Out for a Kill (2003 Video) User Reviews

WARNING. FOR MEN ONLY!!

[=G= · 4/10 · 23 August 2003]

Men have a place in their brains called the macho cortex (MC) buried in the limbic system which, when sufficiently stimulated, turns us into drooling morons with only two desires; survival and sex, not necessarily in that order. Most action flicks are designed to stimulate the MC by flooding our senses with big, ugly dudes who are bad (we don't care why) and we want to see killed or luscious babes who are good (all babes are good, even bad ones) and we want to...well, you know. This parses as Big, ugly = bad, Babe = good. All we need is some kind of Rambo-like hero with whom we can identify and, presto, we're there, vicariously getting off as we watch the hero (us) waste the bad guys while the babes swoon.

The problems with the formula in Seagal's formula action outing "Out for a Kill" are manifold. First, the hero, Seagal, doesn't fit the strong, silent type paradigm because he looks like a porky zombie on ludes. Second, the hero is married and then quickly widowed. So, now we're stuck with a porky zombie on ludes who is in mourning. Yuck! Thirdly, as Seagal trucks through a plot flatter than a saltine, there are no babes watching or waiting to drop their skivvies at the end. So, where's the prize? No respectable action hero would go to so much trouble with no hotties watching and waiting. Hottie cop Goh is waiting at the end but she's a platonic thing because she can't jump the hero since he's in mourning. Duh! Therefore, all the killing is a needless, senseless waste of time, the MC never gets engaged, and we, the men, are left with no reason to drool so boredom sets in and that's a bad thing. (C-)

Seagal went out and killed his career

[BroadswordCallinDannyBoy · 2/10 · 1 June 2004]

Can he sink any lower? Probably yes, because at the rate he is going turning back is going to be very hard. It was after Exit Wounds that Seagal started his nose dive which has yet to end. Half Past Dead was a good step up from Ticker, but it still was only OK. Now we arrive at... ...this horrible film. It contains a bland to the max story of vengeance on the people who killed Seagal's wife. Some of the scenes are also so overly and ridiculously dramatic that you'll cringe. And Seagal, in this film, plays Seagal. That's right, he plays himself. He just shows up on screen pretending to be a professor and the audience expects him to start fighting with people soon and that's what happens.

No character development to speak of just mundane fights one after another. The bad guys are really stupid and just sit around a table somewhere. One by one they disappear and we are led to believe that they among the films body count. Does that sound dumb and confusing? Well that's because it is. 2/10

Rated R: violence and profanity

Makes pretence to some faint meaning

[JamesHitchcock · 2/10 · 5 February 2008]

This is a film which asks its audience to accept that Steven Seagal is "Yale's most distinguished academic". An interesting idea for a competition might be to ask people to try and come up with a more egregious example of miscasting than that one. John Wayne as a drag queen? Woody Allen as a heavyweight boxing champion? Arnold Schwarzenegger as a seven-stone weakling? How about Steven Seagal as the world's greatest actor? Actually, even asking the audience to accept Seagal as a moderately competent actor might be a bit much.

Make no mistake, this is a bad film indeed. It only gets a second star because it never quite plumbs the awesome depths of badness achieved by Seagal's other 2003 film with director Michael Oblowitz, "The Foreigner". The seventeenth-century poet John Dryden, comparing his detested rival Thomas Shadwell with other minor literary figures of the day, wrote:-

"The rest to some faint meaning make pretence But Shadwell never deviates into sense".

A similar distinction applies here. Whereas "The Foreigner" never deviates into sense, or comes within a thousand miles of doing so, "Out for a Kill" does at least make pretence to some faint meaning. Seagal's character, Robert Burns, is Professor of Archaeology at Yale University. (Burns was originally a master thief specialising in stealing Chinese antiquities, and gained his degree while serving a prison sentence. I doubt if in real life Yale would have awarded a professorship to a man with this particular curriculum vitae, but the film is presumably set in a parallel universe where seats of learning are happy to offer academic chairs to convicted felons).

While on a dig in a remote part of China, he unwittingly becomes embroiled with a gang of drug-runners and he is framed on false charges of narcotics smuggling and the murder of his assistant, who was shot dead by the gang. He is released from jail by a Chinese cop (named Tommy despite being female) and her American colleague who hope that, back in America, he will lead them to the criminal masterminds behind the drug-smuggling operation. Unfortunately, the villains have not finished with Burns, and his wife is killed by a bomb intended for him. He sets out to get revenge, and the film turns into the normal Seagal mixture of gunplay and martial-arts sequences.

It was ironically appropriate that in "The Foreigner" Seagal played a character named Jonathan Cold, because his performance seemed to come straight from the deep freeze. Perhaps he and Oblowitz recognised this unfortunate irony, because in "Out for a Kill" his character has a surname suggestive of heat rather than coldness. His style of acting, however, remains as frozen as ever. Burns suffers a series of disasters to rival the Book of Job, but neither being imprisoned on false charges, nor the destruction of his home, nor the murder of his wife, can elicit any degree of emotional reaction from him.

