Genres

Visitors Review

2012-05-19 09:10:05

Welcome to the Amazing Crapfest

Ok, I didn't exactly have high expectations for this film. That being said, this movie managed to dissapoint even my extremely low expectations. I think this film has the worst dialogue of any film I've ever seen. Also, the whole plot is retarded. What kind of a moron would hijack a train? Gee, that makes sense. I think I'll hijack a slow moving object about a mile long. No way anyone could ever stop that. Its a shame because the first film was fairly enjoyable and the character Seagal played was interesting. Unfortunately they killed all of that in this crapfest. Only watch this film if you're trying to analyze how NOT to make a film.

Michael DeZubiria 2012-05-18 20:32:49

Not as bad as you would think…

I seem to remember hating this movie to death when I first saw it aboutten years ago. I watched it again yesterday and was surprised at howmuch I enjoyed it. This either shows how much your opinion can changeover time or shows that I missed something the first time around. Or Iwas a little drunk when I watched it this time. Either way, it's not asgood as the original film, but I'm sorry to say that this is betterthan the average Steven Seagal movie.Seagal is right on the money for most of the movie, except for any partwhere he's trying to be a good uncle and have a normal relationshipwith his niece, played by Katherine Heigl. No matter how much I lovehim, Seagal absolutely can not be a normal guy, and he can NOT doromance. Holy crap, I saw him do a sex scene in one of his movies, Ican't remember which one, but it was like watching a beautiful woman inbed with a rhinoceros.Seagal reprises his role of Casey Ryback, now retired from the Navy andworking as a chef at the charmingly named Mile High Café in Denver,Colorado. He has long since lost contact with his brother, but now thathe has been tragically killed, Casey wants to come back into his nieceSarah's life. Sarah is unimpressed with his long absence, and they donot start their vacation off on a good note.As they are traveling by train from Denver to Los Angeles, a madmannamed Travis Dane (a clownish performance by Eric Bogosian) takescontrol of the train and uses it as his control center for a wild planto take control of a top-secret government outer-space super- weapon.OK, so get this. Some Middle Eastern terrorists offer him $1 billion todestroy not New York City, not the White House, but nothing less thanthe entire eastern seaboard! Now THIS is a bad guy! Say what you willabout the rest of the movie, but the plot has all of the villainousambitiousness of a 1980s 007 film. Dane takes it all in stride, though,even agreeing (for an extra $100 million) to use the satellite todestroy a passenger jet in mid-flight to get rid of one particularman's hated ex-wife. Personally I'm willing to bet that they could havefound some crackhead to off the poor wife for like, you know, maybe $20million (or another of his henchmen to just do it for free), but nomatter, we get the point of that little addendum to the deal. Theaccuracy on this thing is astonishing.Early in the film, soon after taking over control of the satellite(which he is able to do because, of course, he designed it but wasfired by the government before it was deployed), he demonstrates hiscontrol by destroying an alleged chemical weapons plant in China. Iloved this part. I've been living in China for two years now, and hedescribes a weapons facility in the city of Guangzhou, which hepronounces "Guang-zoo," but is actually pronounced "Guang-joe." Yeah,this is a little nit-picky, and most people wouldn't recognize themistake anyway, but for me it's a little hard to take a super-villainseriously when he can't even pronounce the names of his targets. And'Guangzhou,' by the way, is Mandarin for "Canton." It's not an obscureplace!OK, so we certainly know by now what to expect from a Steven Seagalmovie, so I had no problem with the outlandish villain and his nuttyscheme. But Eric Bogosian really blew his role. He plays Travis Dane,the man who has taken control of the train and the satellite weapon,with a casual aloofness that completely takes away any sense of tensionor danger that the movie might otherwise have had. Throughout hisentire performance, he looks like he's joking his way through an earlyscript reading.Katherine Heigl phones in her performance but there's not anythingovertly bad about it, although there's also not really anything goodabout it. Seagal is showing the first signs of aging in this movie, butstill does what he needs to do to make it a fun film. It's got a goodstory and some clever comic relief and, despite a couple of botchedperformances, is still entertaining enough. I've heard rumors of anUnder Siege 3, and while Seagal is certainly too old by now to do it,it's not like that's gonna stop him. I'd watch it…

callanvass 2012-05-13 22:14:52

Awesome Sequel, That's Almost As Good As The Original!.

