Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Years ago I liked some of Segals work for the simple action. But, this movie is simply an insult to the intelligence of the viewers. Somebody should have offered some sort of advice to the crew responsible for this. Just about any aspect of this movies is poor. I strongly suggest you skip this one.

The once glorious (well I'm sure some still believe that to be the case) Steven Seagal might be lingering in direct-to-DVD haven, but these enterprises sometimes provide the goods, that's if you're not expecting much. But then again there are some just plain and dull outings and for me this European stint "Born to Raise Hell" fell in to this group. Seagal feels like nothing more than a bit player and a bored one too. Spending more time sitting about, pondering, having a heartfelt chats or if he has to - walking from 'a to b' to shoot someone or casually crack some bones. So when it comes to the explosive bursts, they do lack any sort of punch or adrenaline despite the seedy scene. Here he plays a streetwise American Interpol agent assigned to a drug / weapon trafficking task force in Eastern Europe. This is one rather generic action drama, which thinks it's tough, but comes across as violently spiteful and sluggishly paced with a bogged down script. The director keeps it rather kinetic with the filming techniques, being slickly dressed up with sped up visuals, slow motion and titled camera angles. The performances are nothing to write home about, but the cast do acquit themselves well enough. Not terrible, but a very ho-hum Seagal vehicle."I like your style".

People who are going out of their way to say how bad this movie is, or making sarcastic posts about Seagal being extremely overweight, are missing the point. Yes, Seagal is making a straight to video movie in 2010, it's going to be objectively bad. However, 1: The movie must be judged in the context of his recent output, not compared to a super high-budget picture like Under Siege while Seagal was probably the #2 action star in the world, and 2: the only people who are likely to see this are committed Seagal fans anyway.Contrary to lazy stereotypes, Seagal's recent output (excluding Machete, post-2002's Half Past Dead, which I believe was his last in theater release) has been mixed, leaning towards bad and really bad. Still, there were some standouts in that context (I'm thinking of 2007's Pistol Whipped, but I haven't watched most of his movies since 2002), and to be blunt, a lot of his movies before that weren't really much good either (Glimmer Man in particular was godawful and objectively worse than Born to Raise Hell). Also worth noting is that according to IMDb, this film cost about $10 million while Half Past Dead had a budget of only $13 million, which considering it was filmed in California, as opposed to Romania, is surely not that much more. I'm all for gratuitous ridicule of Seagal, but if you're even considering watching this movie you bear some responsibility for his output.BTRH was actually better than I expected. The "avid fart" camera-work mentioned by an earlier reviewer is in full effect and somewhat annoying but you get used to it pretty quickly. The film quality itself is surprisingly high for a recent Seagal film, it's not overly dark and the visuals are crisp. Seagal is given credit for writing the script and his girlfriend is young enough to be his granddaughter (don't worry, Seagal doesn't take off his shirt), and there are a few cringe-inducing lines praising himself that are showing off Steven Seagal's personal insecurities. Even so, the dialogue is generally not bad (except with his girlfriend, where it's off the charts unbelievably bad). There's even one character who's intentionally funny. The acting in general is also of a quality one would expect from a decent movie, although as an earlier reviewer pointed out, Seagal is hardly acting at all. Indeed, he's the single weakest link in the whole movie; not because he's a terrible actor but because his character was basically unnecessary in the first place. He could have been replaced with anyone or no one. Without spoiling anything, the ending, and Seagal's role in it, is also jaw-droppingly terrible, although since the plot is very uneven throughout this doesn't affect the film as much as it should.All this leads up to an interesting conclusion: Seagal is not making the same movie over and over again, not really. What he (accidentally?) wrote was a movie that could potentially have raised a lot of interesting questions about a visceral response to torture, stereotypes of a Gypsy criminal in Romania (the worst criminal is a Gypsy), and the US's international drug war. Instead he's tried to fit this film, complete by itself, into the straitjacket of a Seagal beatdown film and it's disappointing (to the film's credit, Seagal is not constantly on screen and this allows other characters to develop, though I suspect this was more the result of poor pacing on the writer's part than good writing). What this movie needed most was an editor for the script.As far as Seagal's actual beatdowns, they're fairly good, if a little overly one-sided even for Seagal. Stunt doubles are employed for a lot of neck-down shots of Seagal fight scenes, but that's all the more disappointing because despite Seagal's weight and age, he is also shown to be personally capable of credible aikido moves. Seagal is definitely overweight but not the walking corpse he was in some recent films, so there's that.Finally, there's the matter of language. The film is virtually entirely in English. I have never been to Romania but I'm pretty sure Romanians don't speak English to each other in their own homes. Considering every actor portraying a Romanian was Romanian with one exception, it would have made sense, and added to the believability, if they just spoke Romanian to each other and used subtitles. Seagal (who's spending so much time in that country anyway he might as well learn the language himself) could just have the good fortune of only encountering people who also speak English.BTRH is not a good film, but neither is it a complete crapfest. If you're a fan of Seagal, don't miss it.

Steven Seagal is sitting down in his favorite Romanian restaurant with his 19-year old blonde girl-friend; he is wearing his favorite turtle-neck and leather jacket combination for the occasion. When he is done ordering for him and her from a dodgy-looking waiter ("She's having what I'm having, because I'm totally awesome. - What I'm having? I don't know, what are you having?"), two even more dodgy-looking pony-tailed Albanians pop up, and certainly not to sell roses...So Steven tries to get up, falls over - almost into a fire - because for some reason unknown to the viewer, he suddenly seems to be wearing no less than FOUR TURTLENECK SWEATERS! So his stunt-double is trying to get up while Steve is fighting off two dodgy-looking Albanians and multiple turtlenecks. On top of that he's wearing a MASSIVE bullet-proof SHIELD that leaves room for about seven more turtlenecks and two more leather jackets! Just as everything gets get way too complicated on the eyes, ears and brain, the muscles take over and get the job done! Steven Seagal's hand muscles - in extreme close-up: supreme slapping by Steve! Every other Balkan-type is effortlessly brushed aside with a top-spin backhand.Steve pushes a few more - also some innocent looking staff - out of the window and takes his stone-faced trophy by the hand. "This is why I hate eating out," he groans as he walks out of the place.And he is so right. Putting on multiple turtlenecks, two or three leather jackets and a kevlar suit two times the size of Oprah Winfrey must be a hassle - let alone the fans that want a word, an autograph or a smack in the face ("Please, Steve - It would be an honor!"). Add that to the fact that it takes him about five minutes to get a bite of food down. Steve is practically unable to breathe during dinner and he has to rely on ancient eastern meditation techniques to stay alive!No - bothering the maestro during a meal is certainly not a good plan. Don't do it kids, stay in school! Don't do Steven Seagal. Well, not unless you're 18, or until you're 16. Or before you're totally awesome. Like the pony-tailed sushi-chef extra-ordinaire himself, the man whose hair has miraculously started to grow back since 1988, after a mystical experience at a Rick Astley concert. The man we have all learned to love, in spite and because of everything he is, was, and will be.If one time, the day comes that I am to meet him, I will not kneel and kiss his feet - no siree Bob! I will stay out of his way, because I'm afraid he will do something unexpected , like quote Shakespeare. And that would not be right. Because, not only is Steven Frederic Seagal an outstanding thespian in his own right and time and place in time and space, he's an excellent auteur as well. So there is absolutely no in him quoting a fellow playwright. Hah! Having said that and having said this and having said earlier that what I'm saying right now may or may not be entirely according to the truth as we know it , I rest my case.