Not that the rest of the cast are any better. In "Under Siege" Seagal made the mistake of playing against a major Hollywood star, Tommy Lee Jones, whose acting skills served to underline his own deficiencies in that direction. At least he avoids that mistake here. The way in which the villains are played implies a racist view of the Chinese, little changed since the days of those old Fu Manchu movies. The main difference is that the criminal mastermind Wong Dai is played by a Chinese actor instead of Boris Karloff or Christopher Lee, but the impression is still given that the entire Chinese race, except for attractive women like Tommy, consists of fiendish Oriental villains. About all one can say in the film's defence is that some of the martial-arts sequences are reasonably well done. Overall, however, this is the sort of cheap, shoddy and racist actioner which I had hoped Hollywood had given up making years ago. 2/10

Mother Theresa in a gangbang! What is this???

[CuriosityKilledShawn · 1/10 · 21 May 2005]

Either Steven Seagal has absolutely NO self-respect or the Mob were just too damn scary for him when it came to signing the contract for this total pile of crap.

They couldn't even be bothered to come up with an good title. Instead they took Hard to Kill and Out for Justice and combined them (Hard to Justice?). But don't even think for one minute that this film is up to the standards of Seagal's golden years. You'll NEVER see anything worse than this. Well, Son of the Mask maybe.

Seagal plays an archaeologist (well, it's a change from Cop or ex- CIA) who's precious Chinese artifacts and pots are seized by the Tong (the non-threatening Chinese Syndicate baddies) and stuffed with brown sugar (or cocaine, I don't know). Big Steve stumbles upon this dastardly deed and takes off for the Uzbekistan border. A hundred baddies come out of nowhere and start firing at him.

Big Steve is promptly framed and sent to jail, where he meets a character introduced as his new sidekick but is quickly forgotten about and never seen or heard from again. What the hell was the point in this? It turns out that Steve used to be in the CIA (oh for the love of crumb cake) and was their best ghost thief (huh?) and the DEA release him for some reason and he goes home to his quiet American suburb, where the Tong blow up his wife and house.

Steve goes on a killing spree. But what helps is that every Chinaman who's neck he breaks has a one-word tattoo on his arm that when added up makes an ancient Chinese proverb that provides the right order of tiles to push in case of fire in the Tong bosses office. What? Don't look at me! I didn't write this! The bad guys don't do anything apart from sit at a long table in a poorly-lit and cold-looking room and smoke cigars while looking evil. The boss isn't even Chinese but an Ian Hislop-lookalike with bushy eyebrows. Every 10 minutes the film will jump to them (subtitles list their hobbies and interests for some strange reason!) and the boss goes 'We have to stop him, he knows too much'.

The fight scenes are horrible. What is the deal with the kung-fu monkey barber? Seriously! What is the deal with that? The computer- generated effects are the worst ever (second to Son of the Mask, nothing will beat that in terms of terribleness). I've seen more convincing stuff on a ZX Spectrum.

Seagal puts NO effort into this film. He looks incredibly bored through-out and looks like he'd rather be praying to Budda. However, you can almost see Frankie Fingers from The Mob loitering off- camera, pointing a gun at his head. I know I wouldn't show enthusiasm if that were the case.

Out for a Kill is directed by Mike Oblonglowiscz, the same amateur responsible for the equally as horrible The Foreigner. The man has NO idea how to make films and should never be allowed near a camera again. He desperately tries to mime Michael Bay (a dubious choice of inspiration) with his pointless stutter-cuts and incoherent editing which only makes the film look worse, turning it into an avalanche on top of another avalanche. It's quite possibly one of the ugliest-looking film you'll ever see. Considering some of the high-profile and veteran production members it's phenomenal they made a film so indescribably bad.

Eternal, everlasting shame on all those involved with making this trash. Utter crap of the lowest order.

The DVD is in 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen, showing off the ugly photography and poorly planned camera angles in all their rubbishy glory. The Dolby 5.1 soundtrack also turns the films unbelievably bad sound design into pure torture for the ears. The cover also features 2 exploding helicopters. There are no helicopters in the entire film, never mind exploding ones.

Steven Seagal is out to kill his career...

[AwesomeWolf · 1/10 · 16 April 2005]

Seagal is back, more monotonous than ever and with even less personality than usual. Unfortunately, that's only the beginning of all the problems with this so called 'movie'. Now, I'm a big fan of cheap, mindless action, but even I have limits. 'Out for a Kill' is beyond all hope.

Seagal plays Robert Burns, a Professor of Chinese History, and Killing People. Naturally, he has a secret past that he keeps hidden when he is framed by a Triad family. He is obviously innocent, but for the sake of keeping the movie going, and thereby torturing the mind of anyone watching , the lead cop decides he must be guilty, and he is thrown into a Chinese prison. Naturally, the DEA decides that if they release Burns, he'll do their job for them and take out the Triads, and so Burns is free to on a global stroll of death.

Sometimes laughably bad, but generally very cringe-worthy, 'Out for a Kill' is easily one of the worst movies I've seen. Right from the start when we are treated to poorly done CGI bullet-time, followed by a massive break from action clichés when bullets actually penetrate a car and kill a good guy. Some clichés we can do without, but action movies need the bullet-proof cars. Bullet-proof cars are an essential part of action movies, and one element you just don't mess with.