This is an awesome sequel, that's almost as good as the original!.Seagal is fantastic in this, and in my opinion gave one of his bestperformances, here, plus, some of the stunts were fantastic!. While itcan't quite match the original it comes pretty close, as it's full ofexciting and action, and non stop thrills throughout!. A lot of peoplecriticize Seagal for not having any acting ability , i disagree, whilehe doesn't show much emotion he showed some here, and was quite good inthe acing department. all the characters were cool, and the 2 mainvillains were very menacing, but not as good as Jones Or Busey stillthey were fine. Overall this is an awesome sequel, and i stronglysuggest you see it!. The Direction is great. Geoff Murphy does a greatjob with some outstanding camera work, crazy angles,especially in thehuge train crash scene at the end, and overall keeping the film at avery fast pace!, great job!. There is a bit of blood. We get LOTS ofvery bloody gunshot wounds,bloody slit wrist,bloody gunshot wound tothe head with blood and brains splattering,nasty bone breaking,bloodybroken nose,and other minor stuff. The Acting is excellent. StevenSeagal is AMAZING always, and gives possibly his best actingperformance i have seen yet(he is always good), he seems really relaxedand into his role, he also had good chemistry with morris Chestnut andKatherine Heigl,kicked that ass, and was tons of fun to watch! (Seagalrules!). Eric Bogosian is very good as one of the main villains but wasrather bland at times,still for the most part he was somewhat menacing.Everett McGill is extremely intense, here as one of the main villains,he was extremely menacing, and a very scary presence!. Katherine Heiglis GORGEOUS!, and does fine with what she had to do here, however iwish she had more screen time, she also had a couple of bad lines.Morris Chestnut is amusing, and was not bad as the comic relief. AndyRomano reprises his role here as Admiral bates, and did well onceagain. Kurtwood Smithis fine here, and did what he had to do well,great character actor. Overall this is an awesome sequel and i highlysuggest you see it as soon as possible!. ****1/2 out of 5

Chromium_5 2012-05-13 10:45:13

A wonderful action movie, but with one major flaw

This is one of the rare instances where the sequel far surpasses theoriginal movie. Under Siege 2 has tons more action than itspredecessor, as Steven Seagal smashes his enemies to pieces withrelentless brutality. The high point of the last one was the amazingknife fight at the end, but even that has been outdone here, with theknife being replaced by a terrifying meat cleaver. And I didn't thinkit was possible to one-up Tommy Lee Jones' performance as a villain,but Eric Bogosian managed to do it, as a truly cuckoo guy who has a lotof good-natured fun terrorising the government.The one flaw that brings the movie down is Steven Seagal himself. Hegives a lazy, half-hearted performance, and spends the entire timelooking like he's falling asleep. He doesn't appear to be particularlyconcerned about being attacked by mercenaries; rather, he acts like hejust wants to get it over with. If it wasn't for his dud performance,this would be a spectacular movie. However, I am forced to only giveit...8/10 stars. But it's still worth watching.

Howlin Wolf 2012-05-10 09:15:53

Blind Man's Bluff.

