Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

paulwaidelich I live in Mexico, and while this is the Caribbean, the blending of the bad guys and the cops was too real. The common people have no control, and the narcos and the police find a way to work together. They feel there is no reason to shoot each other when they can all make money the easy way. Everyone who has anything is corrupt in Latin America. They protect what's theirs and to hell with everyone else. In The Blood got that right.In The Blood is a boring, predictable story. It's a 4 or 5 star movie, except for 3 performances. Gina Carano is no Meryl Streep, but she is totally believable as the loyal, ass-kicking wife who will go to any lengths to protect her guy. The fight scenes are great, and worth slogging through the swamp of poor dialog and the formula plot. The second performance that exceeds expectations is Luis Guzman as the police chief. He is perfect as the malignant, corrupt official with a face of stone. Then he is perfect when things don't go his way. Both his arrogance and vulnerability capture the essence of the Latina male.The final excellent performance belongs to Stephen Lang as the Flashback Dad. How did Gina Carano's character get so tough? Stephen Lang plays Gina's outlaw dad. The tough love he gives her is intense and believable. He's only got a couple scenes, but then are intense. Whether he's playing a civil war general (Gettysburg), a mercenary trying to steal a planet from the nativesDanny Trejo also gets to play another knife wielding bad guy. Danny Trejo is always good, but he's like a Latin John Wayne. He plays himself perfectly every time. You can't watch In The Blood like a normal movie, because it doesn't work like that. It's a boring story. You watch it to see the lovely Gina Carano beat up the bad guys and look good doing it. You watch it to see Luis Guzman play a villain so despicable you feel no regret when things don't go his way. Most of all, you watch In The Blood for the brief moments that Stephan Lang dominates the screen. 3 great performances. Skip the rest.

witster18 Of course the highlights of the film are the action sequences. The brief moments where we get to dismiss the abomination of a plot and watch Gina kick some butt.The film has some MAJOR problems. You get the feeling as a viewer that the film crew threw-together this plot on the fly. Like they didn't know where to go with it.The film starts-off with some bad acting, a really cheesy 80's montage love video(ala "Streets of Fire" only placed in a bad movie making it worse instead in a really good movie making it only above average for SOF). Really bad start.Gina can't act. Let's face it - she can't. Her character is just so void of emotion - especially considering what she's gone through. The only person that kicks Gina's butt in this film is the younger actress who's playing her younger self in some flashback scenes.. at least I can tell when she's upset.This kinda reminds me of "Falcon Rising"... I gave both films a 4/10, but this is probably closer to a 5 than FR was. The production values here are certainly better. Like FR, In The Blood is shot in a beautiful location. This film looks great BUT.It's total nonsense. The actions of the characters are ridiculous, and again the plot was written by a pre-kindergartner. It's full of laugh-off loud moments that weren't meant to be funny.How could so many directors in the 80's get the formula right? Not trying to do too much with the plot, so as to not detract from the action, or not throw in the plot like it was a complete after- thought an hour into the film?(the case here) I mean it literally feels like the production stopped and they decided on the fly 'why' the husband had been taken. They had no idea until that moment. Like it or not. If the reason was actually put to paper and this was actually scripted in advance then I apologize, but the writer should still bit put out of our and their misery.Very little works here. The highlight of the whole film is a barfight in the first third, after that, it's all downhill. THey could have used the scene to drive the plot, but instead, the writers and director got drunk and went into lala-land for the films final hour.Gina still deserves some props because she can certainly pull-off the action stuff better than just about any chick in the biz, but the aimless, silly plot, and the lack of emotion here sink this ship. I dialed up Falcon Rising and In The Blood because I wanted a mindless action flick - i just didn't want them THAT mindless.I'd pass. If you want some action flicks of the last decade that do it right(many sleepers and low-budget too) - i'd check out these first: The Man From Nowhere(subt), Elite Squad 2:The Enemy Within(subt), Running Scared, John Wick, Jack Reacher, Olympus Has Fallen, Dredd, IPman1&2(subt), Point Blank(subt), True Legend(subt), Shoot'em Up, Rampage, SHooter, Purge:Anarchy, 3 Days to Kill, Oldboy(remake), Homefront, 2 Guns, Raid1&2, Hanna, Never Back Down, Parker, The Mechanic, SNitch, From Paris With Love.... ...all those are significantly better than this junk and many of those have similar budget constraints.

gridoon2018 Possibly the best female action star of our times, along with Zoe Bell, Gina Carano deserves a better vehicle than "In The Blood". It's true that in this movie you get to see a lot of Gina's fantastic body (I envy the woman who was lucky enough to get knocked out in Gina's sleeper hold - just look at her biceps and you'll know why), but it has a lot of problems: the editing is often amateurish, the cinematography is sometimes poor (although the locations are beautiful), the kidnapping story is very standard, there is practically only ONE real fight scene in the entire movie (all the rest are quick beatdowns by Gina on opponents who don't stand a chance - I hope they won't turn her into the female Steven Seagal), and the excessively cruel edge of Gina's character (she perpetrates a lot more violence than the villains) makes it hard to root for her as much as we should. Danny Trejo is on the DVD cover but he appears in no more than four scenes in total. ** out of 4.

Bruce722 In the Blood was a low budget film and unfortunately it felt very much like one. The camera work and cinematography was horrible, the plot was tired and poorly developed. The characters were uninspired and lacked development outside of the protagonist. The acting was abysmal, especially by the protagonist. Honestly, the only saving grace for the movie was that the fight scenes were done well... at least well enough. Unfortunately that's what happens when you have a female MMA fighter carry a movie. Hopefully one day we get the best of both worlds (either a fighter who can act or an actress who can fight) because until then this is what we're stuck with. If it ever comes on a movie channel, it's not a bad watch. I wouldn't spend a dime on it though.