Review: Belly of the Beast (2003)

[Menard]

Belly of the Beast (2003)


Another entry in my Steven Seagal marathon. Belly of the Beast is the name of the film and not a reference to Steven Seagal's ever expanding waistline.


This time around we have Seagal playing a retired CIA operative, Jake Hopper. Two yound ladies are kidnapped by a group of purported terrorists in Thailand. One of the girls is a senator's daughter, the suspected target of the kidnapping, the other is Hopper's daughter. Not being one to sit idly by or follow rules (and when does he ever in his films) Hopper takes it upon himself to find the kidnappers.


Compared to my previous viewing of a Seagal film, Belly of the Beast is a much better effort. As a matter of fact, this film is more of a throwback to the better films in his career.


Unlike other recent viewings, Belly of the Beast does not have him waltzing through enemies with the greatest of ease, rather, it puts his character in an unfriendly situation where he constantly has to be watching his back. The plot and twists and turns in the plot are better than what I have seen in his films in a while. The film does try to move ahead at points, leaving the viewer to wonder about a particular plot device, but, overall it does a good job of maintaining its storyline enough for the viewer to follow along.


Add to the storyline various elements such as backstabbing, corruption, a sorcerer (I did not stutter), a romance, a friendship rekindled, and a devious assassin who turns out to be another twist (and ewwww, yuck at that), and you get a satisfying mix of story, action, and some very well choreographed fight scenes; with lots of shootouts to boot.


Belly of the Beast additionally gives Seagal more with which to work, character wise, and he does a good job of throwing himself into the character.


I thourough enjoyed this Seagal actioner and hope that others he does can at least come close to this one. I would also dearly like to receive special messages via courier the way he does in this film.

[dean]

Wow, a recent Seagal film that actually isn't bad...

Are you sure you're ok Menard?  Perhaps the recent Seagal binge you've been on lately has fried some of your judging circuits.

That being said, it does sound like an interesting film.  Seagal has that ability to make me hate him, but not look away whenever I watch one of his films.  Especially when he's being such a badass, 'one guy takes on fifty' type of gung ho person.  His talent in constantly snapping necks is one to laugh and mock, yet it also makes lazy, entertaining viewing...

[Menard]

I am not a big Seagal fan, but I do find many of his films to be quite entertaining for a casual viewing. I had seen The Glimmer Man recently and it put me in a mood to catch some more Seagal films. As luck would have it, shortly thereafter I came across a bin of $1.88 videos at Wal-mart and found four Seagal movies in it. The price was cheap and they make for good, mindless entertainment, whether they are good or bad.

Belly of the Beast was a surprisingly good effort considering what I have read about his latest efforts.

I have two more Seagal films to watch. Good or bad, they will probably be enjoyable for just killing time. I will post reviews once I have seen those as well.

[Neville]

I saw it some time ago and thought it was pretty good, but since Seagal's stardom is slowly declining nowadays, it's gonna make very little good to his career. I suscribe most of Menard's comments, but c'on, the sorcerer bit was laughable, specially when they intercut Seagal's fight with the bad guy with shots of Buddhists monks praying (I guess) for Buddha to help Seagal. That was just jawdropping.