Watch The Hunt for Eagle One For Free

Who payed the critics

Boring

Best movie of this year hands down!

It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

Back in the 1960s, the likes of director Eddie Romero churned out endless WW2 films in the Philippines, all of them sub-par and displaying a distinct lack of talent. In the 1980s, cheap American studios and directors like Cirio H. Santiago reignited the genre with some more enjoyable, RAMBO-inspired blow-em-up pieces of spectacle. All has been quiet for a couple of decades, but now THE HUNT FOR EAGLE ONE seeks to bring this defunct Filipino war sub-genre back to life.Unfortunately the best part of this production is the opening credits, in which we learn that Roger Corman served as the producer and good old Cirio H. Santiago was co-producer. Promise indeed! Sadly, THE HUNT FOR EAGLE ONE turns out to be a throwback to the '60s-style war films rather than the '80s-style, and a right chore it is to sit through too.The film is badly written and horribly directed, with all of that choppy editing and bad, distorted direction that was a scourge of the 2000s (it helped spoil many a Steven Seagal-starring DTV flick, for example). Characterisation is nil and the endless battle sequences are low budget and largely uninteresting, failing to draw viewers into the scenario or action. There are precisely three familiar faces on show here: a tired Rutger Hauer, delivering a minor cameo; a bored Mark Dacascos, in a role which could have fitted anyone; and Theresa Randle (BAD BOYS), who once had a career of sorts in the 1990s, not that you'd know given her performance here. Avoid this one like the plague.

Legendary Hollywood producer Roger Corman has managed to turn a profit on every single one of his films because he produces them on a literal shoe-string. One of his frequent favorite cinematic collaborators is Philippine producer Cirio H. Santiago. Santiago has produced over twenty movies with Corman. These two moguls anted up the bucks for "Rage and Discipline" director Brian Clyde's "The Hunt for Eagle One" with martial arts sensation Mark Dacascos and African-American beauty Theresa Randle. Not long after Sony Pictures and Nano Pictures released "The Hunt for Eagle One" as a direct-to-video movie, they released the sequel "The Hunt for Eagle One: Crash Point." Although "The Hunt for Eagle One: Crash Point" has a far more suspenseful plot, "The Hunt for Eagle One" is a creased, straightforward, standard-issue combat epic in the tradition of "Black Hawk Down" on a micro-budget that has displays greater camaraderie among the members of an elite U.S. Marine strike force.Despite its wall-to-wall pyrotechnics, "The Hunt for Eagle One" lacks the cutting edge violence of both Ridley Scott's "Black Hawk Down" and correspondingly Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan." Actually, "Bloodfist 2050" scenarist Michael Henry Carter's screenplay for "The Hunt for Eagle One" resembles the plot of "Black Hawk Down" because both films concern rescue missions about saving helicopter pilots. Unfortunately, the lack of drama and the tight-lipped performances mar this otherwise well-produced B-movie action thriller. "The Hunt for Eagle One" looks like a Vietnam era combat opus because it relies on Vietnam era armaments and choppers. The filmmakers have also taken dramatic liberties with various technical factors that only military enthusiasts would recognize, while Clyde relies on tried-and-true film-making conventions that illiterate filmgoers neither recognize nor understand. For example, the opening scenes when our heroes land on a beach in inflatable rubber rafts as the sun is rising clashes with the normal tactics of landing under cover of darkness. Alas, had Clyde lensed the landing scene in the dark, nobody would have seen anything. Yes, the landing would be more realistic, but audiences would have harped that they couldn't see a thing.The same thing applies to the failure to recognize certain military practices by the U.S. Navy and Marine Corp when it comes to saluting a superior officer. Most people that watch "The Hunt for Eagle One" could care less whether one officer salutes another officer without the proper headgear in place. Remember, it isn't whether it's done according to proper military etiquette that matters, the point is does it create excitement and suspense. Unfortunately, "The Hunt for Eagle One" looks more like a reenactment of a rescue mission than a rescue mission itself. Clyde and Carter have managed to forge a sense of unity among the Marines on the rescue mission, but nothing about the mission or the hostage situation generates suspense. "The Hunt for Eagle One" qualifies as just another combat mission movie with better-than-average production values. You see to see and hear a hell of a lot of shooting in this thriller but it rarely translates into thrills and chills. Incredibly, despite its R-rating, Clyde and Carter shy away from showing a decapitation scene in the jungle and the torture of the female helicopter pilot is extremely mild and unrealistic. Considering that "The Hunt for Eagle One" received an R-rating for violence and language, this gung-ho actioneer seems pretty tame.Essentially, the plot concerns a raid against Middle Eastern terrorists who are working with local rebels in Mindanao in the Philippines. U.S. Marine General Paul Lewis (Rutger Hauer in a thankless role) assigns Lieutenant Mark Daniels and his crack team of troops to rescue a captured helicopter pilot, Captain Amy Jennings (Theresa Randle of the "Bad Boys" movies), who has been taken captive by terrorist chieftain Abubakar Al Hassan (Jojo De Leon of "Uzi 9mm Brothers") and his troops after two rescue chopper are blown out of the sky. Daniels and his men have to shoot their way into the terrorist camp, avoiding getting hit by friendly artillery fire, and then they must not only snatch Jennings but they also must destroy an anthrax chemical warfare laboratory. Not for one single second is there any chance that anybody on Daniels' squad will die or that Jennings will suffer abominably at the hands of the terrorists. In fact, the terrorists are not particularly unsavory as you might expect from a propaganda thriller. They look like ruffians and they fall to our heroes' fusillades like ten-pins in a bowling alley, but you don't hate them the way that you hate Nazis in a World War II movie.All-in-all, despite it technical flaws, "The Hunt for Eagle One" is a tolerable potboiler if you have an hour and a half to blow.

This Roger Cormon produced action/war flick is reasonably well made but ultimately as shallow as most of it's rival DTV action films. The film shot on a clearly microscopic budget manages to deliver some competent action scenes however the lead Mark Dacascos has been used to far better effect in other movies.Following in the vein of Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down this film has the requisite battle sequences, which are shot well enough to mask the low budget, however unlike Scott's film and Spielberg's film, this lacks the character and depth of those movies. The cast is not too bad and everyone does reasonably well with their simplistic roles, but we never really care about any individual characters, particularly Dacascos in the lead. Dacascos is essentially playing a his character in solider mode all the time, he's in battle mode, showing little emotion or personality. Dacascos convinces as a solider but is given little humanity to convey. Also Rutger Hauer appears to chew scenery in a quick and wasteful cameo. Unfortunately Theresa Randle is quite wooden in perhaps the most fleshed out role.Overall there are many films better than this but similarly this isn't too bad. **

Begin rant : don't waist your time. not even if it's in the bargen bin at ur local superstore for 1 pound. it's to expensive to use as a Frisbee and there are better ways to make coffee cup coasters. i honestly couldn't stand anymore, i watch for one hour. and that was one hour wasted. i couldn't take anymore. End rant /The acting was OK , i feel most of the poor screen work was due to director / producer's input. i can't see any research , or specialist advice used in the film in regards to mission operation procedures and gun handeling. this is the first ever movie i have rated as 1 out of 10 . and it deserves every single point.