Belly of the Beast (2003 Video) User Reviews (97)

Should be given credit for the upsides

[jofitz27 · 6/10 · 10 June 2005]

I cannot remember a recent "Steven Segal" movie in the cinema, or anywhere near publicised. The last one even close was "Half Past Dead", a mediocre yet fun action flick about Alacatraz if my memory serves correctly.

I rented "Belly of The Beast" for some Friday-night fun. And that is exactly what I got. Endlessly terrible and cheesy but fantastic at the same time, this is Steven Segal reaching new lo's in acting but highs in martial arts and action sequences. He kicks the hell out of anything he see's in bloodthirsty fashion, in some very inventive and surprisingly sadistic fashion (in one scene, he pushes a guy in hugely OTT fashion across a line of fish in ice-cubes into a meat hook- the '15' UK certificate is questionable). But still, this manages to be fun.

The plot is non-existent, as it turns in predictably bad fashion in any excuse to get Segal fighting, but this is hopeful- it proves this 50 year old overweight guy may have something left in him.

3 out of 5

Seagal should get in shape

[sveknu · 4/10 · 19 July 2005]

Even though Steven Seagal has made movies who are much worse than this, this is still far from being his best work. I wonder if the whole movie was made just for self-ironical reasons (remember, Seagal fortunately has a lot of self-irony). The main problem is that Seagal is too fat too be a real action-star right now. Some of the fights in this movie still are pretty cool, but there are just something that isn't there. Maybe it's because some of the fights are so overdone so that everyone know that it isn't Mr.Seagal doing most of it anyway? The worst part about the fighting is the roundhouse kicks. Even though they're rather cool, they're as far from the typical Seagal fighting style that it's possible to be. And you never see Steven's face when these are performed..........................

The story is standard, but that's totally OK. No one cares too much about that anyway in a movie like this. This is in fact one of Seagal's best movies after "Exit Wounds". That doesn't mean that this one is any good, because some of the others are pure garbage.

Ong Bak - Stevie Seagal Version

[CelluloidRehab · 4/10 · 4 March 2005]

From the director of Chinese Ghost Story and Naked Weapon (and collaborator in the action scenes from Hero and House of the Flying Daggers), we have a story about an ex-CIA agent who's daughter is kidnapped. Its not just any ex-CIA agent, but Steven Seagal. Yes !! Pony-tail is back, BACK WITH A VENGEANCE. (Sorry, I had to do that).

This is your typical action movie, usually based on some revenge/honor theme, where the hero has to take out dozens to hundreds of henchman and usually a "Boss" character, or several. The acting is atrocious and all we are left with is the action (and a lot of wire-work). Steven brought his typical dead-pan/Prozac acting along. This movie is not going to be on anybody's Christmas list, however, it is hysterical and very very light. I was laughing the whole way through the movie.

Steven Seagal is looking to do some major butt-kicking. Unfortunately, most of the serious butt-kicking is done by a much younger, thinner man (the stunt guy is actually wearing fake fat to look like Steven), who has a lot more physical talent than Steven had in his prime. This is further compounded by the fact that the stunt man performs stunts that Steven could never perform (jump kicks, jump spin kick, and all other stunts involving jumping high).

The movie seems to have been filmed entirely in Bangkok, Thailand and recruited what seems to be the entire cast of Onk Bak, minus Tony Jaa. The wheelchair boss and Don the drug dealer stand out in my mind.

There are somethings about the movie that bother me. Steven (who is the star of the movie) looks like he just woke up in Bangkok after weeks of binging on milkshakes and vodka, with no money and no change of clothes. He looks dirty and grimy. I wouldn't sit next to him on the subway if he looked like that. Next, what was up with the Steven's gun? He seemed to have a magic weapon. This weapon fires anywhere from 30-50 bullets and rarely needs another clip. Also Steven has become such a big star, he no longer needs to aim his weapon. He just fires in the general direction of his target. Steven's sex scene was certainly interesting. It made me quite nauseous. Shoving toothpicks under my fingernails is pleasurable as compared to watching Steven has sex. The cinematography was quite strange. I didn't realize the same guy who did certain Outer Limit and Star Trek episodes was still alive (tilt the camera 45 degrees). The wire action becomes ridiculous, especially when you are trying to make a somewhat realistic action movie (imagine what one would think if Tony Jaa jumped 10 feet straight in the air and did 2 full revolutions). I also like the variation on Thai boxing : Thai Transvestite Claws and High Heels Boxing. Not only that, what was the deal with all the mystical crap introduced 10 minutes before the end of the movie, complete with with a Thai Mako impersonator who had taken too much PCP ??

One may think from my review that I hated this movie. This is not true. This is the funniest movie I've seen since Shaun of the Dead, unfortunately that movie was trying to be funny. I do recommend this movie as a rental,a discount-bin purchase, or a late night cable session while completely wasted.

