Silent Trigger (1996) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
47 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
More like an art-house movie than an action thriller
Leofwine_draca21 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
A cat and mouse game between a heroic sniper and sinister assassins, all set in a super high-rise building miles above the ground, directed by Russell Mulcahy, the man who gave us that '80s cult classic HIGHLANDER. It's a premise that can't go wrong, right? Wrong, unfortunately, as Mulcahy yet again proves himself to be a one hit wonder with this watchable but disappointing story that suffers from a slow pacing, a lack of decent action, and a budget that really hurts. You know the film is in trouble when there are only four cast members and the story is set in one location, but despite this, there are flashes of style and inspiration to keep you watching and wanting more. For a start, the camera-work isn't bad at all and manages to make the setting pretty interesting, if bleak; a deserted and run-down building soaked by the constantly pouring rain and covered in grime, littered in dirt.

Into this setting comes all-round action man Dolph Lundgren, one of the more dependable actors in the straight-to-video crowd whose work I'm quite fond of; his highs may not be as high as the high points in Van Damme's and Seagal's respective careers, but at least he usually hits the mark more often than those two with his movies and rarely lets his audience down. Here, we see Lundgren putting in a solid performance as the conscience-ridden sniper with a background; although his character is kept mysterious throughout, Lundgren's subtle (let nobody call it wooden) portrayal keeps his Waxman character interesting, whilst still proving himself a force to be reckoned with in the various action bouts.

Unfortunately the rest of the cast attempt to match Lundgren at his game but their bids do not pay off. Partly at fault is Gina Bellman as the contact Clegg; her character is perhaps even more mysterious than Lundgren's but she fails to connect with the audience, even when emoting; her character always seems cold and distant and never really explored as well as it could be. Then there's George Jenesky as Klein, a security guard with a surprising secret that only comes out in the latter stages; his acting is barely existent with only the odd emotion flickering across his face about every twenty minutes or so. The opposite can be said of Christopher Heyerdahl, who at least puts in an enjoyable if over-acted performance as drug-addicted guard O'Hara, a vile would-be rapist who hallucinates that killer spiders are out to get him.

Most of the action sequences take place in flashback, and prove to be brief but well-staged. They're also exceptionally violent, with deaths occurring in slow motion and loving zooms on blood erupting from human bodies and necks being slashed open with knives. In fact in this respect it's actually gorier than many a horror film I've seen and certainly a surprise to see such violence on terrestrial television. After an incredibly slow first hour (which introduces and explores the characters to a minimal level, whilst they walk and sit around a lot) there is one major set-piece towards the finale which provides something of what I was expecting from this movie, but it really isn't enough and the end result is that I'm left feeling a little cheated. A waste of Lundgren and a bare minimum of an entertainment value, SILENT TRIGGER is recommended for dedicated drama fans only, as its cold atmosphere makes it seem more like an art-house movie than the action flick which it masquerades as.
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you"
The_Phantom_Projectionist20 December 2015
Dolph Lundgren's 1996 vehicle here is a pretty unique production. A 90s action-thriller with heavy existentialist aspirations, the feature manages to attain most of its ambitions via the surprisingly careful touch of director Russell Mulcahy. It's got some problems that threaten my rating and may limit it to a niche audience, but for the most part, this is a successful experiment the likes of which Lundgren has yet to reproduce.

The story: A mysterious sniper (Lundgren) and his spotter (Gina Bellman) face a series of internal and external threats as they prepare to eliminate a target from an unfinished high-rise building.

From a thematic standpoint, this is an extremely ambitious effort for an action movie starring a performer best known for punching people. The first time I saw it, I thought of how easily this could have been turned into a play. There are only four prominent cast members, all generally inhabiting a single location, and there is an emphasis on character scenes with few action highlights. Sergio Altieri's screenplay mixes a typical action premise with heavy doses of noir and a touch of absurdity, creating a micro-world wherein alien codes of conduct are natural and the namelessness of characters is taken for granted. Though Russell Mulcahy can be a heavy-handed director, he's very in tune with Altieri's story and manages to create a tense, intimate atmosphere that's oftentimes more chilling than his attempts at horror have been. There are some lapses and excesses to this moody atmosphere, but for the most part, the filmmakers are very successful at striking the tone they want.

