Noutions Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

GazerRise Fantastic!

Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

adonis98-743-186503 A former bounty hunter who finds himself on the run as part of a revamped Condemned tournament, in which convicts are forced to fight each other to the death as part of a game that's broadcast to the public. The Condemned 2 feels pretty cheap in front of the first film which i believe even got a theatrical release unlike this one. The acting was pretty below average although Randy Orton did try his best for sure. The film's storyline was also pretty dumb against the first one which although no masterpiece made a bit more sense as a whole. (4/10)

Gino Cox "The Condemned 2" stars Randy Orton as a likable underachiever who disappoints his family and associates. A similar criticism could be leveled at the film. The story concept is actually a vast improvement over "The Condemned" (2007), which was basically a retelling of Richard Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" with multiple "contestants" pitted against one another and video surveillance. This version adds elements of films like "The 10th Victim" and "The Tournament;" a revenge plot similar to the "12 Rounds" movies; the blood sport promotion to jaded reality television viewers used in the "Death Race" films and the idea of jaded gamblers wagering on the survival of the contestants. The script has numerous elements that could have been developed much more effectively. The gambling angle was highlighted, but made little sense. Bookies make money regardless of the outcome of sporting events. It makes no sense at all that Raul would be concerned that the events would somehow break the house. Another intriguing angle is how the villain managed to intimidate and coerce several characters who seem particularly insusceptible to coercion. This is never explored or explained and detracts from the film's tenuous credibility. One character, presumably acting because of threats to his family, chooses death over surrender when death holds no promise of saving his family, but surrender might.The strong suit in WWE films is usually the martial arts scenes. The gunfights, car chases and pyrotechnics are typically less imaginative. TC2 is no exception, but the martial arts scenes are not impressive and there is too much reliance on gunplay. The film might be more effective if it played to the strengths of its actors. A few incidents defy all logic and reason. A character fires a short burst with an assault rifle at another character standing a few feet away, but misses. A character suffers a "through- and-through" bullet wound from a .50 caliber BMG sniper rifle that not only fails to rip off his arm, but doesn't slow him down much. Two characters survive a fragmentation grenade that detonates a few feet away from them. Not only are they uninjured, but they can hear each other speak in normal voices afterward. The story lacks a romantic angle. The only subplot concerns father-son love, which is a little ham-fisted. A similar subplot was handled much more effectively and efficiently in "Inception." Several attractive girls show interest in Tanner, but he never responds with much interest. Technical aspects are generally passable. Lighting is a bit weak and the typical overdependence on jiggly-cam shots is evident, although not as obvious as in some other films. It takes time to set up a tripod, level out the bubbles, brace it with sandbags and choreograph the action with the camera movement. One can appreciate the simplicity and economy of Steadicam rigs. But films that rely extensively on jiggly-cam shots often feel like the director has asked the cameraman to cover the action as best as he can. The results often seem haphazard rather than planned and crafted. One of the scenes that does seem well crafted is a minor scene involving Tanner changing a tire. Another involves a lot of dirt. Overall, the film is passable as a no-brainer action film. There are a few good shots, including one where Tanner camouflages himself, a slow-motion close-up of the effect of shock waves and the destruction of a flying object. The action is watchable, but uninspired. The characters do as well as can be expected with what they're given. The film has a sort of half-baked theme about Tanner needing to follow though and the nature of accepting responsibility. But Tanner never has a plausible option not to continue to the conclusion. He is pushed along by outside forces. The characters who actually make moral choices are his father and two members of his team. In an early scene, a judge imposes an ultimatum which motivates Tanner, but that ultimatum is later abrogated by a character who doesn't have the authority to do so and offers a reward which would ordinarily be unavailable to somebody convicted of manslaughter. The major problems lie in the script and direction. The script seems like it's about two re- writes short of complete and the direction seems slipshod, haphazard and unplanned. However, it squeezes in a lot of action, usually at a lively pace and the scenery looks nice. If one can crank up ones willful suspension of disbelief to a moderately high level and sit back and enjoy the show, it's not a bad way to fritter away ninety minutes.

djdeathx Just don't waste your time with this movie. Bad acting, horrible plot, unbelievable bullets go through wood but don't hit the main actor but you can clearly make out the holes facing the actor. Just wow. They try to make it "modern" with shitty graphics and horrible sound effects but it just makes it worse. I stopped watching it half-way, I got up and left. Just garbage. In fact, the alien spider movie was better and that had like a $10K budget or something like that. Didn't this turd of a director have a better plot to waste their money on? I guess it's all part of the shitty experience. All you gotta look is the main actor and realize he can't act if his life depended on it. There's plenty of times where you can see the actors faking their horrible acting. I wish there was a -1 rating.

KineticSeoul This is a pretty darn bland movie with some poor editing and super cheesy and poorly executed action sequences. Mainly because of the camera execution, it was just lame from start to finish. The acting is pretty bad and seems like regular civilians with shaved heads, some muscle and a beard participated. Or guys that just look slick or a bit geeky played these roles. I like watching movies where it's survival of the fittest, but this movie was boring. I have seen much better from amateur youtube videos and much entertaining as well. Randy Orton for most the time, looked like he didn't know what he was doing. The movie is about an hour and thirty minutes and they try to milk every second of it. Because apparently movies have to be at least 1 hour and 30 minutes or close to it. So there is a bunch of shots of rich people throwing around money, cheering and making bets. Sure this can play a part in the story, but not when it's constantly shown over and over again. This is a action movie, but just about all of the action in this movie is downright stupid and doesn't make any sense. The story seems like something someone can come up with in like an hour by just sitting and writing. Even the interactions between characters was so bad, cliché and boring. Just pass on this one, it's a waste of time. I give this movie a 3 because they seem to have tried really hard to make a cool, stylish quasi video game style movie.3/10