-Celluloid Rehab

Not great but much better than Seagal's films have been of late

[bob the moo · 10 April 2004]

Jake Hopper is ex-CIA who retired from the job after a bad shooting incident, although he still does work on the side for an old Agency buddy. When his daughter is kidnapped along with her friend (a Senator's daughter) while on a backpacking holiday in the far east, Jake's contact tells him. With official channels working to get the girls' back, Jake joins up with his old partner and begins trawling the underworld looking for the gang that has his girl.

Despite getting consistently burnt, I keep on coming back to Steven Seagal films - I can't help it. I always go to the video store (for that is where Seagal now resides) looking for something to veg out in front of that will entertain me without challenging or stimulating me; it is a sad condemnation of Seagal films that they rarely manage to do even that most basic of requests. However, in some regards, Belly of the Beast is actually a reasonable film. The plot is pretty standard and relies on nonsense to move it forwards - stuck with no clues, a girl approaches Jake with a mystery tattoo on her naked chest that only appears when she gets wet! Talk about an excuse for nudity! This sort of plot device is over used; too often the film has things just happen for a way of moving the plot forward.

The plot is poorly developed and it also has elements that just seem to have been thrown in in order to fulfil the formula. The love interest is one good example of an element that is silly and simply doesn't work. What does work is the action. For once in recent Seagal films, the fight scenes are actually pretty enjoyable even if they do overdo the slowmo effects. Seagal himself is quite effective; despite his weight gain he manages to move quite well here - even if most of it involves upper body work rather than full motion.

As an actor though, Seagal is about as bad as ever: his emotional range is rubbish, as seen in his reaction when told his daughter has been kidnapped (`you don't say' he blankly emotes!). He even is blank when kissing the gorgeous Lo - so what hope is there for him? Having said that, the worst moment in the film is one that is another actor's fault. In one scene Seagal is dubbed by an actor who sounds nothing like him - it is a laughable moment and a sad comment on the effort Seagal is putting into his films now (unable or unwilling to show up for ADR). Luckily for him, his support cast is OK. Mann's sidekick is good and Wu makes for a decent bad guy despite having very low screen time. Monica Lo is very beautiful and sexy - just a shame that her scenes where she gradually falls for Seagal make more for laughter than passion! Even these few good performances are still pretty basic though and the standard is no better than Seagal's usual stuff.

Overall, if you watch Seagal films a lot, then this will probably be better than you are used to, despite not actually being that good a film. The acting, script and plotting are as poor as you would expect but it is in the action stakes where this film improves upon his recent efforts. Understand that this is still not saying a great deal in my opinion but it still makes the film a lot better to have well choreographed and quite exciting fight scenes. If you have to watch a recent Seagal film, then this is probably the one to pick.

This film is awful on so many levels...

[Sanctimonious_Bakuto · 1/10 · 28 July 2010]

This is just one of those films where you cry out 'Please let it end!'. I mean, everything about the movie was absolutely abysmal. But let me start from the top.

Plot. There was none. The kidnapping of Jake Hopper's daughter is just another lame excuse for Steven Seagal to go on another of his ass-kicking adventures. Apart from that the 'plot' is completely predictable with Jake wreaking havoc in Thailand whilst leaving hundreds, if not thousands, of enemy corpses sprawled in a bloody trail throughout the film.

The most awful aspect of this film, however, is Steven Seagal himself. His lack of acting talent and facial expressions, of which he has just one, never ceases to amaze me. In this film he has made an extra effort to be exceptionally bad, especially in his action scenes, during which he unleashes his super-powers which involve a sophisticated cat fight technique (which I assume is meant to be kung-fu), a power punch (specifically designed to send helpless enemies flying 20 feet across the room) and deadly lightning speed accuracy which his favourite pistol which seems to have an immaculately large clip size considering the number of negligent enemies he managed to shoot without having to reload it at any time during the film. The only thing that Steven Seagal lacks, in fact, is a change of clothes, as the only clothing we see him wear is his trusty brown leather shoes, jeans and sensei top combo, which remains spotless despite the blood spewing out from dying enemies.

Another factor is the special effects of the film, which is limited to spilled ketchup leaking out in a tap-like fashion to represent blood and Steven Seagal jumping through paper thin walls, one of which was the iron side panelling of a train. The rest of the action in the film is left up to a group of actors just as awful as Steven himself, but with added stupidity. I could bet that a five year old playing Cowboys and Indians in his back yard could make a better impression of dying compared to that in the film. The hordes of enemies have no organisation whatsoever and more or less run at machine gun fire head on, and are surprised to be cut down. And then, just as the final nail in the coffin, we witness the blatantly predictable and cheesy death of Jake's best friend Sunti, of which no-one can realise that he was even hurt until before he was dead.

