Contract to Kill (2016) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
43 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Yap yap yap yap yap. Could Seagal shut up for one moment to do some butt kicking?
subxerogravity16 December 2016
So in Contract to Kill Stephen Seagal travels to Turkey to take on some terrorist drug dealers, which I thought was interesting as I can't remember when the last time Istanbul was in the movie as the center for espionage and trafficking (No Wait it was Taken 2), but as it turns out, the Mexicans are still the drug traffickers and the Arabs are still the terrorist. Oh well, so much for something different. At least it's a different setting I guess.

Seagal plays...I don't know the character's name and let's be honest, it doesn't really matter, cause I can't remember the last time he did not play a retired CIA agent living in(Insert any foreign country) who was brought back into the game because his fat tired ass is somehow that good at stopping the crappy enemy he's going after.

I should have known where the movie was going, as Seagal's introduction included Steven spending 20 mins being interviewed by a CIA agent who's trying to convince Steven (And the rest of us) that only the big man with the keg can save the world or something. Then as an extra added bonus Steven sees two gringos who can't keep their hands off some waitress and goes over and some how beats them both while sitting on his ass, then he turns around and puts his hands all over the waitress who could be his granddaughter.

Seagal puts together a team that features dude from Vanishing Son, Russel Wong, who looks like he could have been more impressive in this film if he did not have to tone it down to make Seagal look better.

The third man on the team is some eye candy whose role as a covert black bag agent makes no sense instead for being eye candy. Seagal treats her like she's been in the game as long as him but she doesn't even look like she's past 30. Her one purpose is to make old fat Seagal look like he's still got it. There's one part where Seagal has a small love scene with this chick. Normally I'm a fan of needless nudity from hot girls, but it just puts more focus on the fact that Seagal is just an old man who wants the world to believe that he can still get the girl. Not only that but this "experience capable agent" gets kidnapped, so that Seagal can rescue her.

Some Seagal style action, but not much with Seagal repeating the same moves over and over and using multi angles and fast cuts to try to make it more exciting. It's starting to get lame now that it's 30 or so years in the action movie biz. Seagal has never come up to an opponent as skilled as him in Aikido to at least be able to make him stumble. Not bleed or fall down just push him Back a little, that's all. Yes, Seagal is a very big menacing dude, he still is, but come on.

This may not have been such a problem, but for the most part, fat Seagal spends a lot of time sitting down in the movie. I mean literally sitting in a car, sitting at a desk, and sitting while doing some of the fight scenes. It tells me something about how lazy the filmmakers are putting this together.

Man, there was so much talking, and it was all though guy talk, too. By the good guys, by the bad guys. I think Seagal, I think action and in an action film tough guy talk should be minimal to one liners, not these over glorified speeches about how awesome they are. I'll give credit that one speech that Seagal himself had with one of the bad guys that was pretty good, but it was only one in a sea of really really bad ones, so it did nothing to make the film better.

Half way through you realize it's an espionage movie. Not really Seagal's cup of tea and not what I came to the movies to watch him do, and unfortunately for Seagal, he did nothing to change my mind.

Overall Contract to Kill feels like it's screaming Steven should retire. I don't think any one loves Seagal so much, you are cool wasting 90 mins watching him sit and talk with the enemy than go for it. They're better Fat Seagal action movies than this one. Find that one over Contract to Kill.
33 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Wait. Where have I seen this before?...
paul_haakonsen18 December 2016
Another year, another Seagal movie...

...but wait, haven't we seen this before? Seagal as a former government-super-secret-special-something-something taking on the entire world by his merry lonesome? Yep. And haven't we seen that since the 1980's? Indeed we have! "Contract to Kill" offers nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing to the genre, and nothing that Steven Seagal haven't already done to the brink of pointlessness in one of the endless heap of movies similar to this one that he has notched on his black belt.

It used to be fun to watch Steven Seagal back in the 1980's and 1990's, but it has progressively just become more and more tiresome to watch his movies, as they are all exactly the same, year after year. It is time to branch out and try a new approach.

