Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever (2002) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
276 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
It blowed stuff up, and blowed up more
jaywolfenstien18 May 2005
Let's be honest with ourselves for a moment. In a movie like this, the producers don't pay expensive actors to act or to create realistic performances or to use their talents to win our sympathy. No, they pay these actors for face and name recognition, so when a movie like Ballistic: Banderas vs Liu comes along we don't have the inconvenience of learning about characters and plot. Hell, we don't even have the inconvenience of wondering, "Is this actor hot while all this excitement rushes them by?" Name recognition, baby, it's all marketed by name recognition.

And why should they let actors acting take up precious moments from the rooftop chases, the explosions, the gunfire, and posing like models? Everyone already knows these actors right? No need to develop anything more than flimsy excuses for action/motivation, right? Sarcasm aside - I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but I think Ballistic would have been a better, more sophisticated, film if they scrapped the plot and cliché character developments and just went for 90 minutes of uninterrupted Banderas and Liu gunning at each other backdropped by a slow-mo explosions.

This film would have to scale a cliff before reaching the level of plot intricacies and intelligence that just thrive in Michael Bay films.

We get a crappy plot and crappy characterizations anyway just in case we don't have a favorite actor to root for. We get ultra cliché scenarios that anyone who has been to a theatre in the last fifty years will pick up on. Oh no, a child's been kidnapped – we're supposed to sympathize with the boy. There's the old (young?) has-been former cop (FBI guy in this movie) who lost his motivation – we're supposed to sympathize with him and the loss of his family. And then there's--oh, but wait? What are these plot revelations? What are they pointing towards? Gasp! They're making the already obvious villain even more obvious! Me? I was rooting for the aliens from Independence Day to come down and blow them all up, but the bastards got stuck in traffic.

Somewhere in the movie is a subplot about a nano-assassin, but I cared about that as much as the movie does.

And since we're being honest, I admit this is a great film to watch after a night of provocative and cultured cinema to recalibrate your personal scale to the realities of the industry. Like I explained to the guy at Blockbuster, "I just got a box-set of Hitchcock, been watching those back to back, and the other day I watched De Palma's Femme Fatale. I need something trashy before I become a full-blown film snob." So I walked out with Ballistic and Shark Attack 3, went home, and turned off my mind for a marathon of stock footage and needless gunfire/explosions . . . and all was well.
81 out of 89 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Here's a do-it-yourself B:E vs S
jjs4029 February 2003
Start out with the Lucy Liu character. Wear a long coat and slacks everywhere you go. Look into a mirror and erase every expression you have. Speak about once every few hours.

Then you can do the Banderas character. Don't shave. Muss your hair. Put 15 jumbo olives in your mouth when you speak. Shuffle when you walk.

Oh yeah special effects. Let the gas on your stove run for about 10 seconds without lighting it. Then light it. Say "Boom". Repeat 100 times.

You can get a copy of the script really easy: Buy 10 comic books. Tear a couple of pages out of each one and staple the pieces together. Be sure that they don't fit too well together. They don't even have to be right side up.

If you do this, you won't need to rent this stinker.
189 out of 221 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
absurdly bad espionage thriller
Buddy-5128 September 2002
`Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever' has been saddled with not only one of the worst movie titles in recent memory, but one of the worst screenplays as well. The film's third-rate espionage plot makes no sense at all and serves basically as a lame excuse for endless explosions, shootouts and double-flipping car chases, which have become the standard accoutrements for virtually every action picture since `Bullitt' in 1968.

The problem with `Ballistic' is that the viewer can never tell who is doing what to whom or why – and we never care. The film is really all about style anyway. How else to account for the rather ludicrous image of Lucy Liu - looking more like a fashion model out on a shoot than a trained killer doing the shooting herself - strolling in elegant slow motion through the streets of Vancouver, wiping out what seems to be an entire hit squad with a combination of superhuman marksmanship and Matrix-like kickboxing moves? With her ankle-length designer coat and her icy-cool demeanor, she looks like Calvin Klein's idea of what the well-dressed assassin should be wearing this season. It's enough to reduce the whole enterprise to the level of comic absurdity – and, indeed, I often found myself laughing out loud at many of the ostensibly serious shenanigans occurring in the film. The flashbacks, which are obviously intended to clarify the characters' relationships, are so poorly done that they actually end up making the whole story more muddled and confusing. (And, although the child-kidnapping scenario is never as offensive in this film as it is in `Trapped,' one can still question the propriety of filmmakers running to this theme with the kind of frequency they seem to have been doing of late).

