Under Siege 2: Dark Territory (1995) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
130 Reviews
Sort by:
'Nobody beats me in the kitchen!"
Nazi_Fighter_David26 November 2003
Steven Seagal reprises his role as a one time SEAL team captain, a counter-terrorist expert who had to rely only on his personal skills in order to survive, and protect the hostages... He happens to be on the Grand Continental passenger train traveling from Denver to L.A... Seagal joins the only family he has, a 'cute kid' named Sarah (Katherine Heigl) after her parents died in a plane crash...

Seagal has an electrifying screen presence... Seeing him in action is similar to appreciating modern art...

The train is hijacked by a team of 'ugly men' with guns... Their chief, Travis Dane (Eric Bogosian), is a high-tech mastermind, who fakes his own death in order to gain control of a top-secret nuclear satellite... For this crazy technical genius, technology can be used for beauty or debasement, and 'until you plug it in, you just can't tell.'

Dane's henchman Penn (Everett McGill) is a soldier of fortune freak, whose relationship with his boss resurfaced during Desert Storm...

Morris Chestnut's focus is on humor and breath-taking sequences...

Geoff Murphy's film is incredibly entertaining, combining action, martial arts, and dark sense of humor...
41 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Seagal accidentally ends up on a train full of terrorists and has to save the world
Randall Cameron9 August 2006
Yes, the earthquake beam from space (heck, the whole story line and all of the villains too) are totally unbelievable. Frankly, if you can find a "believable" action movie, I have a beach house in Arizona you might want to buy. Yes, the production values were not the finest.

But -- if you like watching the hero exterminate the bad guys, few do it with the style of Seagal. Like Jet Li (yeah, I am old enough to remember Bruce Lee the original, and Chuck Norris), he is one of the few action heroes who is a real martial arts guy, and he moves so fast and fluidly it is hard for the eye to follow, but fascinating to watch. This is brainless entertainment, full of hilariously cheesy B-movie one-liners you can laugh at ("Assumption is the mother of all f-ups!"), often bad acting, a story line you could describe in one sentence, and zero character development.

There are worse ways to spend 90 minutes. Believability is for films that take themselves seriously. Seagal is more like stand-up comic straight man meets Aikido ace. At least he handles a handgun like someone who has actually fired one.
23 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Blind Man's Bluff.
Howlin Wolf31 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
... Close your eyes and listen to all the explosions and the sound of limbs hitting flesh, and you may be happy. If you OPEN your eyes, however, that's when the implausibilities become much harder to ignore.

A CD-Rom is crucial in some megalomaniac's plan to extort money and terrorise the world. I've no problem digesting that, I've seen it happen before in the movies; but when said CD is dropped ON A ROCKFACE and left undetected for who knows how long, it still works as it needs to!! Funny that, I don't dare to even put mine on the coffee-table if I want to be able to use it again...

We see a shot of Seagal's large head within the cross-hairs of a sniper rifle... Game over, Casey? No way, within no time he's hiding under the train and explaining blithely that the bullet just 'grazed' him... However stupidly enjoyable the rest of the film was (and I suppose it has its moments) I could no longer in good conscience cheer for Mr. Ryback, he should have been dead by now, not completely impervious to harm so that he can continue with his rescue mission...

A train is a poor environment in which to stage skilfully choreographed battles. On the boat you had galleys, walkways, etc; but here everything's a bit cramped. This means we spend a lot of time watching dough-boy (What?! He's a chef, that's all I meant... :-) ) on top of the speeding vessel, making his ungainly way from carriage to carriage... Here's a general rule; as soon as a terrorist so much as peeks their head outside, they're a dead man (or woman). If Seagal ever gets his hands on a baddie, just assume that Stevie wins the day, since a lot of the time things are so poorly directed and edited that it's hard to tell...

Bogosian playing the 'tech-geek' villain does well. True he can't come close to matching the previous standard of Lee Jones or Busey, but that's to be expected. I have to admit, as hitherto mocking as I've been, that there is still a strangely unaccountable thrill in seeing the big man in black bust up those with shadowy souls... Darkness very much the theme, then. If you can manage to turn off the overhead light of your brain for awhile, then you can still find some entertainment in this as long as you feel your way gently.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Seagal's best and one hell of an exciting ride
Shawn Watson18 February 1999
Since 2001 Seagal has been quite happy to let his film career crash and burn while he sings the blues and does all his strange little things in his personal life (have you ever tasted his wine or his energy drink?). But there was a time in the 90s when his name guaranteed you an hour and a half of broken bones, severed limbs, bad guys in agonizing pain and a showdown with a head villain who stands no chance against the awesome hurricane force that is Steven Seagal.

I never really like the first Under Siege. I found it to be too low key and slow and after enjoying such brain-free fare as Marked for Death and Hard to Kill in my youth I had come to expect a tougher movie than the what we were given (though the tyrannical BBFC cut the film to shreds and denied me what I wanted to see). I was dismayed at the lousy 15-rating and not even Erika Eleniak's boobs could cheer me up (she's blonde-not my thing).

