ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

SimonJack "A Father's Revenge" is a story about terrorism and one father's personal efforts to save his daughter. The audience appeal to this TV film would have been different than it is for an audience watching the film today. To understand that, it helps to consider the evolution of terrorism, especially since the mid-20th century. There always has been terrorism of some kind someplace in the world. But except for genocidal campaigns that have occurred in history, most terrorism had been in isolated acts organized by small groups. The terrorism of today is more often widespread random acts of bombings and mass killings. These are associated mostly with radical Muslims. They are against governments, religious groups and nationalities and cultures. No one will ever forget 9-11– the Sept. 1, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S. that resulted in the collapse of the Twin Towers in New York City, and other death and destruction.Two other major terrorist actions happened in the 1970s. In 1972, Palestinian terrorists killed 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team. Many people saw some of these killings live on TV. Then, in July, 1976, Palestinian and Neo-Nazi terrorists hijacked an Air France jetliner with 248 passengers aboard. They landed in Uganda where they had assistance from the government of dictator Idi Amin. After 148 passengers were released over two days, more than 100 Jewish and Israeli passengers (and the French captain of the plane) faced death if hundreds of political prisoners weren't released from prisons in Israel and Europe. An excellent film was made on the daring Israeli rescue operation. Israeli planes carrying 100 commandos flew 2,500 miles at night, landed at the En Tebbe airport and rescued 102 passengers. Three passengers and the operation commander were killed, with five others wounded. But they killed all the terrorists and 47 Ugandan soldiers who were guarding the airport. Read any encyclopedia account for more on the En Tebbe hijacking and raid, and the terrorist reprisals against Kenyans and others who aided Israel in the raid. So, by the time of this film, "A Father's Revenge," people in many nations were anxious when traveling. And, by that time, the U.S. and most Western nations had adopted official policies that they would not negotiate with terrorists. Sound reasoning was behind those policies. Negotiating with any terrorists only encouraged more terrorism. And, with no hope of negotiating, many would-be terrorists were discouraged from making such attempts. Of course, that doesn't bring much hope to the families of people who are taken hostage in terrorist actions. This film is fiction and takes place in 1988. The plot is very good, but the script is a bit choppy in places and not well connected. The scenes in Frankfort and cinematography in Germany add to the film. The acting is fairly good overall, but I agree with another reviewer who said the portrayal of the terrorists was not very realistic. It seems strange that Paul Hobart, played by Brian Dennehy, didn't know outright that the U.S. would not negotiate with terrorists. This film has a couple of surprise twists in it. Although it seems quite far-fetched, it has some good action and sleuthing, and makes for an interesting watch.

merklekranz Brian Dennehy comes to West Germany to rescue his Daughter from terrorists who have taken her hostage. Although short on action, the film moves at a rapid pace, as the desperate Dennehy enlists rather unorthodox methods for freeing his Daughter. Though not always logical, "Payback" a.k.a. "A Father's Revenge" is entertaining. The German locations add realism, and the acting is totally acceptable. Some of the accents are difficult to understand, but I guess that is the price for realism. The indifference of both the German and American Governments for dealing with terrorists is what eventually forces Dennehy to take action on his own. - MERK

Bezenby I spent most of the film worrying that Brian Dennehy was about to drop dead from a heart attack. He's obviously a big man, but in this film he runs everywhere! Whether it be chasing terrorists through Frankfurt, or just running around outside while his wife discovers that their daughter has been kidnapped in Germany by a bunch of terrorists. Don't get me wrong, Dennehy's a good actor and very convincing here, but this film spends a long long time getting around to tracking down the terrorist. Probably quite realistic in that sense, and I suppose the film does a good job of showing what a father would do in order to rescue his daughter, but I could have done with more rampaging and gunfights than folks standing around discussing the moral aspects of torture. Quite frank(furt)ly, you might enjoy this film, but you'll have to condition yourself for a slow time, as most of the action happens in the last ten minutes. People rate this more highly than I do, and you might too, but I just needed a bit more morph to keep me going.

manuel-pestalozzi This movie starts off very well but unfortunately ends as one of the most questionable flicks I have ever seen. It suggests that something like that could happen in reality. It is full of wrong assumptions. And that may lead to wrong conclusions.A mixed American and English crew of an airplane is kidnapped in Frankfurt, Germany by German terrorists who want to exchange them against imprisoned comrades. They videotape the hostages and set a deadline. The American parents of one stewardess cannot bear to sit still at home and travel to Europe. They think the authorities are not interested in their daughter's safety and the husband decides to engage some „specialists" who convince him they can rescue the hostages.So far I did not have any problems. The terrorists were clearly inspired by the German Red Army Fraction (RAF), also known as Baader Meinhof Gang. The sorrow of the parents had me feel for them and I could understand that they clasped at any straw they were offered, even if it smelled like some illegal and dangerous action. But the moment the rescue team leader agreed to take the father with him and make him part of the team so to speak the film instantly sank to the bottomless depths of stupid and morally dubious movie making. The father's being included in the action is explained at the end but it is a cheap last minute twist that does not stick. Not by a mile.The rest of the movie is Vigilante revenge stuff of the worst kind. It cumulates in the father's accidental killing of the main terrorist's brother whom the rescue team has taken hostage in return. That man is, as everybody knows, absolutely innocent. The killing happens at the very end of this movie. The ending is presented as a family reunion and a happy finale. The fact that the father would probably have to stand trial for manslaughter and has the blood of an innocent man on his hands is suppressed entirely.What really disturbs me is the movie's innuendo that this is the best way to deal with terrorists to obtain the wanted results. I do not know any evidence that would support this theory. It may sound cynical and you can call me a coward but if the safety of the hostages really is what is wanted most then your best bet is to give in. There is a discussion between the parents about the father's motives. Has his activism really to do with is daughter? Or isn't it more about himself? Unfortunately this line of argument is abandoned quickly. In my opinion a missed opportunity as Brian Dennehy and especially Joanna Cassidy are brilliant and make an interesting couple.A last word about the RAF which really existed in the 1970ies and 1980ies. Considering all I have read about these dangerous fanatics, they are rather badly misinterpreted. In this movie they seem to be some spoiled rich people's kids who are fairly easily scared. This means underestimating their sectarian fanaticism and the formidable group pressure they were able to build up. In a long chase sequence we see the father pursue one very nervous terrorist who leads him directly to the hiding place of the hostages. From what I have read and heard about the RAF, the terrorist most probably would have shot the father dead at point blank range without batting an eyelid in the first stages of that chase.