However, it was sort of embarrassing to witness Seagal in this movie, as he seemed like a beached whale fighting to survive as he waddled his way through scripted fighting and stuttering dialogue.

I managed to survive for about 50 minutes into "Contract to Kill", before I just simply lost the will to go on. I got up and just gave up on the movie. It offered nothing new to the genre, nor nothing new to the Seagal repertoire.

If you have seen any single one of the myriad of Steven Seagal movies in the past, then you have essentially already seen this movie as well. Trust me.

The characters in the movie were so generic that it was just amazing. They could be cut out of this movie and pasted directly into any other Seagal movie and they would fit right in. So don't get your hopes up for anything that even remotely resembles character development and progression.

This was nowhere near being anywhere near the usual entertainment, albeit its overwhelming generic entertainment, that Seagal usually delivers, and I have no intention of returning to finish the rest of the movie, because I already know exactly what will happen.

"Contract to Kill" was a wide swing and a wide miss, even for the teddy bear of action movies Steven Seagal.
32 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Seagal Needs To Stop With The Sex Scenes!! Bork!!
slightlymad2217 November 2019
Continuing my plan to watch every Steven Seagal movie in order, I just watched Contract To Kill (2016)

This is my second of Seagals 6 movies, yes 6 movies released in 2016. All released in the May & September of 2016.

This is another one that sucked, It's plot of you can call it that, was insanely hard to follow. Why is this story so complicated? I have no idea. I eventually lost interest before I started looking at my phone.

The only other thing I have to say about this movie is, I think it's time Seagal stops having sex scenes in his movies. Watching him fondle a much younger hot babe is about as awful as it gets, and his sex scene with Dallender is just vomit inducing. The scene might have worked if Dallender and Seagal had actual sexual chemistry (Like Eastwood and Russo in In The Line Of Fire) but since they don't the whole thing is just horrible to watch and at this point I turned it off.

This movie is a waste of electricity.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
90 minutes of pure agony
johnzappulla12 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
What the hell did I just watch?? It's actually been a while since I watched a "new" Seagal film and this atrocity is the reason why. First I have to say that it was as if I was watching 5 different movies at the same time that all had no relationship to each other. Except for the fact that Seagal got to hit people in each version. I mean many of us watched Seagal to see him perform his unique brand of martial arts but if that's what you are hoping for in this disaster, then surprise!!.... he does a little but it's mostly close ups of fists with allot of sound effects. Gone are the days of seeing Seagal actually fighting. OK, so he's put on some weight. Well, allot of weight and every shot of him was carefully crafted to make sure we didn't see how huge he has become. But, like everything else in this film, it didn't work and his bulk was obvious and embarrassing. Now I haven't kept track of Seagal's health but did something happen with his voice? It seemed painful for him to speak and his voice was very raspy. I sincerely hope he is OK, but please Mr. Seagal call back this film and burn all the masters.
38 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
He's just getting fatter!
lacarcagne18 May 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Never have I seen a more disgusting scene than fat old Segal, fully clothed, orange shooting glasses, leather coat and all on top of the lovely Jemma Dallender, mauling her beautiful naked breasts with his chubby hands. I will never watch another one of his movies again. Oh, the rest of the movie was poorly written as well.
20 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Another poor attempt to go with a laundry list of poor movies
robbieadams196923 February 2017
Anyone claiming that this is a good movie should have their head examined. It's obvious and clear as day that Steven Seagal as an 'action star' is over... And it's been over for more than a decade. He is far too fat and old to continue making these straight to video trash movies. Wearing the same glasses in every single movie and the same suit to try and hide his extremely obese frame, (and it's not working) the fight scenes which involve Seagal are a joke. So much editing which translate to the fact the man cannot even raise his hands properly anymore. It's time for him to give this up and go on an Atkins diet. If I could give this 'movie' -10 rating, I would.
23 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This Movie Will Cure Your Insomnia
jamdifo4 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Let's face it, most people watch Seagal to see him fight. The story is always the same, he's the best in whatever agency he's in, he always picks his own team, and beats the bad guy(s). We know the story, but we watch him for his fights.

