IMDb > Code of Honor (2016) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Code of Honor
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
Code of Honor More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 20 reviews in total 

6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Steven Seagal is: The Punisher (sort of)

4/10
Author: brchthethird from United States
11 May 2016

Ugh. It's a foregone conclusion that Seagal will never make anything again that lives up to his heyday in the 80's and 90's, but at least his DTV work up to this point had been quirkily interesting. As Seagal has aged and grown more portly, he's done less hand-to-hand combat and relied more on guns and knives, but the new trend seems to be that he barely appears in movies where he has the top billing. SNIPER: SPECIAL OPS was guilty of this, but at least that one had the good sense to be on the short and simple side. CODE OF HONOR is, quite frankly, one of the most cynical and shoddy pieces of work (and I use the term loosely) to ever have Seagal's name slapped onto it. Here, he plays Colonel Robert Sikes, a Punisher-like character who acts as a vigilante in his city to clean up crime. On his trail is a former protégé/friend who is trying to bring him in along with the help of the police. And, for some reason, there is a sleazy news team who follow them around trying to get a good story. So, you have elements of THE PUNISHER, SURVIVOR (the generic Pierce Brosnan movie from last year), and NIGHTCRAWLER, with none of the nuance or sophistication of each (at least the first and last ones). There are no characters with significant screen time to root for, as government, the police, and news media are all painted in such a bad way. Even Seagal who normally is likable, if stoic, is stuck playing a character who straight up murders people. Of course, I was with the movie for about two-thirds of it because it was kind of entertaining in a bad way. However, a third act plot twist completely ruined the film for me. It's like the filmmakers/screenwriter were like, "Just kidding!" It honestly angered me a little bit, making the last half hour or so a real chore to get through. As for the action, which is what most people will care about, there is a decent amount of it although it's mostly shootouts and some knife-fighting. Seagal gets very little to do, and I was disappointed here just like with SNIPER: SPECIAL OPS. The opening scene was probably the best, and there was a couple short fight scenes towards the end that partially made up for how dismal the rest of the film was. Seagal also gets one of his trademark speeches about halfway through, although the politics of it rubbed me the wrong way. Ultimately, I feel like I've been tested for the last time as a Seagal fan. These last two films were a whole new level of lazy, and I don't know if I can take it anymore. CODE OF HONOR is for Seagal fans only, and even then I'd still be cautious

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

This could have been a not god awful Seagal movie, but...

4/10
Author: subxerogravity from United States
7 May 2016

I know what your thinking. It's a Seagal movie so it has to be god awful, right? Well the concept of the movie was actually pretty cleaver. Most of the plot had to do with Seagal playing a punisher- like character, a soldier who while was overseas thought his family would be safe, but they end up getting killed in a gang related shooting. His head snaps and he begins a vigilante crusade to kill organize crime.

One of the things that makes this an...interesting Seagal picture is that, technically Seagal is playing the Antagonist. He thinks he's doing the right thing, but the cops this movie really focus on are assigned to take him down.

That's another reason why this could have been a good Seagal movie, he's barely in it. Most of Seagal's scenes look like they were inserted after the movie was finished. It was like the filmmakers made a bad movie and thought they could make it better by finding the money to hire Seagal, film him saying some corny stuff and doing his once bad ass but now cheesy Akido movies, and edit it into the rest of the movie.

Code of Honor could have done for Seagal what JVCD did for Van Damme (not that it did so much), but unfortunately the film making looked very amateurish even for a Straight-to-Video film. It is a Seagal film, but I do expect better quality in sound and visual effect than what I got.

Even though you can see it coming before it does, the movie has a pretty decent plot twist that made it interesting, but it does not sit well because of all the really bad acting (and I'm not even talking about Seagal)

It had potential, but overall it's not even worth it to watch to make fun of Steven Seagal. Skip it.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Seagal Returns as a Badass!

