IMDb > Sweepers (1998) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Sweepers
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Sweepers More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 13 reviews in total 

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Frustratingly Unbelievable! Dreadful Film..

Author: Facade from West Midlands, England
30 May 2000

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I didn't like this film one bit. I actually think that it was worse than "Deep Blue Sea" in terms of the stupidity portrayed by the characters. Its one if those films where you sit on the edge of your seat shouting "Shoot him, shoot him now, hurry up and shoot him or he will take the gun of you" and "Don't do ____ "

Anyway, the whole thing is one frustratingly unbelievable event after another.

SPOILERS: As if you could spoil this!

Here is my list- I suppose these count as SPOILERS of a kind so be warned!

0) (forgot this one) Just watch them deal with the mine! Look out for gems like "walk where I walk", yeah, so how do we get back then when we haven't marked anything?

1) When attacked by the helicopter, Dolph has a hunting rifle, which easily outranges the assault rifle in the helicopter. Dolph fires one shot, killing the rifleman, but then throws his gun away, and drives off- doesn't he carry ammunition? Doesn't he pay for his guns?

2) Then 2 helicopters attack. Dolph has no rifle, and can't hit anything with about 70 shots from his pistols (he has about 50 magazines for each [all different]), but brings it down with a flare pistol.

3) Why does the girl reverse off a mountain? Why don't they drive back? The Landrover looks perfectly drivable to me.

4) In the bad guys bedroom, Dolph is going to shoot a naughty man with his combat shotgun, but it gets kicked out of his hands easily (what would have happened if he had fired it? He would have dropped it if he was holding it that loosely), so he has to hit and kick and bite and gouge, with me saying "shoot him Dolph, you have a gun stuck in your trousers" about 50 times.

5) The naughty people kidnap the girl and fly her by helicopter to the secret mine, arriving AT THE SAME TIME as Dolph, who has walked it!

6) In the mine, many chances to shout "shoot him" etc, until the implausible ending, when Dolph is able to shoot about 30 people straight off.

7) You won't believe what happens on the train. Is abject incompetence a pre-requisite of being a bad guy? (As well as a huge cargo of exploding oil drums)

8) Dolph's flesh wound seems much better after his little swim.

Note to foreign powers. Don't buy those landmines- they are much too unstable! (and anybody can just turn them off in the 15 second delay time)

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

painfully awful

1/10
Author: highwaytohell-1 from United States
10 April 2009

This has to be the worst steaming pile of dog flop I've ever wasted my time watching. Fortunately I regained my sanity about half-way through and changed the channel. Dolph must have paid the MyTV Network to show this. Continuity was completely non-existent. Notice that the kid was completely vaporized by the landmine, yet seconds later Dolph scoops up Johnny, who has only a bloody lip. Would have been nice to see Dolph get blown up at that point too and end the movie immediately. I didn't catch who the lead actress was, but it seemed that her botox injection got a little out of hand. She looked like a bloated carp.

If you can get your hands on the DVD, please, please throw it on the floor and stomp on it so that the rest of humanity doesn't have to suffer.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Standard Lundgren.

5/10
Author: davideo-2 from United Kingdom
4 June 1999

Dolph Lundgren in a Ken Loach drama about a group of male council flat floor sweepers facing prejudice and taunts off the sexist,narrow minded women employees on the estate.Something sound wrong here? It should do. No,old Dolph once again reprises his everyday,tearandwear action man role,this time as a former landmines specialist turned down-and-out fist fighter,whose services are called on to sort out a major new killer mine,being deactivated ,in his place of spiritual demotivation,along the way bumping into his old doctor buddy,Passenger 57 baddie Bruce Payne. There's some added British metaphors (mention of Princess Diana,local lads playing football)and midway through,Dolph makes a bizarre change from an Indiana Jones alike adventurer into an Arnie-Commando esque train dweller.At one stage,he even has to swim under a small wad of water,just like a Dolph-in. Tee hee hee.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

The film transforms into "Indiana Dolph", complete with fedora-like hat and leather bomber jacket, it makes for a nice night for DTV fans.

