Nowhere To Run is one of Van Damme's better films. It has a nice storyline and some good acting. The direction is tight and I lked the score also. Not bad, but will probably be overlooked because it's a Van Damme picture.
72 Reviews
Claude & Roseanna Show Off
ccthemovieman-110 April 2006
This is another Jean-Claude Van Damme action flick, but a definite notch above many of his other films, at least in production values. The photography and stereo sound are excellent.
Actually, this is pretty simple stuff and old storyline of a low-key good guy rescuing the girl from local meanies. Here, Van Damme defends Rosanna Arquette and her small kids.
In another respect, the movie is just another avenue for the two stars to show off their incredible bodies. Neither has ever been shy about doing that and certainly aren't in this movie. My only objection is having one of the kids make a sexual remark, which is done in here. There is no excuse for that.
Ted Levine, who has turned nice guy in the hit TV series "Monk," is an effective bad guy in here. He played a lot of villains before "Monk" came around.
Anyway, it's fairly low-brow entertainment, but at least it is entertaining and fun to watch.
Actually, this is pretty simple stuff and old storyline of a low-key good guy rescuing the girl from local meanies. Here, Van Damme defends Rosanna Arquette and her small kids.
In another respect, the movie is just another avenue for the two stars to show off their incredible bodies. Neither has ever been shy about doing that and certainly aren't in this movie. My only objection is having one of the kids make a sexual remark, which is done in here. There is no excuse for that.
Ted Levine, who has turned nice guy in the hit TV series "Monk," is an effective bad guy in here. He played a lot of villains before "Monk" came around.
Anyway, it's fairly low-brow entertainment, but at least it is entertaining and fun to watch.
Jean-Claude Van Damme Film Festival
lastliberal26 March 2007
Now, we are moving into what I consider a good Van Damme flick. The story has been told many times. It is similar in many respects to Romeo Must Die - evil developer wants to put up a kitzy development and needs to run off small landowners. Clydie (Rosanna Arquette) resists and her deputy dawg boyfriend (Edward Blatchford) is playing both sides. In comes the hard-ass to get things finished (a very young Ted Levine) and, at the same time our hero breaks out of prison and camps on her doorstep. It seems Van Damme is always either breaking out of prison or going AWOL. Relationships with her two cute kids begin and then things really heat up with mom. Boyfriend is jealous and it all comes to a head, as expected, between Van EDamme and Levine. Smaltzy ending, but great chases. fights, and lots of passion.
This was one of the best of 1993, no joke.
baumer23 September 1999
Van Damme has a reputation as a kickboxer or an ass kicker and a martial artist. No one really thinks he can act and the only reason he has a career in the movies is because he can do all those things and because women swoon over him. Being the quintessential guy, I am pretty much in the category of guys that likes to see him in films that are loaded with kicks to the head and punches to the stomach. It is a guy thing to want to see guys like Van Damme, Arnold, Sly and Seagal kick some major butt. But I have to admit that as much as I like some of his films that are action and nothing but, this film really blew me away. I was completely convinced with the love story and I felt for the characters. Jean Claude gives his best performance in here. And the sript being written by Eszetheras is perfect. This is a film that relies more on character and dialogue than it does kickboxing skills. And perhaps that alienates die hard Van Damme fans but for the rest of the audience out there this is a great step in the right direction. I have heard people that love his smashmouth style of film say that this is a more tame Van Damme and they don't like it that much, but when your films only gross about the same amount as a typical Friday the 13th film, it's safe to say that there is room to grow and Nowhere to Run is definitely growth. The only reason that people didn't go to see it is because it is Van Damme. But this has so much more to offer than just your typical action flick. The romance is fresh and Kieran Culkin is excellent as the young tyke who grows attached to Van Damme. It's just too bad Claude couldn't make more movies like this one because I really think people would warm up to this style of movie from him and eventually his box office appeal would grow. But as long he continues to make movies like Universal Soldier 2 and Knock Off, he will forever be stuck in that mold.
Nowhere to Run is a great film and when it came out in 1993, I remember making out my list for the ten best films that year, and yes, this one was on it. I highly recommend it. I think you will be surprised. However, if you are hard core and like to see his films with lots of kicks and blood and cheesy lines from guys like Bolo Yeung, then don't go see this one, it is too much of a movie for you to enjoy.
Nowhere to Run is a great film and when it came out in 1993, I remember making out my list for the ten best films that year, and yes, this one was on it. I highly recommend it. I think you will be surprised. However, if you are hard core and like to see his films with lots of kicks and blood and cheesy lines from guys like Bolo Yeung, then don't go see this one, it is too much of a movie for you to enjoy.