The one major qualm I personally have with the picture is its treatment of Gina Bellman's character, which makes painfully clear that this is a movie written by men and for men. Bellman's talent shines through even in the most indignant of situations, but aside from the usual tropes of turning a highly-trained female operative into a damsel and a random sex scene, it's a challenge to find any statements or actions the character makes that aren't in some way critiqued by her male counterparts.

The action content is measured. It's pretty sparse, but what's there tends to adrenalize. The worst of these scenes is the single brawl that Lundgren had with sadistic coke-fiend Christopher Heyerdahl, but the best scenes involve the use of Lundgren's unique sniper rifle. Two major shootouts compose the highlights of the action, and Lundgren's weapon of choice – with its immensely powerful bullets but agonizingly slow rate of fire – gives these scenes a unique pace that you don't get when both sides of a firefight are blazing away with automatic weapons. The uneven nature of these gunfights, combined with their infrequency, may understandably leave some action fans unfulfilled, particularly if the story is not to their liking either. Essentially, this is an action movie that asks you to take a chance on something other than the strength of its action, and if you'd rather spend your time on less of a gamble, Lundgren has an entire library of other flicks to check out.

Personally, I had a good time with this one. The fact that the star has not attempted to make another film along these lines is a little disappointing, since Lundgren does well with the minimalist touch. Nevertheless, this helps make SILENT TRIGGER something of a hidden gem, and if nothing else, the strength of its production places it on the list of high-end offerings among Lundgren's non-theatrical features.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Watching in 2020 & It Still Holds Up As An Average Actioner
bingepulse-0629313 April 2020
The best part of this movie is it's set pieces. It definitely gives off a Die Hard 2 vibe. Dolph Lundgen does a great job in the game of cat and mouse between his character as well as Christopher Heyerdahl's creepy character. When the two are together the scenes are intense and a good time. U fortunately, the poor writing in this film keeps this film from being distinctive from other action films. Nevertheless, this is a great action film and if you were looking for something to watch you won't waste your time.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rain, elevator shafts, reminds of La Femme Nikita, Bladerunner, and Die Hard
arcanearchivist17 November 2020
This film felt like a mix of LA FEMME NIKITA, another early '90s piece, and BLADERUNNER, in both aesthetics, mood, and plot elements. The whole 'crawling-around-in-shafts-and-elevators' reminded me of DIE HARD, as well. This film has a welcome female presence, unlike Die Hard. I found this film very enjoyable. The endless rain and lighting, as well as just '90s vibes, were enough to make me keep watching. I found the repeated flashbacks to a previous mission bothersome to the narrative present; I thought the opening scene was enough to establish the relationship between Gina Bellman and Lundgren, although they did a good job maintaining the tension between them throughout the film. On a side note, people forget how gritty the '90s were, and this film shows that (not that people were sniping each other all the time), similar to La Femme Nikita. I have yet to see Russel Mulcahy's HIGHLANDER (I have the VHS on my shelf!) nor have I seen any other Dolph Lundgren films, but watching this one made me want to see all his other films. I don't know what else to say, except the opening music rocks, the CGI is bad (typical '90s), and it was confusing why such a large, important tower would have been left vacant like that. Now, if you don't mind, I have some unfinished industrial buildings to climb around in.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Looks great , but nothing more
Maziun28 December 2014
If you are interested in the technical aspect of movie-making this is an interesting movie. It's an low budget picture that looks really good. The lighting is spectacular and director Russell Mulcahy deserves a praise for this. This movie utilize some of the best lighting I've seen. They've used lots of colored, cleverly placed, spotlights to enhance the walls. This level of professionalism is unusual for a B-class movie.