The movie is also not without its astonishing selection of completely random scenes that leave you wondering 'why?'. Most notable of these is the scene where a girl walks in front of Jake's car causing him to stop. She starts walking away and Jake instinctively follows her into a random house (I mean, why wouldn't you?). Here the girl removes her top and pours water over her bare chest to reveal her magical water tattoo consisting of five or so incomprehensible characters which Jake seems to understand. This is clearly just a poor excuse at a topless scene for the film, which has absolutely no relevance whatsoever. Another similar event is the introduction of magic and voodoo at the end of the film, which has no impact on the action scene, but succeeds solely in making the film just that extra bit more unbearable to watch.

Seriously, for the love of God, don't watch this film unless you are strapped down to a chair with your eyes forced open. For a proper gun and kung fu action film just pop down to your local DVD rental and get a classic Jackie Chan movie, and save yourself an hour and a half of your life, which you will most probably sorely regret once it is this film is over.

Wait, this is supposed to be good?

[reverendtom · 4/10 · 5 December 2006]

First things first, I love the classic Seagal movies. I own every one on DVD from Above the Law to Exit Wounds. Since then, Seagal hasn't made one good film. I couldn't believe that his output had gotten so bad, so I was researching his stv output on IMDb and trying to see which one was the best of the trash pile. Lots of hardcore Seagal fans seemed to like this one, so I rented it. What a forgettable mess. There are little glimmers of hope here and there, but overall this is garbage. If this is good compared to his other films of the past four years, he's really in trouble. The only other STV Seagal films I've seen are "The Patriot": not bad but boring, and "The Foreigner": terrible. Steven, what's up man? Instead of making 10 bad movies a year, make one good one. And, I'm sorry man, but lose some weight, too.

Probably the most B.S. I've ever seen in an action movie

[actionmoviestar · 5/10 · 30 May 2005]

"Belly of the Beast" isn't a great movie nor is also a bad film. I watched this film under the insistence of my friend because he said this movie was terrible so I had to see for myself. This turned out to be a pretty decent action flick. Seagal does okay in his umpteenth straight-to-video outing. It's seems as if Seagal is going to be the next king of straight-to-home video movies. In this film, the plot is nothing great, but the action scenes are pretty decent. The main problem with this film is that it was too unrealistic at points. ****CONTAINS SPOILERS**** For example, Steven Seagal had never ever moved that fast on screen. Especially in the scene when he jumped through the window and fell on his back. You know that was a stunt double. If Seagal had of tried that stunt himself, he would've ended up in the hospital for about 4-6 weeks. What about that crap when the guy was shooting arrows at him and he takes out a sword and slices the arrows in half as they're being shot at him. This film is not bad, it was just unrealistic at times but hey what action movie isn't? Instead of being called "Belly of the Beast" this film should've been called "Bullsh*t of the Beast" cuz it was so much of that going on in the movie.

Is The Title Making Fun Of Seagal

[slightlymad22 · 5/10 · 13 July 2019]

Continuing my plan to watch every Steven Seagal movie, I come to Belly Of The Beast (2003)

On a whole, it is actually a whole lot better than you'd expect. The plot is a bit confusing, there are some huge plot holes and the wore work is more than a tad silly at times.

This is the first time is Seagal looks bloated, and his close ups are mostly framed to cut out his chin and hairline

But he still looks like he can kick ass. His wardrobe is on the ridiculous side again but he does seem like he still cares (I think it was Evan who said it previously) even if he uses stunt doubles and is dubbed at times.

I didn't like how the right scenes were shot (especially nor the one in the market) clearly not Seagal doing most of it.

I really like the Buddhist monk who was Seagal's friend. He was awesome, a great sidekick for Seagal. I didn't like the ending for his character at all.

Director Siu-Tung Ching filmed most of the action scenes without the involvement of Seagal, opting to film his shots last, but conflict arose when Seagal insisted on filming his shots in a way that wouldn't accommodate the existing footage. Ching is said to have left the set, taking his stunt crew with him and welcoming Seagal to finish the scene by himself. This infuriated the producers, who convinced Seagal to go along with Ching's approach.

All in all, ridiculous and totally implausible, but a watchable dtv flick.

That strange sound you hear is the bottom of the barrel being scraped

[ianlouisiana · 4/10 · 22 July 2010]

Give us a break Steve,how long do you think you can keep on getting away with this sort of stuff?This isn't merely "Direct to Video" it's "Direct to Charity Shop". But at least he's got a sense of humour - any movie of his with the word "Belly" in it is going to give his long - suffering fans a wry chortle............... Still,at least I watched it for free on TV last night. Our man is getting careless,not content with losing a son in an earlier movie he now loses his daughter,albeit to a kidnapper.Come on Steve,you really should take better care of your kids,y'know? Whoever he owes money too is certainly getting their pound of flesh.Or about 50 pounds,actually.

One of Seagal's Best!

[liammurphy1 · 7/10 · 24 April 2004]

After renting the abysmal,complicated,confusing,badly acted and edited mess that was 'The Foreigner (2003)' I thought Seagal's career was all but over, So I wasn't expecting much from this movie, and having just shelled out nearly £10 to buy it I was almost sure I'd made a huge mistake, but tonight with nothing on the TV I thought I'd give it a whirl.