Great movie
glenn-major17 July 2020
"When push comes to shove, you'll be dealing with me."
docchainsaw20002 January 2004
"Nowhere to Run" is a 1993 action film with decent action star Jean Claude Van Damme. Although good for fans of the genre and Van Damme, it may be a let down for others. Why I myself am not a diehard Van Damme fan (at least he did "Hard Target"), I thought this movie was good. Why, you ask? Because it has Ted Levine as the bad guy.! Anyway, this movie caught me by surprise. I thought it would be one of those bad movies where stuff explodes just so you can watch stuff explode. But I found it to be a decent vehicle for it's stars, and you never can go wrong with Ted Levine. It's a nice little movie. 6 out of 10.
Modest ambitions, modest results
dinky-43 August 2001
Reactions to this movie seem to depend on one's appetite for action. Those hungry for it are disappointed while those looking instead for plot and character development are pleased. I tend to fall into the latter category but must point out that while "Nowhere to Run" ranks among the better Van Dammes, it relies too much on stock situations, (plucky woman defending homestead), and cliche characters, (corrupt business tycoon with oily smile). I'd also like to point out the good work of Edward Blatchford as the local Deputy Sheriff. It's a thankless part but he manages to make something of it, and no, I didn't read any dark psychological meaning into the scene in which he discovers Van Damme taking a shower. However, I did find utterly bizarre that moment at the dinner table when Patricia Arquette's little girl casually comments on the impressive size of a certain portion of Van Damme's anatomy. This was promptly followed by Arquette's comment that it was only average in size. Talk about weird!
Not JCVD best work. 5.5ish
welhof125 January 2023
On Facebook Van Damme was feeling nostalgic and mention this movie on the 30 year anniversary so I thought I'd give it a go and the rating was spot on, it wasn't that good.
The plot was just so dumb and cliche, common of these types of movies from this era. There was also these uncomfortable sexual innuendos with him and the kids and his penis. Just weird. The villains were some of the worst. Not even comical, just silly.
The scenery was pretty though. Where were they? Montana? They may have said.
Huge fan of these types of movies from this era but there are at least half of dozen of van dammes better work out there.
The plot was just so dumb and cliche, common of these types of movies from this era. There was also these uncomfortable sexual innuendos with him and the kids and his penis. Just weird. The villains were some of the worst. Not even comical, just silly.
The scenery was pretty though. Where were they? Montana? They may have said.
Huge fan of these types of movies from this era but there are at least half of dozen of van dammes better work out there.
A huge surprise
theskylabadventure25 April 2008
Having recently revisited my old Van Damme collection (my wife has developed a bit of a crush on JC), I have made my way through all the classics (Bloodsport, AWOL, Kickboxer, Death Warrant, Universal Soldier etc) and hugely enjoyed revelling in the guilty pleasure of watching a short, white Belgian dude kick the living snot out of everyone else on the screen. Why else would anyone go to see a Van Damme picture?
The last film I came to was Nowhere to Run. Having not seen it in a good ten years, and remembering it as slow-paced, indulgent and severely lacking in arse-kicking, I was not really expecting to be at all impressed. It's funny, looking through most of the reviews here, that two groups of people have clearly emerged. The first group, the Van Damme fans, are all complaining that this is not your average VD film and bitching about how they were cheated into watching a serious drama.
The other group are all up in arms at the fact that anyone would make a serious drama and cast Van Damme in it. I have a name for this group, but I doubt IMDb would publish it. Let's just call them w*nkers. Why the w*nkers, who clearly have an abundant dislike for the Muscles from Brussells, would go to see a film with his name above the title is beyond me. Cinesnobs have no place at a Van Damme show. I'll leave it at that.
The reason I felt compelled to write this review is that I am, admittedly, a bit of a Cinesnob, but I'm also happy to take a film for what it is. I like James Bond, I like Sonny Chiba, I like blaxploitation and I also fricking like Van Damme movies! What I did not expect, was for "a serious drama starring Van Damme" (trying saying that out loud without snickering) to be so Damme good! (Get it?)
The story is pretty simple, JC is an escaped con who happens upon a sleepy little town which is about to be pulverised by a nihilistic land developer (not surprisingly, a British one, played with appropriate menace by Joss Ackland). He befriends a little boy (not in the Michael Jackson way, though the boy in question is, ironically, Macaulay Culkin's younger brother, Kieran) and consequently gets rather chummy with the boy's mother. Happily, she is both widowed and incredibly hot. As if her being a still distraught widow weren't enough, she is also being harassed to a rather unreasonable degree by Ted Levine, who is hilarious and brilliant and the land developer's chief henchman. Cue Van Damme.