Antonio Banderas makes up the other half of the film's title (he is Ecks, she Sever), and one only wonders what he could have been thinking about when he signed on to co-star in this particular project. `Ballistic' is utterly dispensable moviemaking: here today, forgotten tomorrow, a film utterly without distinction, conviction or purpose.
59 out of 79 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
For the love of Christ! Make it stop!
Mr Parker21 January 2003
Once in a while, a movie comes out that just defies logic. Sometimes logic is defied in how rewarding the watching experience was, say like with the Sixth Sense. Sometimes logic is defied in such a way as to make you question the mental state of those involved with giving this movie the "greenlight". This is not necessarily a good thing. This movie hurts on so many levels that it could be considered a cruel and inhuman torture to be made to sit through this. Everything about this movie screams bargain bin. With the exception of one scene (see below), this movie pretty much blows. Antonio Banderas is absolutely useless in this picture. You'd think from the ad campaign, let alone the fact that the movie is titled "Ecks vs. Sever", that he would be more of a serious ass kicker. No, no. The only one who gets to do any serious ass kicking is Lucy Liu and I'm 100% positive that she did this one only to pay the bills. Even with that revelation, she still sucked in it. The direction is pretty much what you'd expect from someone who goes by the name, "Kaos" but sometimes I'd like a little order to my chaos, ya know? I read a quote somewhere, where they said, 'who knew so much action could be so boring?' That's definitely the case here. Yeah there's a lot of action but it's of the direct-to-video variety. God, help me but this movie sucked. It wasn't even of the "so bad, it's good" type of flick. The story is incomprehensible, something about microscopic termites and little babies blown to smithereens and wives that bounce on you and the guy from Payback and.... AARRRRGGGHHH!!! I wouldn't recommend this to anyone. I can't recommend this to anyone. I'll give it a 1/2* out of ***** ONLY and I repeat, ONLY because of the aforementioned scene where some guy is knocked off of a rooftop by a grenade launcher and is shown falling to his death onto a parked car. If you want one reason to watch this, that's it. But don't say I didn't warn you.
35 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Can't we go into negative ratings?
dbborroughs12 March 2004
I liked the trailers, I hoped for the best and then sat in dumbstruck horror as one of the worst films ever made (as in so bad its painful to watch bad) unspooled before my eyes. Rumor has it that the film makers know a thing about movie making. I know the cast does, but what wanders across the screen looks like the dailies of a really bad TV commercial put together by someone with no sense of film structure. I'm told that this has something to do with two assassins fighting each other after some one is kidnapped, but I'm not certain since things just sort of happen for no real reason. I would like to think that this movie was a big joke on the movie going public but no one would want to spend what it cost to make this movie as a joke, especially when there was no hope of ever getting the money back in ten thousand life times. A void unless your eyes need to experience cinematic blunt force trauma applied to them.
58 out of 82 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Negative review *spoiler warning*
frankmilne11 October 2002
Warning: Spoilers
This is a review chock full of spoilers. I find it difficult to express why I disliked this film as much as I did without expressly pointing out key scenes and events that made me cringe while attempting to enjoy a thoughtless summer film. I did approch this film as just that. I am a guy who likes a thoughtless action film more often than not. I love thoughtful ones but the thoughtless ones can truly be fun. xXx comes to mind. I was expecting something along those lines when I came to see Ballistic. What it turned out to be was a number of explosions that seemed to occur for no reason what so ever. To say there was little plot bringing these explosions together is a given. That comes with the territory, but in this case the reasons are even below the lowest C movie in quality. No one reacts to an event the way you'd expect a normal human being to react. In fact the two main characters were so devoid oh personality I have come to wonder whether or not they were both blackmailed into performing the roles. I'm used to Lucy Liu not showing any on screen personality but Antonio consistently show's his "Latin Lover" charm. Not here.