What a Surprise! It kept me on the edge of my seat from start till finish even though it had a unoriginal storyline (Very similar to Arnie's 'Commando (1985)' - Seagal's a Ex-CIA Agent whose daughter Jessica just happens to be kidnapped along with her best friend Sara who is a daughter of a U.S Senator by a group of violent rebels, so Steve goes in guns blazing along with buddy turned Monk Sunti to save the day - against the advice of CIA Agent Leon Washington who wants to handle it in his own way.

The movie has a coherrent plot,plenty of action,good acting,nice locations and a moderate sized Budget ($18m)

Everything you want in a Action Flick!

Avoid Seagal's earlier effort as mentioned above and go straight to this picture My Rating *** out of *****

You'll become bulimic over this!!!

[gauntman · 2/10 · 26 March 2004]

What you get here is 38 Bullets with one stripe of ammo, the worst-acting-ever-world-record and the beastly belly of Mr. "Bud-Spencer of the 90's" Steven Seagal. Then there is the script. Anyone watch the thug in the market slip on a tomato, fall and then ACCIDENTALLY slide headfirst into a knife????? Did they legalize cocaine in Hollywood??? Anyone watch Seagal jump through the paper-thin wooden wall of the train while shooting, what, 20 rounds out of a single pistol, killing 3 men(all this in 3,5 seconds!!!)??? Seagal's films used to be so stupid that one could find some entertainment laughing about them, but this is so bad, it only makes you wanna pass out, so you can stop barfing over your sofa.

Belly of the Seagal

[philipsavory · 8/10 · 16 August 2005]

Contains Spoilers. (Like it matters) Steven Seagal is a miracle. Somehow he has made a career making the same film over and over and this is no exception.

In my opinion he is a comic genius and a shrewd businessman, he's so good he has everyone thinking he's an action star. He is master of hypnotism. When you see a DVD of his on the shelf you are always drawn to it. You read the blurb. Ex CIA agent (John/Jack/Jake, or my favourite Forrest Taft) seeks revenge on everyone for kidnapping/murder of family/environment/hostages/nuclear weapons.

You inevitably rent it and proceed to cry with laughter. In this film Seagal, jumps through a train, fights a Ladyboy(!), beats 5 ninjas just by turning around a lot and best of all slicing an arrow clean in half with a sword.

Although this film deserves special praise for giving Seagal some nookie and the chance to find a secret message hidden on a woman's breasts.

After years of trying he may have finally made his masterpiece something to rival Under Siege 2 and all those films that had three word titles, for example; Out For Justice, Hard To Kill, Above the Law, On Deadly Ground and Fire Down Below.

This is comedy to rival Chaplin, Keaton and Jean Claude Van-Damme.

As far as bad action movies go,pretty good

[veganflimgeek · 6/10 · 1 June 2004]

Belly of the beast

There are two kinds of action movies. High quality intelligent action films like The professional, The killer, Ronin or the Bourne identity all films I totally love. Then there are action films like Invasion USA and Commando which I love because they are terrible and yet still very fun. Belly of the beast may strive to be in the first category but it remains in the so bad it is good realm with other Segal classics like On deadly ground, under siege and out for justice.

While Exit wounds was not as bad as Cradle to the grave, Segal has been going down hill since Fire down below. Don't get wrong the EPA agent with the license to kill worked for me, even when he was jamming with the country band at the county fair. However as his Belly grew, his star power and screen charm has faded.

There are lots of rules for bad action hero's things to do when your career needs a boost. Now that Segal has gone to a Hong Kong director for help the only thing left to do is a movie where he fights himself. What's up Segal? Van Damme has already fought him self like 4 times. The good news is that Segal got the best goddamn fight director possible. I know Woo Ping is considered the best by many but for me Ching Siu tung the man behind the action of Hero, duel to the death, The killer and countless others would be my choice if I was making a Kung Fu film.

Not only that he is the creative director behind some very neat films like the Chinese ghost story films. His creative film making skills are on the screen as well, even in the opening scene it is displayed in interesting camera motions that makes a above average experience for a direct to video movie.

The Good: As a low brow action film I enjoyed Belly of the beast, if you don't take to serious you will too. The action is well done. The story has some cool twists, Segal and Co. made some surprising turns with the story especially in the post 9/11 world.

****Spoilers****

I am sure many hated the spiritual show down between the shaman and the monks but I thought that was a cool and original scene. Shot with tinge of Chinese ghost story it brought a smile to my face. Brave also to have the Muslim terrorists be innocent of the kidnapping and to have the CIA behind, of course Segal is the man who wrote a screenplay where the CIA had invented AIDS. I can respect a writer who always blames the CIA.

The Bad: The romance for Segal was so misplaced and stupid. Trite and unbelievable. It was done for the direct to video hormonal action fans with Asian fetishes. Does anyone really believe this young Asian woman would fall for a washed up CIA agent with gut.