Sounds like the ideal recipe for another typical action flick, so I am willing to forgive those VD fans who felt cheated. What we actually end up with is a genuinely moving, well paced and hugely enjoyable action drama. It may sound unthinkable, but JC actually pulls his character off perfectly. Sam is mistrusting, awkward but ultimately striving to be a decent person. Director Mark Harmon made a very savvy decision in keeping JC's dialogue to a minimum, leaving him the task of creating a believable character with his face and body language alone. Don't believe the naysayers, JC delivers a truly surprising performance.
Rosanna Arquette also handles her role well, even if the character is flying dangerously close to stereotype. Her performance grounds the whole story, and we both care for her plight and admire her determination (the men in the audience will also admire her perfectly formed semi-naked body). The two kids were bound to be annoying, but they're certainly nowhere close to being as bad as they could have been.
The real star of this film is the consistently beautiful cinematography by the relatively unknown David Gribble. With scenery like this, you'd be hard pressed to go wrong with the external stuff, but the interiors are equally well shot.
The big let down, both in terms of cinematography and the film as a whole, is the truly lame action. There are only a handful of action sequences in the whole show, but they're easily the dullest moments in the film. When you have a good story, solid characters and a really well-cast group of fine actors, do you really need to throw in a bunch of crappy fights? Sadly, if you're selling this as a Van Damme picture, the answer is yes. So they had the courage to put JC in a serious role and give him the chance to prove that he can actually act, but they didn't have the balls to actually sell the film on this basis. The trailer says "Van Damme, as you've never seen him before" and then just gives us a bunch of poor action clips. Is it any wonder that nobody who actually bothered to see this film liked it?
If it weren't bad enough that the action scenes are badly shot and clumsily edited, they're also punctuated by really poor one-liners from JC ("Strike 3, you're out!" and "Au revoir, f**ker" are among the worst). One gets the feeling that there were differences in the opinions of the director and the star and the opinions of the producers and studio folk. Presumably, someone thought they had found a happy balance. Someone was wrong, and the film really suffers as a consequence.
If you can overlook this, and you're not watching the film either to complain that it's not a solid action flick or to complain that Van Damme is in a drama, you'll probably find yourself surprisingly impressed with the film.
The last film I came to was Nowhere to Run. Having not seen it in a good ten years, and remembering it as slow-paced, indulgent and severely lacking in arse-kicking, I was not really expecting to be at all impressed. It's funny, looking through most of the reviews here, that two groups of people have clearly emerged. The first group, the Van Damme fans, are all complaining that this is not your average VD film and bitching about how they were cheated into watching a serious drama.
The other group are all up in arms at the fact that anyone would make a serious drama and cast Van Damme in it. I have a name for this group, but I doubt IMDb would publish it. Let's just call them w*nkers. Why the w*nkers, who clearly have an abundant dislike for the Muscles from Brussells, would go to see a film with his name above the title is beyond me. Cinesnobs have no place at a Van Damme show. I'll leave it at that.
The reason I felt compelled to write this review is that I am, admittedly, a bit of a Cinesnob, but I'm also happy to take a film for what it is. I like James Bond, I like Sonny Chiba, I like blaxploitation and I also fricking like Van Damme movies! What I did not expect, was for "a serious drama starring Van Damme" (trying saying that out loud without snickering) to be so Damme good! (Get it?)
The story is pretty simple, JC is an escaped con who happens upon a sleepy little town which is about to be pulverised by a nihilistic land developer (not surprisingly, a British one, played with appropriate menace by Joss Ackland). He befriends a little boy (not in the Michael Jackson way, though the boy in question is, ironically, Macaulay Culkin's younger brother, Kieran) and consequently gets rather chummy with the boy's mother. Happily, she is both widowed and incredibly hot. As if her being a still distraught widow weren't enough, she is also being harassed to a rather unreasonable degree by Ted Levine, who is hilarious and brilliant and the land developer's chief henchman. Cue Van Damme.
Sounds like the ideal recipe for another typical action flick, so I am willing to forgive those VD fans who felt cheated. What we actually end up with is a genuinely moving, well paced and hugely enjoyable action drama. It may sound unthinkable, but JC actually pulls his character off perfectly. Sam is mistrusting, awkward but ultimately striving to be a decent person. Director Mark Harmon made a very savvy decision in keeping JC's dialogue to a minimum, leaving him the task of creating a believable character with his face and body language alone. Don't believe the naysayers, JC delivers a truly surprising performance.
