FIRE DOWN BELOW (1997) Zero Stars
Starring: Steven Seagal, Marg Helgenberger, Kris Kristofferson, Brad Hunt, and Stephen Lang Director: Félix Enríquez Alcalá Running time: 105 minutes Rated R (for strong violence and some language)
By Blake French:
"Fire Down Below" is a dead zone of an action film. It is the complete worst, most horribly presented, badly written movie to come down the pike in years. The film is directed by Félix Enríquez Alcalá, mostly known for directing television programs and specials, who here is as focused as a two year old child full of energy. The film's writers produce the it with about as much smarts as a box of shredded wheat. The fight scenes are dual and the special effects are unsatisfying--all of which will be covered in my review, dedicated to keeping this movie out of your home.
Lets start at the first act, which is presented through brief flashbacks, (coming from God knows who) and spoken expressions as the opening credits role by. The character explains that there is something happening in a little country village where villains are dumping toxic waste in the sunrise while the pedestrians watch patiently as their environment polluted. There's a cop assigned to investigate undercover in order to find a witness who will testify against the corporate animals in charge of these dastardly events. They are named Orin Hanner, and his son Orin Hanner Jr. who are both fat cat, greedy, businessmen who are only assumed, never actually developed.
The undercover cop is, of course, played by Steven Seagal, who can't, nor could he ever, act. His character is named what other than Jack, and he is everything that the plot requires of him. He likes annoying country music, acts macho and sly, and stutters "That's a nice name" to most of the females he meets in the movie. Jack is obviously the film's hero, and in movies like this, you have to expect him to be a man of many talents. Lets take a look at all the things Jack is, or, in other words, lets take a look at what the plot requires him to do and be:
· Jack is a karate expert and can take on several bad guys at once without receiving a single scratch on his body. Sounds like "Walker: Texas Ranger," doesn't it?
· He is a snake wrestler.
· He is a pilot
· He is rich and resourceful.
· He's a master of weaponry.
· Jack is an insightful environmentalist.
· He is also an experienced craftsman.
· He's an undercover cop.
· He can play the guitar.
· He is a very intelligent engineer.
· He is obviously a long time member of the sharp shooters club.
Now lets take a look at the film's view on what character development and its nurturing of poor dialogue. First, I need to explain something called subtext, the dialogue that explains character's feelings, emotional qualities, and more or less develops the character; it basically taking the place of actions and events. Naked subtext is mostly known as a negative quality. The examples of subtext in "Fire Down Below" are mostly present in character descriptions. This material is overwhelmingly existent in this horrible, horrible excuse for a movie. Sarah Kellogg, who is the film's heroine, is discussed among other characters as "a nice girl, sad though," as she stares into the sunset. How touching. Not only is this material naked subtext, but not even said by the character in focus. It's like "How Stella Got Her Groove Back," except much, much worse.
The action scenes in "Fire Down Below" may appear to be tense and suspenseful, but when it all comes down to it, we know the outcomes in advance. Therefore, if you are an experienced moviegoer, you'll have no problem with seeing past the outer appearance of the violence. For example: there is a car chase scene involving Jack in a small car and a large construction truck. We know it will resolve with one of two outcomes. 1) Jack will be killed or 2) Jack will defend himself and triumph over the evil. Think about it: if Jack is killed, the town in danger will be doomed because he is their only savior, therefore, if he is taken out of the picture, it will be the end of the movie. Can you guess what the outcome is, A or B? For as bad as the action sequences are, you would be shocked about how much the film relies on them and the help of special effects and explosions to carry it through its overly long 105 minute running time. Sorry, but this film completely misses the mark. You see, most productions, even those as bad as this, start out with a story then add special effects and action sequences to raise the tension. "Fire Down Below" does exactly the opposite.
Brought to you by Warner Bros.
Starring: Steven Seagal, Marg Helgenberger, Kris Kristofferson, Brad Hunt, and Stephen Lang Director: Félix Enríquez Alcalá Running time: 105 minutes Rated R (for strong violence and some language)
By Blake French:
"Fire Down Below" is a dead zone of an action film. It is the complete worst, most horribly presented, badly written movie to come down the pike in years. The film is directed by Félix Enríquez Alcalá, mostly known for directing television programs and specials, who here is as focused as a two year old child full of energy. The film's writers produce the it with about as much smarts as a box of shredded wheat. The fight scenes are dual and the special effects are unsatisfying--all of which will be covered in my review, dedicated to keeping this movie out of your home.
Lets start at the first act, which is presented through brief flashbacks, (coming from God knows who) and spoken expressions as the opening credits role by. The character explains that there is something happening in a little country village where villains are dumping toxic waste in the sunrise while the pedestrians watch patiently as their environment polluted. There's a cop assigned to investigate undercover in order to find a witness who will testify against the corporate animals in charge of these dastardly events. They are named Orin Hanner, and his son Orin Hanner Jr. who are both fat cat, greedy, businessmen who are only assumed, never actually developed.
The undercover cop is, of course, played by Steven Seagal, who can't, nor could he ever, act. His character is named what other than Jack, and he is everything that the plot requires of him. He likes annoying country music, acts macho and sly, and stutters "That's a nice name" to most of the females he meets in the movie. Jack is obviously the film's hero, and in movies like this, you have to expect him to be a man of many talents. Lets take a look at all the things Jack is, or, in other words, lets take a look at what the plot requires him to do and be:
· Jack is a karate expert and can take on several bad guys at once without receiving a single scratch on his body. Sounds like "Walker: Texas Ranger," doesn't it?
· He is a snake wrestler.
· He is a pilot
· He is rich and resourceful.
· He's a master of weaponry.
· Jack is an insightful environmentalist.
· He is also an experienced craftsman.
· He's an undercover cop.
· He can play the guitar.
· He is a very intelligent engineer.
· He is obviously a long time member of the sharp shooters club.
Now lets take a look at the film's view on what character development and its nurturing of poor dialogue. First, I need to explain something called subtext, the dialogue that explains character's feelings, emotional qualities, and more or less develops the character; it basically taking the place of actions and events. Naked subtext is mostly known as a negative quality. The examples of subtext in "Fire Down Below" are mostly present in character descriptions. This material is overwhelmingly existent in this horrible, horrible excuse for a movie. Sarah Kellogg, who is the film's heroine, is discussed among other characters as "a nice girl, sad though," as she stares into the sunset. How touching. Not only is this material naked subtext, but not even said by the character in focus. It's like "How Stella Got Her Groove Back," except much, much worse.
The action scenes in "Fire Down Below" may appear to be tense and suspenseful, but when it all comes down to it, we know the outcomes in advance. Therefore, if you are an experienced moviegoer, you'll have no problem with seeing past the outer appearance of the violence. For example: there is a car chase scene involving Jack in a small car and a large construction truck. We know it will resolve with one of two outcomes. 1) Jack will be killed or 2) Jack will defend himself and triumph over the evil. Think about it: if Jack is killed, the town in danger will be doomed because he is their only savior, therefore, if he is taken out of the picture, it will be the end of the movie. Can you guess what the outcome is, A or B? For as bad as the action sequences are, you would be shocked about how much the film relies on them and the help of special effects and explosions to carry it through its overly long 105 minute running time. Sorry, but this film completely misses the mark. You see, most productions, even those as bad as this, start out with a story then add special effects and action sequences to raise the tension. "Fire Down Below" does exactly the opposite.
Brought to you by Warner Bros.