The ugly: This has to be the worst example of body doubles ever. Not since the enemy within episode of Star trek(Shatner an early bad action star, I mean he fought himself?) Segal…dude… Diet, exercise, disciple. I had a hard time with this, even made worse considering the word belly is in the title.

Above average Direct to video. If you are a fan of well done bad action it's worth a hour and half of your life.

Seagal is just going through the motions, but the movie trappings are good!

[lemon_magic · 5/10 · 23 July 2005]

I've heard of hackwork, but this is getting silly. Why does this guy still have a career? It's pretty obvious that he has nothing but contempt for his audience.

The scenery and photography is great, the supporting actors are fine (especially the exotic female love interest), the plot and the writing are OK (if a little hackneyed); in other words the overall content of the movie is good B movie stuff (with some inspired directorial touches in a lot of places).

And into this potentially pleasing and exciting melange comes Steven Seagal, who sleep walks through the entire thing as if he had pressing business elsewhere and spends the entire movie with his inner dial set to 'squinty eyed tough guy' and using one of two expressions -('squinty eyed scowl' and 'eyes slightly widened'). I've watched a lot of movies (even a lot of action and martial arts movies) and I've rarely seen a lazier "lead" performance than this.

You doubt me? Check out the fight scenes - Seagal used to do nice, snappy Aikido/Aikijutsu style fight choreography, and his gunfight choreography was fast, fluid and visceral. Now he uses a stunt double for any scene involving kicking, leaping, or leg fencing. Now he seems to be pretending to be some kind of Tai Chi master and Hung Gar stylist, with a lot of extraneous wire work to hid the fact that he isn't putting ANY 'oomph' or speed into his motions (no matter how hard the director tries to frame him, he's obviously loafing); in fact, Seagal can hardly be bothered to raise his hands above his head or pick his feet off the floor anymore. And he's gotten really fat - the generous fit of the loose kung-fu GI and the numerous flattering camera angles can't disguise his girth or the way his neck balloons out of the shirt collar to give him wattles and a double chin.

Almost anyone other actor with a martial arts background and a 'tough guy' persona could have taken the lead role in this move (Jet Li, Gordon Liu, Donnie Yen, or even Don Wilson or Oliver Grunier) and done a better job. Heck, David Carradine could have pulled this off with aplomb. In fact, this could have been a killer movie with a relative unknown in the part. one that could take some acting direction and was eager to prove himself. But someone somewhere still thinks that Seagal's name can sell a movie, and so he gets to grunt out another performance.

There are also some weaknesses to the plot that aren't especially Seagal's fault, but I'll blame him anyway: Of course, he gets the exotic Thai call girl in the end for no apparent reason other than the plot requires it. Seriously, there is literally almost NO transition between the point where they are allies and when they are lovers- it's a couple of lines of dialog and that's it. And Seagal's friend the Buddhist Monk comes out of seclusion to help him rescue his daughter, and is immediately able to leap into demanding physical action after 10 years of asceticism, living on 1200 starch based calories and an average of 4 hours of sleep each day. And Southeast Asia apparently has its own brand of voodoo mind control, because a weird shaman type appears for 10 seconds nears the beginning of the movie, and never shows up again until Seagal's final showdown with the bad guy, and then the shaman starts sticking pins into a voodoo doll to slow Seagal down only to be fought off somehow by the chanting and good vibes of the remaining monks. The whole thing is so badly and transparently handled that it will leave you scratching your head in confusion. The plot element is completely out of place in this kind of movie and makes no sense. (It might work in a 'sword play' style movie). The film makers just threw it in there to make Hopper/Seagal even more of a knee-jerk hero than before - the monks are on his side and fight for him, so he MUST be a HERO, right?

I sound as if I hate this movie. I don't. I like almost everything about the movie except Seagal, and even he doesn't suck all that much here. It's just that I can't imagine any actor in a leading role of an action movie who has even a shred of self respect doing this little actual work and expecting his fans to accept it.

I have no idea what has happened to Seagal in his private life (and it's none of my business) to turn him into such a total hack with such a threadbare schtick. I can hope that he either shapes up and turns his life around, or that he just finally has enough money saved up that he can retire.

It can't really be called that... can it?

[Leigh L. · 19 March 2004]

Whether it was blind ego or genuine good humour on Seagal's part that allowed this title to be attached to the barrel-shaped action star's latest film, we may never know, as I can't see any interviewers being willing to ask. It's even possible that he came up with it himself, as he's given a writing credit. Though to be honest, a cinematography, direction or casting credit would have been more impressive, as the 'plot' is by far the most hopeless thing about this otherwise surprisingly polished but cliche-ridden corpse-fest.