6/10
Author: nama chakravorty from India
11 May 2016

Steven Seagal is in Badass mode in his latest 'Code of Honor. This low-budget Action B-Movie is a routine watch, although a few good scenes & a nice twist in the end, make it work somehow.

'Code of Honor' Synopsis: Colonel Robert Sikes is on a mission to rid his city of crime. As a stealthy, one-man assault team, he will take on street gangs, mobsters, and politicians with extreme prejudice until his mission is complete. His former protégé, William Porter, teams up with the local police department to bring his former commander to justice and prevent him from further vigilantism.

'Code of Honor' is a fair watch. Its the regular good versus bad story. However, there is twist in the end, which works & makes the action-fare a bit more than just remaining to be an action-fare. The Writing is okay, although its interesting to see Seagal take on the baddies one-by-one. Michael Winnick's Direction could've been sharper. Cinematography & Editing are passable. Action-Sequences are good. The Graphics, however, are tacky.

Performance-Wise: Seagal is back at what he's been doing since years: Kicking Ass & being a Badass. And although he has very less dialogue & also not much screen time (I wish there was more of him), he remains tough enough to continue his quest & blowing up heads. Craig Sheffer has a larger than Seagal & he does the acting bit well. Others lend adequate support.

On the whole, 'Code of Honor' is a one-time watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

So bad its good !!!

10/10
Author: mattcroman from United Kingdom
10 May 2016

This movie is ten out of ten for entertainment. It is so terrible it is actually entertaining in it's utter direness. Steven Seagal, overweight, mumbling intelligibly, sporting a horrible box beard and unreal jet black hair, is a magnetic presence on the screen. It's almost impossible to tear your eyes away from him.

The plot? Ridiculous. I can just imagine the meeting of z-list execs and Steven Seagal. Seagal: I just read the greatest script ever. Exec: Who wrote it? Seagal: I did it. Exec: What's it about? Seagal: It's about a good bad guy and a bad good guy. They're mirror images of each other. Ying and yang, baby. I'll play the good bad guy, he's an ex-special forces vigilante seeking to rid the city of criminal scum. No wait, I got it mixed around. He's the bad good guy, no, my bad, I confused myself, I was right the first time...What about the bad good guy? Well, I'm glad you asked. He'll be a fed, and one of my ex- special forces buddies with a deep relationship to my character. He'll speak like Christian Bale's Batman, at one point, he must utter the lines "I'm just a sinner looking for redemption." Also, he'll kill people with knives. What kind of FBI agent dual wields knives? I'm glad you asked...

Dialogue? Overblown. Seagal mumbles and grumbles his way through a script that seems to believe it posses some kind of philosophical credibility. It does not. He also seems to drift from one accent to another, I'm not sure where he is supposed to come from. Is he black? Cajun? What? The movie seems to hinge on the question: "If you could save the world but nobody would know you did it, would you do it?" I suspect Seagal and whoever wrote this thought they were being unbelievably deep...in a word. No.

As for the fight scenes, these were comical and clumsy. Seagal is not the man he was. And seeing him trying to recreate fight scenes from earlier movies is painful to watch. Fast hand to hand combat devolves into comical slap fights. The gun-fights are all characterized by terrible CGI blood splatter and gunfire.

The end twist? Well, I don't want to spoil it too much. But entertaining to say the least. You must watch this movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

It Isn't All About Seagal!!!

7/10
Author: zardoz-13 from United States
22 December 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

"Guns, Girls, and Gambling" director Michael Winnick's "Code of Honor" isn't as egregious as some Steven Seagal epics are these days. Predictably, most Seagal sagas qualify as potboilers, but writer & director Winnick really brings the pot to a boil with this exception to the rule. He stages several bullet-riddled firefights with high body counts and flying CGI blood spray. When Seagal isn't dispatching morally reprehensible villains with his well-aimed shots, Craig Sheffer wields dual knives and stabs away at his own adversaries. Aside from Craig Sheffer, "Code of Honor" features a better-than-average cast with familiar faces, including James Russo, Griff Furst, and Louis Mandylor. This movie amounts to an improvement over recent Seagal thrillers because it is not all about Seagal. Listed as a producer, too, Sheffer takes his share of screen time with Mandylor turning up more often than usual as a city detective investigating the killings. The ending will give spectators something to ponder, which isn't often the case in a Seagal movie.