Rosanna Arquette also handles her role well, even if the character is flying dangerously close to stereotype. Her performance grounds the whole story, and we both care for her plight and admire her determination (the men in the audience will also admire her perfectly formed semi-naked body). The two kids were bound to be annoying, but they're certainly nowhere close to being as bad as they could have been.
The real star of this film is the consistently beautiful cinematography by the relatively unknown David Gribble. With scenery like this, you'd be hard pressed to go wrong with the external stuff, but the interiors are equally well shot.
The big let down, both in terms of cinematography and the film as a whole, is the truly lame action. There are only a handful of action sequences in the whole show, but they're easily the dullest moments in the film. When you have a good story, solid characters and a really well-cast group of fine actors, do you really need to throw in a bunch of crappy fights? Sadly, if you're selling this as a Van Damme picture, the answer is yes. So they had the courage to put JC in a serious role and give him the chance to prove that he can actually act, but they didn't have the balls to actually sell the film on this basis. The trailer says "Van Damme, as you've never seen him before" and then just gives us a bunch of poor action clips. Is it any wonder that nobody who actually bothered to see this film liked it?
If it weren't bad enough that the action scenes are badly shot and clumsily edited, they're also punctuated by really poor one-liners from JC ("Strike 3, you're out!" and "Au revoir, f**ker" are among the worst). One gets the feeling that there were differences in the opinions of the director and the star and the opinions of the producers and studio folk. Presumably, someone thought they had found a happy balance. Someone was wrong, and the film really suffers as a consequence.
If you can overlook this, and you're not watching the film either to complain that it's not a solid action flick or to complain that Van Damme is in a drama, you'll probably find yourself surprisingly impressed with the film.
Good Old School
willbrailey31 March 2022
Nowhere to Run is a film that I put on expecting an explosive action spectacle. What I got was a legitimately solid performance from Jean-Claude Van Damme and 1 hour 30 minutes of beautiful cinematography in a peaceful countryside setting. There are hardly any cityscapes or townships in this movie and, for me, that gave it a unique appeal among other movies in the action & adventure genre.
I really recommend this one. Worth your time and attention. It hits that sweat spot of being badass, while making you feel relaxed and comfortable.
I really recommend this one. Worth your time and attention. It hits that sweat spot of being badass, while making you feel relaxed and comfortable.
Not expecting this one from Van Damme.
m-ramanan27 September 2022
RATED 5/10
Language: English
Source: Netflix
This is simple and templated action masala. The story is wafer thin and it has very good starting escape scene. Based on the story i was expecting some nice heroism and great action stunts.
It has more romance than stunts. Not used Van-Damme's full potential. Not even close to his old masala. Easily skippable one.
Its more on drama and that too highly predictable one. The story and characters are run of the mill and it add even more dullness to the movie.
How much you lower your expectation, this will not go with that. It is not typical Van Damme movie.
This is simple and templated action masala. The story is wafer thin and it has very good starting escape scene. Based on the story i was expecting some nice heroism and great action stunts.
It has more romance than stunts. Not used Van-Damme's full potential. Not even close to his old masala. Easily skippable one.
Its more on drama and that too highly predictable one. The story and characters are run of the mill and it add even more dullness to the movie.
How much you lower your expectation, this will not go with that. It is not typical Van Damme movie.
Nice guy saves the day in one of his better films
crazy-2317 February 2000
Escaped from prison, Van Damme camps out near a widow's home in the woods.
Sure there's some action in the movie with quite a number of punch 'em outs but the movie really should have been in the drama section, not the action section of rental stores. This is quite a change for Van Damme as he becomes a father to the fatherless, nice guy, gentleman, and town savior.
So the story was really good and damn Van Damme did a good job at his nice guy part. The funniest part is when he and the boy go into town for motorcyle parts and the sherrif dude asks him questions. Listen to how Van Damme pronounces 'motercycle' and 'Quepec'.
Sure there's some action in the movie with quite a number of punch 'em outs but the movie really should have been in the drama section, not the action section of rental stores. This is quite a change for Van Damme as he becomes a father to the fatherless, nice guy, gentleman, and town savior.
So the story was really good and damn Van Damme did a good job at his nice guy part. The funniest part is when he and the boy go into town for motorcyle parts and the sherrif dude asks him questions. Listen to how Van Damme pronounces 'motercycle' and 'Quepec'.
Such an awful-good film
bowmanblue21 July 2020
Do you like cheesy, bad, action movies from the eighties? If the answer is 'Yes' then you should find entertainment from 'Nowhere to Run' (even if it was made in 1993!). Jean Claude Van Damme has made some great films. And some equally bad ones. 'Nowhere to Run' lies so far in the 'bad' category that it transcends its terrible make-up and pushes through the negative to force its way back into the good category.
This time round Van Damme plays - yet another - slight variation of every other character he's ever played when he takes on the form of an escaped criminal who winds up helping a widow and her family protect their land against a bunch of cliched villains, lead by an 'uber cliched' British mastermind.
If you like action, then you won't find much of it here. Yes, there are the obligatory punch-ups and car chases, but they're not filmed particularly well and therefore you'll be shaking your head at how someone actually thought they would satisfy adrenaline junkies.
If you had some sort of 'action movie bingo' card, I reckon you could tick off pretty much every trope associated with the genre. And that's even before you mentioned the script. It's awful. In fact, there are some moments in the dialogue which just come so out-of-the-blue that you'll find yourself laughing at the sheer ludicrous randomness of the inclusion of such lines.
And yet for all its - many - faults, I found myself taking enormous entertainment from 'Nowhere to Run.' In some places I found myself laughing harder than many comedy films. It's not a film you should take seriously. If you stopped to over-analyse the plot for even a fraction of a second you'd find yourself trying to make sense of something that just isn't meant to be logical. If ever a film required you to put your brain 'on hold' then it was this one. Sheer popcorn fodder.
This time round Van Damme plays - yet another - slight variation of every other character he's ever played when he takes on the form of an escaped criminal who winds up helping a widow and her family protect their land against a bunch of cliched villains, lead by an 'uber cliched' British mastermind.
If you like action, then you won't find much of it here. Yes, there are the obligatory punch-ups and car chases, but they're not filmed particularly well and therefore you'll be shaking your head at how someone actually thought they would satisfy adrenaline junkies.
If you had some sort of 'action movie bingo' card, I reckon you could tick off pretty much every trope associated with the genre. And that's even before you mentioned the script. It's awful. In fact, there are some moments in the dialogue which just come so out-of-the-blue that you'll find yourself laughing at the sheer ludicrous randomness of the inclusion of such lines.
And yet for all its - many - faults, I found myself taking enormous entertainment from 'Nowhere to Run.' In some places I found myself laughing harder than many comedy films. It's not a film you should take seriously. If you stopped to over-analyse the plot for even a fraction of a second you'd find yourself trying to make sense of something that just isn't meant to be logical. If ever a film required you to put your brain 'on hold' then it was this one. Sheer popcorn fodder.
Disappointing for those waiting for action.
tuomas_865 March 2022
Frustration. When you start watching a movie that is defined as an action movie starring Van Damme, expect a great action or an allusion to it. It was hardly in this movie until the last 20min. Of course, otherwise there were momentarily small references to the action during the film. For example, if you're a real Van Damme fan this is part of the collection, but not because of its action. I would say more of a drama as a film that is lightly spiced with action.
Cliché-ridden.
DigitalRevenantX727 April 2008
Plot Synopsis: Sam, a convicted bank robber, is freed when the prison bus he is on is hijacked. On the run from the law, he comes to the aid of a woman & her two children who are being pressured to sell their land to corrupt developers.
"Nowhere to Run" is one of the numerous films featuring Belgian martial arts legend Jean-Claude Van Damme. The film, like many of Van Damme's work, does not rank too highly when it comes to things like acting, script or even direction. Director Robert Harmon, who helmed the excellent "The Hitcher", manages to keep things from going out of control. The script is simplistic, bordering on clichés the good guy convict, the embattled single mother, the shady developers, even the corrupt sheriff. As usual, Van Damme makes a meal out of his role, while the two kids should have been taught a serious lesson on not to talk to strangers. Joss Ackland & Ted Levine play the villains quite well.
"Nowhere to Run" is one of the numerous films featuring Belgian martial arts legend Jean-Claude Van Damme. The film, like many of Van Damme's work, does not rank too highly when it comes to things like acting, script or even direction. Director Robert Harmon, who helmed the excellent "The Hitcher", manages to keep things from going out of control. The script is simplistic, bordering on clichés the good guy convict, the embattled single mother, the shady developers, even the corrupt sheriff. As usual, Van Damme makes a meal out of his role, while the two kids should have been taught a serious lesson on not to talk to strangers. Joss Ackland & Ted Levine play the villains quite well.
