Mercenaries (2011) User Reviews

was that it?

[ILYRiCaL · 4/10 · 7 December 2011]

After having had a sneak-preview of Mercenaries, i must admit it just wasn't very good, even for a Balkaneze guy like me.

The plot seems rushed, the actors are mediocre at best, and there just isn't any substance to get you hooked on the story. The only character you can sympathize a little with, is Andy Marlow(played by Robert Fucilla). Along with Kirsty Mitchell, they did a decent job acting.

But having watched it, i was like "was that it?", and i started wondering if it was worth the time in the first place.

I hope somebody out there enjoys it...

because i didn't.

Not up to the standards

[rukmal1987 · 3/10 · 7 December 2011]

After watching so many great special forces movies, all we expect from such a movie is that it to be an action packed explosive one. with that expectation I started watching this movie and I was totally disappointed.the plot is simple, a guy takes over a country and threatens the region. so the good guys have to go and take care of it.instead of sending the army they decide to send a bunch of ex SAS mercenaries. the actors don't at all look like ex SAS soldiers. instead they look a bit too girlish to portrait such tough characters.that is enough to kill the mood. their acting isn't strong enough at all to convince the audience that this is going to be something fun to watch.even the dialogues lack the punch . instead you feel like shooting yourself for choosing to watch this. sometimes the muscle flash of the gun just blinds you.give the movie a cheap look. you see hardly any action that is normal to a movie of this kind. All i can say is that it's lacks everything a good action movie should have.

P.S. The actors in the movie don't look tough at all like the ones in the poster.

A very slow and uninspired war movie about a hostage rescue after a military coup. Seemed flat, not interesting. I say C-

[cosmo_tiger · 4/10 · 31 January 2012]

"No Andy...they are wrong." After a military coup occurs in the Balkins the U.S. ambassador is in trouble. An ex S.A.S. serviceman is picked by Colonel Tourida (Zane) to lead a rescue mission. I have to admit that I like war movies, but like the new batch of western movies lately they seem to be either really good or really bad. It seems that some people assume that if you put a guy in cameo with a gun in a movie people will flock to it regardless of plot. I am not one of those people. To me just because it's a war movie doesn't automatically make it good. This one was very slow and didn't seem to have a point. I lost interest quickly and started to forget what I saw. By the end I was just glad it was over. But on the other hand not everyone thinks like me and many will like this. I just couldn't get into it. Overall, compared to the recent war movies like "Beneath Hill 60" and "Age Of Heroes" this is not nearly as good. I give it a C-.

Unforgivable

[belts24 · 1/10 · 25 May 2012]

Rather than watching this film, I felt as if i was being subjected to it. I have seen thousands of film, both high and low budget, and I can quite honestly say this is one of the worst I have watched. The only thing more terrible than the script were the actors' performances. Although, the actors aren't fully to blame as the casting choices were the true root cause of the film's problems. Not one character was believable as having served in the SAS or any military unit, they couldn't properly hold weapons or implement any semblance of military tactics.Beside from the countless military inaccuracies; the plot was unoriginal, unbelievable and totally boring.

Avoid this movie, it is absolute rubbish!

Dreadful!

[silsurfer2001 · 1/10 · 14 December 2011]

Being a Producer/Director of Music Documentary's I find it incredible that in what is a poor financial climate that a film like this can get the funding to have been made. This film is nothing short of dreadful, I feel sorry for the Actors there performances will have not done anything for the future careers. As for the direction I have seen better home movie productions from children, it looks like the outside location filming was made in somebody's garden, the interior shots some cheap and nasty set built in a warehouse. So to sum it up please spend your well earned money elsewhere or watch it and see what a waste of time and money this was. Thank you

Dreadful Film!