* spoilers begin below *

Everyone is out to get Lucy Liu. No one seems to know where to find her. In fact they need to draw an FBI agent 7 years out of retirement to capture her. His groundbreaking method of investigation is to sit in a car listen to a radio and carry on dull conversations with secondary characters. Meanwhile across town Lucy Liu is walking in circles for no reason in a coffee bar. The bad guys know this and have snipers set up all over the place that would make the Kennedy assassination look like amateur night. How is it that they don't know where she hides out but knows when and where she's going to walk in circles? After giving the order not to hurt her immediately all snipers try to kill her and an overly armed SWAT team hit's the scene. By overly armed I mean they have grenade launchers and heavy machine-guns all designed to kill as many innocent bystanders as possible. In fact the FX crew even botched the way rifle mounted grenade launches work and turned them into mini rocket launchers. But fear not, they don't use them. They are just there for Lucy to pick up and level 12 city blocks with. I often wondered how it is if she were so professional she'd stand in one place and take on an army rather than just slip away in the crowd.

Once the mayhem is complete Antonio arrives glances at a few bullet holes and declares that the FBI should pick up and not investigate the devastation because `she's not done here.' I was able to relate to the FBI assistant directors baffled expression in this scene because I wouldn't know what to say to one of my agents who asked me to pull out all of my investigators cause the criminal might be coming back. Wouldn't you want to catch her?

Skipping ahead to what I assume is the largest injustice here. Antonio finds his wife to learn that for the past 7 years she was in bed with the big bad guy of the film. Married to him in fact. He confronts her in an aquarium while she is contentedly looking at whales, which must be where she goes whenever her son is kidnapped and threatened to be killed within 12 hours. And she also proceeded to have Antonio's son, who has been raised by her and the man who;

1) Tried to hill Antonio's character.

2) Faked the death of himself and Antonio's wife in an effort to `have her to himself'. Which evidently worked for 7 years.

When confronted she reveals that she had knowledge that Antonio was not dead and in fact always really loved him and not the big villain. She only stayed with him to `protect their son'. By having the son live with this guy? Give me a break! But what's worse is Antonio's reaction. He instantly understands and forgives her. No anger, no slap for her lack of logic. It's all OK. Lets go get the bad guy now. Honestly that ended the film for me. I was through.
20 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not to be taken seriously, but entertaining at 3 AM
mstomaso7 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I gave this movie a 3 of 10 which, I guess, makes me one of its biggest fans in my age group(I'm 41, and the highest ratings for this film averaged 2.5 at the time of my writing and were limited to sub-18 year olds).

Banderas and Liu saved this film from deserving the rating it got here on IMDb. The film is certainly pointless, loaded with ridiculous plot twists and absurd action sequences, but how many action films don't fit this description? Seriously, if you want to see what two entertaining actors and a lot of wasted film can do together, this film is worth a look. it's plot heavy, bit soul-less and clichéd, but entertaining nonetheless.

I turned it on at 3AM one sleepless night because I wanted to see what the heck Liu and Banderas were doing in a direct to video film. Expecting a thoroughly dreadful film, I was pleasantly surprised, and found the film to be entertaining. The film views like a series of strung together early-80s MTV videos with a contemporary hard rock sound track, plenty of loud noises and explosions, and, thankfully, few words.