Unfortunately, he hardly fights anymore. He put out 6 movies this year and there was not one good fight scene. The last good fight scene he did was against the Russian in Driven to Kill. That was in 2009, 7 years ago. Now he just shoots people in the head or the few fight scenes he does are so edited, you don't know who does what.

I know he doesn't have control over how the movie turns out, but he does control the fight scenes. Its become painfully obvious he doesn't care, and I'm done expecting any good fight scenes from him anymore. If you see recent videos on YouTube or photos, you can see he is vastly overweight. How does a 7th degree in Aikido become so undisciplined in diet? How does he accept his pitiful choreographed fight scenes? Another amazing thing with this movie, for the umpteenth time he has sex with a gorgeous woman with his clothes on! This seems like a running joke in all his movies in the last 10 years or so. Director Keoni Waxman, who has directed Seagal at least 7 times, must be having a field day with this joke. Again, Seagal don't seem to get it.

In conclusion, there are no good fight scenes and this is not the action star of 20 years ago. The only scene worth watching is the sex scene for the comedy and actress Jemma Dallender fit physique. I hope she got compensated well.
16 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
"Contract to Kill" The viewer?
johndoyle-9051610 March 2017
Sounds like Steven Seagal read his lines with the help of a bottle of booze. Movies like this keep REDBOX filled with fresh titles, not so fresh acting or directing and writing. My advice save yourself the hassle and the $1.50. At 65 I guess his ass kicking days are over, to cheap to bring in stunt doubles to spice up scenes. Steven please retire and let your legacy stand the test of time, (or not)....
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Nope, just not it; bad acting, bad story and long dialogues
genotix19 February 2017
Warning: Spoilers
In this movie Steven has a relationship with someone at-least half his age and there is some sexual content in this movie too. I found that pretty disturbing actually.

The actors in the movie sound like they're reading up a script. The set of the movie is default American-Patriotic.

Steven is hardly opening is mouth as he is speaking, making his long dialogues difficult to follow.

A handful of elements in the film are repeated about 3 times, also a piece of an airplane blowing out of the sky. The first time is good. The second time is a tad annoying. Every other time is just an insult to the person looking the movie.

In several situations you expect some appropriate "speed of handling" would be needed and expected yet the actors walk at a pace like they're in no rush at all. Just doesn't add up to the tiny bit of realism that you are hoping to find in the movie that already has this unrealistic story line.

It's a definite NO for me...
11 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
What?
isimplypanda17 February 2017
What? is what i have to say about this movie i barely understood the point of this movie, I would have to say the special effects as well as whoever wrote the script used some words that confuses the audience in one part some guy says brother but he meant it as a friend usage not as a real brother it got me confused. I will have to say the best part was honestly Jemma Dallender and the the first half of the fight choreography.
11 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Disregard all other reviews. Only read this one
samtenenbaum12 January 2019
Let's be real guys, this is the greatest movie of all time. The greatest actor of this generation (Steven seagal) at his finest. This movie is so amazing, that I watch it 24/7 365. Best movie ever 10/10
9 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Standard Seagal
kirbylee70-599-52617912 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
In 1988 an action star broke onto the screen in a modestly budgeted film that took the world by storm. This mystery man claimed to have worked for the CIA, became a master of aikido at a young age in Japan and worked with Hollywood celebs before making his move in front of the camera. The movie was ABOVE THE LAW and the star was Steven Seagal.

But in the late 90s his films dropped in popularity, he divorced and most of the later output went straight to DVD. This doesn't mean that his films lacked quality or that they were any less ambitious than in the past but that times had changed. As we all do he'd grown older and wasn't as rail thin as he appeared in ABOVE. In Hollywood this is a no no. But he didn't care what they thought and continued making movies that remain some of the best action films even when the budgets dropped from what they once were.