Our soft-spoken, paunchy protagonist sports those distinctive orange-lensed spectacles, wears his boot-polish black hair slicked back, and doesn't waste a whole lot of time talking. He has equipped himself with an impressive arsenal of firearms, and he handles these weapons with confident expertise. Former Special Forces honcho Colonel Robert Sikes (Steven Seagal of "Exit Wounds') has "a laundry list of medals," and he is cleaning up the streets of an anonymous city. He prefers to carry out his work with a high-tech sniper-rifle, but he can sling a knife with nimble accuracy. This trigger-happy vigilante has embarked on a killing spree because his wife and son died in a random drive-by shooting incident while Sikes was in Afghanistan searching for terrorists. When the police conduct a background check on Sikes, they learn that the Army has Sikes listed as "missing in action, presumed dead." Initially, Winnick gets "Code of Honor" off to a bullet-blasting start with a nocturnal massacre. Sikes uses a long-range rifle from the safety of a high place to wipe out two gangs during a drug exchange in a parking lot. Sikes clashes with his old nemesis, Special Agent FBI Agent William Porter (Craig Sheffer of "Night Breed"), who is just as violent as Sikes.

One of the more amusing as well as brutal scenes occurs after a rendezvous between Sikes and Porter at a local nightclub owned by a gangster. Sikes shows Porter a portable detonator in his fist and warns the Special Agent that if he tries to rise from his chair that Sikes will blow him to kingdom come. Sikes exits the nightclub without fanfare, and then Romano's henchmen armed with machine guns come after him to kill him. Porter labors under the mistaken belief that Sikes has told him the truth. Porter swaps shots with his adversaries while clutching the chair, even after he has toppled sideways on the floor. Imagine his chagrin when Porter realizes afterward that Sikes has deceived him! Romano (James Russo of "Django Unchained") tries to kill Porter, but Detective James Peterson (Louis Mandylor) gets the drop on him. The nightclub scene is the most imaginative in "Code of Honor," and Winnick orchestrates the action without a shred of humor. The big difference between Sikes and Porter is that Sikes controls his encounters while Porter finds himself in the middle of melees. Eventually, about 81 minutes into the action, we learn Porter isn't a Fed, but an inactive soldier. Another thing that differentiates this Seagal movie from lesser efforts is the cast. Aside from the usual array of characters, "Code of Honor" has a stripper heroine, Keri Green (Helena Mattsson of "Seven Psychopaths") who escaped from an explosion at a strip club that served as a depot for arms. The confusing last-minute surprise resembles something about of "Fight Club." It seems that Sikes may in fact be Porter! Of course, Winnick refutes this during a rooftop confrontation between the two men. "Somehow everybody's thinking that you're me, and I'm you," Sikes tells Porter. Sikes whips Porter in a brief, close-quarters hand-to-hand combat sequence. Afterward, when Porter tries to escape, Sikes blows up a floor of the building where Porter fled. Meantime, the FBI has entered the fray and takes over the high-profile vigilante case from who has been on the case since the get-go. Ironically, at the end, Porter may have escaped the explosion because the stripper's son has a baseball glove that appear in Porter's motel room earlier.

The big difference between this Segal outing and others is that it is set in America and not Eastern Europe. Unfortunately, Seagal is still relying on stuntmen that are clearly thinner than himself. Comparably, "Code of Honor" ranks as above-average Seagal fare.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Death Wish, Punisher and others

4/10
Author: kosmasp
28 October 2016

They do not need to worry. Not only because Steven Seagals character won't be after them (he's hunting criminals you see?), but also because this just tries to mash a couple of things and take a decent idea and make something out of it. I'd say it doesn't succeed, but at least it doesn't shy away from showing the violence behind it all (even if most of the blood, if not all is CGI).

