Ah, back to the simple times. Back to the simple movies. Movies that deal with serious issues, but not as realistic as they could be. For a movie with a small budget, it was pretty good. I was buying a few VHS's at Vintage Stock when I saw the title. I'm a big fan of movies and documentaries that deal with the war on drugs because while I'm opposed to meth, cocaine, heroin, and pills, I have supported the NORML for 6 years. Many narcotics were illegalized in the late 1930's in America. Yet we still haven't even begun to make much of an impact. Most of the emphasis is put on marijuana, which is why we didn't make an impact during the crack epidemic, and there's no sign that we will with meth because in order to do so you must not discriminate.
But enough about politics. This movie is about a DEA agent in a foreign country going undercover in a cocaine ring. He's constantly insulting and threatening the kingpins, who apparently don't know how to their job. For example, if I worked under Escobar and I get screwed out of some money, the last thing I want to say to someone like him is, "One way or another, I'm going to get it from you. Just wait and see." I would be killed so fast, I wouldn't see it coming. So instead of the kingpin having the main character executed while he's surrounded by his personal army, he allows him to leave and waits to sends very few dimwitted thugs who easily get beaten. They put up less of a fight than the rape victim from Deliverance.
There is also one pointless scene where the main character is walking to a bar and is offered an Uzi from someone on the street. For no reason at all, he takes the gun, looks at it, puts it between the guy's lips and say's no. Come on, the man was just making an offer. Typical DEA agent! That's not what he's being paid for! This man is more cocky than the freaking' criminals are.
Anyway, he hooks up with his girlfriend, they escape death a few times, they have sex, protect a politician, etc. Then, they both get kidnapped. He gets briefly tortured and she gets smacked around. He escapes torture as easily as Seagal in Above the Law because these gangsters or whatever can't fight.
Now we get to the end of the film where our hero must rescue his girl who is kept alive even after he arrives at their "trap." You're supposed to use the woman he loves to lure him and then get rid of both of them. What's the point of keeping her alive while the hero is killing all of your men. Aren't these criminals supposed to be ruthless. I'm sorry, but I hate it when the bad guys have this much mercy. Why not do what Death Wish IV did, kill the girl just seconds before Bronson gets his man. Teach the viewers that you can't always get a happy ending.
Just like in Commando, there is no moment where you are given any doubt as to whether the hero will prevail or not. It just seems way too easy. Movies like this need some kind of tragedy or else they become forgotten or uninteresting. When the hero's woman is killed, the audience feels for him. Braveheart is a good example of this. When Wallace's wife's throat is slit, the audience is captured and their mouths drop wide open. This movie, as entertaining as it is, left me a little disappointed. It was as predictable as a made-for-TV movie and leaves you wondering what difference was made. So he destroyed the supply. What else? Did he go after the others? Were troops brought in? Did drug use decline in this country? Oh, what am I saying? They probably went back to their original plan: Spraying the crops with poison, even though it only affects the users.
But enough about politics. This movie is about a DEA agent in a foreign country going undercover in a cocaine ring. He's constantly insulting and threatening the kingpins, who apparently don't know how to their job. For example, if I worked under Escobar and I get screwed out of some money, the last thing I want to say to someone like him is, "One way or another, I'm going to get it from you. Just wait and see." I would be killed so fast, I wouldn't see it coming. So instead of the kingpin having the main character executed while he's surrounded by his personal army, he allows him to leave and waits to sends very few dimwitted thugs who easily get beaten. They put up less of a fight than the rape victim from Deliverance.
There is also one pointless scene where the main character is walking to a bar and is offered an Uzi from someone on the street. For no reason at all, he takes the gun, looks at it, puts it between the guy's lips and say's no. Come on, the man was just making an offer. Typical DEA agent! That's not what he's being paid for! This man is more cocky than the freaking' criminals are.
Anyway, he hooks up with his girlfriend, they escape death a few times, they have sex, protect a politician, etc. Then, they both get kidnapped. He gets briefly tortured and she gets smacked around. He escapes torture as easily as Seagal in Above the Law because these gangsters or whatever can't fight.
Now we get to the end of the film where our hero must rescue his girl who is kept alive even after he arrives at their "trap." You're supposed to use the woman he loves to lure him and then get rid of both of them. What's the point of keeping her alive while the hero is killing all of your men. Aren't these criminals supposed to be ruthless. I'm sorry, but I hate it when the bad guys have this much mercy. Why not do what Death Wish IV did, kill the girl just seconds before Bronson gets his man. Teach the viewers that you can't always get a happy ending.
Just like in Commando, there is no moment where you are given any doubt as to whether the hero will prevail or not. It just seems way too easy. Movies like this need some kind of tragedy or else they become forgotten or uninteresting. When the hero's woman is killed, the audience feels for him. Braveheart is a good example of this. When Wallace's wife's throat is slit, the audience is captured and their mouths drop wide open. This movie, as entertaining as it is, left me a little disappointed. It was as predictable as a made-for-TV movie and leaves you wondering what difference was made. So he destroyed the supply. What else? Did he go after the others? Were troops brought in? Did drug use decline in this country? Oh, what am I saying? They probably went back to their original plan: Spraying the crops with poison, even though it only affects the users.