VALUTAZIONE IMDb
3,7/10
2282
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Un signore della droga viene catturato e trattenuto segretamente da sei agenti statunitensi in un hotel a Constanza, in Romania.Un signore della droga viene catturato e trattenuto segretamente da sei agenti statunitensi in un hotel a Constanza, in Romania.Un signore della droga viene catturato e trattenuto segretamente da sei agenti statunitensi in un hotel a Constanza, in Romania.
Lauro David Chartrand-Del Valle
- Eric Ramirez
- (as Lauro Chartrand)
George Remes
- Chief Cristi Badea
- (as Remes George)
Adina Eady
- Luca Negru
- (as Adina Galupa)
Bryan Byrne
- Assistant SWAT FBI Leader
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Trama
Lo sapevi?
- QuizGeorges St-Pierre was not paid to be in this movie with money. In exchange for his performance, he wanted Steven Seagal.to teach him the same secret front kick that Seagal to Anderson Silva.
- BlooperIn the shot when Steven Seagal and Georges St-Pierre fall off a ledge during their fight, Steven Seagal is obviously replaced with a stunt-double who is much thinner and has a completely different face.
- Citazioni
John Harrison: I was not born on the fucking turnip truck, man!
Recensione in evidenza
Steven Seagal has done some good, or at least watchable, films. Particularly 'Under Siege'. He has also done a lot of mediocre and less films, indicative of laziness and that Seagal was well past his sell by date, and a good deal of them are even very bad.
'Killing Salazar' is one of the very bad ones, with exactly the same time as 'Contract to Kill' except not quite as bad. Awful even, and for me if ranking Seagal's filmography from best to worst it would be towards the bottom. Did not expect much, but watched it because Seagal has shown signs that he can be halfway decent and as said not all his films are bad. Also do appreciate the action genre and there are good films out there in the genre, classics even. 'Killing Salazar' is far from that, more closer to a waste of time that shows little signs of trying.
Seagal himself, in a role that is not a lead but more an extended cameo, gives another lazy and wooden performance that shows that he was not interested and wanted to be somewhere else. His reading-from-an-autocue-like and robotic line delivery in particular betrays that. The rest of the cast are just as poor though in all fairness have little to work with and over-compensate.
The characters are ones we know very little about and don't care what happens to happen, so unengaging and one-dimensional they are. The dialogue is risible, with a lot of cheesiness, awkwardness and far too much talk delivered with little emotion or momentum and bordering on the near-incomprehensible.
Its excessively talky nature affects severely the pacing, which never comes to life. There is no urgency, let alone tension, intrigue or suspense. The action doesn't feature enough in comparison and suffer from pedestrian choreography and laughably bad editing. The story is by-the-numbers, dull and not always easy to follow.
Direction is flat and ill-at ease, while the sound/soundtrack are one-note and obvious as well as poorly recorded and the whole film looks cheap. And it's not just the editing, the slapdash effects and drab photography.
Overall, a mess in every single way. 1/10 Bethany Cox
'Killing Salazar' is one of the very bad ones, with exactly the same time as 'Contract to Kill' except not quite as bad. Awful even, and for me if ranking Seagal's filmography from best to worst it would be towards the bottom. Did not expect much, but watched it because Seagal has shown signs that he can be halfway decent and as said not all his films are bad. Also do appreciate the action genre and there are good films out there in the genre, classics even. 'Killing Salazar' is far from that, more closer to a waste of time that shows little signs of trying.
Seagal himself, in a role that is not a lead but more an extended cameo, gives another lazy and wooden performance that shows that he was not interested and wanted to be somewhere else. His reading-from-an-autocue-like and robotic line delivery in particular betrays that. The rest of the cast are just as poor though in all fairness have little to work with and over-compensate.
The characters are ones we know very little about and don't care what happens to happen, so unengaging and one-dimensional they are. The dialogue is risible, with a lot of cheesiness, awkwardness and far too much talk delivered with little emotion or momentum and bordering on the near-incomprehensible.
Its excessively talky nature affects severely the pacing, which never comes to life. There is no urgency, let alone tension, intrigue or suspense. The action doesn't feature enough in comparison and suffer from pedestrian choreography and laughably bad editing. The story is by-the-numbers, dull and not always easy to follow.
Direction is flat and ill-at ease, while the sound/soundtrack are one-note and obvious as well as poorly recorded and the whole film looks cheap. And it's not just the editing, the slapdash effects and drab photography.
Overall, a mess in every single way. 1/10 Bethany Cox
- TheLittleSongbird
- 2 lug 2018
- Permalink
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Cartels?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 6.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 37.766 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 35 minuti
- Colore
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti