Kill Switch - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Kill Switch Reviews

Page 1 of 9
December 2, 2016
A low budget variation forgettable Steven Seagal movie attempt at a much superior movie of an actual serial killer movie called Se7en, in which he plays Jacob attempting to overcome his dark past regarding witnessing his twin brother's murder. Linking the connection with what happened to him back then to the recent killings that has been happening as of late.
April 5, 2016
A une époque, Steven Seagal parvenait à écrire des scénarios qui réussissaient à rendre ses DTV acceptables, voire même bien, comme Into The Sun. Kill Switch n'est clairement pas Into the Sun, car cette histoire de serial killer traqué par un flic aux méthodes dangereuse est abominablement mise en scène, particulièrement mal écrite et surtout affreusement mal jouée, que ce soit par les no-names qui peuplent le casting, mais aussi par Steven Seagal, apathique et pire, par Isaac Hayes, qui s'offre deux ou trois apparitions lamentables. Rien n'est à sauver dans Kill Switch et cela devient une mauvaise habitude chez Seagal...
July 12, 2015
It's one of those moments where you know it's a bad film, but it's very entertaining. Despite dodgy editing to make certain scenes trying to look more effective, the over the top violence done by Steven Seagal when he takes on the bad guys makes up for it.
June 1, 2014
This is another terrible Seagal DTV film. The editing is awful and laziness and also i rank this film as 1 of his worst film along with the other film attack force which also sucked. His latest film force of execution is very forgettable.
½ April 20, 2014
I'll be honest, there are a few 90's Seagal flicks that I enjoy as guilty pleasures. Kill Switch however despite maybe one or two entertaining fight scenes, is overall brimming with horrible acting, painfully repetitive fight choreography, abysmal editing and some of the most dizzying camera work one will ever see. Apparently according to this films logic, pistols have unlimmited ammo...Seagal does anything for money nowadays though, it's obvious considering 99.9% of what he stars in is straight-to-DVD junk.
½ February 5, 2013
not to bad segal not back to his under siege best but he aint that far away
½ December 30, 2012
I am almost speechless with this utter rubbish. How could Steven Seagal be involved in this kind of stuff? I'm quite tolerant but this was too much.
I've bought and watched on DVD or TV every, or nearly every movie by mr. Seagal. Some of them haven't been that great, to be honest, but I haven't seen him in a movie so horrible before. Even "Out for Justice" with its scenes of gratuitious and unnecessary violence is light years ahead of this movie. (I though I would never see myself write something like that).
I found one positive thing about this film. Let's list first why I didn't like this movie, though. The biggest, hugest minus is the gratuitious violence: people are beaten in a way that is impossible for a human to withstand; Seagal's character nicknamed 'lightning' for his hastyness shoots an escaping person in the back, killing him in the process; he kicks a person who is lying on the ground; he crushes a person's knees elbows and ribs with a sledge hammer; he slices a throat; to name a few violent scenes in this movie.
I think it's not just bordering on irresponsible, I couldn't help but wondering what kind of example Seagal was thinking he was setting for young kids when his character says "This is fun!" while beating up a fellon who can hardly fight back.
Second huge negative issue with the film is that Seagal has a stunt double who does his fighting! Not only is this unheard of , it also causes severe problems with the so called martial arts scenes because when only Seagal's hands and feet are shown beating someone up - spiced with loud smashing and thudding noises - the result starts to look like a parody, which I quess the film makers didn't intend.
Someone has cut the film to pieces in the cutting room. When someone falls on the floor, or in one scene on top of a potato bowl, they show the same falling twice and not always even from another angle. The fights ended up looking comical, which was unfortunate, because I know that Seagal could have done better.
Third minus, there are discrepancies and bloopers in the film', like you see a guy's front teeth broken, and in the same scene a moment later he says something clearly to his thug friends and you can see his all teeth showing, in place. Someone is thrown from a window a couple of stores high and he survives with bruises. Guys get up from the floor after having been unnaturally beaten. You hear a gun shot and see Seagal's character shoot a gun, that same scene is repeated in the same angle maybe thrice to give the impression of a longer scene. Sick.
A minor thing I would also mention are the lines the characters speak. Let me give a few examples which I found silly and rather stupid to be honest. Seagals character says to his girlfriend something like this: "We at homicide sometimes get to investigate creepy guys". Or he first beats up guys and then he says "Oh, I see you wanna talk to my fist". He has a strange accent and calls all his colleagues "baby". (even male colleagues) One of the oddest lines was when he shot his pistol towards an escaping serial killer about a hundred shots and then he looks at the guy and says earnestly "I just wanna talk". His colleague visits his house where Seagal's character is holding a liquour glass, and says to him "No thanks Im trying to cut on the liquour" , so what does Seagals character do: he hands the liquour glass over to him. The plot is a little bit incoherent tool. At the end of the film, after he has just advised his girlfriend to apply to police academy or something like that, one sees Seagal's character visit a house where he has a russian speaking wife and two kids.. one other odd thing was when a guy jumped over a small barrel and you could hear a huge swooooosh sound. I think they just didn't view the film at all before they released it. So, I did not enjoy watching this kind of slaughter, it topped all violence I have watched ever before.
Ok, that one positive thing , here it is: I didn't notice _even one_ Aikido-technique in this movie. That made me almost glad, that Aikido, the peaceful and wise martial art, wasn't involved in any way. Ok thats it. At least I know what switch I was reaching for.
½ December 17, 2012
I am almost speechless with this utter rubbish. How could Steven Seagal be involved in this kind of stuff? I'm quite tolerant but this was too much.