I still haven't scratched the surface, because after Oblowitz (the director) spits in the face of action-movie values, we get treated to a plot, a very poor plot. Now, I don't think anyone anywhere has ever watched a Seagal movie expecting a good story, but when there is not enough action to distract us, we will start paying attention to such things. In this case, Seagal swears he will get vengeance, but to do so, he must follow a series of clues which are - get this - conveniently tattooed on the arms of every bad guy Seagal kills. Bravo. It would have been much easier for everyone if the Triad boss just invited Seagal over for a game of mahjong. Throw in a pair of useless and annoying cops who follow Seagal everywhere and many pointless scenes, and you may start to get an idea of how bad this movie really is.

There are a few action sequences in the movie, but maybe only two that are of any real worth. Sadly, the best bit of this movie is a scene in which Seagal takes on a monkey-boxer who can defy gravity. Well, there goes Seagal's unique style of using Aikido in action movies. A few more movies like this, and Seagal flicks are going to be nothing more than 3rd rate clones of Hong Kong action movies, mark my word. Most of the fights are poorly choreographed and poorly edited, all based around trying to make Seagal look like an action hero while trying to hide the fact that he is still out of shape. It worked in 'Half Past Dead', but not here.

Onto even more bad news: Here Seagal tries to act a lot, and his character is just boring. I never thought a boring action hero could exist, but here you are. He is more monotonous than usual, his character rarely says or does anything amusing (there is only one scene where his character does or says something cool) and just lacks personality. As for the bad guy, the movie returns to his office every few minute just so he can repeat what he has been saying for the whole movie, which is something like: "The professor is giving us trouble, we must get rid of him". I actually felt tempted to barrack for the bad guy, had he not been so repetitive and annoying.

Some final complaints: The special effects are pretty bad. Apart from the once-off terrible use of bullet-time, the fake backgrounds stand off as being laughable. Would filming in daylight have been that hard? As for Seagal speaking Chinese: it sounds worse than his use of Italian in 'Out for Justice'.

'Out for a Kill' is a terrible movie. Well deserving of its place in IMDb's worst 100 movies (it could probably take a higher spot...). I would not recommend it to fans of Seagal, but anyone willing to see something so bad it offends that it will offend good conscience should have a quick look - 1/10

Poor even by Seagal's standards – derivative, messy and delivered with less care and effort than a fast food burger

[bob the moo · 9 January 2006]

When he finds that his Chinese artefacts are really being used to smuggle drugs across the world, archaeologist Professor Robert Burns (no, really) makes a break for the border. His colleague dies in the ensuing chase but he makes it to safety, only to framed and arrested for the very crime of drug running. The American DEA get him released and he goes back home to his wife. However the criminals who framed him, come back after him and, when they miss him, kill his wife instead. Of course what they didn't know was that the mild mannered and slightly portly Professor was once one the world's greatest thieves and a martial arts expert to boot and, when he is struck, he strikes back.

Early on in this film, Professor Burns notes that pilot "Crash" Kupper used to fill proper airplanes and that his current job of flying rubbish little passenger planes shows that his career has really taken a turn for the worse. About 90 minutes later I couldn't help wonder how many takes they had to do of that scene before they were able to get Seagal to deliver the line without the irony bringing tears to his eyes (although his "highs" were never really that high were they?) because even by his standards "Out for a Kill" is a poor film, whose unimaginative title only hints at the dreariness to come. All the clichés are present – a hero who "used to be a top etc", a shady mastermind etc etc. None of it really engaged me and the globe-trotting nature of it just didn't work at all. Usually the action makes up for all the rubbish but here it was also pretty poor; the direction of them are unimpressive and attempts at something fancy in the barber shop were really just ridiculous.

The cast can do nothing to stop the rot, in fact they are a big part of the problem. In every scene Seagal looks like someone has just woken him up and that he just wants to get this all over and done with. He mumbles his way through it, only doing well with a bit of the action here and there. Goh is equally as bad and her narration is just plain awful in terms of dialogue and delivery. Johnson doesn't have much to do and just hangs around till someone decides he isn't needed any more. The support cast are made up of Asian actors who fill space on the screen and a baddie who we know is a baddie because he spends all his time in a big room, smoking – they must have shot all his scenes in about a week.

Overall this is a poor film and even fans of Seagal will struggle to find any value in this one. The direction is messy and derivative while the actual story could only aspire to those standards. The cast clearly are not up for it one bit and Seagal looks like a man carrying a crushed spirit as he repetitively goes through the motions with a lot of mumbling and a dead look in his eyes.

What a total disaster!

[USOutpost31 · 1/10 · 20 August 2003]

Where, oh, where do you begin talking about the plethora of problems with a film like this? This film is technically and artistically inept from beginning to end. It plays as if it were literally assembled out of scenes from other films and slapped together as this mess. Most of Seagal's dialogue was added in post-production because he's always speaking when he's out of frame -- an obvious sign that this thing - story and all - was basically created in the cutting room. The director uses odd transitions and focus pulls for no reason. Boring slow motion scenes are an obvious attempt to push the movie out to a full 90 minutes. Transitions are abrupt and make no sense -- all of a sudden Seagal is in the middle of a car chase that goes nowhere. Characters appear from nowhere, and lesser characters suddenly have voice-over inner monologues that make no sense. Every rule of common sense filmmaking and storytelling are completely broken. The plot makes no sense. Everytime we see the bad guys they are in the same room, at the same table, wearing the same clothes -- again, obviously shot in one day to piece this tub O' crap together in post production. The editing is choppy, the action clumsy, and the climax is a total joke. To be avoided at all costs. Surely one of the worst films made in recent memory. Seriously -- what were they thinking? Garbage.