Flash forward to July 1995 and the awesome poster for Under Siege 2 started showing up in cinema lobbies. It featured the impassive one clinging to the side of a burning train hurtling through the countryside and featured, quite frankly, the best subtitle of any sequel ever 'Dark Territory'. This time it was rated 18 which meant I could look forward to all the blood and gore that the first Under Siege lacked. Obviously I couldn't see this film in the cinema, being only 15 and all, so I had to wait until the video came out in early 1996. By that point the BBFC (those people from the dark-ages again) had censored every last bit of red stuff to the point where it could be shown on the friggin' Disney Channel if it weren't for the swearing.

I would have to wait until 1999, when I bought the uncut US version on DVD, to see the film in it's entirety. And when I did it was like watching a brand new movie.

Casey Ryback, now the head chef of the Mile High Cafe in Denver, had retired from the Navy but still works for the government doing the odd secret mission here and there. When his brother is killed in a plane crash he takes his niece Sarah (the lurvley Katherine Hiegl) on a trip to LA on the Grand Continental, but that particular train just so happens to be hijacked by crazed computer genius Travis Dane and his band of menacing mercenaries featuring dead-eyed Everett McGill and the sleazy Peter Greene. He has a beef with the government and is only too happy to use his skills to blow the Pentagon off the face of the Earth and collect a nice paycheck from the Saudis.

Luckily for Ryback, he was momentarily absent when the hostages were rounded up as he nipped into the kitchen to bake a cake. He teams up with naive porter Bobby Zachs (Morris Chestnut, bringing life to an otherwise ordinary sidekick role) and begins his skulking, lurking mission through the shadows and voids of the train to pull the brake and free the hostages. Do these nasty people really think that they stand a chance against Ryback's awesome power and apparent invincibility? Sit back and watch them get annihilated with a variety of improvised mêlée weapons and other gruesome tools.

The train is a better setting than the boat. This time instead of a plain black backdrop we've got lots of pretty scenery and the constant forward motion of the loco gives the movie a nice momentum. Basil Poledouris' score soars miles above Gary Chang's bland notes of the first one and it honestly ends up being one of the best scores ever and a perfect example of how action music ought to be. And don't worry about this one being slow as the first. Under Siege 2 is edited so quickly that coherence is almost lost. You have to pay quick attention and perhaps watch the film a few times just to catch everything.

The comic-book nature of the plot, the cliffhanger feel of the ever-escalating mayhem and cartoonish villains might normally result in a campy movie but Under Siege 2 is as hardcore and sadistic and mean-spirited as the come. That's probably the reason the BBFC chose to cut it, claiming that it featured 'gloating and pervasive violence'. Well, I never found it to be that evil, just entertaining. Which is why I don't like narrow-minded institutions telling me what I can and cannot watch.

No one could possibly have a bad time watching this film (unless it's the UK version) and if you've had enough of Shane Meadows doing pretentious black and white stuff or Keira Knightely in a frock to last you a lifetime then the brainless and breathtaking action of Under Siege 2 is just what you need.
36 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Best Steven Seagal movie yet. Exciting and re-watchable.
moviecat-61 September 1999
The best Steven Seagal movie to date. This is the second, and apparently the last, in the series in which Seagal plays Casey Ryback, an ex-Navy SEAL Captain, who, as explained in Under Siege, was demoted for punching out a superior for poor intelligence which got many of his men killed. In Under Siege 2, his character has been promoted from Chief to Lieutenant, although we only find that out in the end.

Unlike some of his earlier movies in which Seagal fights for causes, specifically liberal environmental issues, here Seagal is fighting strictly for family and Country. The first scene starts off with Seagal making his appearance in civilian clothes to dramatic music. We learn the grim news that his character's only brother and sister-in-law were killed in a plane crash, leaving his only relative, a niece, still alive. He accompanies the teenager on a train ride from Denver to LA. He has the bad luck, but good for his Country, to be on the train that is attacked by terrorists bent on destroying Washington, D.C., and the US eastern coast for profit only. The maniacal would-be killer of millions is character Travis Dane, recently fired by a Government agency. The terrorist method is a high-tech powerful new weapon orbiting the earth and the train moving through lonely mountains provides the screen, as in "Dark Territory". Seagal seems somewhat lucky to avoid being killed early on, but then becomes a locomotive of destruction for the bad guys. Andy Romano returns as the full admiral, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and provides a continuity from the first Under Siege movie. This is all action showing Seagal as a dedicated and deadly force of protection for the train hostages and the citizens to the east. The action moves, and some of the death blows are right out of the military manual. Watchable over and over and still exciting.
40 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
100 minutes of pure bone breaking action
Viva_Chiba24 October 2010
I love action movies, if they features some decent bone breaking action, it's even better.

Steven Seagal is the lord of bone breaking, how you could go wrong ?

Plot: A bunch of terrorists hijack a train, they took a satellite (which is also a weapon of mass destruction) under they control, they demand 1 billion dollars, or they are going to blow up everything ! Unfortunately for them, Casey (Seagal) is on the same train, while he was traveling with his niece.....now bones are going to break and arms are going to get snapped.

Under Siege 2, delivers good one-liners and violence. The violence is almost in a comic-book or video game style, that is one the reasons why i like Under Siege 2.