CONTRACT TO KILL is a great example of a quality action film starring Seagal that delivers the goods. Seagal plays John Harmon, an ex CIA/DEA asset brought out of retirement to handle a particularly sensitive contract. Arab terrorists are about to set up a deal with a Mexican cartel head that will help them gain access to enter the United States with ease. This gives them the opportunity to smuggles in people and weapons up to an including a dirty bomb. What the government wants Harmon to do is pinpoint the location of their meeting and let them know where it is.

But as with most movies involving spies these days crosses and double crosses are the rule of thumb and Harmon isn't your typical low level asset. He's been there, he knows how they work and figures out that the original plan wasn't what he was told. So he takes him team, FBI agent Zara (Jemma Dallender) and drone pilot Matthew Sharp (Russell Wong), and sets in motion his own plan.

Harmon realized early on that the location for the meet wasn't in Mexico as the intel thought it was but in Istanbul instead. With his team they ramp up the paranoia of the terrorists and plant the seeds of suspicion between the two. It won't be enough to prevent the deal from going down completely but it will allow them a greater margin of success in accomplishing their goal. And does that goal align with that of the agency that sent them in giving the plausible deniability? Watch and see to find out.

Segal remains the strong, silent type in his films and this one is no exception. His demeanor and vocal stylings are low key and subtle. Why yell when you can quietly put things in motion? His fighting style while aikido reminds me of the term Bruce Lee created with jeet kune du, the way of the intercepting fist. He allows his opponent the chance to throw at him and then uses their energy and the flow of their own body against them providing him with ample opportunity to deliver more debilitating blows. It's worked for him in all of his films and continues to do so now.

The supporting casts here does a great job. Dallender shows plenty of future potential here with an acting ability and attractive appearance that makes you wonder why she isn't doing more mainstream features. Wong seems on the same career path as Seagal having been in higher priced fare in the past but seemingly relegated to lower tier films of late. He too is a victim of Hollywood where age isn't seen as a positive thing no matter what you can still do which is sad. At least he helps elevate the roles provided him as in this film.

On the whole the movie will probably not make anyone must see list but does provide plenty of entertainment for action fans. Seagal fans will rate this one higher than some of this other films and the plot ties in perfectly with what is happening in the world since word has come out that there is a possible connection between cartels and terrorist organizations actually taking place. One can only hope there is a team like Seagal's seen here in place to stop them.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A killing contract well worth turning down
TheLittleSongbird1 May 2018
Steven Seagal has done some good, or at least watchable, films. Particularly 'Under Siege'. He has also done a lot of mediocre and less films, indicative of laziness and that Seagal was well past his sell by date, and a good deal of them are even very bad.

'Contract to Kill' is one of the very bad ones. Awful even, and for me if ranking Seagal's filmography from best to worst it would be towards the bottom. Did not expect much, but watched it because Seagal has shown signs that he can be halfway decent and as said not all his films are bad. Also do appreciate the action genre and there are good films out there in the genre, classics even. 'Contract to Kill' is far from that, more closer to a waste of time that shows little signs of trying.

Seagal himself gives another lazy and wooden performance that shows that he was not interested and wanted to be somewhere else. His reading-from-an-autocue-like and robotic line delivery in particular betrays that. The rest of the cast are just as poor though in all fairness have little to work with.

The characters are ones we know very little about and don't care what happens to happen, so unengaging and one-dimensional they are. The dialogue is risible, with a lot of cheesiness, awkwardness and far too much talk delivered with little emotion or momentum and bordering on the near-incomprehensible.

Its excessively talky nature affects severely the pacing, which never comes to life. There is no urgency, let alone tension, intrigue or suspense. The action doesn't feature enough in comparison and suffer from pedestrian choreography and bacon-slicer-like editing. The story is by-the-numbers, dull and not always easy to follow.

Direction is flat and ill-at ease, while the sound/soundtrack are one-note and obvious as well as poorly recorded and the whole film looks cheap. And it's not just the editing, the slapdash special effects, drab photography and laughably bad green screen (that was too obvious and jarring) are just as bad.

