! There are A movies, B movies, even C movies. At the bottom there are BS movies. This is a fine example. Two stars for skill of engaging Sly and Scott Eastwood. Were they blackmailed to participate? Nothing else could explain it. Run from this before it's too late.

Despite having Scott Eastwood and Stallone, this film is ponderous. Eastwood hardly seems enthusiastic, and really doesn't give the impression of having once been a top agent. Stallone is beginning to creak, and he struggles physically with this action picture, which should have been much tighter.

Mike Colter deserves a shout out. His villain is cold, calculating and murderousy believable, but he is wasted in this calamity. The shootouts are just not believable, Eastwood seems to be missable at every opportunity and during his first gunfight, he has a machine gun that never needs reloading!

Willa Fitzgerald holds it together rather well, but isn't able to rescue this mess.

Alarum, a 2025 action crime thriller, unfortunately fell far short of my expectations. The most significant flaw lies in its weak script. The plot development lacks logic and coherence; the plot points are simplistic and poorly constructed. Many scenes feel jarring and abrupt, lacking necessary context and explanation. This makes it difficult to understand the characters' motivations and actions, ultimately hindering audience engagement.

Furthermore, I was surprised by Sylvester Stallone's limited screen time. Advertised as a key draw, his presence and contribution to the narrative were far less substantial than anticipated, diminishing a major potential highlight of the film. While Scott Eastwood delivered an acceptable performance, it couldn't compensate for the deficiencies in the script and overall plot.

While the action sequences were technically well-executed, the sluggish pace and lack of tension rendered them underwhelming. They failed to elevate the viewing experience. In summary, Alarum is a disappointing film. It squandered a talented cast and production resources, resulting in a mediocre, even poor, cinematic experience. I doubt even a director's cut could salvage this film. The special effects also disappointed, appearing rough and dated compared to current standards. The film lacked any memorable or impactful moments.

Horrible!!! I bet even the director himself didn't watch this movie. If he had, he would've stopped it from being released. The script is a mess, the acting is amateurish, and the editing looks like it was done by someone who just discovered video software. The dialogue is cringeworthy, and the pacing makes it unbearable to sit through. Even a 12-year-old with a smartphone could create a better movie. This isn't just a bad film, it's an insult to cinema. Save yourself the time and avoid Alarum at all costs! And my final note to the director: Dear Michael please find yourself another job, this is the proof you are not for this job.

Okay, this movie is an absolute blast-a perfect B-movie with great actors and nonstop fun! I'm stunned anyone would skip it; you'd have to be crazy not to see this gem. It's so well-crafted, making it the ultimate Friday night escape. Yet, it's sitting at a measly 3.3 on IMDb, and I'm totally flummoxed. Is it because Scott Eastwood stars and some folks assume he's a Republican? That's a stretch-there's no good reason for the hate. This flick delivers top-tier escapism, brimming with action and cool performances. Honestly, if you don't enjoy it, you're missing out-lame! A must-watch for action fans.

Seeing the surnames Eastwood/Stallone on the poster really is something that should of been in the 80s/90s and thus thinking something more of an epic action thriller doesnt do this film any favours at all... It was an ok little action film but just having them names together sells me something totally different in my mind that would still be cherished to this day... To be honest I have forgotten this one already and I did enjoy it, just your typical little action film of today.. Scott is ok, he just isnt his dad, though he can act like him very well as seen in the film with Mel Gibson... Sly is just himself, cool and professional as always. Hard to Believe he is 78 and the age Charles Bronson was in the late 90s, that alone makes this a sad watch even though Sly is still showing he is believable as a movie tough guy. Off topic lets hope Stallone and Schwarzenegger pack in one more film togther while they are still here and young ; )...

The first primary action scene the main character is surrounded by 20 generic henchmen. He hits one and steals an AR15 then proceeds to fire 200 rounds from one magazine. Hip firing and coming out on top of course.

CGI blood and bullet wounds are absurd and the lowest tier effects. This is a painful slog of bad acting and terrible writing. The mercenaries can't hit the broad side of a barn. A guy fleeing at 10 paces can run away and take them out in packs of 3, because the story calls for the absurdity.