You can watch it even if you haven't watched the first Under Siege, because there are no real "connections" from the first movie, just the character played by Seagal.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Highly entertaining, implausible action.
martin-53014 June 2004
A high water mark in the career of Mr Segal. He returns to the screen as the, unflappable, invincible, ice cool, ultra hard Casey Ryback. See him leap from a speeding train, rock climb, roll in dirt, take bullets in the arm, all without putting a mark on his immaculate black suit. No messing about with drawn out fight scenes against a super hard villain, everyone is dispatched with minimum of effort as no-one is anywhere near as hard as Casey Ryback. No-one is more entertaining as to watch as the one man army than Segal. If you watch this film expecting an intellectual script and fine acting then you will be disappointed. But if you expect that from any all out action film I expect you are a fool. Totally over the top, totally unbelievable but a total blast.
35 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
This is a great sequel to the first
Brian T. Whitlock (GOWBTW)24 November 2004
This is one of the best sequels to Steven Seagal. Under Siege 2: Dark Territory is not your ordinary hijack-action-adventure films. Since I do like trains, this movie was a plus for me. The part in this film was everyone, including Ryback(Seagal) got to be part of the action. His niece Sarah, played by Katherine Heigl, knew how to fight back. Bobby Zachs, played by Morris Chestnut, didn't shy away from the action, unless he saw Ryback kill one of the hijackers. The funny part was when one of the female passengers flashed her cleavage saying she "broke her bra", the perfect distraction to the hijacker. Great cast, great action, and a great plot I say. I don't care for the critics' opinion, I just liked this movie the way it is! Rating 3 out of 5 stars. 8 out of 10!
30 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
I don't care what anyone says... DIE HARD ON A TRAIN is superb!!
ringfire21115 December 2011
All right, guys. Let's admit it. This one is a classic. Say what you will about Seagal but he gave us UNDER SIEGE 1 and 2 and he got sucked out into the clouds in the Stuart Baird thrill-ride EXECUTIVE DECISION. And for these 3 films I'm eternally thankful. I still can't change the channel every time this one comes on. C'mon! Trains, terrorists, Katherine Heigl, Seagal at his most zen-like, and Everett McGill as Penn who uses pepper spray as a breath spray. What's not to like? And a techno-nerd bad guy who looks like a demented cross between Elliott Gould and Tim Curry! With classic lines like "Your safety IS our primary concern. However, if you try anything stupid, Federal Regulations require that I kill you" I'm surprised this thing didn't win the Oscar for best script...lol.

But seriously, with so much testosterone flying around, helped by Basil Poledouris's rousing score, and so much cool train climbing action (over, under, all over) I sometimes wonder if this one isn't even better than the first one - helmed by Andrew Davis. I mean the Eric Bogosian/Everett McGill combo is just as good as the Tommy Lee Jones/Gary Busey combo! And the kill quip by Seagal (after he dispatches McGill) "Nobody beats me in the kitchen" is right up there with some of the best quips in the Bond pictures.