Hate to say it, but to me nothing works in 'Contract to Kill' and it is an awful mess in every way. 1/10 Bethany Cox
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Seagal's a bit croaky...avoid this one
elpatoletsplays27 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Another few months, and another Seagal DTV movie. I must say, things are looking worrying for old Steven - he sounds incredibly croaky in this movie and fatter than ever before. Guy needs to sort his health out or one of the all-time greats might die...

Aside from that, you're probably wondering if this is worth watching if you enjoy a bit of Seagal. The answer is no.

The plot...something about Mexican cartels making a deal with Muslim extremists and Seagal and his team have to stop it. Really isn't much to talk about here. There seems to be a deliberate attempt to touch on current topical events, but it fails really, especially Seagal's ending monologue. Not even worth me expanding on it. It's just poor. Very poor.

Directing and cinematography is alright for a Seagal DTV, although there is a massive bit of text that fills up the screen every time they go to a different location to tell us where it is which looks quite silly. Quick cuts manage to cover up any use of body doubles for Seagal. Keoni Waxman has directed Seagal DTVs plenty of times and has shown himself to be capable enough so there shouldn't be concern on this front anyway. Oh yeah, and there's quite a bit of green screen, but that's not exactly unexpected.

The characters and acting...yeah, they leave a lot to be desired. No character is memorable, at all, and everyone just seems to be acting like they're waiting for the director to shout "cut" and they can get their paycheck and move on. Not even a modicum of effort from Russell "irrelevant since the 90s" Wong, or Jemma "I'm here to have my breasts fondled by Steven" Dallender, or anyone else for that matter.

The movie is also largely devoid of action until the latter parts, and well, it isn't even any good. I know you can't expect much from Seagal these days, but you'd expect the other actors to try and do something but they just don't.

Don't waste your time. It's a boring mess that is completely forgettable. Seagal's made much better DTV movies, so why even bother with this?
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Absolutely awful!
runoson27 August 2017
Steven Seagal made some semi-cool action movies in the late 80's and early 90's, but this is one is about as bad as it gets.

Sure, you can watch this if you want a good laugh. But if you like Seagal you'd be better off watching "Nico" or "Under Siege" once more instead of this garbage.

Seagal is in fact the best actor in this thing, and that says a lot. Just listen to the two, soon to be dead, guys in the opening scene, and you'll understand how bad the actors are in "Contract To Kill". In addition to that the special effects are laughable (watch the plane explosion), the dialogue awful (f**k this, f**k that) and the editing is poorly done.

Fast forward to Seagal's fighting scenes. They are still pretty fun to watch.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A whole lotta punching, shooting and mumbling....o
planktonrules17 February 2019
Despite Steven Seagal having made a ton of movies over the decades, this movie is the first of his I've ever seen. And, I have a suggestion that you will likely find helpful....use the closed captions if you see it on DVD or Netflix. Seagal is a mumbly actor...and I had to struggle to understand all of his dialog. This is NOT an attack on him...just an observation from a middle-aged guy who is a bit hard of hearing. But now that I think about it...his delivery is a bit annoying and it was simply terrible.

The plot to "Contract to Kill" seemed both confusing and filled with a lot of cliches. Seagal plays an ex-CIA/DEA agent who assembles a team of three to take down an entire terrorist scheme! It seems that another ex-CIA guy is planning on activating a bunch of terrorist cells in the USA and he's working with drug cartels to bring it off. Whatever....it just seems like a pretect to do a whole lot of shooting, killing and bone-breaking...all during which Seagal somehow doesn't emote at all and mumbles. Particularly memorable is the long dialog with the bossman before the final boss battle....where he just talks and talks and talks. I also loved how Seagal would drive his car down twisty roads in a city...and never hit or got hit by anyone as he speeds through stop signs! And, how the baddies had guns but somehow were easily defeated by just some close-quarters martial arts.