Actually a good movie
Matador0730 July 2010
The ridiculously low rating on IMDb at the time of this posting (5.0) aside, this has long been in my opinion the highest quality of all of Van Damme's flicks. By highest quality I don't mean best fight scene, most over the top cheesy premise, best gore, or anything else. I mean best quality as in an actual quality movie that just happened to star Jean Claude Van Damme.
The cinematography in the movie is excellent, so is the score, and in a real rarity in a Van Damme movie, so for the most part is the acting. Rosanna Arquette plays damsel in distress without ever being weak or pathetic and injects a nice touch of forlorn longing into it, the younger Culkin turns in one of the better child performances you are likely to see from an 8-9 year old, and they get two nice performances from the main baddies, who play evil as steely eyed rather than screaming slobbering over the top. And of course the biggest surprise is Van Damme himself, who probably gave the best performance of his career, although that is both faint praise and I think at least in part because he found a role where his character not emoting fit perfectly.
This is not a 10, although I must admit to being tempted to give it one as part of the stupid IMDb pump the ratings of a film you liked game. The plot is largely derivative of a number of old westerns (Shane comes to mind), the action sequences are fine but not thrilling (I think a large part of the low rating comes from disappointed action junkies), and in general this is a movie aiming lower than a 10 as I would define it. Its trying to be good, not great, but don't let the naysayers confuse you -- it largely succeeds, and is perhaps the only Van Damme movie you can watch (even the entertaining ones) that does not leave cheese dripping down the screen. Solid entertainment.
The cinematography in the movie is excellent, so is the score, and in a real rarity in a Van Damme movie, so for the most part is the acting. Rosanna Arquette plays damsel in distress without ever being weak or pathetic and injects a nice touch of forlorn longing into it, the younger Culkin turns in one of the better child performances you are likely to see from an 8-9 year old, and they get two nice performances from the main baddies, who play evil as steely eyed rather than screaming slobbering over the top. And of course the biggest surprise is Van Damme himself, who probably gave the best performance of his career, although that is both faint praise and I think at least in part because he found a role where his character not emoting fit perfectly.
This is not a 10, although I must admit to being tempted to give it one as part of the stupid IMDb pump the ratings of a film you liked game. The plot is largely derivative of a number of old westerns (Shane comes to mind), the action sequences are fine but not thrilling (I think a large part of the low rating comes from disappointed action junkies), and in general this is a movie aiming lower than a 10 as I would define it. Its trying to be good, not great, but don't let the naysayers confuse you -- it largely succeeds, and is perhaps the only Van Damme movie you can watch (even the entertaining ones) that does not leave cheese dripping down the screen. Solid entertainment.
Standard fare for Van Damme
TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews10 February 2006
It's written by Joe Eszterhas(Basic Instinct)... yet it's virtually entirely uneventful. It's directed by Robert Harmon(The Hitcher, which I haven't seen but is said to be at least mildly interesting), yet barely holds your interest at all. It features Jean-Claude Van Damme(a man known and loved for Karate) yet has little to no fighting at all. The story isn't particularly involving. The plot is dull. The acting ranges, but most of it is Damme's standard. Oh yes, it *is* that bad. I enjoyed Ted Levine's character, but really, when you get to see that guy do his thing, how can you not? The action is as non-existent as it is uninspired. The writing, dialog and humor is pretty dim. The characters are clichés, one-note and poorly developed. The whole romance subplot just barely works. The leads are unappealing and lack charisma. The kids are more annoying than anything else. The film is ridden with action-flick clichés... that and Van Damme's rather poor excuse for acting kept me laughing rather than watching in excitement... I was on the edge of my seat for a fair bit of the time spent watching it, but that was because I almost fell of my chair from aforementioned laughing. I had seen this film once before, a few years back... and I remembered it as forgettable, not really worth my time and thoroughly unimpressive. As it turns out, my memory is not all that bad. Luckily, I didn't waste too much time paying attention this time around; I recognized most from the last time I watched. I guess it had etched itself on my mind, in order to keep me from forgetting how drab the film is. All in all, I suppose it's OK for big fans of Van Damme, just remember that this is not one of those of his films(meaning, the vast majority of them) where he kicks his way through all obstacles. Look elsewhere for that. I recommend this only to fans of Van Damme, as everyone else just won't see the point to it(as I did on this second viewing, after not being a fan of Damme's anymore). 5/10
Surprisingly good
senrav27 September 2003
I had heard that this movie wasn't typical Van Damme, but I still expected it to be mindless action on the whole. I was shocked when it turned out to be truly well done, and not just for a Van Damme movie. The acting is great, especially Rosanna Arquette's performance, and the story is not cheesy at all--it's actually compelling. The (sparse) fight sequences don't involve any weird Van Damme midair split-kicks to the head; they're straight-ahead brawls. This is definitely Van Damme's best, focusing on story and not action, but I guess his presence makes a lot of people overlook it. My rating: 8/10.
