Code of Honor (2016) Reviews

• Steven Seagal is: The Punisher (sort of)

  brchthethird2016-05-11

  Ugh. It's a foregone conclusion that Seagal will never make anything again that lives up to his heyday in the 80's and 90's, but at least his DTV work up to this point had been quirkily interesting. As Seagal has aged and grown more portly, he's done less hand-to-hand combat and relied more on guns and knives, but the new trend seems to be that he barely appears in movies where he has the top billing. SNIPER: SPECIAL OPS was guilty of this, but at least that one had the good sense to be on the short and simple side. CODE OF HONOR is, quite frankly, one of the most cynical and shoddy pieces of work (and I use the term loosely) to ever have Seagal's name slapped onto it. Here, he plays Colonel Robert Sikes, a Punisher-like character who acts as a vigilante in his city to clean up crime. On his trail is a former protégé/friend who is trying to bring him in along with the help of the police. And, for some reason, there is a sleazy news team who follow them around trying to get a good story. So, you have elements of THE PUNISHER, SURVIVOR (the generic Pierce Brosnan movie from last year), and NIGHTCRAWLER, with none of the nuance or sophistication of each (at least the first and last ones). There are no characters with significant screen time to root for, as government, the police, and news media are all painted in such a bad way. Even Seagal who normally is likable, if stoic, is stuck playing a character who straight up murders people. Of course, I was with the movie for about two-thirds of it because it was kind of entertaining in a bad way. However, a third act plot twist completely ruined the film for me. It's like the filmmakers/screenwriter were like, "Just kidding!" It honestly angered me a little bit, making the last half hour or so a real chore to get through. As for the action, which is what most people will care about, there is a decent amount of it although it's mostly shootouts and some knife-fighting. Seagal gets very little to do, and I was disappointed here just like with SNIPER: SPECIAL OPS. The opening scene was probably the best, and there was a couple short fight scenes towards the end that partially made up for how dismal the rest of the film was. Seagal also gets one of his trademark speeches about halfway through, although the politics of it rubbed me the wrong way. Ultimately, I feel like I've been tested for the last time as a Seagal fan. These last two films were a whole new level of lazy, and I don't know if I can take it anymore. CODE OF HONOR is for Seagal fans only, and even then I'd still be cautious

• Unbelievable in 2016

  closetdrunk4202016-05-07

  It's hard to describe what i just watched. It's a Steven Seagal movie, so naturally my expectations weren't high, but what i saw... left me speechless. The horrid acting, the useless CGI in gunshots, the useless CGI in news playing on the TV, the useless CGI everywhere... you just don't see this quality in 2016 even in Indie movies. Everything in this movie is just cheap. I would expect a Seagal movie to have the action he is so known for, but no. He barely says a word. Barely shows up at all. The whole "plot" of the movie is just stupid and unbelievable. The so called action scenes are so slow, that the only thought you are left with is "really??". I have never in my life edited a movie, but if i did, this is not how i would do it. It's impossible to describe this movie, you just have to see it. If you have ABSOLUTELY nothing else to do. Like me. I only gave it 2 stars because i used to like Steven Seagal, back in the day.

• So bad its good !!!