Seagal fans avoid this turkey at all costs

[id247 · 1/10 · 31 December 2004]

I haven't seen The Foreigner but if it's the same director Michael Oblowitz, then avoid it and this film like the plague. Talk about directing/editing basics, this man has no idea of either when it comes to action films. I've liked most of Seagal's films but this is lower than the pits.

Oblowitz has no idea how to edit or direct an action film, he should go back to film school and start again. In fact Oblowitz don't bother.

A disaster for Seagal, the biggest bore of a film I've seen for a long time, to give it 1 out of 10 is being too kind.

Real Shyte.

Tough and two-fisted Seagal searching for vengeance in a short budget movie

[ma-cortes · 3/10 · 3 October 2008]

The picture starts with a brooding phrase : 'All warfare is based on the art of deception'. Robert Burns(Steven Seagal) is a professor of archeology, happily married(Kata Dobo), making excavations in Eastern China. When he discovers the existence a Chinese mob using archaeological pieces for drugs smuggling, the Chinese authorities suspect on Burns and is taken prisoner. He gets the freedom and returns US looking for vengeance. Meanwhile a group of Chinese mobsters encounter in Paris, it's the beginning of a new era. As Sai Li controls shipment in the French heroin market; Tang Zhili controls entire N.Y. drug conglomerate; Yin Qunshi from Sofia controls Eastern European drug cartel; Libo controls Shangai drug exports; Fang Lee from Paris , aka the Barber, controls Paris drug cartel, known to hire unique assassins; Mr Chang controls London drug money. Like all great conglomerates around the world, Chinese families are merging. An united Tong is powerful enough to push other syndicates out of business and will come a day when the Chinese families control entire market. The mobsters take special care so that nothing and no one interferes with a historic event, it will be the most important business transaction in the history of the Chinese family. Robert Burns is helped by two Dea agents, Tommie Ling(Michelle Goh) and Ed Grey(Corey Johnson).Tammie Ling based in Hong Kong investigates narcotics and other related crimes, assigned to work with an American agent, they have been in six countries in international drug ring. Burns gets a books of addresses in code, an ancient Chinese system used by messengers to the emperor, on the arm of every Chinese Tong member is tattooed a symbol from the emperor's code. Decoded and getting the boss'emperor, Wong Dai(Chooi Beh). Then Robert vow revenge and seeks the location of Sai lo(Ping Tang) the man who killed his wife. Si-Lo is using an old building in a laundry of Paris. Si-Lo made one very big mistake, he touched the most sacred thing in Burns'life, killing his wife and Robert is forced to dig two graves.

The film packs lots of noisy action, thrills and violence, but doesn't quite hang together. Wooden Seagal is efficient at dispatching the enemy, he kicks, punches, wags and uses blades against the nasties villains. The fight scenes are middling-choreographed and violent, flowing much blood . May be predictable , especially the graphic violence , but the action is fast though with no sense. This film belongs the Seagal's last period when he's doing low budget and direct to video films, such as 'Flight of fury, Mercenary of justice, Submerged, Belly of beast, Ticker', among others. The motion picture is badly directed by Michael Oblowitz who also directed him in 'Out for kill and The foreigner'.

Steven Seagull Lays a Rotten Egg

[mikevezina · 1/10 · 29 April 2012]

I only wish there was a rating below 1 for this turkey. What can I say: bad editing (oh and you don't have to be an expert to catch this), terrible acting and dialogue, ridiculous fight scenes, stupid character development and on and on.

Seagal must have been short on alimony payments or something to put this mess together and lay it our for viewers. Most action heroes get better with experience but Seagal'S earliest works are so superior to this.

Instead of being a semi-plausible character like a Navy Seal or CIA operative or cop, he plays an archaeologist who dresses like he's auditioning to be Neo in the Matrix or John Shaft. Looks completely ridiculous on a dig in the wilderness of China. They try to explain in hindsight where this professor got his superior kung-fu fighting skills, but it works as badly as their attempt to explain how a convict gets a doctorate in archaeology while in prison (without any field work of course).

Then there's the simple technical aspects of the film like being in Bulgaria, but all the signs are in English and the people are either Chinese or American. Even some of the Chinese dialogue is subtitled in English completely wrong.

Then there's the acting. First the movie contains some of the worst Steven Seagal pseudo Feng-Shui/Asian/mysticism/philosophical babblings that one could ever imagine. Stupid metaphors that apparently only make sense to him. Chooi King-Beh as Wong Dai is definitely the "Wrong Guy" as he desperately tries to deliver each line as some sinister comic book villain rather than the Chinese businessman that he is. Cory Johnson is equally as stupid as a FBI agent who has no role other than to wander through scenes and deliver lines that insult Catholics, Chinese and the French. What I didn't understand is how him and his partner seem to be able to walk around steps behind Seagal invisible to him and the Tong until almost the very end.