... Close your eyes and listen to all the explosions and the sound oflimbs hitting flesh, and you may be happy. If you OPEN your eyes,however, that's when the implausibilities become much harder to ignore.A CD-Rom is crucial in some megalomaniac's plan to extort money andterrorise the world. I've no problem digesting that, I've seen ithappen before in the movies; but when said CD is dropped ON A ROCKFACEand left undetected for who knows how long, it still works as it needsto!! Funny that, I don't dare to even put mine on the coffee-table if Iwant to be able to use it again...We see a shot of Seagal's large head within the cross-hairs of a sniperrifle... Game over, Casey? No way, within no time he's hiding under thetrain and explaining blithely that the bullet just 'grazed' him...However stupidly enjoyable the rest of the film was (and I suppose ithas its moments) I could no longer in good conscience cheer for Mr.Ryback, he should have been dead by now, not completely impervious toharm so that he can continue with his rescue mission...A train is a poor environment in which to stage skilfully choreographedbattles. On the boat you had galleys, walkways, etc; but hereeverything's a bit cramped. This means we spend a lot of time watchingdough-boy (What?! He's a chef, that's all I meant... :-) ) on top ofthe speeding vessel, making his ungainly way from carriage tocarriage... Here's a general rule; as soon as a terrorist so much aspeeks their head outside, they're a dead man (or woman). If Seagal evergets his hands on a baddie, just assume that Stevie wins the day, sincea lot of the time things are so poorly directed and edited that it'shard to tell...Bogosian playing the 'tech-geek' villain does well. True he can't comeclose to matching the previous standard of Lee Jones or Busey, butthat's to be expected. I have to admit, as hitherto mocking as I'vebeen thus far, that there is still a strangely unaccountable thrill inseeing the big man in black bust up those with shadowy souls...Darkness very much the theme, then. If you can manage to turn off theoverhead light of your brain for awhile, then you can still find someentertainment in this as long as you feel your way gently.

Redmist66 2012-05-09 12:45:04

A nasty arsed film

Yes Casey Ryback played by Mr Steven Seagal is back for the second of theunder siege movies, Yes this film is tripe, and the plot is as thin as apiece of dental floss, he has to save a load of people on a train whilstalso trying to save the whole of washington dc, i found his film unbarebleto watch, theres plenty of parts that could easily irritate the normalviewer, i e the goverment cannot contact the mercenaries on the trainbecause they are in "Dark Territory" but the mercenaries can have a laptopand check how much money has been deposited into there switz bank account,or the fact that they need a cd to run the operation, but why the hellwouldthey of not had back up copies, or the way mr seagal can run up to a carandlift the bonnet up and touch two wires to get it running, a very poor filmthat you would expect mr steven seagal to be in. I would not waste my timewatching it as you'll surely be laying on your death bed thinking yourtimecould have been wasted doing something more useful, i e watching paintdry!maybe not,

John M Upton 2012-05-07 21:15:53

An inevitable sequel….

With the overwhelming success of the first Under Siege, it was inevitablethat a sequel would be wheeled out before too long. Sure enough here it is,Under Siege 2 – Dark Territory. Quite why they bothered with the last subtitle I do not known as it is notreadily obvious within the action as to its reference but Idigress.This time the terrorists and Segal are all clumped together on a train. Basically it's a similar scenario from the first film, complete with thesame Admirals, CIA boss etc from the first instalment.The weapon of choice this time is a daft satellite weapon controlled by anutcase and his band of hired mercenaries. The two leading bad guys dohowever have some wonderful much quotable lines, one in particular I cannotrepeat here in print, you will just have to make your ownassumption…..Once again Segal is on his own with just an annoying sidekick/comedy relief(this time a Porter) for company and again he single handed takes on thenon-descript bad guys and duly despatches them one by one as per standardprocedure in an effort to stop the weapon, save the train and also save hisirritating but nice to look at niece.Sadly the quality of the seemingly recycled script is poor and Segal ishopelessly out acted by the two lead bad guys (Eric Bogosian and EverettMcGill) who in turn are out acted by the two former Alaskan Railroad GP7type locomotives hauling the train!!Also not helping in my appreciation of this film is the fact that the UK DVDrelease is badly chopped about and obvious badly done cuts aboundthroughout. Thankfully an excellent soundtrack from Basil Poledouris savesthis film from being just average.

