videorama-759-859391
Santiago, in my opinion, though I've only seen three of his films (where I can pretty well imagine what his others are like) hasn't made anything that's matched up to the exciting, sexy, entertaining, and downright cheesy, Naked Fist aka: Firecracker. That's one of my favorite karate films, like The Protector, that I like to treat myself to on occasion. This was like a long dragging bore of a film, a pathetic reminder that these and other cheesy sci fi apocalyptic films existed in the eighties, with it's bad acting and script. It's one of those films, you lose interest in, then switch back, after a few minutes have lapsed, or something you just watch blankly. The story all so, mirrors the one on The Exterminators Of The Year 3000, a much livelier and exciting pic. Here, water has dried up. Situation: the good guys are helped by a girl who knows of the one last locations, where water is still to avail, only the bad guys are guarding it. There. Oh did I mention, the film has bad acting. This is a film, which if your girlfriend went down to the video store, and came back with it, you would strike (r) her. Forget it. Post apocalyptic crap.
dmdb
I only write reviews of movies with low rating, which actually are not that bad. Give them a chance!I love movies about apocalypse and post-apocalypse and that is why I wanted to watch this one, too. It is a bad movie, but it is so bad that is actually watchable! Yup, I enjoyed it at the end. It is funny, though it was not suppose to be, and you can say that some action scenes are solid, too, as well as vehicles and costumes. Acting is fine for some characters, but nothing special. It is a Mad Max wannabe, and now while I am browsing IMDb I can see that director Cirio H. Santiago made several more Mad Max wannabes! Wow, he was really persistent! He made Wheels Of Fire two years after Stryker, and I think that it is a best bad Mad Max wannabe of all, but you can read about it more in my other review.So, about Stryker, you may enjoy it if you like apocalypse and post- apocalypse. Or if you want to watch something bad with friends so you can laugh - then, Stryker is the movie for you. You need to look at it that way so that you can watch it to the end, like I did. I can say I enjoyed watching it, it was so bad and unintentionally funny that I liked it.5/10
boblipton
Every once in a while, these cheesy grindhouse movies show good movie-making constrained by a non-existent budget. Well, this isn't one of those movies. Script, dialogue and acting ar all way substandard, although the camera-work is good enough. Nice scenery and the young men and women in this can't act, but they are very pleasant to look at in their ripped shirts and leather panties. But the whole thing is clearly a Mad Max rip-off and you can't look at it for more than, oh, half a minute without figuring it out.But after a while you start to wonder about the basic premise of the movie: a nuclear war has destroyed all the water in the world. Uh, OK. So why does everyone have clean clothes, hair and tanks? Obviously these people know why civilization needs water.
BloodTheTelepathicDog
Where is the dialogue? There are periods in this film when no one speaks for like five minutes. I can't get over how bad this film is, but I really enjoyed it nonetheless.I bought it .75 cents on EBay, and was surprised how entertaining it was. This film has a certain comic book feel to it, although it borrows the same premise from Mad Max.Steve Sandor, the hero, is a big dude and handles the role well, but William Ostrander of Red Heat outshines him. The villains were all laughable, and you knew Sandor would have little trouble defeating them The flashback scenes were the worst I have ever seen.A must have for the "It's so bad it's good crowd."
AD
