Best movie of this year hands down!

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

I wanted to start my review by "Steven Seagal rides again", but it's actually more like "Steven Seagal fails again !", because come to think of it, the last movie where Seagal did right, was long time ago, and since years, he's doing the same poor movie, time after time, with lower and lower action, rather effort, from his side, every time ! You can stand many negative points, as long as the positive points are more. So, let's play what's negative and positive in Seagal. It's a universal fact that Seagal can't act. No problem. Many action stars can't too. Seagal is incredibly cold. On the contrary of what you think, that may serve his movie-character, enhancing it with peculiarity. Seagal is unattractive, with uncombed hair and obvious paunch. So what ? Bud Spencer had that, yet he was charismatic, with a devil of a smile and millions of fans. Seagal isn't funny. Come on, Charles Bronson used to be an action hero, till the age of 70 something, while having no sense of humor, or doing a comedy. Let alone that Seagal mocked at himself numerously, in movies like My Giant (1998), and The Onion Movie (2008). Seagal doesn't work with major studios anymore. Don't bother yourself, as since the 2000s start, he makes from 2 to 4 direct-to-video movies per year, producing all of them, so his career is continuous, and his name is still there. Seagal is whispering instead of talking. Get out here, you go to his movies to watch good fights and action sequences, not listing to anything but bullets and explosions, and arguably his whispering voice can be intimidating and a proof of scary confidence. As you see, I was too indulgent, all the way. BUT, when Mr. Seagal makes movies, where he doesn't hit somebody by himself, or even speak with his own voice, then I must scream AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!! Because this way, it isn't about having many negative points, IT'S ABOUT NOT HAVING ANYTHING POSITIVE ANYMORE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!First of all, I don't hate Out of Reach's script. I think in the right hands, it could have been wonderful and huge. Kind of early Taken, which would be produced 4 years later. I loved the main conflict, the unspoken language of the girl; with always smart ciphers, and the idea of ending the movie with a climactic fencing. However, everything else was hateful. The production is wretched to the utmost. The sets are have-not. How to make an action movie in so tight places ? You can swear that the cameraman was squeezed while shooting a lot of scenes. And you read that it cost 20 million dollar to make ?? Most probably, 19 million were Seagal's salary, and 18 million of them he spent on his food ! The performance is between usual, bad, and very bad. I won't forget Matt Schulze as the evil man. He was truly evil, yet to the whole schools of acting all over the world ! Here's a guy who thinks he's evil by goggling, screaming, and – let's not overlook – spitting ! The heroine is there in utterly inserted way. Save the first laconic fight, there is no action. That climactic fencing ends before it starts. It's crystal clear that watching a Seagal movie for enjoying some action has become fruitless lately. I believe they used dubbed voice for Seagal, not due to "changing the story after most of the movie was shot", as I read, but for substituting Seagal's unheard voice with more audible one, and adding some one-liners to make the movie look funnier or cooler. And when you hear Seagal dubbed over by a voice-over artist, you have to furiously ask; what's left for that guy to do ?? I know. Putting his picture on the posters to fool some of the most miserable viewers out there, whom are ignorant enough to know the ugly truth, incapable of finding better movies, or – worse – still have faith in the late Steven Seagal ! Seagal once said : "I have been able to make Above the Law (1988) which was a politically conscientious movie. And On Deadly Ground (1994) which was environmentally conscientious movie. So I want to keep making movies like that, which are more geared with a certain entertainment value, but also bring people forward into contemplation". OK. According to that, Out of Reach has the least entertainment value, plus it brought me forward into contemplation concerning how Seagal and his movies grow more and more deprived of any discernible talent during the last 15 years ! This is very little to entertain. And you have to bear a lot of diminishing factors to finish it as well. So, consider it an unimpressive episode of Without a Trace, or a special one of The Biggest Loser !! Finally, Seagal's pen-pal in the movie, played by Ida Nowakowska, said describing him, in the movie's last line "He's not one for words". I can describe Seagal, in the last half of his movies, as someone who's not for words, or acting, or action, OR ANYTHING !

Steven Seagal stars as a former CSA agent, William Lansing, who discovers an orphan girl he corresponds with, Irena(Ida Nowakowska) has been kidnapped by Poland human traffickers, joining forces with a Warsaw detective, Kasia(Agnieszka Wagner) to find her(and to stop this whole sleazy operation by eliminating all those involved). Matt Schulze is the loathsome creep, Colonel Faisal, behind the whole human trafficking network, with plenty of foreign clientèle willing to pay big bucks for pretty girls yet of age. The CSA must be some sort of shadowy organization who send out assassins to remove specific targets for political reasons. It's a past Lansing wishes to cleanse himself of, yet those who were once his associates, will not allow him to. Robbie Gee is a former partner, Lewis, who seems to have a shaky history with Lansing. Actually, OUT OF REACH is one of Seagal's lesser violent outings, and his character is more humane and tender-hearted than in other action fare where he annihilates a host of scumbags. Sure there's a shootout in a high class brothel, but there aren't a vast number of action set-pieces Seagal flicks are known for. I think the choice of villains, both the human traffickers and the CSA willing to help out these cretins to remove "an old dog who needs to be put out of his misery", are perfect slime for Seagal to euthanize. Still, you would expect, for instance, a major set piece to erupt in the Turkish Embassy Ball, or in that enormous castle where Faisal has laid down roots, but really there are few adrenaline-pumping sequences showing men being blown apart by bullets or hoods getting pummeled by Seagal. I'm frank in that these flicks, which are most often than not generic and predictable, should at least give us what we expect. Anyway, the climax where Lansing and Faisal duel, with swords(Faisal is a fencing geek) as Irena watches, is less than spectacular. Schulze is all growl and no bite. That's been a major problem, I think, in many of Seagal's films, a worthy adversary for his heroes to combat. While Seagal continues the always reliable "silent, man of few words" routine, I thought he had good chemistry with Wagner. Jan Plazalski portrays a kid named Nikki who was in the orphanage at the time the girls were carted off to be potential call girls in training, assisting Lansing with identifying those involved in despicable operation.

I am being very generous here giving it a 5.... It was not great, but at the same time it was not terrible either..... It did have some good action scenes that were done by Seagal himself.However the story line is typical, and the dubbing in his voice for added scenes (?) was just horrible and shows how low budget this movie is... I cant say much els about the movie, it was OK at best.... keep in mind I am basing this off his last few movies that were just horrible.... Foreigner, out for a kill etc etc... compared to those it was actually enjoyable. Its still not even close to his standard of movies like Out for Justice, Glimmer Man, Above the Law but we know what were getting from steven now and if this is all were getting then I thought it was actually OK.

Anybody know why Steven Seagal had to have his voice dubbed by another actor? It was terribly distracting and took away from my enjoyment of the movie.I have been to other sites and I am unable to get an answer to this question. Otherwise the movie had a certain appeal as the now famous Segal is able to take care of all evil in short order. I just don't understand his losing control over his own work to this extent. Is it possible that he just didn't care? The thought crossed my mind that once he walked away from filming he did not have the time to fix it. If true this is a sloppy and disrespectful way to treat loyal fans who expect better from their hero.