I saw this one way back when it came out, and thought it was pretty good 15 years ago. The action is quick and fierce, the plot is interesting and the bad guys are all psychotic and evil (kudos go to Busey and Jones).
However, where this film falls flat is the lack of suspense. Many people call this 'Die Hard on a boat', well, it is in a lot of respects. However, the most important thing that separates those two films is suspense. Bruce Willis showed us a vulnerable guy put in a extraordinary situation against a group of terrorists. Honestly, the first time I saw Die Hard, I was probably about 8 years old, and having never seen a movie like this (had there even been one before it?) I honestly didn't know if McClane would survive the ordeal. In other words, I was on the edge of my seat the entire movie. With Under Siege, we have an awesome setup, however, Seagal NEVER breaks a sweat, and comes out of the ordeal practically unscathed. That is why I prefer Die Hard to this one, is the human vulnerability showed by Bruce Willis. Seagal rarely, if ever, shows any type of human flaws...preferring to be his stereotypical quiet badass character that we've seen eleventy billion times.
Having said that, Under Siege is still a good time waster. Good action, with great badguys, and let's not forget to mention that former Baywatch babe's perfect jugs popping out of a birthday cake, and you have a pretty damn good action flick. Still, this is not a suspenseful film in any regard...Die Hard this is not. I give her 7 out of 10 stars.
However, where this film falls flat is the lack of suspense. Many people call this 'Die Hard on a boat', well, it is in a lot of respects. However, the most important thing that separates those two films is suspense. Bruce Willis showed us a vulnerable guy put in a extraordinary situation against a group of terrorists. Honestly, the first time I saw Die Hard, I was probably about 8 years old, and having never seen a movie like this (had there even been one before it?) I honestly didn't know if McClane would survive the ordeal. In other words, I was on the edge of my seat the entire movie. With Under Siege, we have an awesome setup, however, Seagal NEVER breaks a sweat, and comes out of the ordeal practically unscathed. That is why I prefer Die Hard to this one, is the human vulnerability showed by Bruce Willis. Seagal rarely, if ever, shows any type of human flaws...preferring to be his stereotypical quiet badass character that we've seen eleventy billion times.
Having said that, Under Siege is still a good time waster. Good action, with great badguys, and let's not forget to mention that former Baywatch babe's perfect jugs popping out of a birthday cake, and you have a pretty damn good action flick. Still, this is not a suspenseful film in any regard...Die Hard this is not. I give her 7 out of 10 stars.