I am truly stunned something like this gets made or even funded. How on Earth does this make its money back? Its absolutely dreadful. This is like an art school pipe dream production idea that actually came to life.

The armorer on the movie must be a teenager that has played too many video games. The weapons used are laughable. AA-12 shotguns and all kinds of outlandish rare expensive guns. They got out some of their toys for the movie and wanted to showcase many of their favorites.

Stallone phones this one in and collects a Bruce Willis paycheck for phoning one in. This is a complete bomb.

How can a movie production have all these good actors and still manage to make such a terrible movie. Directors do not get enough credit and this movie proves it. The acting is bad, the fight scenes are terrible you can see them waiting for one another to make a move with poor reactions to getting hit., the stunts are terrible. Maybe Stallone, Eastwood, and Colter owed someone new producer or director a favor? This movie should have a warning label letting viewers know they are going to be severely disappointed. It leaves you very curious as to why they would agree to participate in such a poorly conceived idea.

A very low-budget movie with terrible directing and acting.

They look exactly like the actors from Facebook Reels!

I understand the need for actors to work for a living, but I think going down is not an option. Although having two or three actors from action movies in one film makes it watchable to a certain extent, this will always be a drawback for them, and eventually I will not try to see any more of their new movies.

The CIA offices' in-office takes, which give the impression that they are underground, are the worst. The director is a chilly performer who reads a newspaper with no emotion on his face.

We only watched this because Sylvester Stallone was in it. I mean, I'm all for a guy getting paid, but damn this was a slogfest. It's touted as a spy action movie and it's trying, but this had to be one of the worst movies we've watched in a while. Hell, Stallone's previous movie Armor was better than this and that's saying something.

Stallone isn't in this movie for very long maybe 10 minutes, if that and he plays a super-assassin who's supposedly a master of poisons. Sounds cool, right? Wrong. He's terrible at his job in every conceivable way. It's disappointing, to say the least.

I'm not even going to talk about the plot because (A) it's terrible, and (B) I'd rather go on a tangent.

The bad guys in this movie are some of the most incompetent villains to ever grace the screen.

For example, our "heroes" are trapped in a small building with two automatic shotguns. The bad guys? They've got automatic weapons, surround the building, and outnumber them at least 3 to 1. Do they attack? No, because as one genius says, "They have heavy artillery." Seriously? I'm not sure if this was supposed to be a serious action movie or a comedy, but wow.

Another gem: the bad guys have the ex-female spy outnumbered and surrounded. Yet somehow, they still manage to lose because they're...well, terrible. I get it, main characters have plot armor, but come on how am I supposed to take this seriously when the villains seem braindead?

And don't even get me started on the drones in the last act. That final action scene has to be the stupidest thing ever put on film. I am convinced the technical advisor if there even was one had no clue how military drones actually work.

I cannot recommend this one by any means. Not even for Stallone fans. You'll just be highly, HIGHLY disappointed in his role and the acting here. Save yourself the time and just rewatch Demolition Man or Rambo instead. At least those movies are fun and entertaining.

I give this 3 out of 10.

So many plot holes and problems. Plane is shot out of the ski, crashes intact. A US DEA plane flying in Poland just to start.

You only need to watch 15 mins to know how bad it is.

Come on Sly you cant need this money.

Dont tarnish your image further.

I think of all the great movies you have done that have brought me joy or the years.

Rocky, Tango & Cash, Cliffhanger, Lock Up, and Rambo just to name a few.

This movie has none of those redeeming qualities that made those good movies and enjoying to watch.

Scott Eastwood has made some good acting choices. This was not one of them.

I look forward to watching movies as an escape however maybe I need to watch some of this casts movies of yester year.

This movie makes me sick to my stomach. It is just so atrocious in every imaginable way. Fake flashes from guns. Every imaginable cliché and trope you can imagine. Why would Scott Eastwood and Sylvester Stallone make a movie this atrocious? The answer is because they need money. The plot holes are more than the plot itself. The action is sheer stupidity. The writing is nonsensical. It is in my top 25 movies of the worst movies I have ever seen. I beg of you, don't waste your time watching it! I paid $5.99 to XFINITY to watch this movie. I was able to watch approximately one hour of this movie before I gave up.