Anyway it's one of the top films of 1995. I have come to the conclusion that you just can't go wrong when using the DIE HARD formula. I have yet to see a bad DIE HARD clone. SPEED, CLIFFHANGER, UNDER SIEGE, SUDDEN DEATH, AIR FORCE ONE, CON AIR, etc. Die Hard on a Bus, Die Hard on a Mountain, Die Hard on a Ship/Train, Die Hard in a Hockey Arena, Die Hard on a Plane, etc.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Kick the Cook
thesar-219 June 2009
Warning: Spoilers
When 'Under Siege 2: Dark Territory' first came out in 1995, I really liked it. Or, I should say, just simply enjoyed it. It was simple fun, and yes, another shameless 'Die Hard on a (fill in the blank)' rip-off. This time, a train. This is my first viewing since; 14 years later. Though, somewhat ashamed of liking such a bad flick and even considering removing it from my guilty pleasure top ten list. But, I will say the villain, played by Bogosian, was highly entertaining and funny and did better than his role even required of him. Tommy Lee Jones (his counterpart from the original,) he is not. Still, he made his scenes more enjoyable. In addition, I am not a Seagal fan whatsoever, however, comparatively speaking, he's the best of the low-budget clones he mirrored in the 80/90s: Van Damme, Lundgren, Norris, etc. After a plane crash kills his brother, ex-seal Seagal escorts his last living relative (surprisingly played by a very young Katherine Heigl – my, she's come far since) across country on, get this, the very same train terrorist "siege" to get back at the government and make money in the process. Speaking earlier of copying 'Die Hard,' you want the same bad-guy premise but in a 100x better flick, rent 'Live Free or Die Hard.' Anyways, suffice to say, Seagal spends his time up and down the train, on top of it, or on a cliff to save his niece and other faceless hostages while cooking up exploding gadgets and even picking up the most clichéd black wisecracking sidekick along the way. Part one made some money, over $150 million worldwide, so why did they strip this of any budget? It was almost embarrassing to see the fake exterior shots when they're inside the moving train.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
easy fun!
william (willsgb)15 August 2003
i love this film. its great fun from the off and stands up to its average predecessor in my honest opinion. alright, the effects aren't exactly top notch, and the cliches and obvious acts and outcomes are predictable, but this is meant to be entertainment, its meant to make us gasp, get us hooked and give us some fun to concentrate on for two hours. Steven isn't exactly the worlds best actor but he puts in a decent effort here and the end result is a thoroughly enjoyable, if not epic or memorable, fable about a train thats been hijacked by ex NASA employees with control of a satelite with a powerful laser, on which Casey Riback - Seagal - happens to be traveling on to some funeral, with his niece who isn't a happy bunny. enjoy!
15 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Warner Brothers' were thinking about the terminate the contract
alpaykadir19 February 2015
Starting with Above the Law and peaks with Under siege,Steven Seagal become almost action legend.He was making box office killing with movies like Marked for Death,Hard to kill,Out for justice and Under Siege.But things start to change When Seagal demands more and more,more.For On Deadly Ground,despite without any previous experience,He insisted to direct the movie.After Under Siege 2,WB has decided not to work Seagal anymore.Not Because of He is not as bankable as any previous movies,Because of his attitudes.WB didn't do too much effort to promote the movie and recruited two unknowns names as main villains and No name Director.Seagal's behaviour to other actors and stunt performers were no longer tolerable.His big ego would never let anyone to even to touch him, let alone a fair fight with a villain.As an Uncompromised guy,He finally face the truth He is no longer bankable.Hollywod career,big studio career is over in 10 years.What a pity,In a good shape,good relations with producers and directors,He could have been one of biggest stars.In Taken,Bryan mills, ın The Equalizer,Mccall may be John wick.too sad.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Disappointing Territory...
Frank Markland23 May 2006
This time our hero from Under Siege faces off against terrorists who have hijacked a train and are planning on using a nuclear satellite to zap the Pentagon unless demands of money are met. Once again nobody beats our favorite U.S seal turned cook in the kitchen, or for that matter in the movie. Aside from a few exciting action sequences and the hilariously cheesy one liner "Nobody beats me in the kitchen!" Under Siege 2 ranks a huge disappointment. The main reason is that Seagal is too invincible and that the story is too asinine to even bother following. Also the bad guys this time, while having their moments, pale in comparison to the ones in # 1.

*1/2 out of 4(Poor)
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Quintessential Segal Experience
David_Frames15 June 2005
First a confession - In a dark little corner of my life which some people incidentally think is all of it, I've got time for the work of Steven Segal. You can scoff but some of the most outright disturbingly entertaining movies of the last ten years read like a roll call of his hits. Hard to Kill, Nico, Under Siege, its sequel of which more in a moment, Half Past Dead, Out for a Kill - the man is a cine-alchemist, turning poor, workman like material into solid gold. This is primarily for two reasons. 1)You must be some kind of crazy genius to forge a career with virtually no personality and 2)He is prepared to go further than most stars in the vanity project stakes, in fact next to Segal people like Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger and John Travolta look positively reserved and self-conscious. Under Siege 2 has both of these factors at full strength and in some respects this makes 'Dark Territory' (the sub-title is no understatement) the quintessential Segal Experience. He's been everything from a cop to a University professor (no, seriously) but here the great man reprises his role as Casey Rybeck, an ex-Navy Seal, special ops whathaveyou who jacked it in to pursue a career as a navy chef. In the original Siege and I use the word original purely in the context of first film, Segal saved his ship from terrorists when they threatened to ruin his Japanese rice cakes. In the second version, sorry Installment, Segal is taking his niece, who's very good looking indeed on a Colorado rail journey when its taken over by mercenaries lead by an insane computer genius who plans to destroy Washington using a laser in space. Believe it or not this is almost a Ken Loach set-up in comparison to some of Segal's movies but if you were trying to make the most generic action movie imaginable you'd have a hard time beating this movie. In lesser hands we'd be as dead as one of Rybeck's Poterhouse steaks but Segal the alchemist comes to the rescue and delivers 90 minutes of solid ego-mania and it's a joy to watch. Segal followers will know that when the villains find out who he is and his mêlée of specialist combat tactics (Kick boxing, bomb making, weapons expertise, three Michelin stars) they usually start to panic, all except one head villain, usually no.2 to the main villain (see F.Lee Emery and Michael Caine in On Deadly Ground) who is ill-advisedly confident that he can take our hero in the final reel which of course he doesn't. These scenes show us and reassure Segal that he's one total badass, a man to feared and respected and in case you missed the point Segal's side kick (in this case doubling as black, street talking' comic relief) is there to write it on the blackboard for all the slow kids at the back. Siege has many of these moments in which both Segal's niece and sidekick say things like "I guess he's a hero" and in one terrific moment the aforementioned hired help is told by Segal "oh, you're a hero now?" only to be told "No, man you're the hero!". Willis might have cut in with a quip at this stage but the man with the tan doesn't do jokes or indeed anything except fight and deliver lines in his trademark monotone. Segal's so gloriously vain that he can't even allow himself to be dirtied up over the course of the movie. In Die Hard Willis got beaten, blooded up and shot but not so much as a strand of Segal's hair goes out of place the entire time, the dark jacket remaining in place throughout. This is despite such potential soiling incidents as explosions, armed combat, cliff face hand to hand fighting and leaping out of moving trucks. My favourite scene is the one where the lead heavy thumps Segal in the face during their climatic fight and although he's a bit blooded in that shot by the time he's got up there's barely a scratch on him. What chance does any terrorist stand against that? All that's missing from Dark Territory is a speech of the kind of quality witnessed in the dieing minutes of the aforementioned On Deadly Ground in which the then eco-friendly action hero delivered the monologue that every Greenpeace activist dreams about. So there you have it, if you want to see a one man force of nature at work rent this one out tonight but remember, this isn't even his best - for that you'll be wanting 'Out for a Kill' and only a idiot would refuse an invitation like that.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An inevitable sequel….
John M Upton23 August 2004
With the overwhelming success of the first Under Siege, it was inevitable that a sequel would be wheeled out before too long. Sure enough here it is, Under Siege 2 – Dark Territory.