As I've never seen another Seagal movie, I am naive. Perhaps in his earlier films (before he got too old for this) he actually KICKED someone....here he just uses a lot of wrist holds and punches. It's high quality martial arts...but also so limited that it felt silly....sort of like Martial arts from the waist up. The only kicks I remember were from his team members.

Overall, a silly film which simply provides a vehicle for a lot of violence. Not much depth here and not for anyone wanting anything approaching a good movie.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Seagal nicks it into the bud for an Islamist terrorist plot
shakercoola25 September 2018
An American action thriller; A story about a CIA/DEA enforcer investigating a plot to bring deadly weapons and terrorist organisation leaders into the USA over its border with Mexico. To prevent an attack on American soil, he must turn two savage forces against each other. Seagal gives a fair performance as a man cool under pressure, his demeanour chilled and enigmatic when not ruthless but his fighting scenes are less than impressive with their close up camera angles because Seagal is not limber enough for the athletic character he purports to be. The story at least provides some interest in the way the chase and surveillance sequences play out even if he plot is a bit protracted and exposition is heavy handed. The dialogue is a bit of a let-down too, full of expletives for reasons that will mystify. Lastly, the production quality: CGI rendering is below-par and sound falters early on with some of Seagal's dialogue.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Nothing more than Seagal playing spec ops in real life and that's just as pathetic as it sounds
daniel-mannouch11 September 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Contract to Kill is very much business as usual for Steven Seagal as he plays yet another rogue law enforcer, badly, on the hunt for whatever stock bad guys are floating around action cinema at the time.

The plot is intriguing enough with Terrorists wanting to use the smuggling routes of Mexican drug cartels, but the execution is beyond terrible with a screenplay that was so desperate to show off what little research has been done into the subject matter(s), that it had no time left for developing characters or any kind of optimisation as entire five minute conversations in Contract to Kill are nothing more than a heated debate between two near unintelligible beings who believe in the exact same conspiracy theories.

The action scenes are the worst I've ever seen in a Seagal film, ranging from shaky cam nausea to erratically edited montages of close ups to mask the sad fact that Seagal just can't go anymore. He can barely even speak now with his raspy voice suggesting some degree of exhaustion, from talking. I would feel sad for him, but those multiple sexual allegations clear me in utero of those bad feels.

Contract to Kill can't even have the dubious honour of being the worst Seagal film I've seen. That goes to Out for a Kill and this Infowars crap doesn't even come close to having the comedic appeal of that 2003 disasterpiece. This one's just another of several tiresome retreads that will inevitably become more desperate with each passing attempt until Seagal attains some self-awareness and calls it a day.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
It's a 3 for the supporting cast
staunton-gary17 May 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not sure what mad Russell Wong sign up for this poor attempt at a movie, sometimes, I think that Mr Wong was thinking the same thing. He seemed to have more action than Seagal, and I'm not talking about the sex scene that was painful and uncomfortable to see. Bad guy walking in slow motion does nothing to enhance his badass-ness, especially when he looks like Griff Rhys Jones. Overall, bad acting, camera work and direction. The fact that Seagal doesn't have a single grey hair is a little creepy, just like the enclosed sex scene.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
calling this a film would be insult to cinema
FilmMan4727 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
This is not even garbage you see when you see junk or garbage cinema you dig up something good out of it too but this movie is trash..calling this film a film would be insult to cinema in general,i used to respect steven seagal and have some of his old films in my collection but with this one he lost it.

gone are the days of his late 80s and 90s films this guy is a z grade actor now.i prefer jean claude van damme any day then this.jcvd or wesly snipes worst films are even better than seagal these days.

how much was steven seagal paid by cia to promote this crap,this is pure propaganda garbage nonsense,if you want to know whats really going on in middle east check out watch the jason bourne film series with matt damon and november man 2014 the cia and mosad hates those films because it shows the reality of dirty games and politics,and exposes crimes of cia and fbi and how they use religion of others to their gain and controling the areas,and then blaming muslims islam and middle east,afghanistan,iraq,syria,palastine is a mess because of cia & moosad,this stupid movie wont tell you that,the jason bourne will tell you.