Youz also get some nudity (a friend of mine told me that Steven Seagal movies nowadays have at least one scene shot in a strip club, haven't checked if that's accurate but wouldn't be surprised at all) if that floats your boat. And a story of sorts of someone being after a guy, although they have the same goal and ... well who am I kidding, you're not going to watch this because of a plot. Even when it sounds decent and made me reconsider my own recent ban on Seagal movies and watch this. He did worse, but if you're not a fan, you probably should just stay away ...

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

I Really gotta stop watching the latest Seagal flicks..

3/10
Author: homecoming8 from Belgium
13 July 2016

Steven Seagal was one of the biggest action stars of the '90's. From his smashing debut "Above the Law"" (aka Nico, 1988) all his movies were a box office hit and among the better action movies ever made. He was cool, charismatic and his best role was Casey Ryback in his biggest success "Under Siege" (1992). His contract with Warner Bros. ended after the box office failure "Fire Down Below" (1997). Just like "On Deadly Ground" (1994), still an underrated movie in my opinion with an excellent cast, a good story and jaw dropping action. We once again saw a glimmer of his success in the box office hit "Exit Wounds" (2001) but after that, the legend was history. Up until then, his incredible filmography gave him a lot of credit and the fans (like myself) kept watching turkey after turkey after turkey..

There were some average movies like "A Dangerous Man" and "Driven To Kill" but hardly worth mentioning. We kept believing in a resurrection of the Action Man of the '90's but it never happened and frankly, it never will. Seagal is too old, too fat and totally out of shape. Add the cheap production values and bring on the latest Seagal Flick "Code Of Honor";

It's a poor man's "The Punisher" but lacks story, character development and even tension. It's downright boring and the action consists of CGI gunshots and CGI blood. Co-star Graig Sheffer is best known for the horror hit "Nightbreed" (1990). It's obvious that the man hasn't aged well either. He could actually play a creature in Nightbreed 2 without any make up. His acting is the same as the rest of the cast: uninspired and sleepwalking through this mess.

I've been a fan of Steven Seagal since the beginning and still love his old movies: Hard To Kill, Marked For Death, Out For Justice, Under Siege 1&2, Glimmer Man: I've seen them a dozen of times. I'm going to watch them again and forget about the fact that's he's still trying to make more.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Unbelievable in 2016

2/10
Author: Toni Moisio from Lisbon, Portugal
7 May 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It's hard to describe what i just watched.

It's a Steven Seagal movie, so naturally my expectations weren't high, but what i saw... left me speechless. The horrid acting, the useless CGI in gunshots, the useless CGI in news playing on the TV, the useless CGI everywhere... you just don't see this quality in 2016 even in Indie movies.

Everything in this movie is just cheap. I would expect a Seagal movie to have the action he is so known for, but no. He barely says a word. Barely shows up at all.

The whole "plot" of the movie is just stupid and unbelievable. The so called action scenes are so slow, that the only thought you are left with is "really??". I have never in my life edited a movie, but if i did, this is not how i would do it. It's impossible to describe this movie, you just have to see it. If you have ABSOLUTELY nothing else to do.

Like me.

I only gave it 2 stars because i used to like Steven Seagal, back in the day.

Was the above review useful to you?

Very poor Seagal effort...unless my theory is correct

2/10
Author: Lewis Paterson
21 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

So it's another few months, and another Seagal DTV flick. Nowadays we have to get used to Seagal having even less movement that he did 10 years ago, and he's pretty sedentary in this one. He spends most of this film sniping, but does occasionally shoot some guys and gets into one hand-to-hand fight, so I guess there's that.

