www.testfreaks.com

Reviews, reviews, reviews...

Special-forces-dvd.34016133
7.0 out of 10

Special Forces

Best Price at Amazon

Reviews and Problems with Special Forces

Showing 1-10 of 13
Overall 1
1.0

Was this made by the US military?

olddirtyspatula, IMDb
8 May 2013
  • Summary: This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen, and I spent my teen years watching Troma films and other crap horror. Actually the only reason I looked it up on IMDb after seeing it on a bus ride is because I seriously wondered if it was made by the US military, the patriotism was so over-the top. I mean, come on.
  • Read full review
Overall 10
10

Classic Special Forces Flick

sydneyswesternsuburbs, IMDb
16 June 2011
  • Summary: Director Isaac Florentine who also created other classic flicks, Undisputed 2 2006, Undisputed 3 2010, Ninja 2009, Ninja: Shadow of a Tear 2013 and another classic special forces flick, US Seals 2 2001 has created another gem in Special Forces. It stars Marshal Teague who has also been in another classic special forces flick, The Rock 1996 and the classic flick, Armageddon 1998 and Isaac Florentines US Seals 2.
  • Read full review

"Smoking will kill ya!"

Comeuppance Reviews, IMDb
27 December 2010
  • Summary: Far and away the best of the American Heroes series. If the other films only followed this one's lead, the series as a whole would be a lot better. But luckily for Special Forces, it stands alone as the clear winner. Jess (Abell), Bear (Clark), Wyatt (Mittleider), and Reyes (T.J. Rotolo) are an elite counter-terrorism team. They are under the command of Major Don Harding (Teague).
  • Read full review

Another winner from Isaac Florentine and Nu Image

Wizard-8, IMDb
22 September 2010
  • Summary: (Preface: Don't confuse this "Special Forces" movie with the Daniel Bernhardt "Special Forces" movie!) I like movies from the Nu Image filmstudio, and I also like movies directed by action king Isaac Florentine, so I knew I had to watch this. I was not disappointed. I will freely admit that this movie is not perfect. The CGI effects are obvious and clunky. There is little written to differentiate the protagonists from each other, and the bad guys are stock characters.
  • Read full review
Overall 1
1.0

The only way to like it is being on drugs, heavy ones.

Marcio Martins, IMDb
5 January 2008
  • Summary: This is certainly the most awful movie ever done. The action scenes are expensive and ridiculous, five guys fight an army in open field with a van. A helicopter is destroyed and the same army who did it can't destroy the van. The enemies jump in the air ridiculously when shot, a guy kills a lot of people with a punch in the stomach or opening a door strongly against them. The acting on this film is terrible, the direction is horrible.
  • Read full review
Overall 1
1.0

So ******* bad!

MankiBoi, IMDb
14 December 2005
  • Summary: I happened to see it last night, and I watched it just because it was so horrible. I don't get it. Why producers waste 1,3 mil $ on complete trash like that? No originality at all. Stupid enemy soldiers, who preferred to run towards Americans rather than shoot at them. So it's kind of miracle, how they managed to kill most of American soldiers. They also look all the same, probably there were total 10 actors who died at least 5 times in different scenes.
  • Read full review
Overall 1
1.0

One of the worst war movies of all time.

hukatus, IMDb
12 December 2005
  • Summary: One of the first things i have to say - this movie is just awful, horrible acting combined with terrible script. all the shooting scenes are as unrealistic as it can get. the bad guys cant hit the good guys even at the distance of 10 meters. bad guys holding their AK assault rifles always storm towards the good guys waiting to be shot and killed. WHY Aren't THEY SHOOTING? maybe this is because many of the bad guys have wooden weapons.
  • Read full review

One of the worst military movies in terms of filming, scenario and realism i've ever seen.

n1x0n, IMDb
13 April 2004
  • Summary: The only reason i've watched this badly filmed, cheap military action, is that another IMDB member said that there is "an unusual amount of detail & competence" in this movie. Neither detail, neither competence however can be found in it! There's total lack of realism, behaviour of the special force squad is against all army regulations and common sense! Weapon handling is comic, and ballistics are absolutely fake.
  • Read full review

Shockingly decent, balances realism with fantasy

ipkevin, IMDb
6 February 2004
  • Summary: [Note that there are 2 different direct-to-video movies named "Special Forces". One of them stars Daniel Bernhardt (Bloodsport sequels, Matrix Reloaded) and has a black & white cover. This one stars Marshall Teague and is a bit newer.] I cannot believe it. Isaac Florentine's "Special Forces" may be the first low budget, direct-to-video action movie to succeed in satisfying the military/gun nuts, the martial arts fans, and general action fans all at once.
  • Read full review
Overall 7
7.0

"a stylized movie that manages to push the limit on action filmmaking and stands apart from your standard independent action film."

donrw, IMDb
17 July 2003
  • Summary: Director Isaac Florentine's follow-up to his cult hit, U.S. Seals 2 revisits America's military with more Hong Kong style action and martial arts. Budgeted at a mere $1.3 million, Special Forces manages to push the limit on action filmmaking within a grimly patriotic story set in the shadow of the bloody Bosnian-Serbian conflict. Although unrelated to U.S. Seals 2, Marshall R.
  • Read full review
Next page >>