I've bought and watched on DVD or TV every, or nearly every movie by mr. Seagal. Some of them haven't been that great, to be honest, but I haven't seen him in a movie so horrible before. Even "Out for Justice" with its scenes of gratuitious and unnecessary violence is light years ahead of this movie. (I though I would never see myself write something like that).
I found one positive thing about this film. Let's list first why I didn't like this movie, though. The biggest, hugest minus is the gratuitious violence: people are beaten in a way that is impossible for a human to withstand; Seagal's character nicknamed 'lightning' for his hastyness shoots an escaping person in the back, killing him in the process; he kicks a person who is lying on the ground; he crushes a person's knees elbows and ribs with a sledge hammer; he slices a throat; to name a few violent scenes in this movie.
I think it's not just bordering on irresponsible, I couldn't help but wondering what kind of example Seagal was thinking he was setting for young kids when his character says "This is fun!" while beating up a fellon who can hardly fight back.
Second huge negative issue with the film is that Seagal has a stunt double who does his fighting! Not only is this unheard of , it also causes severe problems with the so called martial arts scenes because when only Seagal's hands and feet are shown beating someone up - spiced with loud smashing and thudding noises - the result starts to look like a parody, which I quess the film makers didn't intend.
Someone has cut the film to pieces in the cutting room. When someone falls on the floor, or in one scene on top of a potato bowl, they show the same falling twice and not always even from another angle. The fights ended up looking comical, which was unfortunate, because I know that Seagal could have done better.
Third minus, there are discrepancies and bloopers in the film', like you see a guy's front teeth broken, and in the same scene a moment later he says something clearly to his thug friends and you can see his all teeth showing, in place. Someone is thrown from a window a couple of stores high and he survives with bruises. Guys get up from the floor after having been unnaturally beaten. You hear a gun shot and see Seagal's character shoot a gun, that same scene is repeated in the same angle maybe thrice to give the impression of a longer scene. Sick.
A minor thing I would also mention are the lines the characters speak. Let me give a few examples which I found silly and rather stupid to be honest. Seagals character says to his girlfriend something like this: "We at homicide sometimes get to investigate creepy guys". Or he first beats up guys and then he says "Oh, I see you wanna talk to my fist". He has a strange accent and calls all his colleagues "baby". (even male colleagues) One of the oddest lines was when he shot his pistol towards an escaping serial killer about a hundred shots and then he looks at the guy and says earnestly "I just wanna talk". His colleague visits his house where Seagal's character is holding a liquour glass, and says to him "No thanks Im trying to cut on the liquour" , so what does Seagals character do: he hands the liquour glass over to him. The plot is a little bit incoherent tool. At the end of the film, after he has just advised his girlfriend to apply to police academy or something like that, one sees Seagal's character visit a house where he has a russian speaking wife and two kids.. one other odd thing was when a guy jumped over a small barrel and you could hear a huge swooooosh sound. I think they just didn't view the film at all before they released it. So, I did not enjoy watching this kind of slaughter, it topped all violence I have watched ever before.
Ok, that one positive thing , here it is: I didn't notice _even one_ Aikido-technique in this movie. That made me almost glad, that Aikido, the peaceful and wise martial art, wasn't involved in any way. Ok thats it. At least I know what switch I was reaching for.
½ October 7, 2012
Surely a contender for worst editing ever! This film laughs in the face of the laws of cinematography. I imagine this is what would happen if you strapped a camera to a hyper-active epileptic terrier.
October 6, 2012
My god. This movie was terrible. I would give it half a star but it was rather funny even though it was never trying to be. Steven Seagal trying to add some urban spice to his accent is a failure. the fight scenes are a joke and you can tell during the fight scenes that he never really took part in them. And I was laughing writing this review.
June 1, 2012
Apparently, aikido-expert-come-action-movie star, Steven Seagal wanted to make a more intelligent and twist-laden film after getting tired of starring in a slew of predictable shoot-'em-ups. He claims that it was the hack editors that ruined his would-be masterpiece; cutting out important plot-points so that non of the twists make any sense and making the action look as if it were edited with a cheese-grader. Regardless of who deserves the blame, we are still left with a lumbering mess of awkward dialogues and messy, incoherent fights.
May 14, 2012
DA MANS A GENiUS!!...II <333 STEVEN SEAGAL
½ March 21, 2012
a very cool and incredibly brutal steven seagal thriller, it has some hectic editing and is very very voilent at times, but this movie, is great for a lads night, fast, bloody, brutal like the cover says lol
February 5, 2012
If it was not for the fight scenes, which by the way where not that good, I would have rated this less than one. Not Seagal's best work by far.
½ November 14, 2011
Watched this with my son and husband,their choice not mine. The filming made me feel sick. The acting was horrible. SS accent was stupid and i found myself sitting there repeating him in a silly voice. And WTF was the ending??? Did everyone have this ending??? I feel like i had the wrong ending...it made no sense...nada!!!
½ April 21, 2011
It's a damn mess. Watch this only for psychological torture.
March 21, 2011
Piss poor - The old Seagull is more of a big turkey in this one. The fight scenes - which are the main reasons that you'd watch a Seagull film - are really badly edited, thus spoiling the one thing that might be decent in the movie. As for the ending - WTF!!
March 19, 2011
It's an awesome movie I love it so march.
½ March 10, 2011
Low budget horror, but not in the genre sense. Weak characters for a weak action detective movie.
February 20, 2011
Not enough action and too much emphasis on plot and characters. Which normally speaking is the opposite of what you want, but it's a Seagal straight to DVD flick where if you're actually watching it, you aren't looking for a good plot and good character development. Just ass kicking.
Page 1 of 9