The Siege (2023) User Reviews

Pretty boring

[piggulu · 4/10 · 16 March 2023]

Had a good concept but the execution was severely lacking. Seriously, the synopsis sounds great, and the opening scene sets you up for a ride, but then it all falls apart. It spends too much time with slow, stilted dialog and just a general snail pace. The biggest problem is it wants to be more epic, grander, wilder than it really is.

The main character, who is an impressive hulk of a man, lacks any charisma. His grungy voice and quips, I assume trying to harken back to bygone days of a "man's man" rogue, just didn't work. The other 2 women's characters weren't memorable, either. Not to bust on anyone's acting chops but this wasn't the movie where anybody shines.

The action was a real letdown, so those hoping for a banging good time with bullets flying and explosions will similarly be disappointed. There's minimal gunplay, with the usual "trained assassins/soldiers that can't hit the broad side of a barn" mindlessness, and the fisticuffs are even less impressive. For Stisen's stature, you'd expect him to be out there ripping people new ones but apparently, he's just an average joe when it comes to any physical combat.

Returning to the idea of it wanting to be bigger than it is, there are many over-the-top moments that feel ill-placed. In one scene, the heroes go down a fire escape while a bad guy rains not a hail, but a full-blown hurricane of bullets from a heavy machine gun at them for a good minute. I'm talking 1000+ rounds, and of course every bullet just ricochets off the railings, posing no threat. It's too ridiculous for this movie and feels like they couldn't commit to being too wild (most likely for budget reasons). The movie might've been better had they just gone nuts with it and not have it be such a serious affair.

The funniest comedy so far this year.

[Top_Dawg_Critic · 3/10 · 16 March 2023]

I promise you will laugh throughout the entire runtime - in between eyerolls and cringes. I can understand and appreciate a low budget, but not even a zero budget would have a lead actor this bad. I can only assume that the wannabe Rambo (complete, with arm and head-band), Daniel Stisen, with mostly uncredited and short-film experience, won the lottery, and paid producers to be cast as a lead action star. The outdated tank-top look - also worn in his previous film, has come and gone back in the 80's. His raspy whisper voice sounded like he was holding back having an aneurysm from constantly flexing throughout the entire film, which was hilarious to constantly have to see. Keep flexing those lats so the arms stick out more lol.

Then you have long dragged out scenes in a screenplay riddled with plot and technical issues, that even with the decent pacing, the normally comfortable 97 min runtime felt much longer. Never mind all the cliched characters and dialogue, and the predictability of the entire story that's been done many times before and much better. Even the fight scenes were poorly choreographed and felt endless with how long, dragged out and boring they were, although the double hammers were the only nice touch of all the fight scenes.

Even the score was the most annoying, even for a B film. It was loud, overbearing and constant, and we were on the floor rolling around laughing with the Looney Tunes music. I'm surprised one of the characters weren't named Elmer Fudd. The only redeeming quality was the somewhat decent directing, considering how flaccid the screenplay was. There were some good shots, especially with the lightning storm in the beginning. But either than that, there's no reason to waste your time watching this, if only to get drunk and laugh at how bad this and the acting is. It's a generous 3/10 from me, because newb writers have to start somewhere, and the concept was somewhat inviting, albeit poorly executed.

30 minutes I'll never get back

[maria_garcia_us · 2/10 · 24 April 2023]

Who ever promised that I would laugh throughout the entire runtime is a liar. Maybe if I'd been higher than a kite, hopped up on acid, taking a psychedelic trip, maybe, just maybe, I might have laughed.

There wasn't an original thought, speech or scene in the entire movie. Others have been there and done this soooooo many times. I have no clue as to who the leads are, and honestly, do not care. Their acting was horrible. The could have been given the best script on the plant and still could not have acted their way out of wet paper bags.

They guy with the muscles should have spent less time in a gym and more time with an acting coach. And then maybe he would be able to move his arms normally. As for the chick, she may be ok in something else, but good grief.

One of the worst movies I have ever seen

[levitak · 1/10 · 20 March 2023]

I am no movie snob. I grew up on cheesy 90's actions. Let me be clear even though they clearly wanted to go with a cheesy 90's action vibe that's not what this movie is. This.....I don't even know how to describe. It feels like something made by a bunch of teen boys and shot with their iphone.

Every part of this is horrible. From the absolutely atrocious scrip which feels as if it's written by a 12 year old , to cinematography which makes most vacation videos look like a master piece, to the horrible sound and score but perhaps the worst part of all is the acting. I have no idea who the actor is that portrays the main character but I am 100% sure he is just a body builder who has never taken an acting lesson in life. Every scene with him is just an atrocity. He seems almost entirely dedicated to posing and showing off his muscles and he barely capable of reacting to anything around him or interacting with his co stars. His fight scenes are hilariously and you can practically hear how much he strains to make his voice sound rough to make his voice sound more video gamey

I have no idea how movie was greenlit much less how it got it's low level internet popularity but I am completely convinced that it has to do with nepotism. That someone involved with this atrocity has a daddy in the industry who pulled some strings. I really hope that some movie blogger with too much time on their hands does an investigation in the history of this movie and what kind of strings had to be pulled for it to see the light of the day because this would be a thousand times more interesting then this atrocity

TL;DR. It's very bad. Don't watch it.

