ivo-cobra8
Disclaimer: If you are a viewer that mainly prefers art-house-type movies, then you might as well ignore this review. In addition, if you're not able to take an underrated Van Damme realistic acting performance, including a realistic war drama, ignore this review, as well. We'll both be better off.Second in Command (2006) in my opinion is a really good war drama, that is realistic in my opinion. I like this movie a lot, It is not my favorite Van Damme movie, bit I think it is pretty good. I know a lot of folks will disagree with me and put my review down, but seriously I like it. I did not thought it was bad. Some haters are saying: "Tom Hanks or a Brad Pitt would do a better job, leading a group of soldiers, but not JCVD!" Wrong! You guys are wrong! Van Damme can act and he completely surprised me by his acting skills. After just finishing watching this movie, I thought it was a realistic war drama. I think the movie is good, it has a mayor problems and mistakes, but which movie doesn't? I have enjoy it.This movie in my opinion is miles way better than Street Fighter (1994)! Remember Street Fighter? Van Damme played Colonel Guile who lead his soldiers in to a battle against Bison (Raul Julia) and his men. That movie sucked major ass! Colonel Guile sucked leading his soldiers in to a fight! That movie sucks, I hate Street Fighter movie! I don't care what anyone says, Second in Command kicks Street Fighter's ass to the ground! Anyway this one, had some good action, pretty cool to see Van Damme in this type of role, in a political action war movie. I haven't watched a realistic war drama since I saw and watched Black Hawk Down (2001). The siege in the American Embassy was awesome. Velibor Topic as Anton Tavarov the leader of the militia group did a fantastic job. You can even hear him talking Serbian language when he was cussing out on Van Damme. The final fight scene between those two was really good. I am glad Van Damme could use some of his martial arts skills, that I like. Jean-Claude Van Damme can play a soldier and in my opinion he played a Navy Seal Commander more convincing than Steven Seagal ever did in Under Siege (1992)! I still think Under Siege is a classic action movie from the 90's but Van Damme could play more convincing a Navy Seal soldier than Seagal did. Seagal acted more as a cook and martial artist that was it. Seagal eat your heart out, because Van Damme is much more better actor than you are, even his direct to video movies are much better than yours. In the film, Jean-Claude Van Damme plays an official who's just been appointed as "Second in Command" to the U.S. Ambassador at an American Embassy in a small, turbulent Eastern European nation. When local insurgents attempt a coup d'etat, the nation's President takes refuge inside the embassy. The embassy is then besieged by the well-armed insurgents. The U.S. Ambassador is killed in the ensuing action, and now it's up to Van Damme and the embassy's small detachment of U.S. Marines to defend off the attackers.What I like about this movie is there were a lot of army and marines used for this movie. It is a siege movie and it goes with "Second in Command" delivers enough on the action quotient to make it a worthwhile effort. It's no "The Nest", but then again, few movies can match that one's raw and relentless intensity. And despite the fact that the insurgents are pressed for time, having to take the Embassy and kill the President before two impending arrivals — one by the President's astray military and the other by U.S. Marine reinforcements — the film does fail to really generate mounting pressure. The time the film allots itself for the siege is 4 hours, but it feels more like 4 days. Of course it doesn't help that the country's military is apparently composed of one tank, two armored transport vehicles, and a couple of troop transport trucks. I like that the movie shows a marine ship a USS Challenger on Adriatic Sea. I like that the movie shows the marines in a helicopter who are flying off in Sbelnska, Croatia, since I live near Croatia, I am from Slovenia tough. I like the shout outs and I like Van Damme a lot. Specially I like the ending a lot when he is staying in the Embassy in Moldavia with Michelle Whitman United World News his girlfriend. I like the characters and the story in this movie. So sorry if you disagree with me and Second in Command is not your movie that's fine. I am giving this movie a solid 8, it is a good movie for me. Probably I am the only one that likes this movie. Second in Command is a 2006 American action film starring Jean-Claude Van Damme and directed by Simon Fellows. The film was released on direct-to-DVD in the United States on May 2, 2006.8/10 Grade: B- Studio: Sony Pictures Home Entertainment, Clubdeal Castel Film Romania MPCA Starring: Jean-Claude Van Damme, Julie Cox, William Tapley, Alan McKenna, Velibor Topic, Razaaq Adoti Director: Simon Fellows Producers: RBrad Krevoy, Donald Kushner, Pierre Spengler Screenplay: Jonathan Bowers, David Corley, Jayson Rothwell Story by: Milt Bearden, Jonathan Bowers, David Corley Rated: R Running Time: 1 Hr. 32 Mins. Budget: $12.000.000 Box Office: $10,400,000
ghostrlb
I was actually disappointed with this move as I felt that a better portrayal of the heroism in situations like this, seamed to have been over looked. Never thought I'd see a movie with Jean-Claude Van Damme, being anything but the hero. His character's primary concern seams to be for the Female reporter that he knew personally, then for the others that were in the same trouble. She was about the only thing he did manage to save and protect at the cost of others. The use of abilities that Jean- Claude Van Damme is most known for are few and far in between. Nice action scenes that show the producers paid good attention to the details.Was happy to see the "REAL" Hero, show up at the very end to save the life of the character acted out by Jean- Claude Van Damme's. Not a Movie I would recommend to anyone as it was in my opinion one of Jean-Claude Van Damme's worst.
movieman-234
Wooden acting. "Plot twists" that you can see coming almost from the opening credits. Utterly and completely predictable.You've got a whole army of "actors" who have obviously never fired a real gun. And why is it that all the shooters in the fire fights just stand out in the open to be shot? Cover's available, but no one seems to think that getting shot might hurt. Most of the movie consists of people standing around talking about who's in charge and what they're going to do (while the bad guys wait patiently outside - doing nothing.)The Marine Expeditionary Force is 6 hours out. The army relief is 4 hours out. They both arrive within minutes of each other... but when the Marines show up, they announce that they are the US Army! Doh! The whole movie is supposed to be setting up tension about whether the defense force can hold out until reinforcements arrive - but it totally fails in that regard. You can almost hear the cast yawning (or was that the audience?) the tension is so - not there.There's the trite and underdone squabble over "who's in command", and of course, any time Van Damme isn't running things, people get whacked.Special effects were unconvincing. Editing looked disjointed and jerky. Could say the same about the acting. The female reporter is such a dip - makes you wonder why the "hero" would have anything to do with her.I rated this movie a '2', because it could have been worse... it could have been longer!