This is not even a good action film for those who enjoyed Seagal as Casey Ryback. The fight scenes are either prolonged patty-cake slapping with dubbed bone cracking to the height of dumb with the monkey style kung-fu in the barbershop complete with all the ridiculous gravity defying stunts of Crouching Tiger.

I cannot conceive of any audience other than reviewers for the worst film of 2003 that this movie would appeal to.

To Get Tired of Martial Art Films!

[Juan_from_Bogota · 3/10 · 19 April 2007]

This is a totally awful and boring movie.

I was impressed that a totally bad directing and mediocre script reached to be a Seagal film! Seagal did this movie with no pleasure, you can notice that, he's plain and bored trough all the movie; he usually don't move while fighting, but in this movie he almost fall asleep while taking down the bud guys. He also looks fat and like he just woke up. I like Seagal movies, but this is really awful. Some scenes have no meaning or sense, and some fights are absurd (Like the Kung Fu Monkey style guy that walks trough walls, i laughed at that!). The Chinese mafia (from all the world) meets always in the same place, and this scenes are put almost every 10 minutes in the film, all the time in the film they show the day and the place in red letters (without too much sense), like the comments of the Chinese mafia leaders in the beginning! This movie try to copy a bond film, taking Seagal trough the world as a 008 agent but without the toys and financial support of the British.

About the Movie: Seagal plays here the role of Archaeologist professor Robert Burns, excellent in the matter and who received a prize for his discoveries at Yale University. The story begins when an international Chinese drug mafia cartel tries to use the shipments of Archaeological discoveries from the Chineses border, to export drugs from China (these drugs look more like brown sugar), and Burn find out this and try to escape, in the pursuit, a student of him dies and he is believed guilty of homicide and drug traffic and is send to prison. Some DEA cops, due to their lack of exit chasing these drug lords, use professor Burns (believed guilty) as bait to get to this mafia. In this the Chinese try to kill the Proffesor in order to protect their operations; surprise that the professor is an martial arts expert by some reasons of his past, and the task became harder than they expected. The mafia consist of: (1) Sai Lo (heroin market in Paris), (2) Thang "The Bird" Zhili (New York drug market in Chinatown), (3) Yin Quinchi (Sofia Bulgaria Eastern Europe drug cartel) (4) Li Bo (drug export in Shanghai China) (5) Fang "The Barber" Lee (Paris drug cartel) (6) Mr. Chang (Drug money in London) and (7) Wong Dai, the boss and more powerful drug lord of all. The story takes place in different parts of the world (like a James Bond movie), specially in Chinatowns of all world.

About the Cast: Seagal, terrible!, the Chinese bad guys are the worst actors of all time!, Michelle Goh, beautiful but bad actress, and her DEA partner is even worse than the Chinese; i haven't seen such bad acting in months! (and i watch movies almost every day)

So bad, it's good!

[sacha_brady · 10/10 · 13 June 2005]

This film has such corny dialog; I was convinced it was written by Segal, himself. Mix this in with Segal's desperation to be perceived as a master of all things (the all-knowing, fortune cookie reciting Professor Burns who also happened to be the greatest art thief in the world before he decided he just wanted to be an acclaimed professor) and the Kung Fu Fantasy fight in the barber's shop and you have a film that'll live in infamy alongside Battlefield Earth and No Escape as must-haves for all Trash Movie collectors.

Steven is well beyond his prime, and no amount of tanning or polo-necks-acting-as-neck-disguiser/supporter can hide it. A visit to the hairdresser also seems in order. However, there is something irrepressible about Steven Segal.

I challenge anyone to watch this movie without laughing! Brilliant!

Cheap and gratuitously violent Seagal fun

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 30 September 2016]

There's something charming about the simplicity of this film's plot: it consists of an impassive Seagal working his way through a gang of Chinese Tong, murdering them one by one until his job is complete. That's it. No hassles, no interruptions, no sub-plots; just straightforward, methodological killing the way we like it. The surprise is that we get to see Seagal do some of his old fashioned kicking and Aikido kung fu methods, even sword-fighting at one point; seeing as his last film TICKER saw him sitting in a seat for the entire film, watching him back in action is a real surprise – and a guilty pleasure…

This film is cheap, of course. Every now and then a terrible visual effect will pop up to show you that. The dialogue is nothing to write home about and the locations look particularly cheap. The storyline is clichéd and ridiculous and even the title is cookie-cutter perfunctory. But somehow it all gels together and works for a change. Seagal is in the limelight again, his hair a little longer, his belly a little more rounded, but still kicking backside with the best of them. Watching him destroy Chinese villain after Chinese villain with his well-practised arm and neck-breakings is a pleasure long forgotten in his recent run of movies and it certainly delivers the action goods with almost non-stop fight scenes and death.

Some filler is thrown in with a Mulder and Scully pair of cops but their importance is minimal. What counts is the strong-arm violence, the sleazy strip-joints and nude dancers, and most importantly Seagal kicking backside. Watch out for the hilarious decapitation finale and the crazed fight scene in which Seagal batters a barber who knows the monkey style and flies along the walls at breakneck speed! This kind of imagination has been sorely lacking in similar Seagal flicks recently which again makes it a nice surprise. Far from his best, but if he keeps making these films then he's definitely back on track.

