This movie tells the story of a man who goes undercover in a hi-tech prison to find out information to help prosecute those who killed his wife. While there he stumbles onto a plot involving a death-row inmate and his $200 million stash of gold.
Roland Sallinger is an LA cop who after nearly being killed by his greedy partner, and eventually being forced to retire for medical reasons, flees to San Antonio, Texas, after being asked ... See full summary »
Armed men hijack a New York City subway train, holding the passengers hostage in return for a ransom, and turning an ordinary day's work for dispatcher Walter Garber into a face-off with the mastermind behind the crime.
New York City police detective John Shaft (nephew of the original 1970s detective) goes on a personal mission to make sure the son of a real estate tycoon is brought to justice after a racially-motivated murder.
Samuel L. Jackson,
A criminal mastermind has set in motion a plan to infiltrate a high tech prison in order to persuade a death row inmate to reveal the whereabouts of $200 million worth of gold. It's up to an undercover FBI agent to stop him before it's too late. Written by
Not the worst Seagal has done in recent years... but still not that good
Two rules to go by are: Movies made by Franchise Pictures, or distributed by Screen Gems, are movies to avoid. This movie was made by Franchise Pictures AND distributed by Screen Gems! Not only that, but it has Steven Seagal - it's hard to believe that ten years or so ago he was doing so well. It's a shock to see him here, with a puffy face (and torso) and his hair looking lighter. Not surprisingly, his fight scenes are directed with quick cuts and simple martial arts movies that even an amateur could pull off. He seems very disinterested by what's happening, even a little out of it. He shouldn't be surprised that it's his career that's half past dead.
The director, Don Michael Paul, seems to have no ability to direct an action scene, martial art OR weapon-oriented. He uses annoying techniques like slow-motion or fast-motion to try and be "edgy", I guess. He also has problems telling a story, with some notable gaps that filled would have made some plot points more clear. He was working with a tight budget, which explains some things like numerous close-ups and somewhat impoverished sets. (Plus outdoor locations that clearly aren't in the United States, even though the movie is supposed to be taking place there.) Still, the movie moves along with nary a slow spot, and as problem-filled as it is, it's slicker and less annoying than Seagal movies like TICKER and THE FOREIGNER.
11 of 16 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?