as for action there is no action here the only action was steven seagal getting laid with a girl half his age young enough to be his niece or daughter,

i feel sad for people who bought the dvd disc or who downloaded this nonsens waste of bandwidth not worst even streaming online,forget tv or thater release,its been more that 15 years steven seagal is release direct to home video releases and this one is with keoni waxman probably 7th or 10th film with him.same garbage,low budget trash with no story ,bad dialog,cheezy effects cgi gun shots and no practical stunt,if you see seagal moving or kicking people thats not seagal its a stunt double he is using since belly of the beast 2003.there is no aikido or judo karate here move on guys this is a waste of time and money.

the rating for this should be minus 10 or zero .1 star is way enought for this trash.skipp it.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Pretty good movie.....Don't believe the negativity.
dolemite7213 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
The Plot: Seagal plays ex C.I.A operative john Harmon. His character seems like an off-shoot of Jonathan Cold (more 'The Foreigner' than 'Black Dawn' though) Harmon is lured back into taking out an Islamic terrorist, who is brokering a deal with Mexican Gangsters in Istanbul (?) for safe passage into the U.S. in order to activate (previously planted) 'cells'

As part of a 3 person team, Harmon utilises technology and surveillance to play both fractions off against one another. When given an eleventh hour change in plan by his handlers, Harmon disobeys orders and together with his team, take the fight to the badguys on the night of their meeting.

Action: Despite a rather talky start, the movie moves along at a fairly brisk pace, and is pretty much non-stop carnage, for the final third of the movie. However, the action is rather low-key (so don't go expecting any huge set pieces) what you get is about 2 or 3 explosions, a brief car chase, multiple shoot-outs and about 6 or 7 quick (but brutal) fight scenes for Seagal. The quick cut editing is on display (as per usual) but there's a few longer shots of Seagal dishing out punishment. The doubling is kept to a minimum. He bends a lot of arms (no snaps, sadly) flips a few guys over, kicks a couple, punches most of them, crunches one guys head open with a metal pole (ouch!) and shoots the rest (although, to be fair.....Seagal doesn't actually shoot too many people, preferring to actually fight them.....which may please those sick of the over-reliance on gunplay in previous movies?)

Production Values: For a lower end DTV movie, it looks pretty polished. As previously stated, there's no big set pieces, but the cinematography is crisp, and the locations colourful enough (if sometimes uninspired) The green screen employed in the car chase actually look stylish (for a change) The editing is good (albeit, erratic during certain fight scenes) and the soundtrack has a cinematic feel to it.

Performances: Seagal (as with 'End Of A Gun') is extremely profane throughout this. At one point, whilst giving a briefing to his team, he likens the mess of a mission to (quote) "A monkey trying to fcuk a football" (which not only raised a wry smile from myself....but also to the actual characters he says it to) Seagal isn't as 'quiet' as usual in this movie.....but speaks very slowly. Which is just as well, because most of his dialogue consists of abbreviations for various law enforcement agencies and terrorist groups and other organisations. The first third of the movie is very dialogue heavy....and if you're willing to endure a bit more exposition than usual, there's a pretty good thriller for the remaining hour. The other performers are competent enough (no one embarrasses themselves, I guess?) and Seagal's team also kick a lot of ass also (but not as much as the big guy)