Honestly, the film is just so bland and like so many of his other stuff that he's done since the turn of the century that it's hard to differentiate between the films these days. Seagal plays Robert Sikes, an ex-special forces guy who is specialised in everything and is extremely dangerous, blah blah blah. Whenever they have Seagal play these characters and they try to give background, they should just put in R Lee Emery's line from On Deadly Ground about him drinking a gallon of gas and all that.

His character is a Punisher type thing where his wife and child have been killed so now he's a vigilante on a one man mission to kill any criminal he sees. This would be alright except there's very questionable choices of killing - he decides to snipe a group of drug addicts (because it's them that's the problem, not the dealers, apparently) at a point in the movie and also kill the mayor (whose major crime is cheating on his wife), with no real explanation. Seagal's supposed to be an antagonist in this, I suppose, but that doesn't mean he can kill people for no reason.

The other main guy is a guy called William Porter, who was under Seagal in the military and knows all about him and his mission, and is out to stop him with the help of the police. He is portrayed as the polar opposite to Seagal's character - a man whose wife and son abandoned him of their own merit because of his life of drinking, cheating, and crime but is now out to "atone for his sins" by stopping Seagal. Fairly generic, like everyone else in the film.

A lot of humour in this comes from the atrocious CGI. It has to be seen to be believed, with the blood in the film being the main culprit. The acting is pretty much universally terrible also.

So with all that said, it's one to avoid...unless. Unless the theory I developed is correct.

You see, near the end of the film the police guy believes that Sikes and Porter are in fact the same person, and that Porter is using the Sikes name to cover up his actions. This leads to a final encounter where the police kill Seagal as Sikes, but they believed they killed both Sikes and Porter as it was an alter ego. In fact, Porter had ran away never to be seen again. Of course, the fatal flaw in this is that when they take a look at the body they're gonna see a big fat old guy, not Porter. Then, when sitting on the toilet after watching this, I suddenly came to a realisation...

They could be right. Sikes could be Porter, and vice versa. It is a split personality disorder sort of thing - Sikes and Porter are these two polar opposites, ying and yang. Sikes and Porter are never actually seen together by any of the major characters. In the one scene when they're in a club together, Sikes said that Porter had a bomb under his seat which would explode if he got out, allowing Sikes to walk away unscathed. Turns out the bomb was just a ruse. Before he is killed, Seagal/Sikes jumps through a window and lands on a spike, putting a bloody hole through his hand. Porter gets shot in his hand earlier in the film - an injury that is exactly the same. There is a scene where it switches between Sikes and Porter sitting in the same position in a motel room that looks exactly the same. There's plenty more hints to this idea in the film which I won't go into, but if it is actually the case that they are the same person, it makes it a LOT more interesting. Just a thought.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Surprise ending, but not much else to set it apart from any other Seagal film

4/10
Author: davideo-2 from United Kingdom
11 June 2016

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

Following the death of his wife and child, former Special Ops commander Robert Sikes (Steven Seagal) has committed himself to ridding the city of crime and gangs. But his latest attack, at a strip club, has set him on a collision course with a stripper witness, and the local crime boss who now wants his head. Meanwhile, Detective William Porter (Craig Sheffer) is on a search mission of his own to deal with his old friend Sikes, whilst battling demons of his own.

It's a curious thing to see something labelled as a new Steven Seagal film these days, as with each passing new film, he seems to spend less and less time in it. In Code of Honour, he is in minimal scenes and doesn't even speak until about three quarters of an hour in. His presence is no less felt, but it is misleading to have him billed as the lead star when he's really more of a co star.

As for the film itself, it meanders along without really going anywhere, throwing in the odd fairly decent and violent action sequence here and there, before building up to an ending that has been done before, but is probably pretty surprising for a Seagal film, which is something he could do with to keep interest in his films alive. Other than that, though, it's really business as usual, and nothing that will really make it stand out. **

Was the above review useful to you?


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

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history