[dsshadowgirl · 1/10 · 8 April 2012]

Dreadful Film! OK, many people have already referred to the fact that this is such a dreadful film already. The biggest problem is that if you combine terrible acting with a terrible script then the only sure fire thing you are going to get is a terrible film. It's all just so implausible that a group of amateurs who clearly have not bothered to get any military adviser on board start running round someone's back garden to convince the viewer that they are on some kind of clandestine rescue mission. Mr Fuccilla is clearly no leading man and is unable to carry a gun properly, never mind a movie. His dialog is simply risible.

Does the movie have any redeeming features? Critics, even the hard- nosed ones, will try and find at least one redeeming factor but alas, in this case, it seems to be impossible. It seems that the key to this movie lies in its funding. If you read the PR suicide article on Mr Fuccilla in the Guardian you can see that this is another vanity project. The Merchant Banker might do better spending the money on acting lessons.

In the end, the poster tells it all: on IMDb we see Fuccilla face on in big close up. By the time the movie is released we see the DVD cover with everyone with their backs to us. If the Merchant Banker at the head of the vanity project turns his back on his own film - it's time for the viewer to do the same!

I rather eat a box of nails than watch this 90 minute movie.

[llamaslyr · 1/10 · 4 April 2012]

This movie fell apart within the first 10 minutes of the viewing. If you are going to make a military film, at least research it before production. ACU patterns were wrong, and weaponry were not standard issue. For an example, the Humvee shown in the film is actually a cameo painted Hummer h1, the civilian version of the Humvee. Silly, silly movie that I highly discourage.

The acting was a discouragement to see. Awkward prone positions and shooting positions made actors look like they were playing a game of air soft. There "marines" were not properly shown how to shoulder their weapon nor how to properly engage targets using their iron sights.

Overall, this military thriller looked like an amateur film that any 12 year old with a Sony camcorder could re-enact. This film at best belongs in a high school film festival. What a shame.

Rubbish Film

[reviewerling · 2/10 · 30 April 2012]

I am a film reviewer so frankly I don't care that the lead actor, Mr Fucilla, is, according to the Guardian newspaper, a merchant banker who believes he can bypass training as an actor and has bought bought his way into a project. I don't care that the director was a unit driver called Barry Leonti (according to IMDb) and reinvented himself as a director, called Paris. I don't care about the fact that MERCENARIES advertises itself (on Wikipedia) as being shown at the Cannes Film Festival in 2011 when it wasn't (I was there and there is no official record of it in any competition). What I care about is what I see when I pay my money and watch what is on the big or small screen in front of me. And unfortunately, in this case, it would not be an exaggeration to say it is an absolutely unwatchable mish mash mess. The starting problem is the fact that no attempt has been made to put it in the right geographical setting. Even low budget films need to make an effort, though. Srebenica? This has clearly been set in the local park. This in itself is bad but when you throw a clearly unconsidered plot and script in to the mix then you have problems. Derivative, would be putting it mildly. Where is there any attempt at being original. Low budget is no excuse for making no effort. Quite the opposite - it is the absolute opportunity to do something original. Clearly, Billy Zane, sticks out like a sore thumb, bring the pay check face on the DVD cover (though, as many reviewers have pointed out - even he has disowned the film by refusing to be on the DVD cover). The dialogue just seems to have been thrown together and the acting is a mix of amateurism and half-heartedness - it's difficult to tell what could have been made of this if the script had not been so bad.

Ultimately it is a sad old mess and reflects really badly on the struggling UK film industry. This is not what is needed in the industry, it will just drive investors further away from investing in films. What a sad, missed opportunity. Let's hope this film can be quietly forgotten and the UK film industry can provide us with some low budget, quality, original films again.

Crappy movie

[missing_the_coast_nc · 2/10 · 9 April 2012]

I am about 5 minutes into the movie and very disappointed... First of all you have a Full Bird Col. wearing the uniform all wrong. Then people calling him Colonal... You don't call them by their rank.. Sir... Ma'am.. Then went even further with the Major wearing his head gear inside, and then someone calling a soldier they worked with private. So aside from everyone being all jacked up.. and people getting called by rank this movies script is lacking too. The president is under attack and doesn't realize until they get to his house?? Then they say they have to leave quickly but get caught at the top of their stairs waiting... Who does that? This isn't one of them scary movie plots where the girl runs up the stairs instead of out the door. there is my ten lines.