Then again, it's the script's occasional flashes of sheer madness that make it worth watching. From the random tomato/fish/cleaver death scene early on to the head-spinning ladyboy fight and descent into voodoo lunacy during the climax, it keeps you on your toes, at least. Never seems to bother Seagal, though, whose single expression (constipation) remains fixed in place whether he's frantically fending off gangs of swordsmen with his bare hands, displaying primal fatherly angst over the inevitable kidnapping of his daughter or getting frisky with a hero-worshipping Thai girl less than half his age. Yes, you read that right, and yes, you will feel personally violated when it happens.

The other redeeming feature of the film - apart from the unusually high quality of the direction and camerawork, which gets full mileage out of what must have been a pretty limp budget - is the use of body doubles, which is some of the most blatant ever committed to film and all the more entertaining for it. Seagal *does* actually get more action in this film than in his last three or four combined, but it's still hilarious when he suddenly breaks off from his usual shot-from-the-shoulders-up slappy-hand business to launch into an impromptu flying spin kick, shedding about a third of his body weight in the process.

As long as you're not expecting gritty realism, you'll probably enjoy this as much as any other DTV kickathon on the shelves at the moment, and certainly more than the last couple of brain cell killers that Seagal's put out. Unfortunately Seagal himself is more visibly the weak link in the chain than ever before, with his action chops paling in comparison to those of both his co-star and main adversary, and his acting chops paling in comparison to his fridge. The sight of Thailand's entire criminal underworld taking turns to fly thirty feet through the air and crash into an exploding crate would be far more entertaining if it wasn't an overweight man in his fifties dishing out the damage, especially one who still refuses to take a single scratch in return. Still, one thing you have to give him credit for is not teaming up with any poxy rappers in this one.

I've **** Better Films

[easyrememberaddress · 2/10 · 30 December 2005]

After reading the above review of this film, and specifically that it cost $18m to make, I feel moved to post judgement myself, in the hope that the people involved in its production might read my comments and hang their heads in shame.

The storyline itself is an irrelevance (I find it ludicrous to be warned over posting a plot spoiler with this or any Seagal film), but that is not the problem here. It's not the problem with any of these type of films, which are almost always entirely predictable, and serve only to provide no-brain-required relaxation. The problem here is Steven Seagal himself. He is now the size of a mobile home, and therefore absurd in his familiar role as the vengeful martial arts expert. His grotesque, swollen head looks like it has been carved out of a large potato by a child with poor hand-eye coordination, and the rest of his bloated physique (perhaps the title 'Belly Of The Beast' refers to this) allows him little speed or manoeuvrability during his ridiculous fight scenes, which therefore rely heavily on close-ups of wrist blocks rather than anything too strenuous. I could beat Seagal in the shape he's in (if indeed it is a shape) simply by moving quickly to and fro around him, thus tiring out the beast and reducing him to easy pickings.

The point is, he should really just retire. His films are no longer in the same vein as Arnie's where you could switch off and enjoy mindless violence and a few helicopter crashes (and that's being kind, I don't think Seagal's films were ever that good). He has now descended into a laughing stock. The fact it's still amusing is the only reason it doesn't get 1 out of 10. In fact, the only thing that isn't funny about this film is that it cost $18m to make, the majority of which I imagine went towards pies and cakes for it's overweight star.

Waste of ass time on the couch for this one

[dfsheehy-43048 · 1/10 · 18 August 2018]

Seriously! You call this a movie. The Director should be shot, and Segal needs acting lessons ....and a diet plan. All I can say is they must've plied investors with a lot of booze, coke, and hookers to make this one. Hell, it was so bad I didn't even put it on pause when I got up to go take a dump. It was like watching Elvis in the last year of his life...pitiful

"Unbellyvable"...

[swedzin · 3/10 · 13 October 2012]

You know, love Steven Seagal films, especially his older films. From that time when he was somewhat tolerable, and he was thin and charismatic. He had a screen presence and star power. And his characters, no matter how they look all the same, the were, again, more tolerable. But from the beginning of 2000s... That one was pure mistake. Look at him, he is fat, not that super, boring, slow, disgustingly decadent... Just like every new character in straight to DVD films. Now, the story is simple just like in every Seagal's film, he is the former operative, they kidnap his daughter, he goes after her, blah blah blah... He wins in the end he saves her, everyone's happy, except for the villains, blah blah... This film offers really dumb martial arts scenes, Seagal very rarely uses Aikido, he turns more to some Ta Chi, or Kung Fu.. Wtf? Seagal is constantly dressed as a Buddhist monk, only because you are a member of that religion, doesn't mean you need to do it your films. But, alas, Seagal being stubborn when it comes to his views of the world, he always plays himself, so don't expect some good performances, not from him, not from anyone. Everything is plain bad in this film, action, music score, cinematography... Very amateurish. There is a scene, where Seagal is attacked by a transvestite fighter, I don't know what did they try to do with that. What was the point in that scene? let's put some bizarre opponents in this film, and they were just there, they had a fight, nothing more... No charisma no development, nothing new within these characters. Also, this is the funniest stuff in the film. There's a Buddhist temple, from where Seagal draws power to fight (yes, that happens in the film. The power of Buddhist monks), also the villains have their own dark Buddhist monk... What a hell?! I think that Seagal, not only that he wants to promote his own world views (just like he did in "Fire Down Below", or in "On Deadly Ground"), but he also decided to promote his own religion. Remember, when you promote religion, or force it to your audience, that can only turn bad and repelling. So, I don't recommend this film, because it's a silly Buddhist-action film with no characters and meaning. Mindless garbage!