To the extent that I remember it, the plot was about Banderas trying to rescue his wife and son from the clutches of some very evil super-secret spy types (who are nevertheless apparently exceedingly inept). A lot of stuff got blown up - in fact most of the sets were heavily rigged with explosives which seemed to go off at random intervals. Of course there were a lot of gunshots, fists, and kicks. I don't recall any swords or phasers though. If I say anything about Lucy Liu at all, I will give away the rest of the plot (which ought to tell you something about the quality of the script and the complexity of the plot) Lighten up! It's bad, but it's just a B movie. And this is what B movies are supposed to be about. By the way, a better choice for an utterly stupid action/violence flick is the masterpiece of violence surrealism "Mean Guns"
26 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
More bang for your buck
vamp8813 January 2004
I was not impressed or disgusted enough to leave a comment on this film. So why am I typing now? I saw this was in the bottom 100 here on IMDB. It wasn't that bad. Actually I enjoyed it, but I was in the mood to not think and just watch stuff blow up (having a bad day). That's what I got. Lots and lots of explosions, and fun action, there were more explosions then dialouge. There is some plot here, but don't watch this for realism or story. It's a cartoon, a video game, just mindless action and entertainment, and thats why its worth seeing and doesn't belong on the bottom 100.

It doesn't come close to being a must see action flick (see the first 2 Lethal Weapons, Die Hard, Escape from New York or dozens of others), but it's not that bad.
15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Never mind the ballistics, here's the pathologist
Euromutt14 September 2003
When I say "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever" was incredible, I don't mean that in a good way. All the main characters are current or former US federal agents, presumably to keep it interesting, but all the action takes places in Vancouver, BC, which, last time I looked, was not in the United States. The basic storyline was fairly straightforward (and rather hackneyed), but the motivations of the various characters were utterly incomprehensible. The film was somewhat on the short side, and I couldn't escape the feeling that the three scenes which might have tied together the loose ends inexplicably ended up on the cutting room floor. Banderas phoned in his performance (for God's sake, enunciate, man), and the musical score was just irritating. The only two things "Ballistic" had going for it were the presence of some rarely-seen hardware (fun for you firearms buffs) and some spectacular action sequences (though these were plagued by some annoying clichés, such as a protective vest preventing all injury to a character, and henchmen showing complete disregard for personal safety), and these were simply not enough to save this turkey. Avoid.
18 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Unbelievably dull, one of the worst films of 2002
xx_deleted_xx20 February 2003
Oh my. Where do I start with this one. Let me just say, this is the film that turned me off from Hollywood action films for good. Swayed by the cool poster and sweet tv ads, I actually paid $10 to see this at the cinema. Boy, was I a fool. I was expecting to see a fun, enjoyable action flick, but that isn't what I got. This excuse for an action film has to be the most boring and dull excuses for a movie I've ever seen. Don't listen to those who tell you it's a fun, mindless action film... it's not. Sure, there are lots of explosions, guns, martial arts and what not... but it has nothing to back it up. The script is flat, the actors are terrible and the story is full of plotholes. Sure, Lucy Liu beats up a lot of people... but her character is so boring and emotionless that she doesn't come off as cool as she should have. I mean, she barely says a word throughout the whole movie. Yes, lines DO matter in an action film. It all plays out like a video game... and I can see why; it was intended to be one. They should'nt have made a movie out of it though. Avoid this one at all costs, unless you're too easily pleased.
27 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
a live-action, large-scale, hi-tech Road Runner cartoon
wandeljw22 September 2002
I was entertained by this film but it is not for most people. It would be enjoyed most by fans of action video games. Because of minimal plot and minimal dialog, it is basically a live-action, large-scale, hi-tech Road Runner cartoon.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Somebody owes me for the hour and a half of my life I wasted
bltzburgh3 October 2003
This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. I literally left the movie going and went to my computer to surf the net. I would turn around to see what was happening when I heard an explosion, but otherwise just wanted it to finish. I rented this movie six months ago but never bothered to comment on it here and then they showed "The Making of Ballistic: Ecks vs Sever" on HBO last night and I was reminded how bad this movie was. I think the 3.5 stars is gets for a rating here is way too high.
16 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
It was okay...very action packed
xSoupyTwist12 February 2007
I thought this movie was okay. I don't get why people think it was horrible. The plot wasn't really clear, sure, but if you like action movies then this is for you. There was one scene that was dragged out really long though. That was boring. but otherwise it was okay. It's mainly about two agents who used to work for the FBI and DIA who want revenge on a certain person for their own personal reasons. There really is not romance in the movie which is fine with me. There's almost no cussing that i can recall nothing big at least. some places are a bit unrealistic but hey, it's a movie. It is action packed filled with explosions and gun scenes. so if you're that type of person, go for it :]
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
It actually sucks the fun of a moviegoing experience.
Li-14 April 2003
1/2 out of ****