Worst stinker I have seen ever, stay away at all cost!

[psxexperten · 1/10 · 27 March 2023]

Words cannot express how horrible this movie is.

There is nothing else to say besides save the 1.5 hours of your life and read a book.

There are no redeeming features for this movie.

Here's the main issues; The plot is weak and forced. Acting is very poor, though the terrible script probably didn't help the actors.

Poor casting.

The big hero is just walking around and flexing his biceps and mumbling his lines through the whole movie.

Special effects look like they were done by a 5 year old - Was the director even awake?

Already mentioned the terrible script, but it was worth another mention.

In summary, don't waste your time.

NOT BAD, but the identity of this movie was lost between seriousness and comedy

[pbowen-21678 · 5/10 · 17 March 2023]

I believe the actors had great potential and did good in areas, however the director was either lost managing roles or just a horrible director. Bad music momentum, constant overacting, not much reality check even with simple things such as picking up a cigarette. Not to mention hiding under a light in the dark? Every problem with this movie is on the director doing a horrible job. This movie had great potential but sadly it was thrown out the window. I dont know if the disconnect was with the writer, director, or both, but they are the 2 main failures of this movie. I sat through watching the movie hoping that maybe it was a comic book fantasy of someone who collected comic books that resembled the star and thats why the movie seemed funny from bad directing. BUT NOPE. I guess there was no reason at all why the actors portrayed their roles as they did. Actors get the blame for how they act, not nobody thinks about how the director tells them to act. I thought the actors did good and would have been better if directed better.

Can't Believe I Paid Amazon $4.99 for this Turkey

[arkangil · 1/10 · 9 February 2024]

Lead character seems incapable of speaking a full sentence, mostly grunts. Nonstop murder and mayhem. The lead character is Mr. Cool in the face of commandos sent to eliminate him and several other. Mostly filmed in the dark, obviously to avoid the need for expensive sets.

The writing is nonsensical and the acting is pathetic. The plot, if there is one, is lost in the gun battles.

This thing isn't worth ten cents, much less $4.99. It is one of those movies that one can't wait to end, while futility hoping that it will somehow get better.

Don't waste your time or money on this thing. Not Recommended.

It really wasn't that bad

[james5731 · 8/10 · 31 August 2023]

I suppose people get on here and think they're hot shot critics and slam just about every movie. This movie was no great accomplishment but it was fairly entertaining and action was pretty good, particularly since it was on a shoestring budget I'm sure.

Sure it was somewhat predictable, but the good guys got their butts kicked a few times so it wasn't like a James Bond movie.

Plus, actress Lauren Okadigbo has some serious stunt skills. She actually has been in a lot of Big Time movies doing stunts. And, Daniel Stisen at least held his own even if he's not some great Shakespearean actor. Give it a try!

an Indie with Ambition

[A_Different_Drummer · 7/10 · 14 March 2023]

Remember Kingsmen? That franchise showed it was possible to build a franchise by riffing off an idea that might seem a little loony at first glance. This low-budget but promising little indie starts with the premise that there is an un-named organization that does nothing else but repackage and relocate professional killers who fail to eliminate all witnesses during an assignment, and are therefore at risk. If you can handle that premise, there is not much amiss with Siege that a little more budget would not have fixed. Daniel Stisen has both the size and the charisma to handle his first leading role. The script has ups and downs, but more of the former than the latter. The action is regular and pleasantly distracting. ((Designated "IMDb Top Reviewer." Please check out my list "167+ Nearly-Perfect Movies (with the occasional Anime or TV miniseries) you can/should see again and again (1932 to the present))

BRING ON THE SEQUEL

[BandSAboutMovies · 6/10 · 26 May 2023]

After being compromised during a mission gone wrong, an international assassin named Walker (Daniel Stisen ) is sent to Reassignment Center 42. There, he'll get a new identity and be able to erase any trace of his last job and even his past.

However, a ruthless team of operatives led by Keates (Samantha Schnitzler) storms the secure compound forcing Walker to team up with an elite hitwoman named Elda (Lauren Okadigbo) and her mysterious charge Juliet (Yennis Cheung).

Who will survive The Siege?

Directed by Brad Watson and written by Nicole Bartlett, this is a movie mostly cast with stunt performers, which means that it's all action from literally the first few minutes. You're not coming to a movie like this for emotional resonance. You want to see people fire guns, do ill-advised stunts and beat the stuffing out of one another. I'm happy to report that this movie delivers more of that than you'll find in probably ten other movies.

If video stores still existed on the scale of the past, this is the kind of movie that people would rent and be really surprised how much they liked it. They'd say, "I watched this movie with this super muscular dude getting in all these fights, two women had a brutal brawl and man, some dude used pliers to take the teeth from all the people he killed. It was pretty awesome."

It is pretty awesome.