ITSOGS

I guess anybody with a camera and a few dollars can create content in the name of a movie. Painfully bad and therefore difficult to watch. I made it to thirty two minutes and discarded it. Sorry guys, I tried.

RxB1

So, let''s try an focus on what this movie has for it: * Skilled actors ? Nah, the poor schmucks put as much emotion in their acting as would a stone * Great action ? Hardly * Exotic decors ? Well if you can call Oklahoma city exotic, I suppose. It''s not often figured in movies (with possibly good reasons) * Artfully written story ? Nope, the story was a pile of cliché upon a heap of stereotypes * Some redeeming humor then ? There is one scene that actually tries to be funny. It fails * Competent cinematography ? The cameras were not held upside down, if that counts * Great villain maybe ? See the parts about skilled actors and written story I suppose you could forgive that kind of film it it had been made by an aspiring bunch of 13 years old and give them a C- for effort, but as a full fledged movie production, I''m sorry for the people that sunk money into that. Even as Direct to video i doubt it''ll ever pay back it''s (hopefully low) cost.

cmonster

Well, it''s back to the presidential debate...