Unfortunately EVERYTHING ELSE sucks. The acting , the action , the dialogues , but mostly the plot. Some of the over excited Lundgren fans compare this to "Reservoir dogs" and say that this movie has a very clever plot. I'm sorry , but what plot ?! There is no explanation for what is going on and why. Who was assassinated in the flashback and why ? What's with the road massacre ? Why give another assignment to a person that failed you before ? The movie tries to put some existentialism in it , but it feels flat and unconvincing. I appreciate the ambition , but it just didn't work out . The movie is shallow and no fun.

I give it 1/10.
13 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The ultimate Dolph Lundgren work since 1991
dima-1220 June 2000
`Silent Trigger`is the best actioner Dolph Lundgren made in years and it looks absolutely fantastic for a B-movie.This feature owes a lot to dynamite direction of Aussie-shooter Russell Mulcahy who made a really significant contribution in this one. The whole movie relies entirely on Mulcahy`s direction that is still hip and vital.The script is average with lots of flaws in the middle of the movie but the writing overall does the trick.Plotting is trashy but the ending is twist-oriented and it really freshens up the whole concept.The script isn`t witty enough but those gaps could`ve been filled by bigger budget since the movie has only two capital A,action set-pieces.I wonder how Mulcahy got expelled from the Hollywood action mainstream since lots of hackers like Hyams or Dwight H.Little get to do mainstream movies even though they haven`t had a hit for years. This movie is the right way for Dolph to go because such action vehicles are hard to find in Hollywood these days.Lundgren`s martial art scenes are great since he is tall and bulky so his kicks really pack a punch.His face isn`t as pretty as Van Damme`s but he hits harder.Of course `Silent Trigger` ain`t no `Citizen Kane` but it sure does go way beyond anyone`s expectations from a movie that lays in the dust of the video-store back-shelf. Mulcahy`s visual work is great and he still has the zeal for the job. No Kevin Hooks or Peter Hyams can overthrow this wet of hip visual directing.Let me remind you that Mulcahy brought video clip aesthetics to the Hollywood mainstream at the time when David Fincher,Simon West and Domenic Sena used to dress in diapers.Sadly,he never had an idea of his own like Fincher but he still made groundbreaking videos for `Queen` and movies like `Highlander` or `Ricochet`.Let`s hope he finds his way back to the maistream.
21 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Why are people lying on this film? It barely qualifies as one.
TokyoGyaru22 July 2021
It's AWFUL, a nothing, plotless "film"!!! And I can't take the female lead seriously when she spends the whole movie moping around, staring, breathing loudly, and talking like a 900-number operator. Someone in the production CLEARLY had a girlfriend they wanted to show off. But at least they could have made her interesting and believable! It's insulting to give a woman that kind of role and then just make her act like a model. They barely bother to fake being interested in having her appear believable. Dolph Lundgren, the only reason I watched, sleepwalked through it.

Where is the story? Where is the plot? Where is the point?? Altogether absent! This wouldn't even be suitable for a 30-minute TV episode. I'm actually offended by how pointless it all is, and I tend to enjoy a lot of random, low-budget films, so I have a high tolerance for schlock. But this isn't even to that standard! The only reason it's worth even a star is 1. That Dolph is nice to watch despite his limitations (I really like him, but he's never been charismatic-the closest he ever got for me was Universal Soldier, and his role was a psychopathic mass murderer who wore the ears of his victims, so...) and 2. The early-to-mid-90s Cinemax-like track that just made me want to watch Strange Days.

