Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

AutCuddly Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Stephanie There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Prismark10 This is a bonkers Steve Austin action film which starts off promisingly and turns to dumb and dumber as characters start doing illogical things.Steve Austin and Eric Roberts are border guards but Roberts is only in for a few minutes before he is killed off and we move on four years later as Austin lives a Rambo like existence in the mountains near the Canadian border.A group of bad guys who have been double crossed are out to get their prey and the loot and to do this they break into the Sheriff's office, kill him and then kidnap Austin's daughter. Good job Austin dropped by as he leads the gang into the mountain.The trouble is the gang are a bickering sort, one of them even hits another one in order to rape Austin's daughter.Gil Bellows the gang leader enjoys himself doing a Jack Nicholson impression playing the bad guy. The rest of the film is a below par Cliffhanger rip off with little action and plenty of plot holes and illogical behaviour.

Charles-kyle Bronson-reese A lot of people hate this movie because it has no authenticity, but it is a typical old school arnold, sly, or even charles bronson typish movie. Basically, there's a bad guy he hurts the good guy in some way and then a huge fight ensues in the finale followed by the good guy winning. A lot of of old school type of aspects in this movie because of the way it follows the typical type of genre. I do enjoy these kinds of movies because we don't see much of them anymore. So, I will continue to watch these for as long as people end up making them. Also, you have to keep in mind if it wasn't for those old school actors none of these movies would have been made.

Marcus Hofmann I wanna keep it short. I could not finish the movie, and I've seen a lot of bad movies, but finished them. The story, the acting ....everything is just so low....wasting lifetime.I would give a Zero if possible. Actually, I always wonder what Steve Austing is doing in movies, he is a bad actor. Even in Expendables he was just so bad, but we didn't have to watch him too often. In this movie, he is like a toast with two legs...or whatever. Everything what has two legs could play his role. I always thought movies from Dwayne Johnsen are bad..But at least his miming is interesting. So, keep it short: I hope you don't waste your time with this movie

elliot-117-803854 Oh dear. I don't expect much from an "action" flick starring Steve Austen, but this managed to tick all the bad film boxes.Poor script, poor acting and terrible direction, but worst of all was the plot, if it's not an insult to plots to call it that. There were so many holes and improbable coincidences, it's hard to know where to begin, but I'll point out a few which will make sense if you have had the misfortune to see the film:Why did Lawson leave the bomb in the place most likely to be found by the other baddies? Not very clever. Why did he wire the bomb so that the cutting of the only wire connecting the phone to the explosives deactivates it? Not very sophisticated. Why did he wait a good five minutes after making off with the loot before deciding to make the call, giving others plenty of time to find and deactivate the bomb? Getting really thin, now. When other baddies find the bomb, they all stand around it discussing what to do (putting their fingers in their ears in case it explodes). They are in a big warehouse (conveniently with only one exit - they couldn't shoot the lock?) full of equipment and stuff. It doesn't occur to any of them to barricade the bomb in one corner and barricade himself in the opposite one. Why did Lawson try to get to Canada through the woods when he could have just driven across the border? Geez this guy was stupid. The other end of the rope tying up the daughter was held in Dominika's hand. Ooo - very secure! Why did the baddies not tie Austin up at night to prevent him attempting to escape/kill them? How did the watch strap turn into so much climbing rope? Why did Austin retrieve the bag without getting Banks to let the girl go first? Rather dim. A bit convenient when Austin finds the bag with the bow in it? When did Austin get the time to build the hide beneath which he was camouflaged before attacking Jensen? Austin then shoots Jensen - in the backpack? Why not through the neck or head! Dominika finds Jensen's backpack, but not Jensen's body, a few feet away. Not much of a search! Why did Austin, having picked the baddies off one by one (Rambo-style), does he choose to run, completely exposed, across a rock face in full view of Banks? When Banks has Austin semi-conscious and totally at his mercy, why does he choose to run off and leave him to recover? Banks finds the scooters. He knows he can get away. He has already ruthlessly killed several of his fellow baddies, cops etc, but he chooses to merely punch Austin's daughter. Not very likely. And finally, and worst of all: - Banks finds three scooters. He is being chased by two goodies. Why, in heaven's name, doesn't he disable the other two?I don't mind a little bit of dramatic licence for plot development purposes, but this film just took it way too far. Don't waste your time.