2012-05-07 11:57:09

More of the same from Segal

The original "Under Seige",starring the at times wooden Steven Segal,was set aboard a battleship as our "hero" sets about,overcoming hijacking terrorists against all the odds......a slick action blockbuster in the" Die Hard"mould. This sequel basically rehashes the same plot,but changes the location from the battleship to a train where once again Segal,in the guise of ex Navy Seal,now chef,"Casey Ryback" battles against both the odds and the terrorists. As Ryback says in the film "No one beats me in the kitchen " Fans of the action gerne and Steven Segal will not be dissappointed.

2012-05-01 19:02:43

WOW ,AGAIN.

I WROTE A REVIEW LAST YEAR AND NOW I HAVE A DIFFERENT LOOK AT THIS MOVE.I SAID THE VILLIAN WAS STUPID HA HES COOL, STEVEN SEAGAL IS STILL COOL IS EVER, SO FOR ALL THE SEAGAL FANS GO SEE IT.

WldGal1 2012-05-01 12:08:40

EXCELLENT IN ALL WAYS!!!!

One Of the Best Action Actors... All Of his Movies are loaded woth action. Never seen a bad movie of his and you can always find a throw back actor in his smash hits which also makes them special... I love this Man's Work....

2012-05-01 05:09:07

Runaway Sequel

This review is from: Under Siege 2: Dark Territory (Snap Case) (DVD) There's no denying one thing: "Under Siege 2", directed by Geoff Murphy (Young Guns II), is one of Seagal's biggest movies. Shot on a $60 million budget, the follow-up to the top-grossing Under Siege promises big and features Seagal's most endearing film persona - former Navy SEAL-turned-cook Casey Ryback - taking the fight to the bad guys on a moving train. It's not, however, his best. Reportedly part of a trade-off offered by Warner Bros. so Seagal could direct On Deadly Ground, it doesn't feel as fun as Steven's previous pictures and is, in my opinion, the first wrong step in a career riddled by them. The storyline: now retired from the Navy, Ryback (Seagal) joins his niece (Katherine Heigl, Grey's Anatomy) on a train ride to Los Angeles to visit the grave of her father. However, when the same train is hijacked by mercenaries headed by a computer genius (Eric Bogosian, Law and Order) who gains control of a military satellite with destructive capabilities and the passengers are taken hostage, Ryback must race against time to disarm the terrorists and stop an automated attack on the Pentagon. Though the film still falls under the label of Seagal's "good" movies, I was disappointed by it as a whole: the edge is off the excitement experienced in the prequel, and when comparing it to his earlier titles, this one seems more superficial and reliant on special effects than physical talent. Seeing Seagal beginning to put on weight also isn't cool. The aikido master had never been much of a bodybuilder, but up until this point in time, he had been pretty trim; perhaps it's age, but by now, Seagal's face is pretty chubby and his build is a bit heavier. The villains also sort of disappoint: after seeing Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Busey in the original film, Bogosian and his giant cohort Everett McGill (Quest for Fire) just don't seem fun, crazy, or even particularly competent enough. Luckily, the film still includes plenty of Seagalian violence: lots of arm-breaking, wrist-snapping, and gunshots to the head, culminating in a scene where our hero slices a villain's fingers off with a sliding door. Stunts include Seagal hanging by a rope over a canyon and jumping between train cars - it's obviously a double doing that stuff, but scenes like that help show off the impressive scope and budget of the film. The supporting cast pulls its weight well, with the villains remaining deplorable-yet-intriguing and Katherine Heigl showing she was a capable actress even at age 17. A fairly young Morris Chestnut (later promoted to top villain status in Half Past Dead) plays the stereotypical black sidekick and kind of gets on your nerves after a while, but Andy Romano and Nick Mancuso reprise their government roles from the first flick to give it a greater feeling of continuity. These things weigh in for the film's favour, but all in all, the movie really doesn't live up to its predecessor. The train setting gives the film a much smaller scale than the prequel and the plot offers no innovation of scenarios, action, or Seagal's character.In the end, fans seem to be nicely divided between which of the two "Under Siege" films they prefer, but as a legitimate enthusiast of Seagal's, this blockbuster represents a step down the ladder. Nonetheless, the film should be right at home in the collections of other fans. Casual action-lovers might want to compare this to the original film before considering a purchase.

