During a drugbust operation in Vietnam, two members of the elite force of the army are captured by a ruthless drug lord. When the CIA figures out the capture of these men, they send in their best team to rescue them at all costs!
A beautiful artist stumbles onto a murder just as the killer is leaving. After he levels a brutal blow to her head, she wakes up blind, and the only witness to the murder. Now in the ... See full summary »
A former movie star, Monica Scott, returns to the big screen along with younger boyfriend, Eric Cline, after a long absence. Monica is very jealous of the attention Eric gives to her body ... See full summary »
David A. Prior
Incredibly sloppy action flick, but at least there's plenty of fighting
Andrew Stevens and Karen Sheperd are two cops trying to find out if Karen's father - a robber - was really killed in a car explosion or not, while his previous partners, who were betrayed by him, escape from jail and start looking for the money that he kept for himself after their last job. Obviously "Blood Chase" was a cheap production, but come on, they couldn't even afford title cards? The robbery-betrayal-car explosion stuff all happens five years before the film's present time, but you wouldn't know that until Karen mentions it. And after Andrew and Karen have gone to a fictional South American country looking for her father, they suddenly appear back in the USA, then after a few scenes they're back in "Costa Brava". The gaps of time and place in this film are unbelievable - it's as if parts of it were randomly pieced together and nobody bothered to check the final cut before releasing the film. The one and only redeeming aspect is that the fight scenes are plentiful and pretty good. Karen Sheperd must be one of the most beautiful legitimate female martial artists-turned-actresses, and she does a lot of nice kicks and throws. And Andrew Stevens manages to be convincing in his fights despite his lack (as far as I know) of formal martial arts training. Still, any grade higher than *1/2 out of 4 for this film would probably be misleading.
2 of 3 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this