I'm not typically a particularly demanding moviegoer when it comes to action films; just give me well-choreographed mayhem set amidst a plot that makes a little bit of a sense or a few engaging characters and I'll probably be reasonably pleased. Ballistic fails to follow even that, which explains why the film bored the hell out of me. I'm almost hesitant to say this, but the latest straight-to-video Jean-Claude Van Damme schlock might actually be better than Ballistic, which was arguably 2002's worst film (I've never seen Rollerball).

There's something of a plot here, but I'm not entirely sure what the hell was going on. Antonio Banderas plays FBI Agent Ecks, Lucy Liu is Agent Sever, and the two of them are duking it out because they somehow have crossed paths with a wealthy man (Gregg Henry) who is determined to smuggle a small electronic device that can assassinate its intended victim via heart attack. Mixed up in it all is Talisa Soto as Banderas' supposedly dead wife, only she's not really dead. Much mayhen ensues.

Ballistic is directed by Kaos, a Thai filmmaker who apparently wanted his movies to live up to his name. This is his first American feature and he shows almost no ability in crafting an action sequence. Martial arts fights that should get the adrenaline-pumping are so stiltedly choreographed, it'll inspire either laughs or yawns. Kaos also goes overboard on the slow motion, ensuring there's never an opportunity for the fight scenes to build momentum. And this is the only film I can think of where the people involved in a car chase actually follow the speed limit!

I feel a bit sorry for the cast here, particularly Lucy Liu, whose martial arts talents are squandered here. To date, she hasn't been much of an actress, but she looks and convincingly acts tough so such a role here must have seemed like a good idea. For Banderas, this is the third film where he has trouble with mysterious women. I've heard of typecasting, but never to such a ridiculous extent. The only thing keeping this guy's career afloat is Robert Rodriguez and that Spy Kids franchise.
10 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Little Action...Not much else either
Lursa22 September 2002
I saw this movie this weekend and have only two things to say.

1. Lucy Liu can kick butt and she needs her very own movie. Her action scenes with Antonio Banderas and Ray Park were very good. She was great in her other action sequences as well. Hmmm, maybe someone should add her to the next Matrix flick. She's got that cartwheel thing down.

2. Please, please, please do NOT let Antonio Banderas do another action movie. I love Antonio. I really do. But I don't want to see a cross between Jackie Chan and Harrison Ford.

The movie's okay...but it won't ring your bells. If you want an adrenaline rush...go see Triple X.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Ambient low-key acting, good action but stereotypical bad guys
brahmana29 April 2008
The acting of both Lucy Liu and Antonio Banderas is very low-key - same as you would expect from main roles in a Western; very simplistic and sparse, seemingly shallow were it not for the implicit references to shared knowledge, which the audience is only let in on through flash-backs or from other characters. This way of acting suits them both excellently, and creates an attractive ambient atmosphere, energized by their martial encounters and growing mutual sympathy.

The bad guys (Gregg Henry as Gant and Ray Park as his right hand Ross) do not contribute a whole lot to this movie. Gant is the sinister/smug/self-absorbed crook which Gregg also embodied as Val Resnick in Payback, and Ross' vocabulary is annoyingly redundant, particularly his constant use of the euphemism 'cancel' (one might be inclined to blame this on the script, but more subtle acting could have pulled it off by not emphasizing 'cancel' each time).

Perhaps what I like most about this movie is that Lucy has a major role. In her other movies she is mostly spice to the plot, although Lucky Number Slevin does allow her personality to surface. To me, Ballistic is the best Lucy-movie. She makes a very lovely femme fatale, even agonizingly crisp in a catsuit.

