He Who Dares

Hmm, i do rather watch Power Rangers or Ultraman as action movie than this anytime.

I don't understand why this is like a film produced by amateurs and even worse. There is way too MUCH unnecessary effects used. Slow-motion here, then flash flash there, slow-mo again, and most of the time, it's better without any effect. It feels like someone is getting really hyped about effects and applying it everywhere like a first timer get excited with a new toy.

Then, SAS? Seriously? ONE thing is surely missing in the opening of this film, and it's this line "This is for entertainment purpose only. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead is purely coincidental." A real disgrace to the elite soldier community and in this movie, it just seems like gang fights, rather than SAS vs Terrorists.

It's really that bad that i forced myself to write this.

Zara Phythian is the responsible for all the stars this review awards the film. She is more physically capable than the men supposedly playing S.A.S, and has more of a screen presence than all of the villains in the film combined. I hope she goes on to do far more, in work that is far more deserving. As for the rest... where do I start? This film was clearly made by a team where the quality was second to anything else. Script, story, logic, even effort, seems so lacking. Much like their "white collar hooligan" films, the sequel was in the works before this one even came out. So that sure isn't by public demand. Looking at the other reviews on here, the public has spoken. If the sequel picks up the slack left by it's predecessor it may surprise us all, but the track record of work does not suggest that will be the case.

Oh what a crap, badly made with a terrible acting, editing and production design. I highly doubt that the actual SAS special forces proceed this way during action, and with such a poor equipment and warfare facilities, with no ballistic helmets(!!!) but who cares? I watched as a cheap one more DIE HARD rip-off. Everything here is lousy, tongue in cheek but I enjoyed it, every minute. There are twelve bad guys at the beginning of the assault and it appears that at least twenty of them are eventually killed all long the film. Search the error.. Many surprises here, many brutal killings and this is the perfect example showing that a piece of crap may be exciting to see; and that doesn't mean that the movie is good. I mostly loved the gorgeous female terrorist. Please if you watch it, don't do it with great expectations, just as an effective grade Z piece of work. Monitor your spirit and eye on what it actually is. Don't try to compare with a major Hollywood feature. And then and only then you'll enjoy it.

I've seen some bad films in my life and this ranks up there with the worst of them.

The lead villain over acted so much, he was almost good, he probably has potential if he had a better film to act in.

I was a bit confused at first that I was watching some sort of GCSE media studies project, if that was the case, I might have given it a C...... But it wasn't, I'm really angry with myself for watching this the whole way through, should have gone with with gut instinct and quit after 30 secs.

Nonsense story, plot holes all over the place, extremely am dram acting, massive thumbs down. Half a star!

The idea behind this film is good even if stolen from an old movie. Simon Phillips is about the only think that stopped me from walking out. The way the SAS is shown is a joke, didn't even get the uniforms correct let alone their standard operating methods. Sure some might say this doesn't matter but watch "Act of Valour" or "Special Forces" both much better movies. The acting in "Acts of Valour" was poor but much more watchable than this is because the special forces team are shown correctly. They apparently even used some ex-seal members. It doesn't look like they even did any research for this let alone consultant ex-members. Once again a lazy approach ruins a potentially great movie.