culkins are creepy
bioluminessa8511 November 2020
All in all this was one of jean claudes better movies. the storyline was okay and the acting was good. i did think it was over the top creepy that the mom was talking with a 7 year old and a 5 year old about having sex and letting a stranger sleep in her bed, but maybe that's life down on the farm. negatives; the fighting wasn't over the top and we didn't see any unnecessary splits or leg kicks, which i think are essential to JCVD films.
Could have been very good,if only the directing was'nt so awful.
wellthatswhatithinkanyway1 July 2000
STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs
Nowhere To Run carefully conveys some touching,poignant moments,absent from every other Van Damme film except Legionnaire,but clumsily portrays them.The charecter development is poorly worked out,with potentially great charecters to build on either being killed off too early,or too quick to shed their skin.More of the film Van Damme obviously concentrated on being more dramatic,but ultimately the action scenes are as usual,especially so at the end,what take over,but again,this is too rapidly conveyed to have any real lasting effect,other than to do what any other basic Van Damme film would do.For a truely dramatic break from the norm,Legionnaire remains the Van Damme film to talk about.**
Nowhere To Run carefully conveys some touching,poignant moments,absent from every other Van Damme film except Legionnaire,but clumsily portrays them.The charecter development is poorly worked out,with potentially great charecters to build on either being killed off too early,or too quick to shed their skin.More of the film Van Damme obviously concentrated on being more dramatic,but ultimately the action scenes are as usual,especially so at the end,what take over,but again,this is too rapidly conveyed to have any real lasting effect,other than to do what any other basic Van Damme film would do.For a truely dramatic break from the norm,Legionnaire remains the Van Damme film to talk about.**
Van Damme was a huge part of the 90's for me!!!
lukem-5276014 June 2021
"NoWhere to Run" is another pure 90's Van Damme action flick & it's a decent film with a good performance by Van Damme as the lone hero, man-on-the-run convict who stumbles upon a nice farmland & farmhouse to hide out & ends up helping the a single mum (Rosanna Arquete) & her kids. This is a nice story actually & Van Damme is good in the acting department & in the action department. Damme ends up helping fight back against some land developer villains (a great Ted Levine) & protecting the family.
Yes there's some cheesy bits but it's an action Thriller with a heart.
Now the 90's wouldn't of been the 90's without Van Damme & his movies!!!! Growing up as a teen during that great time i was massively into Van Damme & couldn't wait for his next movie to come out & i would buy it straight away on video, Awwww Nostalgia & big love for my childhood hero Van Damme.
Yes i grew up on Schwarzenegger, Stallone & Seagal too but it was Van Damme's films that i watched constantly & consider some of his as Action Classic's & some of my all time favourite films like his Apocalyptic Action Masterpiece CYBORG (1989) that's a true childhood Classic of mine, also the John Woo action extravaganza HARD TARGET (1993) & the fun & action-packed DOUBLE IMPACT (1991) & the gritty & tough A. W. O. L (1990) & the brutal prison Action Thriller DEATH WARRANT (1990) plus many more that i genuinely love too like Time Cop, Sudden Death, Maximum Risk & Universal Soldier. Van Damme was such a big part of the 90's & my childhood.
Nowhere to Run is another good action Thriller & a nice 90's time capsule of those better times.
Yes there's some cheesy bits but it's an action Thriller with a heart.
Now the 90's wouldn't of been the 90's without Van Damme & his movies!!!! Growing up as a teen during that great time i was massively into Van Damme & couldn't wait for his next movie to come out & i would buy it straight away on video, Awwww Nostalgia & big love for my childhood hero Van Damme.
Yes i grew up on Schwarzenegger, Stallone & Seagal too but it was Van Damme's films that i watched constantly & consider some of his as Action Classic's & some of my all time favourite films like his Apocalyptic Action Masterpiece CYBORG (1989) that's a true childhood Classic of mine, also the John Woo action extravaganza HARD TARGET (1993) & the fun & action-packed DOUBLE IMPACT (1991) & the gritty & tough A. W. O. L (1990) & the brutal prison Action Thriller DEATH WARRANT (1990) plus many more that i genuinely love too like Time Cop, Sudden Death, Maximum Risk & Universal Soldier. Van Damme was such a big part of the 90's & my childhood.