I'm not even gonna touch on what "happens" in the "film" because it's offensively non-existent. This movie had to have been a tax write-off or a money laundering scheme.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Track down the widescreen version
udar551 July 2011
Paranoid assassin Waxman (Dolph Lundgren) is hired to perform a high value hit from the top of an under construction high rise. Trouble starts right away when he finds out his spotter, Clegg (Gina Bellman), worked with him a few years previous on a job that went incredibly wrong. So he thinks he is being set up. Also, there are two nosy watchmen (Conrad Dunn and Christopher Heyerdahl) to deal with. Revisited this Dolph action vehicle in proper widescreen and still enjoyed it quite a bit. Widescreen seems essential due to director Russell Mulcahy's great sense of style. The main building is a great location with tons of atmosphere thanks to the rain drenched night. All of the acting is good with Bellman sporting a really unique accent. It looks they were totally trying to do the Anne Parillaud hit woman thing with her. Heyerdahl plays a completely over-the-top druggie scumbag, but it works and we even get a bizarre bit where he sees spider hallucinations. He recently snagged a gig in the TWILIGHT movies. The action is all well staged and quite bloody for the time. There is also a unique Deep Forest-esque score. Mulcahy did a couple of more features (TALE OF THE MUMMY, RESURRECTION) before going into TV nearly full-time with a few features here and there. His most recent work is on MTV's TEEN WOLF. *sad face*
15 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Atari graphics, tactically lacking
karla-w-usa4 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Dear fans, so sorry but you just don't have 5 minute fist fights on an assignment or any other time when you are trained to kill on first contact. You always have multiple knives and use them frequently in close quarter combat. If it takes more than two seconds to kill an obstacle the "operator" is seriously lacking skills. Bare handed fighting just doesn't happen.

The guys dropping from helicopters were grossly unskilled. When dropping into a kill zone you always have your weapon on-line and ready with your strong hand while working your rappel with your weak hand. Additionally every one on the drop line has a target zone they cover and they are coordinated to cover targets tactically in the air and move in coordinated teams on the ground covering all target areas.

Highly trained crews pick targets, fire on them, and provide cover fire on the way to ground and you haul ass getting there. You drop like a rock, but land on your feet. Your gun is always on-line. Always, always, always on-line. If your long gun or side arm is not on-line your knife is always ready for a quick kill of an unexpected surprise. Fist fights just don't happen with military grade operators.

I found it impossible to slip into a "willful suspension of disbelief" and enjoy the movie. Everyone in this movie has zero tactical knowledge and their antics would get everyone on their team killed or captured in no time at all. In short, IMHO the screenplay is awful, as is the action, special effects, direction, and acting.
6 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good action movie
minunimion11 March 2020
I liked it... I like Dolph Lundgren... not everything was good, but who cares... Gina Bellman... beautiful woman with a fantastic sensual voice... it was a pleasure listening to her voice... I'm not going to say anything about the movie and there's not much to say... a shooter, a spotter, nothing new, but everybody did what they had to do and for me it's enough... if you want you can give a look and then deciding, otherwise I did it and I'm not regretting anything about... if you want an Oscar movie, this is not indeed, so forget it...
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Decent movie? Are you sh*tting me?
bassist_gurl23 January 2007
OK normally i wouldn't bother commenting on a movie like this, but honestly, what is with the good reviews for it?! So yeah, this is possibly one of the worst films ever made. I watched it late at night with some friends at a sleepover, and as one pointed out, the plot sounded like it was made up by a 6-year-old. The one liners had the so-bad-its-funny feel. And i wonder how desperate Gina Bellmen was for work before she went on Coupling. And Dolph Lundgren....i don't know why anyone ever let him near a film set!

Basically, unless you want to laugh yourself senseless at the stupidity of the plot and how little sense it makes, AVOID.
8 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Brilliant atmospheric B-movie
Heaven knows why I fall for this picture. But I do, hook, line, and sinker. The deadpan delivery from Lundgren and Bellman makes this a truly post ironic classic. Gina Bellman is difficult to watch, being from the UK I'm acquainted with her later (emetic) sitcom work, and seeing her try to hold down a serious role is very funny. She's clearly very sensual though, so she has to be let off.

