FA+
Shop
Film Review - Under Siege 2
7 years ago
After the success of Die Hard, there was a bunch of films that tried to cash in by copying the overall concept. You know a Die Hard clone if it can be summed up as "Die Hard on a X". The original Under Siege was one such film, being "Die Hard on a boat" and starring Steve Seagal who was a Navy Seal who was acting as the ships cook when the boat was hijacked by terrorists trying to steal missiles. I guess it was successful as it spawned this sequel.
I was going to watch it's a mad mad mad mad world, but ended up watching Under Siege 2 instead. Hey, it happens.
The film is once again a Die Hard clone, this time being Die Hard on a train. The police captain from Law and Order: Criminal Intent is a mad genius that, with a bunch of mercinary goons, hijacks a passenger train. He needs this train so he can have an always moving outpost to hack into America's sattelite laser/earthquake machine. No, it doesn't sound that stupid in context. Of course, this happens to be the train that Ryback, aka Steve Seagal, is on.
Now, common opinion dictates that you can only like 90s action films if you do so with an Africa sized slice of irony, but I disagree. These action films hold up well and are well put together. The bad guys, with the exception of the final fight scene, are fairly intelligent, and it's hard to find obvious faults with their plans and execution. When someone does do something stupid, they are rightly called out for it. For example, in one scene, Ryback is wounded and falls over the side of the train. The goons report back that he's dead. The boss demands to know if the goon actually saw the body, and when he says no, he receives a slap and is told to sweep the train and find the body. Or when a goon disappears, they send someone to check on him. Now, there are a few scenes where you could argue why didn't they do X, or Y, but for the most part their actions make sense.
One point I've beaten into the ground in previous reviews, but it bares repeating. This being a pre-2000s film means that CG is kept to a minimum. Outside the occational obvious green screen, stunt double, or dummy, the effects and stunt work are well done. One particularlly impressive stunt was a faily low key stunt. A goon who is set on fire and falls down some stairs before running around a bit. Kudos to that guy.
The final fight is a bit underwhelming, due in part to it being one of the genuine moments of stupidity on behalf of the villains, and the fact that he's so out classed he barely gets a hit in. It comes across as a bit mary sue, and seems to only exist to have a final fist fight.
Still, I liked Under Siege 2. Is it the best film ever made? Hell no. But you can do worse.
I was going to watch it's a mad mad mad mad world, but ended up watching Under Siege 2 instead. Hey, it happens.
The film is once again a Die Hard clone, this time being Die Hard on a train. The police captain from Law and Order: Criminal Intent is a mad genius that, with a bunch of mercinary goons, hijacks a passenger train. He needs this train so he can have an always moving outpost to hack into America's sattelite laser/earthquake machine. No, it doesn't sound that stupid in context. Of course, this happens to be the train that Ryback, aka Steve Seagal, is on.
Now, common opinion dictates that you can only like 90s action films if you do so with an Africa sized slice of irony, but I disagree. These action films hold up well and are well put together. The bad guys, with the exception of the final fight scene, are fairly intelligent, and it's hard to find obvious faults with their plans and execution. When someone does do something stupid, they are rightly called out for it. For example, in one scene, Ryback is wounded and falls over the side of the train. The goons report back that he's dead. The boss demands to know if the goon actually saw the body, and when he says no, he receives a slap and is told to sweep the train and find the body. Or when a goon disappears, they send someone to check on him. Now, there are a few scenes where you could argue why didn't they do X, or Y, but for the most part their actions make sense.
One point I've beaten into the ground in previous reviews, but it bares repeating. This being a pre-2000s film means that CG is kept to a minimum. Outside the occational obvious green screen, stunt double, or dummy, the effects and stunt work are well done. One particularlly impressive stunt was a faily low key stunt. A goon who is set on fire and falls down some stairs before running around a bit. Kudos to that guy.
The final fight is a bit underwhelming, due in part to it being one of the genuine moments of stupidity on behalf of the villains, and the fact that he's so out classed he barely gets a hit in. It comes across as a bit mary sue, and seems to only exist to have a final fist fight.
Still, I liked Under Siege 2. Is it the best film ever made? Hell no. But you can do worse.