Quite why they bothered with the last subtitle I do not known as it is not readily obvious within the action as to its reference but I digress.

This time the terrorists and Segal are all clumped together on a train. Basically it's a similar scenario from the first film, complete with the same Admirals, CIA boss etc from the first instalment.

The weapon of choice this time is a daft satellite weapon controlled by a nutcase and his band of hired mercenaries. The two leading bad guys do however have some wonderful much quotable lines, one in particular I cannot repeat here in print, you will just have to make your own assumption…..

Once again Segal is on his own with just an annoying sidekick/comedy relief (this time a Porter) for company and again he single handed takes on the non-descript bad guys and duly despatches them one by one as per standard procedure in an effort to stop the weapon, save the train and also save his irritating but nice to look at niece.

Sadly the quality of the seemingly recycled script is poor and Segal is hopelessly out acted by the two lead bad guys (Eric Bogosian and Everett McGill) who in turn are out acted by the two former Alaskan Railroad GP7 type locomotives hauling the train!!

Also not helping in my appreciation of this film is the fact that the UK DVD release is badly chopped about and obvious badly done cuts abound throughout. Thankfully an excellent soundtrack from Basil Poledouris saves this film from being just average.
8 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Action movie that makes you sleep
laci-529 March 2000
This was the first action movie I saw which made me sleep. It was completely boring to see Mr face-expressionless Seagal fighting from wagon to wagon and I didn't know where the front of the train is and when we can catch it. The final confrontation was nice and quite well-made but I found ridiculous when Seagal was running out of the falling train quite slowly, just like saying "oh, why should I run faster, it's in the screenplay that I will catch that tiny ladder in the last minute, so I have time". Oh my God. 2 of 10.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Train and Story Go Fast!
Robert J. Maxwell9 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
There's a moment in Howard Hawks' congenial Western, "Rio Bravo," in which some bad guys have captured Wayne and are forcing him to trick a deputy into releasing a prisoner. Wayne, in his John Wayneness, has previously rid the world of a passel of evildoers. As they ready themselves, Wayne mutters something expressive of reluctance, and one of the bad guys says, "If it had been up to me, you'd have never got up off the floor. Some of those you killed were friends of mine."

None of that sentimental crap here. None of the dozen or more heavies is friends with any of the others. Instead, they slap each other around, issue orders, leave each other to bleed out, curse one another, and sacrifice each other without blinking an eye. In one case, I think, they sacrifice one of their own simply because leaving him behind the train would seem untidy.

And the villains are -- or should be -- the best part of a cartoon movie like this. They LOOK fine, for heavies. They're ugly and/or sinister and all are brutish, though, at times, Steven Seagal dispatches them with such alacrity that we can't register which is which. They're just bodies slumping bloodied to the floor of the speeding train or acrobatically tumbling off a high span bridge. It doesn't matter. They all look as if they should have been strangled with their own placentas. Except for Peter Greene as a subordinate villain. He not only looks the part; he can act too. (Catch him in "The Usual Suspects.")

Maybe I should mention the plot. Sure, why not? Eric Bogosian is a computer genius who has commandeered a secret satellite that can virtually destroy anything on earth. It can cause subterranean earthquakes or shoot down airplanes or whatever else is required to make the brass at the Pentagon tremble. He wants a billion dollars not to trash the Pentagon -- and he gets it. Oh, and he makes a hundred million on the side by destroying the unpleasant wife of some rich guy. Steven Seagal -- surprise! -- foils the plan and kills all the evildoers.

Hundreds of people are held hostage aboard the train. Seagal saves them all, except a young couple from the Pentagon who give Bogosian the required passwords rather than have their eyeballs coagulated by a red-hot needle. Besides, they were fornicating, so they deserve being thrown to their deaths, such fraternization being against Pentagon policy.

I don't know why the other passengers are allowed to survive. Okay, maybe they weren't having unmarried sex with one another. Not as far as we know anyway. But none of them can act. Appearing in an important role, as Katherine Heigl does, and being bereft of talent is a worse sin than fornication in my book. She's young and tender but she looks sassy enough, and she's supposed to be Seagal's niece, so I suppose they let her survive with the others.