  mattcroman2016-05-10

  This movie is ten out of ten for entertainment. It is so terrible it is actually entertaining in it's utter direness. Steven Seagal, overweight, mumbling intelligibly, sporting a horrible box beard and unreal jet black hair, is a magnetic presence on the screen. It's almost impossible to tear your eyes away from him. The plot? Ridiculous. I can just imagine the meeting of z-list execs and Steven Seagal. Seagal: I just read the greatest script ever. Exec: Who wrote it? Seagal: I did it. Exec: What's it about? Seagal: It's about a good bad guy and a bad good guy. They're mirror images of each other. Ying and yang, baby. I'll play the good bad guy, he's an ex-special forces vigilante seeking to rid the city of criminal scum. No wait, I got it mixed around. He's the bad good guy, no, my bad, I confused myself, I was right the first time...What about the bad good guy? Well, I'm glad you asked. He'll be a fed, and one of my ex- special forces buddies with a deep relationship to my character. He'll speak like Christian Bale's Batman, at one point, he must utter the lines "I'm just a sinner looking for redemption." Also, he'll kill people with knives. What kind of FBI agent dual wields knives? I'm glad you asked... Dialogue? Overblown. Seagal mumbles and grumbles his way through a script that seems to believe it posses some kind of philosophical credibility. It does not. He also seems to drift from one accent to another, I'm not sure where he is supposed to come from. Is he black? Cajun? What? The movie seems to hinge on the question: "If you could save the world but nobody would know you did it, would you do it?" I suspect Seagal and whoever wrote this thought they were being unbelievably deep...in a word. No. As for the fight scenes, these were comical and clumsy. Seagal is not the man he was. And seeing him trying to recreate fight scenes from earlier movies is painful to watch. Fast hand to hand combat devolves into comical slap fights. The gun-fights are all characterized by terrible CGI blood splatter and gunfire. The end twist? Well, I don't want to spoil it too much. But entertaining to say the least. You must watch this movie.

• This could have been a not god awful Seagal movie, but...

  subxerogravity2016-05-07

  I know what your thinking. It's a Seagal movie so it has to be god awful, right? Well the concept of the movie was actually pretty cleaver. Most of the plot had to do with Seagal playing a punisher- like character, a soldier who while was overseas thought his family would be safe, but they end up getting killed in a gang related shooting. His head snaps and he begins a vigilante crusade to kill organize crime. One of the things that makes this an...interesting Seagal picture is that, technically Seagal is playing the Antagonist. He thinks he's doing the right thing, but the cops this movie really focus on are assigned to take him down. That's another reason why this could have been a good Seagal movie, he's barely in it. Most of Seagal's scenes look like they were inserted after the movie was finished. It was like the filmmakers made a bad movie and thought they could make it better by finding the money to hire Seagal, film him saying some corny stuff and doing his once bad ass but now cheesy Akido movies, and edit it into the rest of the movie. Code of Honor could have done for Seagal what JVCD did for Van Damme (not that it did so much), but unfortunately the film making looked very amateurish even for a Straight-to-Video film. It is a Seagal film, but I do expect better quality in sound and visual effect than what I got. Even though you can see it coming before it does, the movie has a pretty decent plot twist that made it interesting, but it does not sit well because of all the really bad acting (and I'm not even talking about Seagal) It had potential, but overall it's not even worth it to watch to make fun of Steven Seagal. Skip it.

• Seagal Returns as a Badass!

  namashi_12016-05-11

  Steven Seagal is in Badass mode in his latest 'Code of Honor. This low-budget Action B-Movie is a routine watch, although a few good scenes & a nice twist in the end, make it work somehow. 'Code of Honor' Synopsis: Colonel Robert Sikes is on a mission to rid his city of crime. As a stealthy, one-man assault team, he will take on street gangs, mobsters, and politicians with extreme prejudice until his mission is complete. His former protégé, William Porter, teams up with the local police department to bring his former commander to justice and prevent him from further vigilantism. 'Code of Honor' is a fair watch. Its the regular good versus bad story. However, there is twist in the end, which works & makes the action-fare a bit more than just remaining to be an action-fare. The Writing is okay, although its interesting to see Seagal take on the baddies one-by-one. Michael Winnick's Direction could've been sharper. Cinematography & Editing are passable. Action-Sequences are good. The Graphics, however, are tacky. Performance-Wise: Seagal is back at what he's been doing since years: Kicking Ass & being a Badass. And although he has very less dialogue & also not much screen time (I wish there was more of him), he remains tough enough to continue his quest & blowing up heads. Craig Sheffer has a larger than Seagal & he does the acting bit well. Others lend adequate support. On the whole, 'Code of Honor' is a one-time watch.