Awesome (for all the wrong reasons)

[Sandcooler · 2/10 · 28 March 2011]

I love how you can see Steven Seagal's career go down the drain just by looking at his titles. In the early 90s he used to be all "Hard To Kill" and "Out For Justice", here he's..."Out For A Kill"? What does that even mean? Does that mean like, any kill? Does he just kill the postman and call it a day? Never thought I'd ever be confused by a Steven Seagal movie, but here we are. The action in this movie is incredibly repetitive, it's the same pattern over and over again. Chinese mob guy sends over dudes to kill Seagal, doesn't work, sends new guys, doesn't work, new guys, doesn't work, same old same old. It's somewhat mind-numbing, but luckily you can still laugh at the poor fight scenes and at Seagal being as agile as a washing machine. It's a well-known fact that Seagal has often had fighting doubles in his more recent movies, but in this movie his outsourcing goes even further: he has a talking double. A whole bunch of his lines are dubbed over, around halfway I started to wonder if Seagal even knew he was in this movie. And the ending, oh God the ending. Nothing could prepare you for that. This movie pretty much defines "so bad it's good".

Not worth the effort.

[lost-in-limbo · 2/10 · 22 April 2019]

So I finally got around to watching my copy of Out for a Kill (2003) and ugh! I didn't realise this was seen as one of Steven Seagal's worst films. So after watching it, I can see why. I was so bored, that it eventually became background noise as I did other tasks while tuning in and out. The premise was fine, but the execution falls flat. Seagal being half-ass mumbling, or preaching his lines of wisdom, providing the same nothing impression (looking constipated) every scene (be it from discovering priceless artifices to the sudden death of loved ones) and then when it came to the action he magically appears out of thin air, swipes around his arms real fast to look like his giving it his all, but as usual the stuntmen along with the film editor are doing overtime to make "him" look good. Also some of the CGI was god awful... oh man, that bullet sequence!? Actually the whole archeology scenes at the beginning where Segeal's professor (mmm I know) character is framed, comes off laughably dumb in its set-up. However the stupidity of it all quickly turns into tedium.

The 3 is for the pretty woman

[tiestvdb · 3/10 · 30 March 2008]

Michael Oblowitz must have been stoned out of his mind and I will be avoiding movies made by him in the future. Watching this movie must be like a bad trip. The perspective is zooming in and out all the time and jumps from one location to an other so often it will make you dizzy watching. Though Seagal never was more than a martial art action hero, good OLD Seagal became a cartoon of himself trying to hide his fatness in a big leather coat, which hardly ever comes off. I think I saw him getting dressed in it when he woke up and went out of bed. Excuse me for not wanting to look at it again to make sure. Probably he became so slow that every fight scene was edited in slow motion with lots of smoke and flashes to make it look like a fight scene. He meets hoods in several parts of the world that are in a smoke filled room in the U.S.A. the next moment and back in Europe the next. At least the few women were pretty nice although they couldn't really act either.

How could you write a spoiler for this film?

[SlimAdey · 1/10 · 4 February 2006]

Great acting, brilliant plot, memorable dialogue, unforgettable music, inspirational directing - Out for a Kill is unquestionably none of these.

At least you've got to hand it to Steven Seagal who effortlessly maintains his unassailable position at the absolute pinnacle of the "films guaranteed to bomb" list with this non-performance in this non-film. (I was tempted to use the word wooden but trees show more expression that Seagal).

I swear, throughout this film Seagal's expression never changes.He adopts the same tight lipped expressionless face when his colleague gets shot, his wife gets blown up, he has to fight a man monkey (what the hell was that scene all about), he has to fight the obligatory several dozen Chinese Martial Arts experts armed with swords and guns who are inevitably no match for Steve who can't even be bothered to get up off his arse to fight in one scene and remains seated whilst he counters every punch and blow thrown with his greased lightening hands.

I think what happened with this film was, when they swept the cutting room floor up they mistakenly canned and released the rubbish on the floor and threw the film away. Its the only explanation as to how this 90 odd minutes of utter nonsense could have been put on general release.

Don't say you haven't been warned.

One of Seagal's worst films.

[DigitalRevenantX7 · 2/10 · 11 June 2015]

CAUTION: Plot spoilers present.

Esteemed archaeologist Robert Burns is shocked to discover that someone had been using the artefacts he had dug up to transport drugs. Panicking, he & his assistant make for the Chinese border but on the way there the assistant is killed by a stray bullet. Sent to jail, Burns is then released by the CIA as bait for the owner of the drugs – the Chinese mafia. Burns is reluctant to play along but when his wife is killed in a failed attempt on his life, Burns decides to single-handedly take on & defeat the Chinese mobsters.

Ever since his 1988 debut in ABOVE THE LAW, Steven Seagal has been one of the 1990s' action icons – a master of the brutal martial art of Aikido & part-time police officer in real life. But during the late 1990s, his career started to decline. He briefly turned to DTV land but after a brief return to the big league, Seagal ended up stuck in DTV wasteland for the remainder of the decade.