Nowhere to Run is another good action Thriller & a nice 90's time capsule of those better times.
Single (mom) at home
kosmasp28 July 2021
So Kevins brother is in this ... the Home Alone kid if you were wondering. But this is not what the movie is about, though small trivia like that really is funny to me - maybe you can get something out of it too. No this was supposed to be the movie that made van Damme a respectable actor. Something that never materialized ... well maybe with the movie JCVD ... but even then or after that, he never really got many roles that challenged his acting abilities.
And while it isn't too clear from this movie either, he is able to act. Not just when his life depends on it - actually it seems to be the case only when it isn't ... or was that just a pun? Probably just the latter - and I was (or sort of still am) a fan of van Damme. Unfortunately he for many reasons never climbed to the top. For a short period of time, it seemed like he was - but that was ... well short lived.
Short lived, something that can be said about people who are in prison. Unless they escape - but where can they run after they escape? Well there are worse places than Rosanna Arquettes place ... and her bed. Overall decent, but not what van Damme (or his manager?) thought it would be.
And while it isn't too clear from this movie either, he is able to act. Not just when his life depends on it - actually it seems to be the case only when it isn't ... or was that just a pun? Probably just the latter - and I was (or sort of still am) a fan of van Damme. Unfortunately he for many reasons never climbed to the top. For a short period of time, it seemed like he was - but that was ... well short lived.
Short lived, something that can be said about people who are in prison. Unless they escape - but where can they run after they escape? Well there are worse places than Rosanna Arquettes place ... and her bed. Overall decent, but not what van Damme (or his manager?) thought it would be.
"Have you ever seen pink flamingos?"
lost-in-limbo4 September 2011
I've never seen this film in its full entirety, until now. But no way is this just brainless action fodder. Jean Claude-Van Damme takes on somewhat a different approach with this dramatically agreeable vehicle, tending to be mellower where violence is seen as a backup method. Still when it comes to shove, it doesn't disappoint neither does a stoically brooding Van Damme. The basic premise is almost a familiar classic outline, think of such westerns as "Shane" or "Pale Rider" but modernized. A prison escapee with a past comes to the aid of a widower and her children who are harassed by pitiless property developers wanting her land. Most of the time is spent with Van Damme developing a relationship with the family, as redemption also becomes a big part of his motivation. Quite slow-going and meditatively talky with some complicated matters, as it doesn't go full-ball until the last heroic 15 minutes with some miraculous stunt-work and intense action. However you feel compelled nonetheless, just like Van Damme's character is to seeing this innocent family get through the ordeal. For most part Van Damme is stealing salt, camping out reading nude magazines, playing family man, giving lawyer advice, being a fireman, finding time to be a mechanic, getting into biting confrontations with a hard-boiled Ted Levine and sharing lovelorn glances with a headstrong Rosanne Arquette. Everything here is straight-forward, but it's ably directed by Robert Harmon ("Hitcher 1986") with some particularly well photographed valley locations, a grand score and skilfully implemented activity. The script is generic, but all of its moodiness is there to build-upon its rough tactics and implosive exchanges. Not a bad film.
"I don't want to sell it."
"I don't want to sell it."
Falls flat after exciting opening...
moonspinner5512 June 2008
Joe Eszterhas co-authored this screenplay (from an original treatment by he and Richard Marquand) about a convict (the able-bodied but colorless Jean-Claude Van Damme) who is on the run from the law after a prison-bus breakout. He takes up with a small town single mom (Rosanna Arquette) who seems ready to love him no matter what his crimes! Vehicle for action-star Van Damme begins quite well but quickly degenerates into sap and silliness. Eszterhas' plot is thin and derivative, not to mention ridiculous, and Arquette is pretty much wasted. There's a surprisingly minimal amount of visual excitement after the opening bust-out; that's all well and good, except that nothing of interest takes its place. *1/2 from ****
Best part of the film was Rosanna Arquette
smatysia1 January 2014
This was obviously an attempt to (somewhat) break type for Jean-Claude van Damme. While there are a number of action scenes, (motorbike chase, etc.) the fighting scenes stayed away from the martial arts that van Damme was known for. They were largely conventional movie fighting. His character was largely monosyllabic, and a lot of the dialog and supposed zingers were quite lame. Joss Ackland as the slimily evil land developer was reliably hate-able. The best part of the film was Rosanna Arquette, as the widow van Damme's character protects/ takes up for/ falls for. She was quite beautiful here, and shows some range. Too bad it was wasted on a poor to medium script. No real reason to watch this unless you are a fan of one these actors.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
