Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Acensbart Excellent but underrated film

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

callanvass The sequel that nobody asked for, funny how that works. Maybe I'm a secret masochist or something. No matter how deplorable Steven Seagal's STD films are, I continue to check them out when I get a chance, as they are released. This is ostensibly a sequel to The Foriegner, but it doesn't really act like it, and it only has a brief mention of The Foreigner. This movie is better than The Foreigner, but that's like saying being shot in the leg is better than being shot in the head, meaning it's not a compliment what so ever. Like The Foreigner. It lacks decent action to keep you entertained or any quality fight scenes. The 15 million budget doesn't help, either. Steven Seagal looks bored out of his mind here, and it looks like my assumption was correct, because he walked out 18 days into a 30 day shoot. He seems dubbed here at times, and is grossly overweight, with outfits that cover up that weight gain. It's funny. In the beginning of the film when he gets Michael Donovan out of prison, there is a bunch of McDonald product wrappers on the dashboard. How's that for symbolization? He waves his gun around aimlessly in some shootout scenes, and he does very little bone cracking, like Seagal fans are accustomed too. There is an escape scene where he jumps through a window to avoid gun fire, with Tamara Davies onto a truck, and you can clearly tell it's a stuntman. It's an extremely lazy and uninspired performance, as is the case with most STD Seagal films. The Donovan Brothers (John Pyper-Ferguson & Julian Stone as I mentioned in the plot summary up above) are bland villains, whilst there are a few pointless Russian Villains on the side as a subplot. Tamara Davies is pretty, but is a very poor actress. I couldn't resist adding some laughable dialog, just to show you how "invested" Seagal was with this movie. Michael Donovan (realizing Seagal is undercover) :I'm disappointed Jonathan. Jonathan Cold: Sh****it happens, Y'know? Bottom line: If you liked The Foreigner, you'll like this one. If you hated The Foreigner like me & many others did, you'll most likely hate this one as well. It's a terrible movie, and one that should be left in bargain bins at Walmart, where it belongs. 3/10

Comeuppance Reviews "Black Dawn" is one of the weakest Seagal movies. This is a sequel to "The Foreigner". There's no reason to make this except that it's another paycheck in the big man's pockets. In my opinion, Seagal will probably never make another good movie like "Marked For Death" or "Above The Law". Those days are behind him.The "plot" is about Russian gangsters in Romania who have a nuclear device. Jonathan Cold (Seagal) has to stop them. Seagal is barely in this and he doesn't do anything, and I mean ANYTHING: fighting, acting, or exercise He has to find better scripts, or at least a director who needs to realize that Seagal is the draw, not some nameless Romanian.For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com

pantagruella Interesting, very interesting. I checked out most of the IMDb comments on the film before buying. Many comments took the view, "I'm a die-hard Seagal fan but this is not very good." But I don't agree. ( Comic Strip reference. ) Recently I've been getting familiar with the 21st century conspiracy material and re-acquainting myself with the heroic deeds of the CIA since the War. I'm an admirer of the two Jason Bourne films, Enemy of the State. I re-watched Spy Game the other night and enjoyed it more for its depiction of the CIA as computer analysts, people no longer capable of acting in the field.I think Black Dawn fits right on in there. It's competent and there is plenty going on, in the style of the Byzantine Empire.Seagal is overweight? When we was he slender? I don't think his weight is relevant to his film persona. I don't associate Steven Seagal with martial arts fireworks. His approach to combat is the realistic one, "Get it over fast." As far as I'm concerned he's always just slapped people's faces and twisted their wrists. He's not like his perceived cohorts who're always trying to top their previous stunts. If you want to see a Westerner 'go for it' then you might follow Jason Statham. I think Steven Seagal's approach is more akin to Sonny Chiba's in the Streetfighter films.Anyway Seagal's are not just about Steven Seagal, although they have a personal moral dimension.This is a competent B movie that is not trying to be an under-funded action blockbuster.

Tonci Pivac Steven Seagal movies are famous for killing and kicking ass. In this film, Seagal is so fat, that they do not bother even to find a stunt-man for him. Whenever there is action in the film, he just disappears from the picture and re-appears when the shooting and fight is over. He doesn't beat up ANYBODY in the whole film, can you believe that? Well, you would, if you look at him, he looks so sadly obese, he can hardly move, let alone walk. He is wearing a terrible wig and a terrible three-piece suit during the whole film, which spans during a 5 day period, but the worst part is the script and dialogs. A pre-schooler could have done it better, honestly.My piece of advice: WATCH THE FILM. It is SOOOOOooo terrible that you can use it as reference point for the rest of your life when judging other films.