Final thoughts: Whilst not perfect, Contract To Kill is a competent enough thriller. The problem being that it's marketed as an 'Action' movie. If it was sold as a thriller, it would be an action-packed thriller. But sold as an action movie, it probably doesn't have enough "kiss kiss bang bang" for jaded millennial audiences. It's problem might be that (even for a Steven Seagal movie) it's actually (scarily) plausible? Playing like a downscalled 20 minute 'Mission Impossible' segment (with a touch of 'Eye In The Sky' added for good measure) Contract To Kill isn't likely to give THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR sleepless nights, but I do think the recent bad reviews it's received have been rather unjust. It's fairly complex, but not at the expense of 'filler plot & characters' Had the exact same movie starred a bunch of A-listers....I'd wager critics would probably praise it. Unfortunately, critics seem to expect every new Seagal movie (however low the budget) to be 'Under Siege' (and quite frankly those days, not to mention 'budgets' have long gone, I'm afraid) Fans of Seagal would do well, to ignore the negativity of the critics (let's face it, they pretty much slammed all his earlier movies as well) and give this movie a chance. The key to enjoy recent Seagal movies is to like them for what they are (and not for what they aren't)
7 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I will do my thing
nogodnomasters28 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
John Harmon (Steven Seagal) former CIA agent who worked for the DEA (not sure how that works or how many pay checks he gets) comes out of retirement to find the location of a meeting between the Sonora Cartel and Islamic terrorist from Yemen (?). The meeting is to smuggle in drugs and maybe a terrorist or two to activate those sleeper cells. Harmon forms a team to go after them which consists of FBI agent Zara Hayek (Jemma Dallender) and drone operator Matthew Sharp (Russell Wong). The meeting is in Istanbul. (Filmed in Romania which looks nothing like Istanbul...just go with it.) This is another goatee film with Seagal spending the bulk of the film sitting in front of a computer or driving a Bitchin' Camaro. He does have a couple of fight scenes which consists mostly of grabbing an arm and twisting it...no leg kicks. The heavy hand-to-hand stuff is done by his partners. Seagal has entered his "work smarter, not harder" phase of his espionage career as he engages in PSYOP and prattles Genghis Khan philosophy.

Guide: F-word. Nudity (Jemma Dallender), Implied sex
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Boring and Incoherent
bozabozidar28 January 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this mess of a film because I had 80 minutes to spare and it was currently on TV, and even though I was even expecting it to be "so bad it's good", I was disappointed because this movie is "so bad it's just bad". The plot is a needlessly convoluted mess about a team of 3 ex-secret agents (or something like that) played by the geriatric Steven Seagal, Russell Wong and Jemma Dallender, that get hired by the US government to prevent a meeting between Mexican drug cartels and Islamic terrorists (the 2 most frequent villains in Seagal's movies are now combined together) that's set to take place in Istanbul. Steven Seagal is known for repetative fight scenes in which he curbstomps hundreds of bad guys, but here he doesn't even do that (since he got too old for that) and instead spends almost all of his screentime either sitting behind a desk or sitting in cars. There is maybe 4 minutes max of fighting in the whole movie - brief scenes in which Seagal and Russell Wong beat up and shoot several henchmen, and it's filmed with so much shaky-cam and frame cuts that it's almost unwatchable. Also, the worst part about this movie is that, since it probably went through numerous re-edits in postproduction, there are several scenes which seem like they were made from various different footage that was re-edited and spliced together quite clumsily. This is most obvious in the epilogue, where after completing their mission, the heroes go on a new adventure, but this clearly consists out of just random shots seen in previous scenes shown again in a different context. Also, even though all Steven Seagal does here is sit and talk, he can't even do that right because his voice sounds so unnatural and weird, like a child with a sore throath is trying to talk like a tough guy.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Nothing's changed
Leofwine_draca27 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
It's been a few years since I've seen one of Steven Seagal's newer films, but CONTRACT TO KILL ticks all of the disappointing boxes and shows that nothing has changed. The portly star once again re-teams with Keoni Waxman for another story shot in Eastern Europe. Seagal plays the leader of a special forces squad tasked with tackling Islamic terrorists, and as usual he wanders around and occasionally beats people to death. Helping him are an Asian-American guy and an actress from I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE 2. This is a faintly watchable film that screams cheapness throughout, and the choppy fight choreography, in which Seagal's stand-in is all too apparent, is a cheat.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Just a bad movie
marielapzavala2 April 2019
Steven Segal made some good movies when he was young but this is a poorly made movie. Just horrible
4 out of 6 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