It was o.k nothing great

[rhythm2001 · 1/10 · 30 December 2003]

Steven Seagal is getting old and flying kicks and all that kung fu isn't him half the time it is a stunt double. He should stick to aikido and breaking bones at least it wouldn't look as ridiculous. One whole scene they use a voice over for Seagals voice...very strange. Maybe he should come out with under siege 3 get a couple of mainstream actors and directors involved. Russell Wong was listed everywhere as being in the movie...he wasn't anywhere in the movie i just saw.

Recent Seagal film that manages to be entertaining

[AwesomeWolf · 2/10 · 14 December 2005]

Here's something I never expected I'd be saying about 'Belly of the Beast': It is an entertaining action movie. That's right, it may a new Seagal movie that has a totally disjointed plot and an identity crisis regarding what style of action movie it wants to be, but its a fun way to kill time.

Seagal plays Jake Hopper, an ex-CIA agent (you guessed it) working on the side as a professional ninja for an old agency buddy. This led me into thinking that ole' Stevie could very well star in a 'Beverly Ninja Hills Ninja 2' film, he certainly is getting to look a little like Chris Farley. Jake seems rather uninterested when he is informed that Muslim extremists in the north of Thailand have kidnapped his daughter, but that's only a cover for his apparent unlimited rage, at least according to the tag line. So Jake is off to Thailand to his rescue his daughter and show off his UNLIMITED RAGE!

Now I realize that 'Belly of the Beast' is a poor film in every aspect of film-making, but its one of those endearingly bad films. The plot is disjointed and sometimes predictable, sometimes suffering from an identity crisis. Seagal seems as excited as he always is (i.e. he actually looks really bored and seems as though he would prefer a quiet night in with a video instead of attempting to kick arse), and his physical fitness really needs to be questioned. You can hear his heavy breathing throughout the film, seemingly suggesting that Seagal just carried a box of donuts up small flight of stairs and now he he needs to recover. The fact that he even has a sex scene is just disturbing to even think about and is best left as one of those "let's never speak of this again" moments. In a scene in which Seagal is chatting up a monk, his voice actually changes! Some suggest Seagal was dubbed in that scene, but I always suspected that Stevie was the romantic type (at least when talking to monks).

The lack of any distinct action style doesn't help things. Seagal starts the movie off with some Tai-Chi and kicking that Stevie can't possibly perform in his shape and also sends his opponents flying through walls. When I realized who the director was, none of this surprised me and I even expected some sort of mystical battle to end the movie. I did not expect random normal shootouts and random 'Matrix'-style shootouts. Basically what we have here is almost a fantasy ninja movie with John Woo adding lots of guns, or something like that. It is confusing, it isn't compelling, but it makes for cheap entertainment.

I should probably feel shame for saying 'Belly of the Beast' was enjoyable. It is a terrible film, and most people really should avoid it, but there are a select few out there who (like me) can use this for cheap laughs - 2/10

A bit of the old Seagal we loved.

[FiendishDramaturgy · 7/10 · 5 January 2004]

I love Seagal movies. I even liked On Deadly Ground, a movie which has been dogged so badly that it's on the bottom 100 list here at IMDb.

Belly of the Beast gives us a glimmer of hope that he is making his way back to the top. I did; however, detest the shape he's allowed himself to fall into. He was tough, edgy, and a general hard-ball player.

Now, he's using baggy clothes to hide his obvious weight gain, partial facial shots to hide the pudgy cheeks, and body doubles wherever necessary. At least Jackie Chan toned himself back into form before he did "The Medallion." (Check that one out. That was a genuinely decent movie.)

Gone (for good?) is the polished and smooth Seagal. Enters Seagal the scruffy, disheveled hero. Sad. I used to love his movies for the purist aikido arts he exhibited. But now, I just watch them out of a sense of loyalty to a has-been master.

He's just not what he used to be. But this movie does give me hope for the future of his movies. He even did a variation on Bruce Lee's "one-inch punch." Not bad at all.

The story was an old one, and it's really becoming a tired one. Kid is kidnapped, and dad has to save the kid. Get over it, already, and beoriginal for Pete's sake! But for an 18M budget, considering the whole thing was filmed in Thailand, I guess a good story is too much to ask for. At least there was some well-placed and professionally executed action, this time around.

As I said, the action was well executed, and almost (if not entirely) non-stop, and the story did move along quite well. The two aspects I do like about Seagal's movies, even the ones which do not fare well at the box office, or go straight to video like this one did, are his connection with family and his boldness about his (non-christian) spirituality. I admire him for that. He may even make some people realize that their mainstream religion only makes up a very small part of the world's religious base.