In the Pentagon group -- those guys sweating it out and trying to figure out how to stop Bogosian from destroying the world -- Kurtwood Smith is his reliable self and so is Dale Dye, looking abominably fit in his Navy captain's uniform.

The direction follows the simplicity of the story. Multiple close ups almost burst out of the screen. For important or unusually witty wisecracks, EXTREME close ups are used. Eric Bogosian never looks at a camera or a computer monitor without the exposure of every pore of his face. You can almost see his pupils dilate when the lights go off at the end of a take.

Of Steven Seagal, what is left to be said? Mano a mano with skilled martial arts experts leaves him unscathed -- not even breathless -- while his opponent fights dirty, curses violently, and invariably loses and winds up covered with blood. Seagal doesn't even have one of those trickles of blood from the corner of his lips. He can't. He's superhuman, supernatural. When his train crashes head on into another, he can outrun the impact and throw himself onto a helicopter ladder. Yet, I'm not sure he's that bright. There is a CD ROM that makes it possible for Bogosian to control the satellite. Seagal and a sidekick manage to steal it and leave the train. A land pursuit follows because the terrorists need the CD and want it back. Why doesn't Seagal just throw the CD irretrievably into the canyon? Did Superman ever take an IQ test? Inquiring minds want to know.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Seagal on a Train....
gazzo-229 November 1999
This was pretty good actually, despite having some production problems(word has it that they were thinking of bringing Gary Busey's character back from Under Seige I-yeah, right-off the exploding Sub? Not likely...)But anyways, this worked well for me. I enjoyed Seagal, showed a bit of humour here in places, thought the train gave it a decent closed in setting, liked both Kurtwood Smith and Everett McGill doing what they do best. (Smith has played the worried Pentagon staffer before too, about the same way...) My impression of Bogosian was that he was a bit too wired at times in his portrayal but it worked just the same. Overall an enjoyable if not great action film, the sort Seagal should have made more of.

**1/2 outta ****, nothing great, but alright.
8 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
beautifully crap... honest...
kcwells5 February 2002
ok ok, i know several other people have mentioned that this movie is horribly illogical... but everyone seems to forget one very important and obvious proof of this. ok, here's the scene. seagal is standing somewhere on the outside of the train, between two different cars. one of the terrorists, a sniper lady, gets out a sniper gun with a scope, aims, and shoots seagal in the heart. you watch him get shot... he falls over, like any dead guy would, and falls between the two cars, assumably getting run over.... but is he dead? no. worse off, is he shot? no! ok, so somehow he manages to hang onto the bottom of the train, get back up, appear back inside one of the train cars, and is now talking to the black guy person... and this is where the worste part comes in. the black guy (who is DEFINATELY the "token black guy" in the movie) mentions to seagal that he just saw him get shot, seagal points to where the bullet hit him, and actually says "you see this? no bullet went in this"... and for the entire rest of the movie, they just completely ignore the fact that he was shot... i suppose you just have to accept the fact that he's... umm... bulletproof? yeah, that's it......... oh oh, there's another really bad scene that nobody else has mentioned. ok, so the train is going along the side of a big cliff... somehow seagal manages to find himself hanging off the side of this cliff. well of course that happens, every action star has to have a scene where he's hanging by his finger tips off the sid of a cliff.. duh... but ok, so they stop the train and send guys out to get him. one of the guy magically has rock climbing propelling equimpent, hooks up a rope, and propells himself over the side of the cliff down towards seagal. seagal again is hanging entirely by his finger tips, and appears to be struggling not to fall. however, whenever this nice guy with the rope comes down to kill him, suddenly seagal apparently is able to defy gravity. he takes one of his hands off the cliff, turns entirely around (somehow) and starts to talk to the guy... picture it... he's hanging there, facing away from the cliff, hanging on by only the finger tips of one hand... and it doesnt even look like he's hanging on with that hand. he just looks like he's standing there, leaning up against a wall or something... but last time i checked, it's pretty hard to stand on AIR. anyways, using that one mighty hand of his, he pushes up off the cliff and lunges towards the guy on the rope... when's the last time you had the strength in one arm (that you're using to barely hang on to the side of a cliff, mind you) to just launch yourself 10 feet towards a guy on a rope? oh yeah, i forgot. you're not an action hero... ok ok ok, i know i said i'd only rant about one at the beginning and i've already mentioned two, but there is a third i just have to mention. which one? the whole making-a-bomb scene. at one point he walks into one of the train cars, which for some reason is stocked with food items (it's NOT the kitchen), and starts fiddling around with stuff. since there is no logical explination for what he's doing, he decides to explain it himself. he turns to the camera and says "oh, so you want to know what i'm doing? i'm making a bomb"... and with that, he takes a scoop of what appears to be either crisco, ice cream or something of that sort and some ice cubes, and mixes it all up in one of those bar tender drink mixer things... he straps his beeper onto the side (which somehow works as a timer? maybe?) and declares it now a bomb. well, it explodes alright, so i guess he was right. anyway, now he casually walks into the main room where all the bad guys are, throws it in, and it explodes... now mind you, all of the fancy equipment that the bad guys were using to try and blow up things was in that room... and he just threw a bomb in there... now despite the fact that all of the equipment assumably just got blown up (and you actually see it on fire), it is in perfect condition later on, and working perfectly fine... hmm, maybe they had a few more lying around in storage just in case.... of course there is the really bad scene that was already mentioned where he runs faster than a 200mph train crash... but that's beside the point... of course there are all of the other things about this movie that just p*** me off... like how his little Apple palm-pilot dohicky has to wait 30 seconds before it can redial... why? because Apple likes to add suspense to everything. argh. ok, ok, i'll stop complaining about specific scenes and just give you all a summary. the movie was terrible. the acting was horrible, though what else would you suspect from steven seagal? i swear its in his contract to act poorly or something. the story plot was extremely predictable.. well, as long as you think seagal is invincable.. otherwise you'd have predicted his death many times throughout the movie (especialy when he got shot! agh!) but yeah... this movie is only worth watching if you're the type of person who enjoys laughing at how increadably bad a movie is.. and even then, it's still pretty terrible... i'd give it... 0.25 stars as a movie over all... but i'll add two to that just for making me laugh at how stupid it was... but then i have to subtract 1.5 just for p***ing me off.. overall? 0.75 stars out of 10. hey, thats pretty good for this movie...
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of the greatest action movies I've ever seen that takes place on a train
Catherine_Grace_Zeh25 November 2005
This is one of the greatest action movies I've ever seen. It really kept me on the edge of my seat. As always, Steven Seagal can really give an action movie a nice touch. The only thing that scared me was when the bad guys took everyone on the train hostage. If you ask me Casey (Steven Seagal) was a really tough guy when it came to fighting off villains. I just have to say that Geoff Murphy has scored a huge hit. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that the performances were superior, the production design was beautiful, the cast was perfectly chosen, and the costumes were perfectly designed. Now, in conclusion, to all you Steven Seagal fans who haven't seen this great action movie that takes place on a train, I highly recommend it.
9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Sequel Cliché in the making.
amwcsu31 October 2005
I can honestly say the original was better than the follow-up. A hell of a lot better! It was more in the plausible realm of Tom Clancy whereas Under Siege 2, is more cheesy science-fiction/martial arts fantasy complete with the cartoonish villains. The only thing good about US2 was that some of the original cast was put back into action and that Kasey has a hottie of a niece placed into the mix. The fact it was on a train was interesting but not even remotely believable . But that's where all the "good things" come to a sudden end.