Do not watch this movie if you consider lack of dialog synonymous with shallow acting, or if you are just not a fan of low-key acting. If, on the other hand, you enjoy good atmosphere in a movie, Ballistic may be one of those you want to return to from time to time.

I give it a low 7, and would have gone higher if the feel of the movie were not occasionally fractured by the Gant and Ross characters.
9 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
decant action movie
dead_end25 July 2003
Just finnished watching this movie, don't know why i rented it maybe cause i wanted to see lucy liu in full action?!?! Don't no, but I didn't regret it!! If your expecting a movie with a good story line, plot twists, perfect acting well i geus this isn't your kind of flick. On the other hand this is a great movie to relax to after a hard days work with a couple of beer cans!! Expect hard action (lucy liu can kick some serious butt!!), explosions, car chases, hot women and more fire power than rambo and commando put together. Don't mind the storyline too much (I didn't) just sit back, relax and enjoy the action sequences!!
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
bizz-226 March 2004
Cooooooooooool flick, forget about the bad reviews and watch the"Ballistic:Ecks vs Sever" DVD edition... what an awesome sound, maybe the best 5.1 dolby surround I've ever heard in my home cinema (in my opinion better than "Saving Private Ryan"). "Ballistic" is a guilty pleasure, when watching it you now that it has gone too far in many moments, and anyone can notice that there's no screenplay (obviously no coherent story)...but who cares if you are having such a lot of fun.

If you are a die hard-fan of action movies this is your sort of film. Lots of fun + loads of action+ hundreds of explosions + perfect sound = an evening of fun...please, bring the popcorn.
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
grafxman3 September 2003
This isn't just another action flick, this is a SUPER ACTION FLICK! When I see a flick that is supposed to be an action flick, I expect to see a lot of action. This flick doesn't disappoint. I suspect another Detroit assembly line had to be opened up just to supply the cars blown up in this film. Apparently they ran out of cars because towards the end of the film, they started blowing up railroad cars!

Lucy Liu really delivers the goods here. Watch her as she runs through an

underground parking garage in one scene. She runs with her mouth closed, just like that liquid terminator played by Robert Patrick in T2. Watch Antonio Banderas race around on a motorcycle without a helmet on. I was very surprised they let him do that.

This movie screams sequel to me. I hope they have one using the same cast and director. One small detail. Watch for Antonio to kill the bad guy's Brit sidekick then watch the Brit sidekick show up a few scenes later.

I gave it a 10.

Roger Moncrief
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
absolutely the worst movie i have ever seen
jarrid3 September 2003
absolutely the worst movie i have ever seen. the acting was horrible, the plot, totally useless and I am really wondering how this movie made it to the screen, not to mention how the script ever got sold.
8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
"Ballistic" contains more than enough action and plot reversals to keep its audiences enthralled
zardoz-1311 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Thailand-born film director Wych Kaosayananda pulls out all stops in his first English- language actioneer "Ballistic: Ecks Vs. Sever," a fast-paced, slam-bang, high-octane, revenge-thriller that pits Hispanic heartthrob Antonio Banderas against Asian beauty Lucy Liu of "Charlie's Angels" fame. Kaosayananda, who made "Fah," the highest moneymaking movie of all time in Thailand, has since slashed his multi-syllabic moniker to Kaos. Not only does this talented Asian action helmer live up to his alias, but also "Ballistic" traces the trajectory of its title with a pyrotechnical frenzy. Our clench-jawed hero, our long-haired heroine, and a multitude of disposable but dastardly SWAT-style villains brandish a formidable arsenal of firepower, ranging from auto pistols to submachine-guns to rocket launchers, and unleash inexhaustible barrages of bullets in slow-motion for more than an hour with barely a word of dialogue. Moreover, when these one-dimensional archetypes aren't shooting up everything in sight, they resort to either kicking butt martial arts style a la "The Matrix" or demolishing dozens of cars, buses, SUVs, and railway freight cars. Although none of this nonsense remains remotely original, "Ballistic" delivers more than enough gunplay to compensate for its prefabricated, cookie-cutter plot about rival assassins.