An Ameteur Film For Ameteurs !

[adabsiz · 1/10 · 15 June 2023]

So .. the American military (ie Billy Zane) entrust the rescue of a US ambassador somewhere in Serbia (where else !) to a rag bag of British mercenaries (we mustn't forget the word "elite" here !) led by an investment manager from Brixton , London !

They walk around somewhere in a wooded area at night talking loudly ... knowing that only the cameraman and soundman are listening .

We know who the top bad guy is because he wears an eye patch , of course ! More walking in illuminated woods at night follows , while the bad guys are torturing everyone they can find !!

Now this is where it gets exciting ... the investment manager (turned actor / cameraman & producer) from Brixton , decides to attack the bad guys , based in a shabby building ... not to be confused with the American Embassy say , and liberate the hostages . Armed only with Kalashnikovs (don't ask !) the good guys liberate the American hostages including the one-eyed bandit.

Here , excitement reaches a zenith ! After firing many blank bullets and more flashing lights , the liberators go back to the woods with the Americans and a captured bad guy ! Surprisingly, the woods are very well lit .

Anyway , the producer / actor investment manager tries to hit on the only female with them . But eventually Billy Zane is there with the obligatory coffee to welcome what is left of the rescuers !

There is a lot of trees in this film , but little daylight.

Breathtaking , don't yo think ??

incredible...

[asterisk-893-146033 · 10/10 · 22 December 2011]

Language-0. Acting-0. Story-0. Where to start. ....

Army overthrown government on Balkans smashing the gates on which are emblem of Poland. Olodan Cracovitch? Best part among many best parts is American chic killing female Serbian specialist firing from AK-47 for the very first time in a life (I like to shoot from that weapon, and believe me, I would be glad that I could be accurate as half as she was). What ever I think personally about England and its SAS, I would never humiliate them showing them on this manner.

In the end, I give 10 stars for this incredible trash, not because its a worst action movie ever that I watched (it is!), but because I am Serb and simply wish to see any serbophobic movie to be good as this one. This movie is for action the same as 'plan 9 from outer space' for SF.

90 minutes of your life will not be wasted on this low-budget blood and guts movie.

[kennethgmellor-287-760451 · 6/10 · 8 February 2012]

This film was written and directed by Paris Leonti, an up and coming British guy.The vast majority of cast/crew are British. It was low budget, not a multi-million pound production. Get real with the negative comments ! Sure, he has been let down by some of the acting but it is not a bad way of spending 90 minutes of your life. The film is better than OK but not brilliant. The production company have done a great job as well so I wonder what Mr Leonti could do with a much,much bigger budget? The British film industry should get behind people like Paris Leonti and bring some good talent into the limelight.Daylight Robbery was a good entertaining film of a different genre. So, what's next? Look out for this guy... he's good.

Just watching this

[joe-825 · 1/10 · 25 December 2018]

Right now. I'm in Oman for Xmas. We have Fox Action Movies as one of the channel options. Thought I would watch a movie before we go out to eat. This is what we have... Poor acting. None of these guys acts in any way like a soldier. Poor plot. What could have been a thrilling story simply is not. I am never coming to this country again.

Yummy...Billy Zane.

[stellafisentzou · 10/10 · 17 December 2011]

I think the people above watched a different film than I did!!! I found it thrilling, exciting, & full of non stop action. I don't agree with some of the others comments, about the direction & acting being bad, for me, although this was a low budget film, i still think it is a solid movie. I loved the outdoor shots, the colours & surroundings were beautiful, as for the indoor shots, they were exactly that!!!! As a female, its not the kind of film I would usually watch, but I loved every minute of it. Especially all the gorgeous men....Ahem!!! Who wouldn't want to see the likes of Billy Zane, etc in full combat gear...yummy. A big thumbs up from me.