Before I get into the review for Out for a Kill, let me point out that I am not Seagal's biggest fan nor his harshest critic. He has made some decent films – the best being UNDER SIEGE – but he is not particularly good as an action hero. His brutal martial arts moves are so sadistic that they are a source of amusement for those who like brutal action (including myself) but Seagal has resulted in some real abominations – particularly the 1998 flop The Patriot. Having said that, his weakest pre-2003 films has been unfairly maligned – TICKER was a reasonable thriller if one goes into it with the right state of mind; HALF PAST DEAD was trashed by almost everyone but was entertaining in a dumb sort of way & THE FOREIGNER was average but not bad.

Out for a Kill is perhaps one of the worst action films I have seen in quite some time. The film is the second pairing of Seagal & The Foreigner director Michael Oblowitz & has been almost a complete disaster. Judging by what I saw on screen, it seems likely that a lot of the dialogue has been replaced by ADR looping since most of the actors (namely Seagal) end up being obscured by odd camera angles while speaking (perhaps the original dialogue was changed for some reason) & the film's pacing borders on the cinematically schizophrenic. This has been done before on other films, but not to the destructive extent it has here.

The film is beset by other problems as well. The plot is almost incomprehensible to understand & has clearly been put together in post. The acting is almost universally poor – chief villain Chooi Kheng Beh spends his role mainly sitting at a meeting room chair spouting stupid lines like "There will come a time when the Chinese (mafia) families will control the entire (drug) market" & lacks sufficient characterisation to be a real threat. The most disturbing part of the film is the poorly-done action scenes, with a couple of real turkeys like the fight between Seagal & a strange assassin who for some reason can climb on walls & keeps scratching his head as if he had a lice problem. The real prize moment of badness comes in the final confrontation where Seagal is stunned by a flashbang bomb & picks up a sword, walks to the window where he spots the villain running to his car & tosses the sword at him, decapitating him from a good ten feet away. I couldn't understand why the assassins all have tattoos revealing codes for the mob's safe but this is a minor problem in a film full of problems.

Out for a Kill is only to be enjoyed by those who have been chemically enhanced (I mean drunk or stoned) or those who can survive sitting through a turkey without suffering from badness overload. The worst part of this film is that it was the beginning of a very long road to ruin for Seagal's post-millennial career.

Seagal must be out for a kill on his fan-base

[Pilsung89 · 2/10 · 12 August 2007]

One good thing I can say about this movie is that it wasn't released in theaters. Steven Seagal made a few decent action movies early in his career, but this movie is proof that his abilities are going down the drain.

The plot is typical and underdeveloped. Seagal unintentionally gets in the way of a Chinese mob, they kill his wife, and he seeks revenge by killing them one at a time. Seeing that Seagal got into the movies mainly due to his martial arts, I wouldn't expect award-winning acting from him. His acting here, however, is horrible even for his standards. No one in this movie really acts. It sounds like they're all reading their lines right off of the script. This movie also features a common symptom of low-budget movies: meaningless subplots that just make the film go longer. Some examples include when the Chinese agent goes undercover for a couple minutes and suddenly turns into a Kung fu master, or when her partner experiences Deja vu that has no connection to the movie at all.

The fight scenes, the one thing we'd all expect to save the movie, don't. They were obviously trying to save money with a cheap fight choreographer. Of course, it is obvious that good ole' Seagal is fat and out of shape. Almost every angle in the fight scenes are either filmed behind Seagal, or from the waist down, so it's apparent Steven is using plenty of stunt doubles for the already bad fight scenes. The worst one was when Seagal fights one of the mobsters, and the entire fight is just a close-up of their hands waving around and smacking each other. Neither face is seen and all, and it doesn't even look like a fight, but rather a slapping contest. The only decent fight is when Seagal has to fight the two monks in the Monastery.

I highly recommend you don't get this movie. Go for a walk instead, that's more entertaining than this. I nearly fell asleep twice watching it. Stick to Seagal's early work.

Out for Boredom

[mazec666 · 1/10 · 9 January 2014]

Continuing with Seagal Month, "Out for a Kill" from 2003 is among the few movies he's made for Millennium Films. Budgeted at $14 million, this has better production values than "Flight of Fury" and that's not saying much. Clocking in at around 90 minutes, this feels like a four-hour biology lecture.

Our portly Buddha white boy plays Robert Burns (not the late production designer on the original "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre"), an unorthodox professor who wears leather coats on digging expeditions because he's cool. Or he might be covering his enormous gut whichever you figure out. After discovering ancient Chinese artifacts, Seagal finds himself chased by a million bad guys in a poorly-choreographed car chase where his female partner is murdered. He reaches the border and gets framed in this low-budget rendition of "Midnight Express." While spending a short amount of time in prison, Seagal befriends a stereotypical black guy who doesn't have anything to do with this film. Upon his release Seagal reunites with his wife whose also forgotten about and is killed in a superimposed explosion. Predictably, Seagal goes on a violent killing spree breaking the arms of every nameless Chinese extra in a series of over-the-top fight scenes that are desperately mimicking "The Matrix." The film is padded with scenes of the villain and his men sitting in a long table with subtitles and title cards galore reminding us of their dastardly deeds.