It's also pretty intriguing on an existential level to see the sniper Waxman (Lundgren) pondering what his duty is and whether he can ever be redeemed. But asides from all the post irony and existentialism it's downright atmospheric. Mulcahy found some pretty extraordinary landscapes to film. The title scene, is of a man running through some sort of estuary set to a nice bluesy piece of jazz. What it has to do with the plot is anybody's guess, but it was brilliant. Most of the film is set in the penthouse of a skyscraper (the Algonquin) at night time during heavy thunder and rain. It's a great looking piece of architecture, and very atmospheric. The rest of the film is shown in flashbacks of Waxman and his spotter's exfiltration following an abortive assassination attempt.

The Algonquin is described in this movie as 'a piece of techno-crap', it's an unfurbished incomplete neo-Gothic skyscraper that no-one seems to be bothered to finish. It's an uninhabited shell that makes a great eagles nest for sniping. It's all quite amusing, quite why the powers that be want a VIP in an armoured limo travelling at high speed to be assassinated so publicly, so flagrantly, and so spectacularly by a sniper using armour-piercing explosive rounds from an incredibly difficult one-mile away shooting position, is anybody's guess. Just for your interest my friends I have looked into why Mulcahy has named the skyscraper 'The Algonquin'. It seems the literal translation of the root of this word (whose definition is an Indian tribe) comes from the Micmac meaning "at the place of spearing fish and eels". How pretentious is that? Good though.

In true B-movie tradition we have a freak, Christopher Heyerdahl, as the night-shift security guard in the Algonquin. His body is tattooed with his 'buddies' a load of spiders who seem to urge him to commit wanton acts of sexual violence, especially after he's snorted a bit of white. He's really very creepy indeed.

The few action scenes in the movie are quite effective, but action fans may find the longueurs in between to be unpalatable. This one is more for the B-movie mavens.

Plot-whores don't really like this movie because it is a bit discontinuous, for example why on earth is Waxman given a second chance after his first failure to complete his assignment? But Silent Trigger is perhaps the most entertaining movie I have ever watched, and I could see it again and again. For the true connoisseurs of tripe from this period it is an interesting debate whether or not to prefer Van Damme or Lundgren, in my opinion this film marks Lundgren out as the top banana. Can you imagine how excited I was at the tender age of 12 to find out that they were appearing in the same movie (Universal Soldier). Food for thought my friends.
44 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Hard,harder, Lundgren
Sven_baumi19 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
For me, one of Lundgrens better performances as soldier and assassin showing what it's not so easy to leave the firm. Kill or be killed. But he gives hinds of that goes deeper. So the flashbacks which switch time and place and shows how he became the lone, tired wolf which wants to leave this business. Just one another job to do. The target is the same. His last "job" failed because of the new spotter which was connected with more unnecessarily bodies . But he sees that his target is not the only target today. The new spotter is an old fiend. In Fact the plot is not the work of a real genius but this film thrills. Not least the work of Gina Bellman which gives the film a warm note in this cold location and her character will be stronger as the viewer thinks at the beginning of the movie.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
It's like Die Hard (if Die Hard was really bad!)
bowmanblue11 April 2017
Okay, where do I begin… I have been known to enjoy a good 'so-bad-it's-good' movie from time to time and I am a fan of the 'classic' action movies of the eighties (and therefore all those muscle-bound hunks who starred in them). Therefore, based on my nostalgia for Dolph Lundgren's stints in such 'classics' (well, I thought so!) in 'He-Man, Dark Angel and Universal Soldier,' I thought I'd give 'Silent Trigger' a go.

Now, normally this is the time I say something like 'You should know what you're getting with a film called 'Silent Trigger.' I know it's a B-movie. I know it's 'straight to DVD.' I know there's no real (current!) stars in it. I'm just expecting a bit of mindless action and vague entertainment for an hour and a half. I guess I got the latter.