6/10
Author: Comeuppance Reviews from United States Minor Outlying Islands
19 November 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In this Nu-Image production, Dolph plays Christian "Ace" Erickson, an adventurous former U.S. Special Forces soldier who has found his calling in life as a member of the Humanitarian Order of Chivalry, a group that goes to war-ravaged countries beset by land mines and removes the offending mines. While on assignment in Angola, his young son is blown up by a mine. Distraught, Erickson becomes a drunk and abandons his mine-finding ideals. He resorts to punchfighting in the local watering holes for cash.

When a new, American-made super-mine, the "A-6 Butterfly" is unleashed on the populace, it's up to Erickson and Michelle Flynn (Stansfield) to stop the madness and unravel the government conspiracy behind these deadly items, spearheaded by Dr. Cecil Hopper (Payne). Will they succeed? A Dolph Lundgren movie about land mines kills two birds with one stone. Firstly, it allows the viewer plenty of blow-ups with an actual reason behind them, and secondly, it's a fairly original idea, especially for low-budget action movies. Think about it: the issue of mines in these third-world countries is a real, pressing problem. It's a human issue many people care about. So when you add Dolph, who about 2/3 of the way through the film transforms into "Indiana Dolph", complete with fedora-like hat and leather bomber jacket, it makes for a nice night for DTV fans.

Dolph ventured back to Africa after his time there filming Red Scorpion (1988), and the rural locations and indigenous music make for a different sort of backdrop to the action. A lot of the action is fairly implausible, but when Dolph dons his "adventure hat" and is chomping on his cigar, who can argue? Especially since he seems a bit more animated this time around, which is always nice to see. Of course, the antithesis to his "adventure hat" is the "evil hat" of nemesis Yager (Roberts). This isn't to be confused with the G.K. Chesterton-quoting baddie Hopper. In their off time, the Sweepers (you didn't think this was a movie where Dolph plays an undercover school janitor, did you?) (because that would be awesome) play what can only be described as "mine games", competitive events where they try not to step on mines. I wonder if this is accurate to how actual humanitarians behave? But then again it probably gets boring when you're out in the country and your mine-hunting is done for the day, especially for a man of action like Erickson.

So despite some of its sillier plot flaws, thanks to its important message and its difference in the world of DTV action, don't be afraid to go on a "Mine Walk" with Ace and the gang.

For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Overall a disappointment

Author: Wizard-8 from Victoria, BC
24 November 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am a Dolph Lundgren fan, so I am somewhat forgiving if I watch a movie of his that has some shortcomings. With "Sweepers", I tried very hard to like it, but I felt that at the end it just didn't work. It gets off to a decent start - the African locations have some flavor, the plot (involving mines) is somewhat original, and there are a couple of acceptable action sequences in this first part as well. Unfortunately, after about the first twenty minutes or so, Lundgren's character becomes a sorry drunk and the movie bogs down showing this drunkard slogging around, and the movie never really recovers from this. The rest of the movie mostly lumbers along, never really picking up steam even when there is some action. If you manage to sit all the way through the movie, you will be rewarded with an awesome visual of an exploding train on a bridge, but I don't think this reward is worth all the boredom you'll go through before seeing it. Not the worst action movie ever made, nor the worst Lundgren movie ever made, but it's still a disappointment.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Not nearly as good as "Missionary Man"....

2/10
Author: innocuous from Raleigh, NC, USA
27 May 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was going to give this three stars, but I had to subtract one star for the unbelievably annoying and funny-looking kid who played Dolph's son.

******SPOILER ALERT********

So, the kid not only tags along by hiding in the back of the vehicle while his father (Dolph) literally goes into a war zone to sweep for mines, but he runs across a well-marked minefield trying to get away from some soldiers...with predictable results. The worst part is that he has this incredibly goofy grin on his face while he's running across the minefield. To be politically mega incorrect, he runs across the minefield like a girl and with the facial expression of someone who's mentally challenged. It's laugh-out-loud funny, even when the kid gets shredded by a mine. If I were Dolph, I'd have counted myself better off without him.

