Panama

Where was the plot, the story was all over the place and the acting woeful ,why was this even made...a low budget film not worthy of being on the screen, avoid at all cost.

What a level of film production Mel has descended to, this is awful! What a level of film production Mel has descended to, this is awful! What is it about and why did this happen? Lack of money or something else? These are now a few bad movies starring Mel. This is a disaster level!

If you take a good thriller novel and simply filmed it, then this would be the result. It has terse, great dialog that is direct and to the point ... like reading a good book. The scenes aren't over dialoged. As for all the very negative 'reviews' it looks like all the arm chair old time would be Sandinistas wrote the negative reviews here based on politics. If you like Elmore Leonard and those type writers put to screen to tell a story of action then this is a good way to spend a couple of hours. Recommended.

And not one of them noticed the sloppy incoherent lazily-written convoluted and cliched nonsense of a so called screenplay? And they all greenlit the final cut to market? Like what was with the long dragged out and boring intimate scenes? It seems the writers put all their effort in those parts. Everything else seemed like a bunch of screenplays for this genre were put in a shredder then randomly pieced together for this story. To make things worse, this was directed by the Crank movie series Mark Neveldine. Isn't experience supposed to make you better, instead of giving the viewers this sub-par 1980's slow-mo-filmed amateur nonsense? I guess we now know that Neveldine's partner in the Crank series Brian Taylor was clearly the brains and talent of the two. I'm assuming this was a low budget film, but the horrible shaky cam filming is inexcusable. A handheld gimbal stabilizer for an iPhone only costs $50. This felt like it was filmed on a flip-phone by someone having a seizure. Between the horribly confusing writing and shaky camera work, I still have a headache. The only thing this film was missing was Bruce Willis. Then I could understand the failure. But I feel bad that Gibson got stuck in this mess, he's better than this. It's a generous 3/10 from me, all going towards the hotties (only worthwhile viewing) and sympathy points for Gibson.

Yes count them in the opening credits 35 -to make this incoherent bumbling mess -even Mel Gibson cant save this and the gunfight scenes were the stupidest i have ever scene -tbh j i only lasted 35 mins but i sincerely doubt it got any better. But i bet it coulda got alot worse AVOID.

I could tell by that awful rock music score just how lousy this film would've been but I couldn't even get thru the first scene. Right off the cast around Mel Gibson looked amateurish and never I've been a fan of Cole Hauser to begin with. So I proceeded to turn off my video player and delete the film from my video library.... Hard ass pass!.

It's a decent enough, I've seen worse over the years... 3.3 rating is harsh and that's generally because if the haters of Mel Gibson that will go above and beyond to tarnish his films. Ignore wannabe critics and watch it with your own mind not others. The only issue I had was the camera could be all over and can mess with ones eyes... I don't mind Hauser but I'd rather see Michael Parè and Gibson in something like this...