Opiniones de usuarios

I'm a huge Scott Adkins fan and will watch him in pretty much anything. I always know going in that I may get a 5-6/10 movie, but the fighting scenes will be amazing. I've yet to be disappointed, until today. I've seen the original Green Street Hooligans and loved it, but knew this wasn't really related, so I went into it for Scott Adkins. Oh, boy.

Another reviewer said this was a typical martial arts movie - this is definitely NOT a martial arts movie! This movie has some training (more like boxing) and some street type fighting, but not very much at all. And don't expect to see the typical Scott Adkins moves we've grown to love. To be believable in this particular role, and I understand why, he's maybe 1/3 of the fighter he normally really is.

If you're going into this movie for the fighting or expecting typical Scott Adkins action, you will be disappointed.

This is not my Scott Adkins or why I watch his movies. :(

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

Danny (Scott Adkins) turned his back on football violence long ago, and now devotes his life to mixed martial arts fighting, until he learns of the death of his little brother. Determined to find out who is responsible, he returns back to his old stomping ground and sets about trying to turn the new 'firm' from flabby, beer swilling no hopers to the top boys they once were. But along the way, he finds everything is not as it seems.

More 'repellent, brain-numbing bilge' then...obviously the first, direct to DVD sequel to 2005's Green Street did well enough that some bright spark decided a second instalment was needed, with martial arts star Scott Adkins in the lead role. Directed by James Nunn, who previously helmed the infinitesimally superior Tower Block, there is at least a little more meat on the bones and less of a boorish hooliganism love in here, but it still can't help but feel like a meaningless, decidedly odd way to spend film making money.

As others have noted, it seems to have moved away from the original street corner/back alley street fighting and seems to focus more on professional looking fighting (which may explain Adkins in the lead role), with constant references to 'how it's all a lot more organized and sophisticated' now, which further shows how far from the original source material it's strayed. It's filled, as well, with plenty of laughable slow motion, opera drenched 'men marching in to battle' moments and Rocky wannabe training montages. And Adkins is a wooden lead. This series should have been kicked to the touch lines long before it even tried to become a franchise. **

First of all, I have to say that I haven't seen the first two movies, and I don't know if I have missed anything. But if you deem this one a autonomous movie, then I can say a few points about it.

Regarding the story, it is your everyday martial arts movie story. Our hero's brother is murdered in a tournament (firm!!!), and the hero enters the tournament and avenges his brother. I don't think I can even this review as containing a spoiler, because this kind of story has been known and predictable since the good old days of Bruce Lee.

But there are many plot holes. We don't know what's the point of the fight at the beginning of the movie. We don't know why the two police officers release Scott. and some other "we don't know"s.

Scott Adkins' acting is acceptable, though not an Al Pacino. The guy who plays his kinda fat friend, though, outdoes Scott in acting. The saucy girl who is done by Scott wasn't bad either, she was, however, casted for something else as you know, not for her acting.

Regarding the fight scenes, we have almost none of them till the middle of the movie (except for the short meaningless fight at the beginning of the film). The final fight is surely the best one in the whole movie.

All in all, it's quite an average flick, but Scott can be very higher than that. I hope he gets more picky in his choice of movies and makes better ones in the future with all the talent we know of him. Good Luck everyone. my Score: 5/10

This movie was so disappointing. It was rocky/some karate movie. There are more cut scenes of them training than talking about football and fighting. I had a felling i was watching rocky origins or something like that. Even part 2 was better, real disappointment!!! If you would like to watch rocky 4 or 5 with worst acting and less interesting scenes then watch this movie if not don't waste your time. You cant even compere it to first green street movie its like you are watching something else. I don't get why didn't they stick with that kind of thing and now when they saw that they did it wrong (talking about 2nd part) they tried to get back on feet, but failed miserably (this movie) so sad. :(

The original Green St didn't need a sequel but we got one all the same and to be fair STAND YOUR GROUND was watchable down to the fact it was unintentionally funny . After all it's not every day you watch a film entirely filmed in an American prison trying to convince its audience that it's set in Britain . To be fair this follow is probably mindful of this hence we get constant establishing shots showing us we are indeed in a cold and cloudy London . This unfortunately is the only thing the film manages to achieve

NEVER BACK DOWN is a cynical exercise in marketing a film as a sequel to another film it has absolutely no connection with . There's no reason what so ever for the words " Green " " Street " or 3 to prefix NEVER BACK DOWN and in reality could easily be a star vehicle for Jean Claude Van Damme since it revolves around martial arts rather than unsophisticated fists and boots

The need to showcase martial arts is what the film concentrates on and as other people have pointed out explanation and exposition is sacrificed to show the protagonists fighting skill . From the outset we get a dialogue free sequence that ends with a couple of heavies getting a good slapping . We also get a long sequence of ramping , ie constant fast motion followed by slow motion most famously seen in 300 . In short it's a film of style over substance that won't appeal to anyone who is after a dramatic movie

The truth is that this part of the trilogy Green Street is not like the previous movies. It's completely different from the other two parts, especially the first. This film doesn't care about the violence between the football fans and its bad consequences. The movie is just showing us some people, who are training to compete in an underground fighting tournament. Of course the leading actor is looking for revenge about his brother's murder, but the viewer doesn't really care about it.