"Out for a Kill" is sleazy-looking for a direct-to-DVD action film and does it show. The computer-generated effects are the most horrible I've ever seen and so are the unconvincing backdrops. I swear, "Plan 9 from Outer Space" has Oscar-caliber FX and producing design compared to this. And the editing is like Paul W.S. Anderson on cocaine. The below-average but great-to-laugh-at fight scenes aren't any better. The good news is Seagal is doubled much less. But the bad news is that they are poorly edited to the max. However, Seagal's performance doesn't fare better as his voice constantly changes from his own to someone else. Also noted is that Seagal is filmed in the shadows to hide his oily skin and multiple chins. That is a prime example of laziness at its highest form. The other actors are even worse. Michelle Goh may be attractive but her performance is awful, awful, awful. Corey Johnson is only in the film until he's bumped off and collects a paycheck.

Did I mention that "Out for a Kill" is terrible? No. But it is. And at least it wasn't a stock footage movie.

Out of shape

[Prismark10 · 2/10 · 20 February 2015]

Steven Seagal has a decent run of action films in the early 1990s with Under Siege being the high point. His decline was swift as his ego got the better of him.

For years he has been out of shape, portly and with bad hair. He still has loyal fans hence the slew of straight to DVD releases which tends to have the same fight scenes. Seagal basically moving his hands around quickly.

Here Seagal plays an archaeology professor in China. The artifacts have been used by the Triad gangs to smuggle drugs and the somehow police think that this award winning expert is behind it and sent to jail.

The US cops get him released hoping that he would lead them to the bad guys, but as always Seagal is a man with a shady past and worse his idiocy leads to his wife being killed. Now he is bent on revenge and no amount of bad CGI will stop him.

This is a film if you want to see bad acting, bad dubbing, bad special effects, bad script and to see how the once mighty have fallen.

The high point is the monkey style kung fu fight scene.

An action-packed delight.

[FiendishDramaturgy · 8/10 · 19 August 2003]

Delve into the Chinese Underworld with Steven Seagal by your side and Michelle Goh's soft voice narrating the story. Provocative and Compelling!

Steven Seagal is archaeologist Robert Burns; renowned in his field and wanted by the Chinese Mafia, the Tong. It seems he's uncovered some very valuable artifacts in the ancient eastern ruins of China and they would like to see them used for more lucrative endeavors.

When Burns is framed for the murder of his assistant, he ends up being used by the American government as the carrot before the nose of the Tong.

His fight to the Emperor of the Tong is quite literally some of the most explosive martial arts assaults on film this year!

With Direction by Michael "Hounddog" Oblowitz, it surely wasn't what I expected. Although his direction of Seagal in "The Foreigner," 2003 and did a very fine job of it, I have otherwise been unimpressed with his talents, until now.

Very Well Done! The storyline is plausible, the backdrop is beautiful and exigent, the sets were very well furnished and added immensely to the atmosphere of the movie, and the casting choices were outstanding.

Seagal just gets better and better. His acting is exemplary; not at all like some of the other so-called martial artist/actors out there. He never misses a beat. Every strike is dead on, every step is in place, and his action sequences are never slow, fake or "hokey."

Sorry people, but I'm NOT a fan of the '70's "Flying Through The Air, Doing Impossible Leaps and Throwing Magick Out Of Our Hands" martial arts flicks. (Movies like THAT are "flicks," not movies.)

Michelle Goh really shines in her performance. I hope to see more of her talents on the big screen.

It gets an 8/10 from...

the Fiend :.

A Step in the right direction...

[rynlarson · 7/10 · 19 August 2003]

I just finished watching "Out for a Kill" which seemed to take a huge step in getting it right for Seagal giving back to the fans what they want to see from him. The supporting cast was the movie's biggest downfall, but the action sequences prove that Seagal still has it. The Foreigner was a huge disappointment after the cartoonish "Half Past Dead" (A Seagal movie should not be rated PG-13) and this is definitely a step up. As a monster Seagal fan it was a positive thing to hear that his straight to DvD releases are doing as well as they are, perhaps setting him up for a huge comeback with The Yakuza or US3. The martial arts were spectacular and held this movie together, and it was great to see Seagal finally break somebody's arm again (it has been since Exit Wounds...)...The only item that particuarly perplexes me is that anyone owning this DVD, looking at the cover art and also the disc one can get a glimpse of helocopters-why? There wasn't a single one in the film....Looking forward to Belly of the Beast.

THE Worst Film I've Seen...

[yatgohoyan · 1/10 · 29 November 2006]

Well, I would have awarded this on a "0" if I could have. cos this Shiite ain't worth anything else.

I'm not going into the plot as its none existent. Let's say, Seagal is a archaeologist, "Out for Justice". Other than that, you don't want to know.

I saw this film on TV the other day when it was on before "Bloodsport". The TV guide gave it one star more...WTF?!?!?! The f*****g Shiite ass wooden acting of Mr Seagull, resembles that of a fat, overweight wooden doll. Clearly impossible, but he pulls it off, in spectacular fashion. Plot is total arse and none of it is convincing!!! The fact he hasn't probably seen his pen-is in the last ten years clearly shows his craving for macho crap in this film, clearly the single worst film I've ever seen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!