Reviews & Ratings for
Act of War More at IMDbPro »

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Great explosion sequence, lots of action, 10 August 1999

Author: Alan-112 from San Diego

It is set in some fictious Soviet country, terrorists take over a palace and the Scalia character has to come in to save the day. I liked the effect sequences of the Palace in the final scene. If you like typical action, you'll like this film.

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Another waste of time, 21 June 2001

Author: refinedsugar from Nova Scotia, Canada

This has to be one of the better looking Jack Scalia outing I've seen ... which doesn't say much ... just like the story. It isn't worth talking about at length and neither is any mention of the cast. The F/X are passable for a low density movie of this order, but the entire contraption is void of anything mildly redeeming. The whole secret agent scenario is cliché and the characters might as well be talking color bars. It wouldn't have made a difference.

My one wish is that I had a briefcase like Jack Gracy (Scalia's character). In the movie his has a red light that when it goes off he know an unauthorized entry at a Russian Nuclear missile silo has occurred. Mine would be slightly different. It would still have a red light, but it would only go off when someone made a really memorable action movie. Needless to say, this is not one of them.

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Not bad.... not good either, 23 May 1999

Author: Buggy-4 from Watertown, New York

I rented this movie because I wanted a movie where thought process was minimal. That is what I got. There was lots of explosions and shoot outs, and no big name stars. Jack Scillia played the take no crap one man army of this movie. He shot people, blew things up and in the end he romanced the girl. Sounds like James Bond you say? Well it is very similar. There is even a character that resembled Odd-Job from "Goldfinger". This was not the worst movie I have ever seen ( the worst being "Trucks" and "Ape" ) but I was down there. There were many acting problems due to the fact that no one could act. And the fact that the camera kept zooming on Jack's eyes, I am clueless. I give it a *1/2 out of ****.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Not a poor man's James Bond, a poor man's Die Hard, 25 March 2006

Author: blahuciak from Canada

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It looks like they took Die Hard and moved it to an ex-soviet republic. It must have taken the writers a day to watch Die HArd and copy down the storyline and then another day to take the transpose the storyline and set it in another country.

Instead of fake terrorists robbing the safe, you have a fake coup to rob the treasury; one of the co-workers selling out Bonnie Bedelia here you have an embassy employee making the same deal. etc. Even the hero appearing in an undershirt at the end.

The stereotyping of the characters - the taxi driver who had cousins who could do anything was horrible, the villain you could tell by his goatee and the Soviet politician who drinks too much - is worthy of a movie from the cold war era.

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Walmart special, 5 February 2006

Author: rps-2 from Bracebridge Ont

When oh when will I learn that the bargain priced movies in the bin at Walmart are there for one reason. They're shoddy junk. "Act Of War" for a buck fifty was no exception. James Bond without the class. John LeCarre without the intelligence. The acting is bad. The plot is simplistic and predictable. As usual in these bang bang epics, the bad guys are all lousy shots. I know nothing about guns but I'm sure I could kill more people banging off an automatic weapon than this bunch. But then, if they hit their targets, the movie could be a good forty minutes shorter. (Which might not be a bad thing.)This indeed is one of those films that is so bad it's almost good. One suggestion. If you must buy bargain movies at Walmart, go for VHS rather than DVD. At least that way you can re-use the tape. I haven't yet found a use for old DVD's.

3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
The horrible act, 3 April 2000

Author: (critique-3) from Rhode Island, USA

Watched it on TV, started to wonder why others liked the explosions. Just a bad movie all around. They must have a lot of money in Hollywood to go ahead with this movie. I would like to read plots of movies that did not make the cut because they must be really horrible if this movie got made.

'The Postman' was a great action flick next to this.

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Canadian conspiracy to destroy movies forever ..., 11 February 2006

Author: A_Roode from Halifax, Nova Scotia

A Canadian conspiracy to destroy movies forever has come one step closer to fruition with the very bad 'Act of War.' The title is a declaration of what it intends to do the the larger body of world cinema, the forces of good, and your free time. This movie is a bad, bad, bad thing and I'm so sorry I spent time watching it. I've started to attend counseling and I'm happy to report that I do appear to be making a move towards recovery.

This movie is a clear sign that 'Telefilm Canada' is in the business of providing tax shelters and opportunities for tax write-offs. I'd just like to take a moment and apologize to the rest of the world for what my country has inflicted upon you. The four out of ten may seem generous but the film has so much intended humour (which is miserably unfunny) that the hilarity of the botched attempt actually makes this film easier to watch than much similar fare you'll find. I've seen worse -- I'm an idiot -- but I've seen worse.

Featuring no 'A-List' or 'B'List' players, one can't but hope that the producers might have tried to get a hold of 'C-List' material like the reliable Michael Dudikoff. Read that last line again with a straight face. I dare ya! Tragically, Dudikoff appears to have been busy on the weekend that this movie was filmed. How lucky are we that Jack Scalia stepped in to save the day instead? In fairness to Jack Scalia, he puts in as good of a performance as could be expected from a film which is never really sure about its own identity. Hampered by a very muddy script, terrible dialogue, goofy plot and botched satirical elements, the inmates are running the asylum. Is it a comedy, a spy thriller, an action film, a (bad) James Bond spoof, a film with a warning on nuclear terrorism? It tries to be all of these and succeeds in being none. The script has no focus, giving the director no focus. A focus-less director has no vision and therefore no control over the actors. The actors ham and mug shamelessly in front of the camera and one suspects they are just trying to add something to their reel that they can use as audition material for better projects.

The taxi driver is completely insufferable. The President is almost as bad. The bald general with the "I'm such a bad guy and you can tell if you look at my characteristic 'evilguy' goatee" beard is awful. The script is mortal wound number one. The acting is mortal wound number two. There are so many bad performances that the restraint to name only these three is unbelievable. Oh what the hell: the vice-president is over the top with his mustache twirling Snidely Whiplash performance. The satirically intended (but ultimately failing in the attempt) American general and his political equivalent are doing bad impersonations of Rod Steiger in 'Mars Attacks!' Jack Scalia looks like Laurence Olivier in comparison to the rest of the cast, but an Olivier who was older, tired and just needed some quick dough.

Don't even get me started on the soundtrack. Hilariously awful, it undercuts every single bit of credibility that the film aspires to have without exception. Find me a single moment where the music in this film helps to support the action or the tension. My own theme music plays in the background while I make that request. It's 'Mission:Impossible." The soundtrack is mortal wound number three. A shame really because it never gives this movie a chance from the opening credits to the mercifully not too far off end credits.

Paradoxically, this movie might thrive because of its awfulness. It is so bad that it is funny. One of those rare gems that are actually highly enjoyable with a few friends and a few drinks in. Just don't make them close friends because after they see this on your shelf, they'll never look at you the same way again. Oh for the days of 'Mystery Science Theatre 3000.' They'd have a lot of fun with this one!

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Act of war declared to James Bond......007 wins, 31 July 1999

Author: PL-2 from Canada

This is an insult to James Bond...They try to copy a 007 movie by using bad actors & bad scenario. What were they thinking??? You have to be fool to make a near movie! I give it nothing more than 1 out of 5 (and I am generous).

Add another review

Related Links