Collateral Damage

Reviews3

• 

  John Chard

  May 22, 2015

  5/10

  Don't even look at those guys unless you can kill 'em. Hmm. As with all action films, especially those that feature one of the action heroes we grew up with, there will be supporters of even the most turgid of productions. Collateral Damage was the point where the truest and honest of Arnold Schwarzenegger's fans knew it was the end of an era. Famously held back from release for a year due to the 9/11 attacks on the twin towers, the film pitches Schwarzenegger as a L.A. fireman, who after his wife and child are killed by an act of terrorism, decides to take the law into his own hands. The focus here is Colombia, and the big guy goes off to Colombia on a one man crusade to kill those responsible for his grief. Cue explosions, kinetic action, bad effects, bad dialogue, mucho posturing and hissing villains. It works on a very basic level for fans of such fare, in fact it's nice to see Arnie playing a vulnerable role where he quite often gets hurt - both physically and mentally. It's just that it feels tired, feels too long, while it wastes a cast that includes Elias Koteas, John Turturo and John Leguizamo. Decent enough as a time waster? Yes, just, but really if this wasn't on Schwarzenegger's CV then nobody would lose any sleep over it. 5/10

  See more
• 

  Wuchak

  May 22, 2015

  6/10

  Lacks heart, but there are highlights and the compelling last act features a nice plot turn A vengeful Los Angeles fireman (Arnold Schwarzenegger) goes to the jungles of Colombia to apprehend a terrorist (Cliff Curtis) where he meets the man’s dissenting wife (Francesca Neri) & their son. An angry CIA agent (Elias Koteas) also travels to Colombia to join with paramilitary allies to take down the same man. When the two teams learn of a planned terrorist attack at Union Station, Washington DC, they return to the USA. "Collateral Damage" (2002) is an action/adventure originally set to be released a few weeks after 9/11, but due to that tragedy it was set back four months wherein an anti-CIA subplot was removed, as well as a plane hijacking. What we are left with is a by-the-numbers film with a couple of highlights that perks up in the final act with an unexpected twist. There’s a spectacular waterfall sequence shot in southeastern Mexico, which takes place near the beginning of the second act. Another highlight occurs at the end of the second act where the movie drives home the problem with military attacks and the eventual revenge of the enemies: One nation’s military attacks a paramilitary organization wherein innocent civilians are killed, which is considered “collateral damage,” and so the paramilitarists attack the nation in question with more “collateral damage.” Who’s right and who’s wrong? And where does it end? The film runs 1 hour, 48 minutes, and was shot in Los Angeles & Burbank, California; Coatepec, Veracruz, Mexico (standing in for Colombia); Union Station, Washington DC; and New York City . GRADE: C+/B-

  See more
• 

  JPV852

  May 22, 2015

  7/10

  Okay action-thriller that has some decent action and overall was entertaining. However, this is one where I think Schwarzenegger was the wrong choice to lead as someone like Bruce Willis (circa 2002 mind you) would've worked better. Still, has its moments. 3.25/5

  See more