Skip to main content

Under Siege (1992) - Tommy Lee Jones as a Villain is Always the Right Call

 



Most of the memories I have associated with Steven Seagal were my step-grandfather’s attempts to connect with me when I was younger. I hated having to spend a week with my grandmother every summer because she wasn’t a very kind person to me and showed very little interest in anything I cared about or had to say. However, her husband tried a lot more with me, taking me out to go karts or big arcades (they still had arcades at that time!) or renting movies for us to watch together. He had no clue the kind of stuff I actually liked to watch, so usually he just picked dumb action movies such as multiple Steven Seagal movies that I didn’t really enjoy much at that age, but I appreciated his efforts.

So honestly, I don’t know what drove me to pick up this 4 pack of Steven Seagal films (used I should note, I would never do anything to financially benefit that man, he is a 100 different shades of awful) when I ran across it on Amazon other than how much I’ve been enjoying 80s and 90s action shlock lately when I want a chaser to all the horror I watch. Anyway, Under Siege!



I think it barely even needs to be stated that the worst part of the film is Steven Seagal himself. He’s a wooden black hole of charisma that sucks the energy away from whatever more talented scene partner he is working with, it’s exceptional how bad an actor he is and for a supposed martial arts expert none of his fights scenes are particularly impressive by any means and often just seem kind of lazy even at the peak of his career. Erika Elaniak, who I absolutely had a crush on as a kid from her performance as Ellie May in the Beverly Hillbillies movie, doesn’t particularly have a great deal more range or emotive depth as Steven and so much mild sexism is written into her character and their interactions that they are just a pretty cringeworthy screen duo. The film doesn’t really put a lot of effort into explaining the past lore of these characters beyond “ex-Navy SEAL or ex-CIA Mercenary” or the real motivations beyond just petty revenge for the villains, not that a lot of people are going to a Steven Seagal action movie for the depth of plot and characters.

There is a lot to like here though, like the entire villain group led by a wild, scenery chewing terrorist in a leather jacket and banana played with utmost gusto by the fabulous Tommy Lee Jones. Backing him up is a goofball performance by Gary Busey that includes him dressing up in drag for reasons that really don’t apply to the plot at all, they just rightfully wanted to see him dressed as a lady, which is right up there with a number of villainous roles he played in the late 80s and early 90s. Colm Meany isn’t given near as many lines as he should have been, but he’s still great when he does get a chance to talk. This trio is really the backbone of the movie and where most of the engaging action takes place, and if I was ever the type to use a star rating for the movies I reviewed, Tommy Lee alone would bump the movie up a full star rating. And as far as character actors go, you also got notable appearances by a young Raymond Cruz, the unmistakable Troy Evans, and playing his signature hardass authority figure a dependably hatable Glenn Morshower.

There are plenty of explosions, some deaths that are so violent and sudden you cannot help but laugh like you would in a slasher film, some good firefight and hand-to-hand combat (when it isn’t Steven doing his own “stunts”), a lot of scenes that truly are utilizing the real decommissioned ship in Alabama where they shot the movie as a set piece, and it is all shot well and looks solid if nothing ever comes across like having a spectacular eye for framing or lighting or anything like that. You don’t need high art in a film like this, but Andrew Davis who would later go on to direct all-time classic The Fugitive and a cult classic for many children of my generation in Holes delivers a steady and sturdy product. Heck, there’s even a bit of room left for criticism for the tactics of the CIA and other intelligence agencies in this film and a rebellious nature against authority that gives it a much less patriotic message than you would expect from what is a very military-centric film.

If what you want is a dumb but fun film where you can enjoy some over the top action and even more over the top performances by character actor greats, you could do much, much worse than Under Siege. And if you are somebody like me who genuinely enjoys the bad performances of martial artists turned actors that made up so much of 80s and 90s action, you can probably even look past the most glaring issue with this film. I enjoyed my time, but felt just a little bit of regret afterwards as you always should. Give it a shot!



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Path to War (2002): More TV Than HBO

  My whole life since I was an elementary school aged kid I’ve always been fascinated by US political history, often much more than I am modern politics (particularly these days where everything political is just crushingly depressing and scary). I make it a regular habit to read books about 19 th and 20 th century political figures and events, and I am an absolute sucker for the subgenre of “HBO Political History Movie/Miniseries” that was so common in the 00s and early 10s on the network (shoutout to the amazing John Adams series maybe someday I’ll review here). So of course when I somehow only found out that Path to War existed for the first time yesterday while browsing through stuff on Max, I didn’t even think about it and just immediately pulled the trigger to watch it. First thing is first, I have heard many a bad attempt by British actors to do a convincing Southern accent like Jude Law a weird number of times, but Michael Gambon here trying to accomplish a convincing Texas

M (1931) - Even Better than Peter Lorre's Haunting Eyes

  Anybody who knows me knows my biggest vice in life is true crime as guilty and gross as I feel about it quite frequently, and unfortunately as a true crime junkie you end up hearing about a lot of cases involving abused or dead children. So of course I joked to my main group chat of friends when I decided to watch M the other day that I needed to take a break from all the stories about dead kids I’d watched that day so I was going to put on a movie about a serial child murderer. To be honest this might be kind of a short review compared to some I’ve written, because I don’t have that much negative to say. Some of the performances seem a little “big”, but so soon after the silent era that is to be expected and that is just kinda of body language analysis since I do not speak German at all. Also it does something that a lot of films of its era does, which I’m guessing had something to do with cameras speeds at that time, where instead of showcasing people naturally running it instead

World Without Sun (1964) - Do You Think We Should Be Smoking in this Pressurized Chamber?

  My entire knowledge of the filmography of Jacques Cousteau, outside of clips here and there, comes through pop cultural osmosis. When I was a young teenager I became an instant fan of The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou by Wes Anderson which I watched together with my stepfather who was a lifelong fan of cult/alternative comedy and we laughed our asses off no matter how dry the material is presented. When a few years younger still, like countless children of the 90s I became a dedicated fan of Spongebob Squarepants and its zany, often surreal sense of humor which included a French-accented narrator in certain “2 Hours Later” or whatever cutaway gags that it is obvious tribute to the great aquatic documentarian. So I knew certain stylistic things or stereotypes, but that is about it before I decided to watch World Without Sun at midnight on a weekday. This is the first documentary I’ve ever reviewed on here, so figuring the best way to go about it as I go along. The most striking ne