Ron-181 2012-04-30 11:21:47

Violence but also action and intrigue!

All Steven Segal movies are violent, but they also contain plenty ofactionscenes and some nice intriguing scripts which always show you somethingnew.The Casey Ryback character is Steven Segal at his best. While this is noaward winner it is certainly worth your viewing time. It is definitely toviolent for the little ones but adults will find it a good paced excitingmovie. Some of the stunts are a little far fetched but what the heckenjoy.I rated this 7.

amwcsu 2012-04-25 01:27:09

A Sequel Cliché in the making.

I can honestly say the original was better than the follow-up. A hellof a lot better! It was more in the plausible realm of Tom Clancywhereas Under Siege 2, is more cheesy science-fiction/martial artsfantasy complete with the cartoonish villains. The only thing goodabout US2 was that some of the original cast was put back into actionand that Kasey has a hottie of a niece placed into the mix. The fact itwas on a train was interesting but not even remotely believable . Butthat's where all the "good things" come to a sudden end.Please don't ask about the dialog....It wasn't as politically activeand realistic at all it was more amateur, as if this was the writer'sfirst day out of college. I hated this moronic action yarn mainly fornot only the putrid dialog, but the special effects. The effects inquestion appeared to be cheaper than a Geo Metro and done by drunkhobby enthusiasts. As far as the plot is concerned: Why did theterrorists pick this particular passenger train? Was there a specificreason? Filler and mock coincidence. Why was a defunct tactical weaponsprogram put back on line in the first place? Was there a reason? Havinga portable nuclear device floating in space is interesting subjectmatter for a movie, but it's one for John Carpenter and MichaelChricton to handle; not this moronic director. That alone more thanenough of a reason for this retch to bomb at the box office. The characters were as wooden as Yellowstone Park! If not more than.There is not a three-dimensional element to be found anywhere. With theexception of Segal. If you can call Segal's character threedimensional. You got the cowardly sidekick who just as dumb as a barrelof bricks. The fighting scenes were "100% Pure Segal" and the only damn reason themovie worked. The movie seemed to be unfinished, underdeveloped, andsilly to say the least. Oh, and speaking of silly the final scenes werejust lame and melodramatic as those airplane disaster movies...notworth more than a sentence! But the worst scene was where Dane washanging onto Rybeck's legs as he climbed a rope ladder to a waitingchopper; Belting out: "Rybeck! We make great team!" What? "Why does hesay that?" Then climbs into the chopper, flames on his back that lookedmore fake than boobs on Baywatch. I guess they ran out of money for abetter ending. Better ending? I guess they didn't have enough money fora better movie!

Enchorde 2012-04-24 12:49:48

Exactly what one can expect...