I enjoyed a lot Scott Adkins in the movie. I prefer him with tattoos, beards and more wild style (I'm talking about Yuri Boyka in Undisputed 2, 3) but he was enough good here too. I like his style of fighting and the way he trains his team in this movie. Definitely, there is a lot of fighting scenes and that's why this is not a dull movie.

If you are looking for an action movie with people kicking some asses all the time, this film is a good choice, without thinking. Watch it. But if you want to see a drama like Green Street Hooligans 1, you won't be satisfied.

I enjoyed the film, a lot more than i thought i would. BUT they could have done this film with no connection to the Green Street name. I would have respected it a lot more, but none the less it was a fun film. Worth a watch. It had good acting (i was surprised by this, i always expect a load of rubbish with these types of films) The story was solid and got me engaged in the story. I really wanted to see how it all panned out even though it was predictable it was still a good story. The choreography of the fights were good, not great but it still looked and felt like a fight even with all the spinney tricks that you would not expect in a film about British football hooligans were there main HQ is a pub, My rating would be a 6 because i know many films that are better that i have rated 8's and 9's but 6 seems low so for this i rate a 7. I think it has earned that extra star for surprising me after i went in to it expecting another rubbish money grab film.

It left only to include Van-Dam and Angelina Jolie. Same history, no personality in the characters, only a copy-paste of the same original story, everything make as Hollywood style. What a waste of time.

..... as this felt more like a REAL sequel to first movie. then this silly second sequel. (There are still not connections to first or sequel, it just another stand alone movie in the series)

This movie about old firm lead who decided come back to his old ways after he get called that younger brother as been killed in one of the fights.

We did get to see this at start of the movie, it was little nasty as you seen head get smashed up at start of the movie.

I liked fact the show flashback of him and brother talking in black and white, I thought that good idea and add some thing to movie.

There were sometimes, I felt like I was watching bits rocky at times, with all training scenes, which kind of make movie a bit more slower pace in some places.

Adkins who back to his firm and get there Firm back on top, as battles everyone which each firm.very weekend.

There some okay fighting, here and there but there were lot high kick and kung fu going on in this movie.

And there were some normal fights, which was decent, some fight don't that long at time and some fights feel end in a blink of a eye.

There one or two turns in story that liked, which I thought, it didn't really add much to the rest of the plot/movie

5/10

"Green Street 3: Never Back Down" is an Action - Drama movie in which we watch Danny, a former football hooligan turned mixed martial arts (MMA) fighter, who is drawn back into violence when his younger brother is severely beaten by a rival firm.

Since I had already watched the two previous movies I had some expectations from this sequel. Despite that it continued the saga of football hooliganism, it shifted from the gritty realism of its predecessors and got into martial arts and action. The action sequences were well-choreographed and packed with energy, they overshadow the emotional core that made the first movie so compelling. The interpretation of Scott Adkins who played as Danny was good but not enough to save this movie despite that he brought the intensity needed for the fight scenes. The underdevelopment and lacked of depth of the characters of this movie were the main issues of it, something that didn't happen on the original. Lastly, I have to say that "Green Street 3: Never Back Down" is a nice movie to spend your time but don't have high expectations from it or even compare it with the previous two movies because I am sure that you will be disappointed.

When it is being considered about the movie i can clearly point out the fact that this is not totally a bad movie. But I prefer the first movie rather than this one. But when it is being considered about the actor ( Scott Adkins) I would state the fact that it is some certain waste of talents. Actually he is one of the best martial artists that i have ever seen in my life who performed mind blowing action in Movies like Undisputed. Within this movie it does not have that much of action. When it is being considered about the movie i feel that it is better if the director is has paid some serious attention about the dialog & action sequence of the movies. Anyway I won't discourage you to watch, It's watchable.

I thought the first green st was average and haven't seen the second. This matched the first and seems far fetched in places. Scott Adkins shines with his fighting style however the martial arts don't seem to suit the street brawling you would associate with hooligans

6/10,

See Accident man for Scott Adkins at his best

Part 1 was the best but part 2 failed big time now we got a sequel in name only but a worthy reboot in any sense. scot is great in those roles and u even get a love story in the mix which u love it as scot and that chick had a great chemistry. the fights were plenty and if u are in to films like "undisputed" franchise and "never back down" movies then this is for you especially if u love scot. scot is more known for his supporting roles in van damme and stallone films but he has a bunch solo decent films of his own like this one and the undisputed films and "close range" get also to see his latest gem "the accident man" which is one of his best.