Please don't ask about the dialog....It wasn't as politically active and realistic at all it was more amateur, as if this was the writer's first day out of college. I hated this moronic action yarn mainly for not only the putrid dialog, but the special effects. The effects in question appeared to be cheaper than a Geo Metro and done by drunk hobby enthusiasts. As far as the plot is concerned: Why did the terrorists pick this particular passenger train? Was there a specific reason? Filler and mock coincidence. Why was a defunct tactical weapons program put back on line in the first place? Was there a reason? Having a portable nuclear device floating in space is interesting subject matter for a movie, but it's one for John Carpenter and Michael Chricton to handle; not this moronic director. That alone more than enough of a reason for this retch to bomb at the box office.

The characters were as wooden as Yellowstone Park! If not more than. There is not a three-dimensional element to be found anywhere. With the exception of Segal. If you can call Segal's character three dimensional. You got the cowardly sidekick who just as dumb as a barrel of bricks.

The fighting scenes were "100% Pure Segal" and the only damn reason the movie worked. The movie seemed to be unfinished, underdeveloped, and silly to say the least. Oh, and speaking of silly the final scenes were just lame and melodramatic as those airplane disaster movies...not worth more than a sentence! But the worst scene was where Dane was hanging onto Rybeck's legs as he climbed a rope ladder to a waiting chopper; Belting out: "Rybeck! We make great team!" What? "Why does he say that?" Then climbs into the chopper, flames on his back that looked more fake than boobs on Baywatch. I guess they ran out of money for a better ending. Better ending? I guess they didn't have enough money for a better movie!
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Steven Seagal is the best!!!!
action-612 December 1999
Under Siege 2 is one of Steven Seagal`s best movies. Steven Seagal is Casey Ryback, a cock(and martial-arts expert) who is going on vacation with his niece(Katherine Heigl). They are on a train, who is suddenly hijacked by terrorists, who are led by the psychotic villains Dane and Penn. Dane is a former computer-engineer who created an insanely powerful weapon, he was later fired and faked his own death. Onto the train he brings hi-tech equipment, with which he takes control over the satellite-weapon and prepares to wipe out Washington D.C.