** Here be spoilers ** Recap: Casey Ryback (Seagal) has settled down after his boat adventureand runs a restaurant. However, he has family troubles and his brother,who he hasn't spoken to in years, recently died. Now, his only family(he seems to have broken up with Jordan Tate) is his niece Sarah(Heigl) and they are going to California to get to know each otheragain. Since Ryback's parents died in a plane crash they are going bytrain. Elsewhere a secret (secret even from congress and militarysuperiors) army and CIA project has launched a military satellite ableto take real time pictures (with remarkable resolution, i.e. a goof)and induce earthquakes from space (even in mid-air, incredible :) ) Asomewhat unstable former employee, and of course main designer, of theproject is out for revenge, and along with a team of mercenaries, theyhijack the train and take control of the satellite. Their goal,destruction and mayhem, and money of course. Unfortunately for them,Casey Ryback is on the train.Comments: So, if you haven't figured it out, I think the story is notthe best ever made as it contains a lot of small goofs. However, themovie is not really dependent on the story that much. I didn't watchfor the story so to speak. Because this is very much like the moviebefore it, action, explosions and fights. Unfortunately, moredisturbing than the plot holes, are that a lot of the special effectsare not very well done. Either it is apparent that the train forexample is a model or that the scenes are filmed in a studio withbackground added separately. Other than that the movie delivers exactlywhat I expected. Seagal is as he usually is, Heigl is good as theniece, her character could have been given a little more time and spaceand McGill and Bogosian are good bad guys. And Chestnut is a greatsidekick to Seagal. So, settle down in the couch and let yourself betaken for a ride.5/10

metalrox_2000 2012-04-23 21:43:58

A true equal sequel

Steven Segall returns as Casey Ryback, yet again at the wrong place atthe right time. The Under Siege series was perhaps the best of Segalls'work.The story opens with Ryback dealing with his brother's death, and howto relate to his estranged niece. Seeking time to clear his mind fro arather disastrous start in the trip, Ryback retreats to the galley toshow his cooking style to the kitchen staff of the train. It is at thistime that a group of terrorist, led by Marcus Penn (everett McGill) andTravis Dane ( ERic Bogosian in a great turn as the ruthlessly evil, butultra intelligent Dane), as they seek the passwords held by two topPentagon captains. The film also features Boyz N' The Hood's MorrisChestnut, as reluctant partner in dealing with the terrorist. Also lookfor Peter Greene, who famously had played one of Denis Leary's hoods inJudgement Night, and as the ill-fated Zed in Pulp Fiction, and veteransupporting actor Jonathan Banks (Freejack, Beverly Hills Cop, Armed andDangerous)in supporting roles.As Ryback once again uses his training, cunning, and skills tooutfight, outwit, and out last his evil counterparts, to not only savethe lives of millions of people, and the hundreds on the train. Whereasit was military personal he had to save in the first installment, thistime, he's charged with having to save civilians.Under Siege to date marks the only true sequel that Segall has done todate. THough there never was a third installment, the two that weremade are proof of quality, not quantity, something that rarely evenhappens.Many of Segall's movies are poked fun of, and not much is thought ofSegall's acting skills. Those views are very misguided, as his trueshinning work, the Under Siege series, proves without a Shadow of adoubt.Check out both Under Siege films if you want to see an action film atit's peak. You will not be disappointed.

2012-04-23 06:13:00

UNDER SIEGE 2: DARK TERRITORY

Steven Seagal is back as Casey Rayback, the Navy Seals officer turned professional cook, in this explosive sequel to the original UNDER SIEGE. This time, a group of international terrorists led by an ex-CIA operative have seized control of an express train and they are using it as there headquarters to control a top secret government satellite orbiting the Earth in space. Well, they didn't count on Casey Rayback to be on the train with his niece. Twice the action, twice the thrills, and twice the fun that was in the first film. If you liked UNDER SIEGE, you'll like UNDER SIEGE 2!

2012-04-19 10:17:22

Under Siege 2: Dark Territory

Maniacal techno-expert Travis Dane hijacks a train and converts it into a command center. He seizes control of a satellite super-weapon and threatens to destroy Washington, D.C., unless his one-billion dollar demand is met. Unfortunately for him, however, Casey Ryback happens to be on board, travelling with his niece, Sarah, and is the only man between Dane and the obliteration of three million people. This movie is great with a lot of action, very entertaining.

cecilparks 2012-04-18 20:25:35

Worst movie I ever sat through (spoiler)

I won't go into details, but I was forced to watch this unbelievablystupidmovie all the way through. How could Eric Bogosian get involved in such amess?I can't even understand how anyone could get a kick out of such a patheticmovie. An action flick has to catch you off-guard and surprise you atleasta couple of times to actually work. This piece of drivel was so utterlypredictable, I just can't imagine how it could thrill or exciteanyone.The WORST has to be poor Morris Chestnut playing the token blackcharacter.You just know from his first scene he'll be in charge of providing comicrelief, and that he'll die before the end of the movie.Rating: ZERO! NO redeeming qualities whatsoever!

Aaron1375 2012-04-16 13:56:47

This siege really does not equal the first one.

This movie was all right for the most part, but in the end becomes thetypical Steven Seagal movie with the only major difference being he isactually reprising his role as the cook from the first "Under Siege".And the only carryover from that film is the fact he is supposed to bethe same guy and cook. Part of the reason this one just did not havewhat the first film had is partly the no name cast aside from Seagal.The first film had a nice assortment of actors like Tommy Lee Jones andGary Busey as the bad guys. It also had a very attractive sidekick forSeagal in that film in the form of a stripper that popped out of acake. Here he is teamed up with some other dude and I think his niece,so decidedly a step down in the sidekick department. Here some computerterrorist type has hijacked a train and is planning something sinister,of course. He also has a bunch of military type nut jobs at hisdisposal. Well guess who is on the train, yes the cook from the firstfilm and of course he is going to make things very hard on the badguys. The action is okay and the film is not bad at all, just has abeen there done that feel to it. Though these days almost all filmshave that same feel to it. So all in all it passes the time okay and isnot boring and you get to see Seagal kick butt per the usual in hismovies.

Mr Ben 2012-04-16 02:50:18

Seagal's second best film but still average at best - 61%

Steven Seagal is one of those people I have a real chip on my shoulderabout. He is the epitome of the monotone stuntman made into a leadingman, replacing charisma and genuine acting with chop-socky action andthe same tired plot over and over again. Like a fat Chuck Norris,Seagal's only real gem was the enjoyably trashy "Under Siege" and itcame as no surprise that Seagal returned to the formula a few shortyears later. Trouble is, can lightning really strike twice or was thefirst one a mere fluke? Seagal once again plays Casey Rybeck, a former Navy SEAL now working asa chef. After his brother is killed in a plane crash, Rybeck takes across-country train with his niece Sarah (a young Katherine Heigl) butdisaster strikes during the journey. A bunch of terrorists take controlof the train and passengers, using it as a base for deranged scientistTravis Dane (Eric Bogosian) to take control of a top secret weaponssatellite. But Rybeck manages to evade capture and working alongsideporter Bobby (Morris Chestnut), begins to take the fight to theterrorists.Seagal films, almost by definition, aren't going to be classics so bearthat in mind. Having that said, "Under Siege 2: Dark Territory" isn'tanything like as bad as other efforts like "Hard To Kill". It's almostembarrassingly dumb and stupid but in spite of its faults, I stillenjoyed myself. Seagal doesn't even try to act - his emotional stateremains the same in every scene, regardless of what's happening in it -and Heigl does OK as the damsel in distress but Bogosian is a wild-eyedpsycho and in that respect, the perfect foil for the pony-tailedpunchbag. Plot-wise, this is much more stupid than its predecessor -the utter annihilation of a city in China halfway through is forgottenabout by the time Seagal begins his martial arts mission and naturally,the principal terrorist (Everett McGill) just happens to have beentaught by Rybeck at Navy SEAL school (or whatever!). Nonsense, ofcourse but still enjoyable nonsense.The only real downside to this is that it isn't as good as "UnderSiege" and seeing as Seagal films can only compete with other Seagalfilms, this makes "Under Siege 2" the second best action film there is.In the greater scheme of things, this is decidedly average at best butat least it isn't as bad as almost any other Seagal film I couldmention. It's stupid but stupidly entertaining, assuming you canforgive its faults and just switch your brain off for this one. Itmight not be big or clever but at least it's mildly diverting.