Robert J. Maxwell In this masterpiece of poetic art, Steven Seagal is -- get this -- a distinguished professor of archaeology at Yale University. He wins prestigious awards. He may even get tenure.Seagal is invited to assess the finds at some dig in China near the Kazakhistan border. What amounts to the Chinese Mafia plants a lot of cocaine in one of his shipments to the states. Seagal is captured. His beautiful Chinese assistant is killed. He gets out of prison and returns to the states to wreak revenge. I don't think I'll spell out much more of the plot since I don't want to spoil any of the absent surprises.My TV Guide, with which I sometimes agree, gives this one and a half stars out of four. It lives up to its rating. The whole thing is not merely implausible. It's impossible. You want an example? Seagal spent many years in prison where he took advantage of the facilities to earn a PhD. Then he disappeared for some years, during which he evidently became an expert on Han artifacts and learned to kick each and every ass that came his way. THEN, and only then, does he become a distinguished professor at Yale. Poor Vincent Scully had to lead a life of eremetic devotion for years before achieving those heights.It's always interesting to see who is chosen to be the villain in these mindless action movies, which ethnic group. In 2003 it couldn't be the Soviets anymore because there weren't any more Soviets. And I suppose by that time the usual Germans were eliminated -- not because they were forgiven for World War II, but because the producers of action movies figured no one in their audience would remember that we had fought the Germans in World War II. I'm surprised the North Koreans haven't shown up yet. There are Arabs aplenty in similar movies but that's a tangled web and we don't want to alienate anyone who might buy a ticket.That leaves the Chinese, or rather a cabal of about a dozen REALLY ugly Chinese Mafia types who wear one of two expressions: a smirk or a scowl. They all smoke cigars. They speak in sinister tones of matters of life and death. I can understand why the Chinese were suitable heavies in 2003. They make all our consumer good, right down to the high heels I wear on Saturday nights. But I think the producers would hesitate before using the Chinese today. They might boycott our McDonalds or start eyeing the Euro instead of the dollar. And -- oh, the hell with it.

movieman_kev This abysmal little film about an archaeologist (Steven Seagal) who's framed for the murder of his friend but gets out to get revenge on a Chinese crime syndicate is amateurish in just about ever conceivable way. Horrible acting, a ridiculous plot hole laden plot, laughably bad special effects, surprisingly even the action scenes are lacking. It's one of the worst Seagal films that I've had the supreme misfortune of seeing.My Grade: D-Eye Candy: Kata Dobo, no stranger to baring skin in supremely awful films (see also the atrocious "Rollerball" remake) gets topless

TheLittleSongbird I will admit it right now, I am not a huge fan of Steven Seagal. He was good once upon a time, but recently he has resorted to poorly acted, sloppily paced and straight-to-video-quality films; Out for a Kill is no exception. I am really sorry, but I do not know where to start pointing out the things that are wrong with this movie.Now don't get me wrong, there have been some good action films, and I do like the genre, but as an action film and a film in general, Out for a Kill ranks towards the bottom of the spectrum. So where do I begin with the criticisms? How about the plot? The plot is so predictable and lame, and it takes such a while to get going. Plus by the end of the film I was running out of fingers to count the number of plot holes there were in the movie. Not only that, some of the plot holes are so big, you can drive a delivery truck through them.Or how about the dialogue? Like the characters, the dialogue is filled to the brim with clichés, no sense of intelligence or wit. What about the direction? Nothing there as far as I could see. It wasn't innovative, it wasn't sensitive and it wasn't good. Instead it felt phoned-in and derivative, as if the director wasn't really interested in the film.How about the quality of the film? Well, I'll answer that right off, it was shoddy and slipshod. The camera work, scenery and visual set-ups were incredibly shoddy, with editing all over the place, and done with no care. Even the action sequences were sloppy and unexciting, and the choreography is... how should I say it, ham-fisted. And what was up with the ending? Really ropey and a real letdown.Even worse was the acting. Steven Seagal looks really unkempt here, and he gives another lazy performance, while Michelle Goh is cursed with some of the worst dialogue of the film and the rest of the supporting cast were pretty much playing themselves. Plus I felt indifferent to every single character, none of them moved or compelled me in any way. Any redeeming qualities? Well, the opening just passes muster, but everything else is very hard to take and is a complete mess. 1/10 Bethany Cox

Scarecrow-88 Chinese crime families from major cities all over the world are uniting to control the marketing of drugs, eliminating any competition(as we see in the opening regarding a massacre in a Bulgaria strip club). Steven Seagal stars as an archaeologist(!), Professor Robert Burns, a recipient of the prestigious Winthrope award for uncovering important Chinese artifacts. Burns gets caught up in the midst of an attempted drug smuggling operation with the Chinese crime family using his archaeological dig recovering Chinese relics at the China/Kazakhstan boarder as a front to traffic heroine in the centuries-old statuettes. His assistant killed by gunfire, Burns makes it to the boarder, but is arrested for his possible involvement in smuggling the drugs in his artifacts. Released, Burns has revenge on his mind, but when Wong Dai(Chooi Kheng-Beh)sends his men on an errand to kill Robert's wife, the scorned professor will surely wreak vengeance on all who took away everything he ever cared for. Working with Hong Kong DEA agent Tommi Ling(Michelle Goh), and her American partner Ed Grey(Corey Johnson), Burns will annihilate each member of Wong Dai's crime family, setting his sights for the ringleader, who is stationed in Paris.Globe-trotting action adventure vehicle for Seagal has his martial arts Buddhist archaeologist taking out Chinese druglords in Chinatown, Bulgaria, and Paris. Like other 2003 action flicks, Seagal is able to look good thanks to careful camera angles, editing, and stunt work. We all know he can no longer propel himself in the air or move across a room like a gazelle. Good use of slow motion allows Seagal to obliterate opponents in a manner that seems quite authentic. I will say that there's one sequence, concerning a heavy dependence of wire-fu where Seagal's adversary can twist and turn in mid air, not to mention crawl across walls, looks positively ridiculous, quite laughably staged. Like most of his action flicks in the 2000's, Seagal's one-man army can go wherever he pleases, leaving an alarming string of dead bodies, without anyone even attempting to investigate him. He can go to Bulgaria and Paris without a hitch, despite his house being bombed and wiping out a number of men in a New York City restaurant in front of witnesses. Where Seagal is at his best is when he has those fast hands moving, blocking punches, and landing blows that send his foes hurling in the air and through objects. There are plenty of guns firing and thugs for Seagal to vanquish, and his Robert Burns goes through the motions with relative ease. The members of the Chinese crime gang all have nicknames and specific writings on their arms which forms a riddle, for which Burns soon interprets at the end. Well, on the bright side, at least there isn't a kidnapped daughter Seagal must rescue this time.