One of my all time favorites.

Just perfect...

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

A superior sequel to Chuck's first Vietnam effort, this is a small-scale drama of prison camp torture and escape, the second half packed with simplistic but pleasing action as Norris kills off dozens of enemy soldiers and generally acts as a hero. Yes, this is violent bone-breaking stuff with graphic head shots, people burning, and a protracted finale which just about celebrates Norris causing extreme bodily harm to his enemy. The tortures (rats are placed in bags over prisoner's heads, living men are burnt) are brutal in the extreme and give the movie a hard edge. The realistic jungle locations give the feeling that this was filmed in the middle of a sweaty tropical inferno somewhere and add to the experience.Norris reprises his role as Colonel Braddock in what is a prequel to the first film, explaining how he managed to escape from the bad guys. The escape is exhilarating as it should be, and fans of the revenge genre will be in their element - this offers up the same kind of "kill everything that moves" moral that Arnie's COMMANDO so superbly displayed. The supporting cast are pretty good and each fits into their respective character with ease. Soon-Tek Oh's dastardly Colonel Yip is a baddie you love to hate, one of the nastiest opponents of Norris' film career and a real swine. Familiar faces include Steven Williams as a captive who turns on his friends, and Professor Toru Tanaka (previously in AN EYE FOR AN EYE with Norris), sadly underused as a heavy. This is mindless but entertaining '80s fare, not for those easily offended but a darned adrenaline-pumping time for those who aren't.

Oddly enough, then this sequel to the 1985 "Missing in Action" movie was actually the best of the entire trilogy. Why is that? Well, pure and simple because it is set to be a prequel to the first movie, and we follow Colonel Braddock during his time in the Vietnam War where he was captured and held at a P.O.W. camp.The storyline was simple, for sure, but it worked out quite well, because the movie had a good continuous flow to it, and the characters were very detailed and came off as being believable characters.Chuck Norris manages to establish the Colonel James Braddock character as a memorable character with "Missing in Action 2: The Beginning", and he does a good job in this movie, both in acting and action sequences.It should also be said that the movie does include other good talents on the cast list, especially Soon-Tek Oh as Colonel Yin, the leader of the Vietnamese camp."Missing in Action 2: The Beginning" is the best of the trilogy because it puts the audience into the Vietnam War and right alongside with Colonel Braddock in the P.O.W. camp, which is what we want to see, and not some political drama about retrieving possible prisoners of war.

We all know Braddock was Missing In Action (1984). But this sequel - actually a prequel - fills us in on just what went on in the brutal prison camp he was imprisoned in. Braddock and his fellow soldiers are routinely tortured and subjected to harsh, cruel, and sadistic practices, thanks to maniacal commander, Col. Yin (Oh) and his sidekick Lao (Tanaka). Will Braddock escape to see freedom? (Actually, you know he will, because this is a prequel, but just ignore that).The fans clamored for more Braddock, and more Braddock is what they got with this sequel/prequel. Cannon provided more jungle action and Prerequisite Torture with that trademark Reagan-style patriotism that we've all come to know and love. There's even stock footage of Reagan in the actual movie. It could definitely be argued that this sequel is superior to the original, because the plot is more streamlined, and the final fight between Chuck and Soon-Tek Oh absolutely delivers the goods. The movie primarily takes place in one location - the prison camp - and you see their travails, everything from Punchfighting to dealing with Professor Toru Tanaka. He's a fan favorite and his presence improves the proceedings.Like the first film, you kind of have to wait for any substantial action, but when it comes, it's a true crowd pleaser. Adding to this, you get to see the origin of Chuck's beard. When he was first captured in 1972, he did not have a beard. But he had to grow one in captivity because Col. Yin did not provide razors. Apparently, he liked the way he looked, so he kept it. Because of Chuck's long hair and beard, and the way he's treated, in Missing In Action 2: The Beginning there are certainly some parallels to the story of Jesus. Think about it.Director Lance Hool, who was credited with writing and producing credits on the first film, here steps into the director's chair with successful results. He obviously understands the Braddock character and that's probably why he got the gig. Once again Aaron Norris is on board for stunt work, as is fan favorite John Barrett. Dean Ferrandini, usually part of the stunt team, here steps in front of the camera in the role of Kirtle. It appears everyone knew what they were doing and did their best to expand the story of Braddock, and it certainly worked.It was released in one of those cool MGM/Cannon silver big boxes, so the collectability factor is high. But the movie is definitely worth seeing, as is the first one. But the highest heights of Braddock were yet to come: the final installment of the trilogy was still three years away.

This movie has lot more story to it than the part 1.Most of the scenes in this movie are beautiful. On the average, Golan-Globus made some of the best quality budget movies of the '80s. Many of them had compelling titles that made you want to go to the theaters and take a look regardless of the content. Chuck Norris' chronic sour expression spoils the mood of this movie. He's supposed to be the hero, so lighten up Chuck, we don't want to be depressed watching you.Soon Tak Oh was great as the villain. The inevitable duel in the end was one of the most memorable martial arts combat scene of the decade.Good movie that could have been better if Chuck wasn't so down all the time, but part 3 answers to that.