I doubt it, but perhaps.

The one memorable line from this movie? "I liked you better as a b*tch." Jake Hopper (Steven Seagal)

All in all, it rates a 7.3/10 from...

the Fiend :.

Seagal is just horrible

[sphinx1-1 · 1/10 · 20 May 2018]

Sorry but no redeeming value. the people who make this crap must be laundering money.

....At last SEAGAL returns to formula

[dolemite72 · 10/10 · 5 July 2004]

After a few ropey movies, somebody in movieland 'greenlighted' this enjoyable and action-packed (words not usually associated with recent SEAGAL s.t.v) movie, that harks back (refreshingly so) to the excesses of the 80's The plot is pure 'COMMANDO' as ex CIA (...CIA) agent JAKE HOPPER (SEAGAL) goes to thailand to rescue his kidnapped daughter (and the senators daughter...hooray!!) from evil terrorists. You can pretty much guess the plot from herein. Suffice to say, that this movie (unlike his last two) give SEAGAL a little bit more to do in the action stakes. Director CHING SIU TUNG certainly knows more about staging action scenes that the lamentable MICHAEL OBLOWITZ. And despite a few (obvious fight doubles) SEAGAL can still handle himself in the action arena. Nice bullet-time vs arrow sequence at the end. This movie captures what SEAGAL wants to say about spirituality, whilst capturing the essence of the action that is commonplace with all SEAGAL epics. Despite it's straight to video origins, BELLY OF THE BEAST is an enjoyable movie, for those who wish to see a real martial artist, in a real martial arts movie

Big lee scores it 9 out of 10 (not quite OUT FOR JUSTICE!)

One of the most enjoyable Seagal films of the last fifteen years

[Leofwine_draca · 7/10 · 8 November 2015]

Forget the likes of THE FOREIGNER or even OUT FOR A KILL, as this, Seagal's latest offering, is a cut above the rest. Director Siu-Tung Ching takes the reins and delivers a surprisingly stylish, OTT, action-packed DTV venture that is sure to please any fan of Seagal's, looking for one more decent movie to watch. The Chinese influence is clear in that there is plenty of wirework in the martial arts sequences, but thankfully the action is generally slick, fast and exciting. My only complaint is that they played a pop song over one of the most potentially exciting showdowns – what the hell were they thinking?!

The plot is slimfast and slightly reminiscent of COMMANDO: Seagal's daughter is kidnapped by a mock Al-Qaeda sect and he has 76 hours to rescue her. The setting is Thailand, with pretty good use of location photography, and there are lots of peripheral characters milling around. Seagal even has a young lover and a romantic interlude in a bed, you have to wonder if he wrote her into the script himself as a reward for his chastity in his last three or four movies. Anyway, back to the action, and we have lots of bone-breaking, high-kicking fun, including attacks by she-males, sword-wielding nutters, common thugs and an arrow-shooting general in the Thai army who seems incredibly fit. There are huge shoot-outs with hundreds of bullets flying and Seagal's pistol has about 200 bullets in it, amazing stuff.

Seagal is looking older every day, and wider. Yet he's more active here than in previous outings and kicks ass in quite a few scenes. There are other hilarious times when he jumps up, changes body shape and does a flying spin-kick on somebody, hmm, can you say body double? Also hilarious are the 'stunts' "performed" by Seagal, such as diving through a wall shooting, or rolling on a rail cart and shooting. Astonishingly, his voice is dubbed too in some moments. Is there anything else this man can surprise us with? Seagal's ranged support includes Rue from STREET FIGHTER (Byron Mann) as a partner who shoots an innocent woman and becomes a monk, and Ash from CASUALTY(Patrick Robinson), pretending to be an American CIA agent. Tom Wu is underused but imposing as a villain. Not a lot else to say, except I haven't seen a film this much fun in a film since it was directed by Mark Lester. Oh, and keep an eye out for the voodoo subplot, great stuff, harks back to the fun of MARKED FOR DEATH.

Formulaic and dull-ish, but not one of Seagal's really bad ones

[sarastro7 · 5/10 · 18 January 2005]

Seagal's movies are of very varying quality. Many are really bad, and some are passable actioners, while some are a bit above average (for instance the Under Siege movies).

Belly of the Beast is fairly well-produced, but doesn't have anything out of the ordinary (well, other than the transvestite assassin, perhaps). It is formulaic and sometimes predictable (what, you thought the expendable ethnic sidekick would survive?), and the story is not entirely coherent, nor the characters particularly fleshed-out. It does have some nice location shots, though; one has to admit that Seagal fans get to see the world! Jamaica, Thailand, whathaveyou...

It's a pity there isn't more substance in these movies, because Seagal has enough charisma, even with that stone-face of his, to pull off something better.

5 out of 10.