'Silent Trigger' was certainly 'entertaining,' but possibly in the wrong kind of way. Whether it was due to the blatantly computer-generated attempts at major action set pieces, or just the ludicrousness of the script – it did hold my attention, sadly just to see how bad it gets. The plot (and I use that term loosely) begins with Dolph Lundgren failing to assassinate his target (did I mention he was an assassin? Well, he is) due to the inexperience of his partner, played by Gina Bellman and her forever-changing accent. The 'agency' (they don't really mention which) that they work for aren't happy and… and already it gets confusing. Skip forward a few years and the pair are reunited to carry out one more job from a vantage point that looks like the Nakatomi Plaza from 'Die Hard,' only not quite finished yet. However, it's not as straight forward as it sounds (and killing should be reasonably straight forward for a pair of professional assassins as it's kind of in their job description) as they come to blows with pair of security guards tasked with… er… defending (?) the under construction building.

And that's sort of it really. It's two professional assassins versus two professional night security men. You may think that's a pretty one-sided battle, but you'd be wrong. I'm not sure whether the security staff are really good, or if the assassins are just bad. Either way there's a lot of 'cat and mouse' which takes place, leaving me a little unsure as who I'm supposed to be rooting for – the killers, or the nut jobs guarding the place.

So, there's basically only four people in the cast and therefore what little action there is is sparse and hardly high-octane. So, in order to pad out the film's runtime there's more flashbacks which don't really make an awful lot of sense and all could have been left out of the story if truth be told.

I like a good B-movie. Sadly, this just isn't really one of them. There's not really enough here to warrant recommending it. Yes, if you're a REAL die-hard fan of Dolph himself I guess you'll like it more than normal, but even he can do better (I take it you've seen the Expendables?). Just leave this one in the bargain basement of DVDs at your local petrol station where it belongs. Sorry, Dolph!
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sweet Trigger
punisher14153 May 2002
The movie has a good plot, great acting, interesting stuff, well scripted bad guys, and is very beautifully shot. The flashback of the shooter and spotter were interesting, one of the two security guards is one messed-up-in-the-brain, coke-sniffer, the other was a very annoying by-the-book rookie, the shooter was a "paranoid" man, and the spotter was a beautiful woman that "got along with everybody", or so she thought, I would dare say Russel Mulcahy did an excellent job at directing and recommend it.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Slow but good looking.
Zahgurim15 February 2002
In my opinion, this movie is pretty uneventful and somewhat boring. It's okay to let long time pass between action sequences if you know how to fill the "downtime" well... This movie doesnt.

However, this movie utilize some of the best lighting I've seen. And considering this is sort of a B-movie, it's simply amazing. They've used lots of colored, cleverly placed, spotlights to enhance the walls. You could almost be fooled to think the movie was designed by an interior decorator.

So, if you are interested in the technical aspect of moviemaking, it's worth seeing just for this reason. This movie should be an excelent guide movie on how to use spectacular lighting the correct way if anyone are teaching a course in this.

So, to sum up, slow movie, some stupid scenes that people have mentioned here before, but nice lighting makes it worth watching.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Best Dolph movie
ost-41 November 2000
This movie was a very pleasant surprise. I figured it was just a BIG turkey, but no. Silent trigger is a very styleful actionflick. Nice photography and a cool storyline, and Dolph delivers (yeah).