But ONE man stays in the way. Casey Ryback starts killing the terrorists on his own. Backed by a powerful and well composed soundtrack, Under Siege 2 is a joy to watch. Steven Seagal shows much of his cool fighting techniques, and every actionfan should consider this as a must see movie. This is a Seagal film as it should be: fast, cool, explosive, violent etc. 10/10
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
"Guess I'm not trained for this..." Easily Seagal's best film & one of the best Die Hard rip-offs.
Paul Andrews30 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Under Siege 2: Dark Territory starts as ex Navy Seal & chef Casey Ryback (producer Steven Seagal) meets up his niece Sarah (Katherine Heigl) at a train station as they intend to catch the Denver to Los Angeles cross country train, also catching that particular train are ATAC employees Capatin's Linda Gilder (Brenda Bakke) & David Trilling (David Gianopoulos). En-route the train is stopped & hijacked by a gang of mercenaries lead by Penn (Everett McGill) & computer whizz Travis Dane (Eric Bogosian) who force Gilder & Trilling to give him their top secret authorisation codes for a powerful particle beam satellite weapon known as Grazer One developed by ATAC & the CIA, financed by middle eastern bad guy's they intend to destroy the Pentagon & the American eastern seaboard with Grazer One. Sounds simple eh? Well, they hadn't counted on Casey 'f*cking' Ryback who is used to this sort of thing...

Directed by Geoff Murphy this is my favourite Die Hard (1988) clone, it is a top action flick in it's own right & is easily Seagal's best film, Under Siege 2: Dark Territory remains one of only two sequels Seagal has appeared in although I'm not really sure what that mean in itself & is superior to the original Under Siege (1992) which was also one of Seagal's better efforts. The script by Richard Hatem & Matt Revees moves along like a rocket, it's action packed, has some quotable one-liners & has that trademark Seagal brutality that was apparent in his early films. In fact sometimes Seagal's character is more brutal & violent than the bad guy's which I must admit didn't quite sit right with me at times but at least it makes for some ultra violent fights & action scenes. The story itself is decent too, the hijacking of a train is a neat idea on it's own & well realised while the particle beam satellite adds a little something different as well, the character's are good with the jokey Bogosian & the deadpan McGill working well off each other & providing a nice contrast in the villain department. However while Seagal comes across as a mean mother his porter sidekick is there for comedy relief & he irritates although not enough to ruin things & then there's Katherine Heigl who is a total babe & her presence is most welcome.

Director Murphy keeps things moving along, he keeps the jokey quips & one-liners to a minimum & he serves up some brutal action scenes & fights. From bad guy's being shot in the face, to Seagal making a home made bomb & letting it blow up in someones face, someone is kicked in front of a train & ran over, people fall from cliffs, wrists are cut, necks snapped, bones broken, knives are stuck in people throats & there is a massive body count. Unfortunately not in any of the British Video or DVD versions though which are heavily cut, in fact almost every violent scene is trimmed in some way & is an absolute travesty. I can't stress enough not to invest in any British version of Under Siege 2: Dark Territory, I got an uncut Dutch DVD from Amsterdam for about 3 quid & the difference is immeasurable. This film also has more action scenes than most Seagal films & isn't just fights, there are some nice explosions as various things are blown to pieces & there's a nice truck chase as well.

With a supposed budget of about $60,000,000 this had a big budget & it shows with really good production values, it has, for the time, good special effects which still look alright & the action scenes are just bigger & better with that big budget Hollywood over-the-top feel to them. There's a decent cast here although Seagal lets it down as he mumbles his way through the part, at least he's gotten rid of the ponytail for this & I think Kurtwood Smith would have been better as a baddie like he was in Robocop (1987).

Under Siege 2: Dark Territory is another excessively violent & brutal Seagal action flick, personally I think it's his beast & just a damned fine film in it's own right. It has a good cast, good villains, good action set-pieces & a decent story, what more do you want?
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Steven Seagal - He`s The Very Worst
Theo Robertson14 April 2004
Did you know there`s an unlimited number of alternative universes ? Think about that for a moment - Somewhere in another dimension Peter Jackson has just released FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING with Vin Diesel as Aragorn and Steven Seagel as Boromir . It goes without saying this alternative version of Tolkein`s classic is the biggest flop in the history of every universe in creation . It`s also the only film credited as having the languages English , Elvish and Mumbelling

You can tell I don`t like Steven Seagal as an action movie star and if you watch UNDER SIEGE 2 you`ll understand where I`m coming from . Former SEALS vet Casey Ryback takes his niece on a train which gets hijacked by terrorists . Considering he was working on a ship that got hijacked by terrorists in the first UNDER SEIGE he most be unlucky , but if Casey`s unlucky what sort of adjective can you use to describe someone who`s sat through a Seagal movie ?

This plays out exactly like every other Seagal movie with ultra right wing types trying to kill our Steven and Steven killing the ultra right wing bad guys one by one . Oh and of course it comes complete with one of those " This guy`s the very best " scenes as the baddies discover who they`re up against .

Actually UNDER SIEGE 2 is not too bad since we don`t have an obvious green/holistic message stuffed down our throats every 10 seconds and while the success of the original UNDER SEIGE was down entirely to Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Busey as the bad guys Eric Bogosian doesn`t do too badly here either as the villain , though you do get the impression Elliot Gould was the original choice

There is also a magnificent scene of unintentional laughter when a bad guy absails down a rockface only to be met by Steven who greets him with " Hello " . It doesn`t sound funny on paper but when I saw it on screen I almost split my sides laughing .

More entertaining than it deserves to be and one of the better Seagal movies UNDER SIEGE 2 gets three out of ten
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews