← Back to Reviews
in
The direction has its pros and cons, as well as the sets. You're always given exactly what you need to see, action, scenario, etc. The movie moves along at a proper pace, and the camera follows along just fine. Unfortunately, you won't get anything fancy here. We're here in the middle of the desert and we can practically feel the Taliban threat around us. But not every decision makes it feel real. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I don't think a Taliban base in the middle of a desert war zone town would use their resources on cleaning supplies for their lockers, so I picture these places being a lot dirtier than what's warranted in this film. In other words, FOR pulled a Christopher FORbes, quickly choosing a "decent enough" place to film a scene with no budget spent on realism.
Now Seagal fans are going to be sorely disappointed in the fact that he has very little action involved throughout the whole movie. When you've got Steven Seagal, you should at least get some real martial arts in, but no. Instead, he ends up abandoned and rescued while sitting in a room doing nothing, you know, the kind of thing you don't put a martial arts star in. So there's one very good reason for people to dislike the movie, because it means a serious expectation was met with sore disappointment for fans. Now I suppose that's a fault of advertisement rather than the filmmaking, but he's still one of those guys who demands some real action if you're going to include him as a relevant character in an action movie. This is not the same situation as when Statham joined the crime comedy Snatch, in which Statham was intentionally cast out of type and expanding his relevance in film beyond "guy movies." This is literally sticking an action star in an action movie and doing nothing with him. At least make him shoot more people with a cheesy explosion behind him. Even when Seagal was sitting in his room and saying, "I'm right where I need to be," my immediate first thought was:
Well, I wrote a lot more on that than I wanted, and my second Spongebob reference this week, so let's talk about the plot. I'm waiting the entire time for the plot of the movie to be as bad as Letterboxd said, but I just kept NOT getting that. Instead, I got a couple interesting details here and there than kept the plot moving forward, even more quickly than Super Fly did. And on top of this pro, the characters might not have had the best acting (it was typically palatable and acceptable), but the conversations they had were always reasonable if never brilliant. I'm actually paying attention to the conversations, having my expectations for the next Alien Dead or Dire Wolf, but no. Everyone at least feels half-real, but real enough. Unfortunately, the ending doesn't really tie everything together well. It throws everything into one place and offers a quick-ass resolution that left an empty feeling in me.
In relation to Super Fly, it was easy to get through this during the empty-plotted stylistic scenes, but I was more engrossed in Super Fly's plot considering that I was expecting a good movie from the Letterboxd ratings, so I paused this one a little bit more.
Well this wasn't anywhere near as bad as the usual Fred Olen Ray fodder, but I wouldn't even say it was one of his best. It could've been one of his best had he handled the ending and Seagal's presence beteter, but in the end it's another low budget war movie with some redeeming qualities. Overall, there's really do need to see this whether or not you're into war movies or bad movies. Basically, it was a 5/10 movie until the very end, so this movie was the loser of the two films. The winner is Super Fly.
= 45
This film does not affect Fred Olen Ray's Directorial Score. He remains at #31 on my Worst Directors List with an average score of 21 / 5.
TWIN CINEMA WEEK, DAY 4, MOVIE 2
Sniper: Special Ops
Sniper: Special Ops
(2016) - Directed by Fred Olen Ray
--------------------------------------------
War / Action
-------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
War / Action
-------------------------------------------------
"Did you ever do promotion for Kindergarten Cop, the movie?"
The direction has its pros and cons, as well as the sets. You're always given exactly what you need to see, action, scenario, etc. The movie moves along at a proper pace, and the camera follows along just fine. Unfortunately, you won't get anything fancy here. We're here in the middle of the desert and we can practically feel the Taliban threat around us. But not every decision makes it feel real. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I don't think a Taliban base in the middle of a desert war zone town would use their resources on cleaning supplies for their lockers, so I picture these places being a lot dirtier than what's warranted in this film. In other words, FOR pulled a Christopher FORbes, quickly choosing a "decent enough" place to film a scene with no budget spent on realism.
Now Seagal fans are going to be sorely disappointed in the fact that he has very little action involved throughout the whole movie. When you've got Steven Seagal, you should at least get some real martial arts in, but no. Instead, he ends up abandoned and rescued while sitting in a room doing nothing, you know, the kind of thing you don't put a martial arts star in. So there's one very good reason for people to dislike the movie, because it means a serious expectation was met with sore disappointment for fans. Now I suppose that's a fault of advertisement rather than the filmmaking, but he's still one of those guys who demands some real action if you're going to include him as a relevant character in an action movie. This is not the same situation as when Statham joined the crime comedy Snatch, in which Statham was intentionally cast out of type and expanding his relevance in film beyond "guy movies." This is literally sticking an action star in an action movie and doing nothing with him. At least make him shoot more people with a cheesy explosion behind him. Even when Seagal was sitting in his room and saying, "I'm right where I need to be," my immediate first thought was:
Well, I wrote a lot more on that than I wanted, and my second Spongebob reference this week, so let's talk about the plot. I'm waiting the entire time for the plot of the movie to be as bad as Letterboxd said, but I just kept NOT getting that. Instead, I got a couple interesting details here and there than kept the plot moving forward, even more quickly than Super Fly did. And on top of this pro, the characters might not have had the best acting (it was typically palatable and acceptable), but the conversations they had were always reasonable if never brilliant. I'm actually paying attention to the conversations, having my expectations for the next Alien Dead or Dire Wolf, but no. Everyone at least feels half-real, but real enough. Unfortunately, the ending doesn't really tie everything together well. It throws everything into one place and offers a quick-ass resolution that left an empty feeling in me.
In relation to Super Fly, it was easy to get through this during the empty-plotted stylistic scenes, but I was more engrossed in Super Fly's plot considering that I was expecting a good movie from the Letterboxd ratings, so I paused this one a little bit more.
Well this wasn't anywhere near as bad as the usual Fred Olen Ray fodder, but I wouldn't even say it was one of his best. It could've been one of his best had he handled the ending and Seagal's presence beteter, but in the end it's another low budget war movie with some redeeming qualities. Overall, there's really do need to see this whether or not you're into war movies or bad movies. Basically, it was a 5/10 movie until the very end, so this movie was the loser of the two films. The winner is Super Fly.
= 45
This film does not affect Fred Olen Ray's Directorial Score. He remains at #31 on my Worst Directors List with an average score of 21 / 5.