******END SPOILER*********

I also got a big laugh out of the super-sophisticated high-tech mines. They can supposedly detect when someone approaches them, but they don't actually detonate at that point. Instead, they obligingly wait 15 seconds, as well as going through all sorts of folding and unfolding motions. Better yet, they conveniently have flashing red and green LEDs on them (pretty low-profile, right?) AND an ON/OFF switch located right on the top. Pretty hard to miss them, especially in the dark.

Other than the kid and the mines, everything else is meant to be serious (I think.) Most of the plot is completely absurd, as are all the action scenes. (I also want to know how a missions doctor can find time to do anything else at all when he's in the field managing a hospital.) The final two stars are based on: one star simply because you can't give zero stars; three more stars for having a script, a beginning, and an end, and for not using crappy CGI; deduct one star for poor editing (quite, quite bad); and deduct one more star for the kid, as described above.

Check out "Missionary Man" if you want to see a B-movie with less social message but more of Dolph kicking butt.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Cheap shot !

Author: DavidDev from Johannesburg, South Africa
3 January 2002



Very disappointing movie to say the least. A "cheap shot" if you will.

However, the only good thing about this movie is the collaborative interaction between Hollywood (American)and African (predominantly South African) actors/crew: which is POSSIBLE. As a South African it was also quite funny to see Dolph Lundgren drinking "beer" from a bottle labelled with a well-known South African beer brand. This taking into account the supposed script location to be "Angola".

Judging Claire Stansfield for the first time(not having seen any of her earlier movie efforts)it seems she'd be better off displaying her physical features in a movie genre that requires it. Acting prowess, as far as she is concerned, is non-existent. I'll rate this movie 3/10 for effort and just going through the motions of movie making.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

Politically Correct

10/10
Author: karrie122 from USA
26 January 2001

I respect this movie because it deals with the problem of landmines in Africa (Angola. It starts out slow but ends with lots of action and has a couple of surprises in it. Dolph and his costar (Claire Stansfield) look really good. There are a couple of problems with the film. One is that Dolph's voice sounds like he had laryngitis during the filming. The other is that the landmine they are in search of is supposed to be very sophisticated technology but is really kind of pathetic. Whether or not you like Dolph or his acting, this movie is relevant and politically correct.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

horrible generic movie, but kinda watchable

3/10
Author: moviefiend-1 from UK
2 March 2005

my dad came home one day with a DVD double feature, he'd paid a £1 for it and it feature two Dolph films, Bridge of Dragons and Sweepers. Needless to say i was happy, i love b-style action movies and my dad had just picked up two potential winners.

Bridge of Dragons for the record was pretty good, not a classic but a fun action movie.

Sweepers however was a huge letdown, it starts brightly enough the whole opening scenes on the minefield are pretty cool and after the 'Roadhouse' style bar-fight scenes i thought i was in for a good time...then it all goes wrong. It's hard to pin-point what's wrong with this film, it's a basic story easy enough to follow and there's come decent action, it's just so stale and normal it makes me sick.

i find it hard to understand why people make films like this, what were they trying to achieve? generic pap overall, but still it was watchable...if your a Dolph fan, check it, if not avoid.

3/10

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Good Grief! I've seen Berkeleyites with less naievite'

2/10
Author: koohii from Silly con Valley
20 August 2003

This movie's grasp of Angolan politics is about as informed as it's knowledge of landmines. In other words, it makes the Lethal Weapon movies look like sophisticated dramas. Even your average Berkeley protester, full of ideal but without a clue as to what is really going on, would be able to display a better grasp of the political situation than this movie. Fight coreography and direction is laughablly bad. Fanfilms on theForce.net tend to be better. Suddenly, 1/2 way through, Dolph becomes an Indianna Jones clone. During a rescue scene, when time is of the essence, he takes time to change clothes. The whole mine sequence reads like Steven Speilburg's rejects. The village scenes scream bogus as well. All these villagers have food and clothing, and running water and plumbing. And they're dumb enough to be playing football in the minefield just when "Our Hero" needs motivation. Overall, the film may have been made to advance a political agenda, but it failed. This is the lamest Dolph movie I've scene since... ever. The only one that comes close to being worse was the film where they actually stole footage from another Dolph movie! Using the Cranky scale (1-4 bombs, Dynamite, Nuke), This one is a dynamite!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history