An unusual actionmovie and Dolphs best too date.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Breaks new ground!
rps-220 February 2008
This film ploughs new cinematic ground. It's the first motion picture ever made without a plot. This saves the viewer the trouble of wondering what is going on and the producers the bothersome need to provide some sort of logical thread for the non stop violence, the threatening bad guys, the gratuitous sex and the continual explosions, lightning bolts and unrelated violent flashbacks. It would have been so much more difficult, for example, if the writers (were there actually writers???) had had to explain that roadside massacre or name who was being assassinated and why. It's an interesting concept that allows the filmmaker to produce 90 minutes of tasteless crap and bad acting without having to invent reasons for it or waste time to explain things, time better used to cram in even more blood, bullets and bodies. You folks at the IMDb really should come up with a "0" vote because my "1" is undeserved praise for this film!
6 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A different kind of Dolph Lundgren movie
phanthinga31 December 2018
Of all the movies I've seen from Dolph Lundgren until now Silent Trigger is the most unusual one and it sure surprise me in a good way. The movie is very stylish with the look and the shot for a B-grade action movie starring Dolph and for 1h and a haft the movie definitely take a large amount of it runtime to set of the relationship between two main character so for some people who just want to be entertain that maybe a downside but don't worry too much cause when the action finally kick in it very bloody and squishy. For me I think the real downside of Silent Trigger is not the limited action scene but the cat and mouse game with those two guard cause this time it actually bugging the hell of out me for long it take and if you look at the situation from a logical angle get rid of those two from the get-go will make thing much easier later on
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bore
jencord15 January 2019
Screams low budget! Poor acting poor setting. I don't see any brilliance behind the movie. I've never even heard of any of these actors in real movies.
3 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Surprisingly watchable
K3nzit7 August 2022
This Lundgren flick doesn't have a great script and the performances by the main cast aren't very good. But 'Silent Trigger' has an unique atmosphere and some decent action scenes. So it's surprisingly watchable.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
* * OUT OF FIVE
bronsonskull7211 July 2003
Dolph Lundgren stars as Waxman an assassin who becomes the target when his supervisor (Conrad Dunn) double crosses him, while Klegg (Gina Bellman) has an agenda of her own in this strictly routine "hitman with a heart" caper. Only some high energy action setpieces relieve the tedium.
1 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Just one click… and you are dead!
leond-429 June 2006
He is calm, silent and deadly. His bullet can hit you from distance of 2 kilometers. This time Dolph holds in his hands a new tool of destruction – a sniper. He works as political assassin, but he doesn't want to kill any more. They sent him to his last mission into the great designed building with a girl who is his assistant (Bellman). While they make preparations, we watch many flash-backs related to their common past and targets from many years ago. They don't know that whole this job is just a trap to eliminate them both. Director of "Highlander" and "Shadow", Russell Mulcahy, brought you another hit. Claustophobic, strong and dramatic, this film really makes you think. Dolph also provided you with fantastic action scenes that will take your breath away. Gina Bellman – always pleasant to look at. The film that is going to become an important part of your personal collection.
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Generic + Weird = Fun
Laxontlyn2 February 2014
Ohh… This movie is special. I mean, when it ended I felt almost like characters in the movie. Maybe it is just me, but watching this movie takes me on the other side of the screen. Maybe people who designed the sets knew something many people don't, maybe the architecture was simple and realistic so it was easier to identify with it, maybe composer did something unorthodox, or was there any music at all?... maybe I was in a special mood, I don't know!

But what I do know, is that despite being a quite generic action movie (hits almost everything in the cliché check-list) it has some amazing atmosphere which actually works fantastic with such special kind of acting (phlegmatic I would say) and some weird-cheap special effects. But overall, it is enjoyable and I recommend you watch it and I recommend you do it alone, for perfect experience.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Rubbish...
danieldonnelly-756556 October 2017
Started off reasonably well, then the camera man seemed to have lost his way. The only thing he kept filming was the stonework inside the building. For Example, Dolph and Gina were talking at length, and the camera pans to the stonework, you don't see their faces, just a glimpse of an ear and top of Gina's' head. The camera work just gets hilarious after this, when they're not in the frame at all. Spent most of the movie talking about it. I had read the previous reviews, thought i'd give it a try as Dolph's a good actor. Gina's voice was really annoying but could see by it.
1 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed