IMDb user comments for
Belly of the Beast (2003) (V)

advertisement

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Index

63 comments in total

---

23 out of 25 people found the following comment useful :-
Not great but much better than Seagal's films have been of late, 10 April 2004
Author: bob the moo from Birmingham, UK

Jake Hopper is ex-CIA who retired from the job after a bad shooting incident, although he still does work on the side for an old Agency buddy. When his daughter is kidnapped along with her friend (a Senator's daughter) while on a backpacking holiday in the far east, Jake's contact tells him. With official channels working to get the girls' back, Jake joins up with his old partner and begins trawling the underworld looking for the gang that has his girl.

Despite getting consistently burnt, I keep on coming back to Steven Seagal films - I can't help it. I always go to the video store (for that is where Seagal now resides) looking for something to veg out in front of that will entertain me without challenging or stimulating me; it is a sad condemnation of Seagal films that they rarely manage to do even that most basic of requests. However, in some regards, Belly of the Beast is actually a reasonable film. The plot is pretty standard and relies on nonsense to move it forwards - stuck with no clues, a girl approaches Jake with a mystery tattoo on her naked chest that only appears when she gets wet! Talk about an excuse for nudity! This sort of plot device is over used; too often the film has things just happen for a way of moving the plot forward.

The plot is poorly developed and it also has elements that just seem to have been thrown in in order to fulfil the formula. The love interest is one good example of an element that is silly and simply doesn't work. What does work is the action. For once in recent Seagal films, the fight scenes are actually pretty enjoyable even if they do overdo the slowmo effects. Seagal himself is quite effective; despite his weight gain he manages to move quite well here - even if most of it involves upper body work rather than full motion.

As an actor though, Seagal is about as bad as ever: his emotional range is rubbish, as seen in his reaction when told his daughter has been kidnapped (`you don't say' he blankly emotes!). He even is blank when kissing the gorgeous Lo - so what hope is there for him? Having said that, the worst moment in the film is one that is another actor's fault. In one scene Seagal is dubbed by an actor who sounds nothing like him - it is a laughable moment and a sad comment on the effort Seagal is putting into his films now (unable or unwilling to show up for ADR). Luckily for him, his support cast is OK. Mann's sidekick is good and Wu makes for a decent bad guy despite having very low screen time. Monica Lo is very beautiful and sexy - just a shame that her scenes where she gradually falls for Seagal make more for laughter than passion! Even these few good performances are still pretty basic though and the standard is no better than Seagal's usual stuff.

Overall, if you watch Seagal films a lot, then this will probably be better than you are used to, despite not actually being that good a film. The acting, script and plotting are as poor as you would expect but it is in the action stakes where this film improves upon his recent efforts. Understand that this is still not saying a great deal in my opinion but it still makes the film a lot better to have well choreographed and quite exciting fight scenes. If you have to watch a recent Seagal film, then this is probably the one to pick.

---

25 out of 29 people found the following comment useful :-
Ong Bak - Stevie Seagal Version, 4 March 2005

Author: Kaiban (lelnu@yahoo.com) from Hell's Kitchen, NYC

From the director of Chinese Ghost Story and Naked Weapon (and collaborator in the action scenes from Hero and House of the Flying Daggers), we have a story about an ex-CIA agent who's daughter is kidnapped. Its not just any ex-CIA agent, but Steven Seagal. Yes !! Pony-tail is back, BACK WITH A VENGEANCE. (Sorry, I had to do that).

This is your typical action movie, usually based on some revenge/honor theme, where the hero has to take out dozens to hundreds of henchman and usually a "Boss" character, or several. The acting is atrocious and all we are left with is the action (and a lot of wire-work). Steven brought his typical dead-pan/Prozac acting along. This movie is not going to be on anybody's Christmas list, however, it is hysterical and very very light. I was laughing the whole way through the movie.

Steven Seagal is looking to do some major butt-kicking. Unfortunately, most of the serious butt-kicking is done by a much younger, thinner man (the stunt guy is actually wearing fake fat to look like Steven), who has a lot more physical talent than Steven had in his prime. This is further compounded by the fact that the stunt man performs stunts that Steven could never perform (jump kicks, jump spin kick, and all other stunts involving jumping high).

The movie seems to have been filmed entirely in Bangkok, Thailand and recruited what seems to be the entire cast of Onk Bak, minus Tony Jaa. The wheelchair boss and Don the drug dealer stand out in my mind.

There are somethings about the movie that bother me. Steven (who is the star of the movie) looks like he just woke up in Bangkok after weeks of binging on milkshakes and vodka, with no money and no change of clothes. He looks dirty and grimy. I wouldn't sit next to him on the subway if he looked like that. Next, what was up with the Steven's gun? He seemed to have a magic weapon. This weapon fires anywhere from 30-50 bullets and rarely needs another clip. Also Steven has become such a big star, he no longer needs to aim his weapon. He just fires in the general direction of his target. Steven's sex scene was certainly interesting. It made me quite nauseous. Shoving toothpicks under my fingernails is pleasurable as compared to watching Steven has sex. The cinematography was quite strange. I didn't realize the same guy who did certain Outer Limit and Star Trek episodes was still alive (tilt the camera 45 degrees). The wire action becomes ridiculous, especially when you are trying to make a somewhat realistic action movie (imagine what one would think if Tony Jaa jumped 10 feet straight in the air and did 2 full revolutions). I also like the variation on Thai boxing : Thai Transvestite Claws and High Heels Boxing. Not only that, what was the deal with all the mystical crap introduced 10 minutes before the end of the movie, complete with with a Thai Mako impersonator who had taken too much PCP ??

One may think from my review that I hated this movie. This is not true. This is the funniest movie I've seen since Shaun of the Dead, unfortunately that movie was trying to be funny. I do recommend this movie as a rental,a discount-bin purchase, or a late night cable session while completely wasted.

---

13 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
Should be given credit for the upsides, 10 June 2005

Author: jofitz27 from Liverpool, England

I cannot remember a recent "Steven Segal" movie in the cinema, or anywhere near publicised. The last one even close was "Half Past Dead", a mediocre yet fun action flick about Alacatraz if my memory serves correctly.

I rented "Belly of The Beast" for some Friday-night fun. And that is exactly what I got. Endlessly terrible and cheesy but fantastic at the same time, this is Steven Segal reaching new lo's in acting but highs in martial arts and action sequences. He kicks the hell out of anything he see's in bloodthirsty fashion, in some very inventive and surprisingly sadistic fashion (in one scene, he pushes a guy in hugely OTT fashion across a line of fish in ice-cubes into a meat hook- the '15' UK certificate is questionable). But still, this manages to be fun.

The plot is non-existent, as it turns in predictably bad fashion in any excuse to get Segal fighting, but this is hopeful- it proves this 50 year old overweight guy may have something left in him.

3 out of 5

---

12 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-
One of Seagal's Best!, 24 April 2004

Author: liammurphy1 from United Kingdom

After renting the abysmal,complicated,confusing,badly acted and edited mess that was 'The Foreigner (2003)' I thought Seagal's career was all but over, So I wasn't expecting much from this movie, and having just shelled out nearly £10 to buy it I was almost sure I'd made a huge mistake, but tonight with nothing on the TV I thought I'd give it a whirl.

What a Surprise! It kept me on the edge of my seat from start till finish even though it had a unoriginal storyline (Very similar to Arnie's 'Commando (1985)' - Seagal's a Ex-CIA Agent whose daughter Jessica just happens to be kidnapped along with her best friend Sara who is a daughter of a U.S Senator by a group of violent rebels, so Steve goes in guns blazing along with buddy turned Monk Sunti to save the day - against the advice of CIA Agent Leon Washington who wants to handle it in his own way.

The movie has a coherrent plot,plenty of action,good acting,nice locations and a moderate sized Budget ($18m)

Everything you want in a Action Flick!

Avoid Seagal's earlier effort as mentioned above and go straight to this picture My Rating *** out of *****

---

10 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
....At last SEAGAL returns to formula, 5 July 2004
Author: lee nicholson (dolemite72) from middlesbrough, UK

After a few ropey movies, somebody in movieland 'greenlighted' this enjoyable and action-packed (words not usually associated with recent SEAGAL s.t.v) movie, that harks back (refreshingly so) to the excesses of the 80's The plot is pure 'COMMANDO' as ex CIA (...CIA) agent JAKE HOPPER (SEAGAL) goes to thailand to rescue his kidnapped daughter (and the senators daughter...hooray!!) from evil terrorists. You can pretty much guess the plot from herein. Suffice to say, that this movie (unlike his last two) give SEAGAL a little bit more to do in the action stakes. Director CHING SIU TUNG certainly knows more about staging action scenes that the lamentable MICHAEL OBLOWITZ. And despite a few (obvious fight doubles) SEAGAL can still handle himself in the action arena. Nice bullet-time vs arrow sequence at the end. This movie captures what SEAGAL wants to say about spirituality, whilst capturing the essence of the action that is commonplace with all SEAGAL epics. Despite it's straight to video origins, BELLY OF THE BEAST is an enjoyable movie, for those who wish to see a real martial artist, in a real martial arts movie

Big lee scores it 9 out of 10 (not quite OUT FOR JUSTICE!)

---

6 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Seagal is just going through the motions, but the movie trappings are good!, 23 July 2005

Author: lemon_magic from Wavy Wheat, Nebraska

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I've heard of hackwork, but this is getting silly. Why does this guy still have a career? It's pretty obvious that he has nothing but contempt for his audience.

The scenery and photography is great, the supporting actors are fine (especially the exotic female love interest), the plot and the writing are OK (if a little hackneyed); in other words the overall content of the movie is good B movie stuff (with some inspired directorial touches in a lot of places).

And into this potentially pleasing and exciting melange comes Steven Seagal, who sleep walks through the entire thing as if he had pressing business elsewhere and spends the entire movie with his inner dial set to 'squinty eyed tough guy' and using one of two expressions -('squinty eyed scowl' and 'eyes slightly widened'). I've watched a lot of movies (even a lot of action and martial arts movies) and I've rarely seen a lazier "lead" performance than this.

You doubt me? Check out the fight scenes - Seagal used to do nice, snappy Aikido/Aikijutsu style fight choreography, and his gunfight choreography was fast, fluid and visceral. Now he uses a stunt double for any scene involving kicking, leaping, or leg fencing. Now he seems to be pretending to be some kind of Tai Chi master and Hung Gar stylist, with a lot of extraneous wire work to hid the fact that he isn't putting ANY 'oomph' or speed into his motions (no matter how hard the director tries to frame him, he's obviously loafing); in fact, Seagal can hardly be bothered to raise his hands above his head or pick his feet off the floor anymore. And he's gotten really fat - the generous fit of the loose kung-fu GI and the numerous flattering camera angles can't disguise his girth or the way his neck balloons out of the shirt collar to give him wattles and a double chin.

Almost anyone other actor with a martial arts background and a 'tough guy' persona could have taken the lead role in this move (Jet Li, Gordon Liu, Donnie Yen, or even Don Wilson or Oliver Grunier) and done a better job. Heck, David Carradine could have pulled this off with aplomb. In fact, this could have been a killer movie with a relative unknown in the part. one that could take some acting direction and was eager to prove himself. But someone somewhere still thinks that Seagal's name can sell a movie, and so he gets to grunt out another performance.

There are also some weaknesses to the plot that aren't especially Seagal's fault, but I'll blame him anyway: Of course, he gets the exotic Thai call girl in the end for no apparent reason other than the plot requires it. Seriously, there is literally almost NO transition between the point where they are allies and when they are lovers- it's a couple of lines of dialog and that's it. And Seagal's friend the Buddhist Monk comes out of seclusion to help him rescue his daughter, and is immediately able to leap into demanding physical action after 10 years of asceticism, living on 1200 starch based calories and an average of 4 hours of sleep each day. And Southeast Asia apparently has its own brand of voodoo mind control, because a weird shaman type appears for 10 seconds nears the beginning of the movie, and never shows up again until Seagal's final showdown with the bad guy, and then the shaman starts sticking pins into a voodoo doll to slow Seagal down only to be fought off somehow by the chanting and good vibes of the remaining monks. The whole thing is so badly and transparently handled that it will leave you scratching your head in confusion. The plot element is completely out of place in this kind of movie and makes no sense. (It might work in a 'sword play' style movie). The film makers just threw it in there to make Hopper/Seagal even more of a knee-jerk hero than before - the monks are on his side and fight for him, so he MUST be a HERO, right?

I sound as if I hate this movie. I don't. I like almost everything about the movie except Seagal, and even he doesn't suck all that much here. It's just that I can't imagine any actor in a leading role of an action movie who has even a shred of self respect doing this little actual work and expecting his fans to accept it.

I have no idea what has happened to Seagal in his private life (and it's none of my business) to turn him into such a total hack with such a threadbare schtick. I can hope that he either shapes up and turns his life around, or that he just finally has enough money saved up that he can retire.

---

7 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
As far as bad action movies go,pretty good, 1 June 2004

Author: veganflimgeek (David@vegsandiego.com) from San Diego, CA

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Belly of the beast

There are two kinds of action movies. High quality intelligent action films like The professional, The killer, Ronin or the Bourne identity all films I totally love. Then there are action films like Invasion USA and Commando which I love because they are terrible and yet still very fun. Belly of the beast may strive to be in the first category but it remains in the so bad it is good realm with other Segal classics like On deadly ground, under siege and out for justice.

While Exit wounds was not as bad as Cradle to the grave, Segal has been going down hill since Fire down below. Don't get wrong the EPA agent with the license to kill worked for me, even when he was jamming with the country band at the county fair. However as his Belly grew, his star power and screen charm has faded.

There are lots of rules for bad action hero's things to do when your career needs a boost. Now that Segal has gone to a Hong Kong director for help the only thing left to do is a movie where he fights himself. What's up Segal? Van Damme has already fought him self like 4 times. The good news is that Segal got the best goddamn fight director possible. I know Woo Ping is considered the best by many but for me Ching Siu tung the man behind the action of Hero, duel to the death, The killer and countless others would be my choice if I was making a Kung Fu film.

Not only that he is the creative director behind some very neat films like the Chinese ghost story films. His creative film making skills are on the screen as well, even in the opening scene it is displayed in interesting camera motions that makes a above average experience for a direct to video movie.

The Good: As a low brow action film I enjoyed Belly of the beast, if you don't take to serious you will too. The action is well done. The story has some cool twists, Segal and Co. made some surprising turns with the story especially in the post 9/11 world.

****Spoilers****

I am sure many hated the spiritual show down between the shaman and the monks but I thought that was a cool and original scene. Shot with tinge of Chinese ghost story it brought a smile to my face. Brave also to have the Muslim terrorists be innocent of the kidnapping and to have the CIA behind, of course Segal is the man who wrote a screenplay where the CIA had invented AIDS. I can respect a writer who always blames the CIA.

The Bad: The romance for Segal was so misplaced and stupid. Trite and unbelievable. It was done for the direct to video hormonal action fans with Asian fetishes. Does anyone really believe this young Asian woman would fall for a washed up CIA agent with gut.

The ugly: This has to be the worst example of body doubles ever. Not since the enemy within episode of Star trek(Shatner an early bad action star, I mean he fought himself?) Segal…dude… Diet, exercise, disciple. I had a hard time with this, even made worse considering the word belly is in the title.

Above average Direct to video. If you are a fan of well done bad action it's worth a hour and half of your life.

---

5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Seagal should get in shape, 19 July 2005

Author: sveknu from Bergen, Norway

Even though Steven Seagal has made movies who are much worse than this, this is still far from being his best work. I wonder if the whole movie was made just for self-ironical reasons (remember, Seagal fortunately has a lot of self-irony). The main problem is that Seagal is too fat too be a real action-star right now. Some of the fights in this movie still are pretty cool, but there are just something that isn't there. Maybe it's because some of the fights are so overdone so that everyone know that it isn't Mr.Seagal doing most of it anyway? The worst part about the fighting is the roundhouse kicks. Even though they're rather cool, they're as far from the typical Seagal fighting style that it's possible to be. And you never see Steven's face when these are performed..........................

The story is standard, but that's totally OK. No one cares too much about that anyway in a movie like this. This is in fact one of Seagal's best movies after "Exit Wounds". That doesn't mean that this one is any good, because some of the others are pure garbage.

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Recent Seagal film that manages to be entertaining, 14 December 2005

Author: AwesomeWolf from Australia

Here's something I never expected I'd be saying about 'Belly of the Beast': It is an entertaining action movie. That's right, it may a new Seagal movie that has a totally disjointed plot and an identity crisis regarding what style of action movie it wants to be, but its a fun way to kill time.

Seagal plays Jake Hopper, an ex-CIA agent (you guessed it) working on the side as a professional ninja for an old agency buddy. This led me into thinking that ole' Stevie could very well star in a 'Beverly Ninja Hills Ninja 2' film, he certainly is getting to look a little like Chris Farley. Jake seems rather uninterested when he is informed that Muslim extremists in the north of Thailand have kidnapped his daughter, but that's only a cover for his apparent unlimited rage, at least according to the tag line. So Jake is off to Thailand to his rescue his daughter and show off his UNLIMITED RAGE!

Now I realize that 'Belly of the Beast' is a poor film in every aspect of film-making, but its one of those endearingly bad films. The plot is disjointed and sometimes predictable, sometimes suffering from an identity crisis. Seagal seems as excited as he always is (i.e. he actually looks really bored and seems as though he would prefer a quiet night in with a video instead of attempting to kick arse), and his physical fitness really needs to be questioned. You can hear his heavy breathing throughout the film, seemingly suggesting that Seagal just carried a box of donuts up small flight of stairs and now he he needs to recover. The fact that he even has a sex scene is just disturbing to even think about and is best left as one of those "let's never speak of this again" moments. In a scene in which Seagal is chatting up a monk, his voice actually changes! Some suggest Seagal was dubbed in that scene, but I always suspected that Stevie was the romantic type (at least when talking to monks).

The lack of any distinct action style doesn't help things. Seagal starts the movie off with some Tai-Chi and kicking that Stevie can't possibly perform in his shape and also sends his opponents flying through walls. When I realized who the director was, none of this surprised me and I even expected some sort of mystical battle to end the movie. I did not expect random normal shootouts and random 'Matrix'-style shootouts. Basically what we have here is almost a fantasy ninja movie with John Woo adding lots of guns, or something like that. It is confusing, it isn't compelling, but it makes for cheap entertainment.

I should probably feel shame for saying 'Belly of the Beast' was enjoyable. It is a terrible film, and most people really should avoid it, but there are a select few out there who (like me) can use this for cheap laughs - 2/10

---

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
A bit of the old Seagal we loved., 5 January 2004

Author: Fiendish_Dramaturgy from .: Fiendish Writings in the Dark :.

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I love Seagal movies. I even liked On Deadly Ground, a movie which has been dogged so badly that it's on the bottom 100 list here at IMDb.

Belly of the Beast gives us a glimmer of hope that he is making his way back to the top. I did; however, detest the shape he's allowed himself to fall into. He was tough, edgy, and a general hard-ball player.

Now, he's using baggy clothes to hide his obvious weight gain, partial facial shots to hide the pudgy cheeks, and body doubles wherever necessary. At least Jackie Chan toned himself back into form before he did "The Medallion." (Check that one out. That was a genuinely decent movie.)

Gone (for good?) is the polished and smooth Seagal. Enters Seagal the scruffy, disheveled hero. Sad. I used to love his movies for the purist aikido arts he exhibited. But now, I just watch them out of a sense of loyalty to a has-been master.

He's just not what he used to be. But this movie does give me hope for the future of his movies. He even did a variation on Bruce Lee's "one-inch punch." Not bad at all.

The story was an old one, and it's really becoming a tired one. Kid is kidnapped, and dad has to save the kid. Get over it, already, and beoriginal for Pete's sake! But for an 18M budget, considering the whole thing was filmed in Thailand, I guess a good story is too much to ask for. At least there was some well-placed and professionally executed action, this time around.

As I said, the action was well executed, and almost (if not entirely) non-stop, and the story did move along quite well. The two aspects I do like about Seagal's movies, even the ones which do not fare well at the box office, or go straight to video like this one did, are his connection with family and his boldness about his (non-christian) spirituality. I admire him for that. He may even make some people realize that their mainstream religion only makes up a very small part of the world's religious base.

I doubt it, but perhaps.

The one memorable line from this movie? "I liked you better as a b*tch." Jake Hopper (Steven Seagal)

All in all, it rates a 7.3/10 from...

the Fiend :.

---

---

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	External reviews
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history