Cast as a disillusioned but fashionably disheveled ex-G-Man named Jeremiah Ecks, Antonio Banderas wears a single expression throughout "Ballistic" as nondescript as his rain-sodden trench coat. According to the melodramatic, bullet-riddled screenplay by Alan McElroy, whose credits include "Spawn" and "Rapid Fire," Ecks quit the Bureau after his wife died in an explosion seven years ago. Ecks nurses a drink in a dimly-lit bar with rain dripping off his trench coat when his former Agency boss Julio Martin (Miguel Sandoval of "Mrs. Winterbourne") drops in and informs him that his dead wife is alive. Martin refuses to divulge the details until Ecks retrieves a microscopic assassination device from bad guy Robert Gant ("Payback's" Gregg Henry) which can be injected into a person's bloodstream and kill them when activated. Meanwhile, Gant faces troubles of his own when Sever (Lucy Liu) abducts his young son Michael (Aidan Drummond) and spirits him off to her Batcave of sorts where she hordes more hardware than most women have shoes. As an ex-DIA agent trained as an assassin because she was an orphan, Sever bears a grudge against Gant for killing her only child. When Gant isn't dodging Ecks and Sever, he contends with his grief-stricken wife Rayne (Talisa Soto of "License To Kill) who fears for her son's life.

"Ballistic" doesn't pretend to be anything more than a $70-million B-movie thriller. McElroy and Koas waste no more than a minute or two on expository dialogue before they load up this ode to the NRA and open fire. The taciturn cast spends more time ducking lead and spinning drop kicks than they do acting. One interesting shot shows a wounded villain plummeting backwards off a building to smash into a car beneath him. What makes the shot so fascinating is that we get to watch him as he falls without any cuts. As Gant's second-in-command, Ray Parks shows off his considerable martial arts expertise. Previously, Parks appeared in George Lucas's "The Phantom Menace" as Darth Maul and as Toad in "X-Men." Round for round, "Ballistic" contains more than enough violent action and plot reversals to keep its audiences enthralled during its lean, mean, 91 minute running time.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
1/10 watch
gmdecesare13 January 2003
I've always liked Banderas.

I don't anymore.

How on earth such an actor could even contemplate acting in such a ridiculous piece of tediousness is waaaaaaay beyond me.

There are absolutely no redeeming features - monosyllabic dialogue, wooden, stilted acting, John Woo-ish plagiarism - without the effect, mind-numbing musical score,NO sensible plot.

Please, for the love of God, do NOT see this film. Wish it on your worst, not even !!
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not heavy on plot, but satisfying on action.
ColdZro21 September 2002
As I write this, the rating on this movie is rather low, and I think that's a bit unfair. I have to agree, the movie is pretty thin on plot, and I was able to point out some problems with the movie. But I must say that I still got what I expected from the movie, and that was action. The movie has some pretty cool action scenes, and I knew going in, that that's what I wanted to see. Maybe I'm just better than most people at evaluating a movie before seeing it, but I fully expected to get more stylish action sequences, and less plot. And I think that's just fine! I love a movie with a strong story, but sometimes it's okay to just watch a movie with nothin' but action. This movie is an action movie, and I say it does quite a respectable job of it. I rated it 7.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Whoa! What's with all the negativity?
MFF in Honolulu8 December 2004
Gee, I'm actually shocked to see the way this film has been savaged. I'll grant you, the story seems to have been secondary to the sfx, but is that so unusual these days? As for being lightweight in the action dept., I disagree strongly. This was the first movie I'd seen where Lucy Liu made me think she was sexy. Then came Payback, and I was sold. Major babe! But it's the cool direction of "Kaos" (a cut down of his real last name), ESPECIALLY the action scenes, that set this film apart. I put it right up there (again, action-wise) with Long Kiss Goodnight and True Lies. Why this director hasn't been hired to helm similar genre films since this one is beyond me. If you think the script is thin, don't shoot the messenger. But you're telling me Lucy's action work at the library/shopping mall isn't up there with the best? Talk to the hand!
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed