This movie offers a novel twist on the already creative concept established in the original, while also featuring strong new co-stars in Bill Goldberg and Michael Jai White. This is actually the fourth movie in the Universal Soldier franchise, but the second & third did not feature Jean-Claude Van Damme or anyone else of note (the main protagonist in both was Matt Battaglia) so you’ll be forgiven for watching the first movie then jumping straight to this one – the fourth.
We don’t see enough of wrestling superstar Goldberg in this kind fast action movie – he makes a very convincing tough guy. Plus, this is easily one of Michael Jai White’s better performances – the robotic superiority-complex role matches his real life demeanour.
Overall I rate this a Decent movie – it’s a bit less of a revelation than the original but still quite creative with a fresh new concept, and features multiple action superstars, but on the downside the plot is a bit one dimensional – the script could have easily been developed more to make it an even better movie. There are multiple females in this movie, including a reporter and a fellow UNISOL, but none of them are particularly worth mentioning – they all deliver bland performances.
Fun fact: this was actually Van Damme’s last widely-released-in-cinemas English-language movie until 2 and a half decades later, when he released Darkness Of Man in 2024 (excluding movies where he wasn’t the main star, such as The Expendables 2 in 2012). Maybe he wasn’t totally playing ball with Hollywood’s sickest shenanigans, but they eventually rewarded him for keeping quiet during the deceptions of the 2020 era? Or maybe his movies had only a small niche audience? The fact that Inferno (1999) had only a limited cinematic released is odd, and the fact that The Order (2001) went direct to video is outrageous.
Further Sequels
If you enjoyed the original Universal Soldier movie from 1992, as well as this one – Universal Soldier: The Return – from 1999, which is the second one starring Van Damme; then you’ll be pleased to know there are a couple more decent Universal Soldier movies to enjoy after this one.
Universal Soldier: Regeneration (2009) rekindles the rivalry between Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren, then they both come back again for Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning (2012) with the addition of Scott Adkins as the main protagonist in the final movie. Both of these movies from 2009 & 2012 also make a significant role for Andrei Arlovski, the former UFC heavyweight champion who still holds the record for the most wins in UFC heavyweight history to this day.
This movie started out looking like a B movie, considering its sound effects, camerawork and acting standards. But it soon caught fire and sustained my attention and entertained me once Scott Adkins appeared about 10 minutes in.
Well done to whoever managed to put this semi-respectable movie together on what seems like a humble budget, outside of the resources of Hollywood et al. To its credit, the action and equipment used, seems to make great use of low budget money. The camerawork and sound effects were also on point intermittently throughout this movie, for example, at nearly 45 minutes in when Scott silently takes a man out by sneaking up and jamming a knife in his neck, that was really slick choreography backed by strong cinematography to the point it’s not noticeably any worse than top Hollywood standards for a moment there. So it’s not a bad effort and not a bad result overall, considering what we’re working with here.
Make no mistake, I am not one of those guys who enjoys watching the occasional B-movie. I can’t stand them, but this movie kind of works, so I guess it can’t be a B-movie really, especially since it’s starring Scott Adkins and has some decent settings & props – it’s more like a BBC drama episode mixed up with a Hollywood action superstar or two. It’s like something made for Netflix, with cost cuts all over the place. Less grandiose visuals and sound effects; more irritating suspenseful noise effects and godawful Eastenders-style acting throughout. But it has some seriously strong action scenes. Scott Adkins basically carries this movie, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it were literally made for him, maybe even funded by him.
It turns out the truth is not far off. It was made by one of the UK’s leading independent production & distribution agencies (Signature Entertainment, founded by Marc Goldberg, a West Ham supporter), and its UK distribution rights were bought by Sky, while its US distribution rights were bought by a division of Sony (called Destination Films). So it’s not exactly Hollywood, but its roughly the next best level around.
It was good to see Michael Jae White join the show too, a little over half an hour in. I don’t say that very often – I’m not his biggest fan – he’s all fronting, even in real life, a bit like Steven Seagal, but with far less martial arts skill – but at least he’s another name in the cast, so it’s likely to continue being a half decent movie, with some effort towards plot development through the remaining hour of the movie. Having said that, he has put in some decent performances in some of his movies, this one included – he’s working with some very corny lines here, but delivers them like a boss. Well, near enough, for the kind of standard we can reasonably hope for here.
Alexis Knapp puts in a respectable performance as the female leader of the baddies in One More Shot. Tom Berenger does a fair job as a CIA boss who she kills, and Edward ‘Teddy’ Linard makes a convincing mercenary.
The blood-soaked crying & snivelling was overly dragged out towards the back end of this movie – we don’t need so much of that in an action hero movie. But the techniques of blackmail & torture are realistic considering what really goes on in this world – well done to the team for raising awareness of such dastardly tactics.
The ending was a bit anticlimactical, as if the real ending was chopped off and we only saw up until the scene before it. But it’s not a terrible ending either – I’ve seen plenty of otherwise decent action movies have a really poor ending and this wasn’t any worse than them. It was kind of smooth, but short and underwhelming compared to what it could have been, but realistically, considering how bad the start was, we shouldn’t be expecting a better ending than what we got.
This movie is actually a sequel to One Shot (2021) also starring Scott Adkins – be sure to check it out if you were a fan of this movie – maybe even watch that one first. Both are named after the one-shot or one-take filming method where the entire movie is either shot in one single long continuous take, or (more realistically) edited to appear as if it were shot that way, or at least with very few sharp switches between scenes. Between these two movies – One Shot and One More Shot – that’s already half of everything the British screenwriter & director James Nunn and the British producer Ben Jacques are known for. Marc Goldberg co-produced One Shot alongside his colleague Ben Jacques, then stepped down to allow Ben to take the lead in One More Shot; while James Nunn (not the actor) personally wrote and directed both movies, presumably with significant input from Scott Adkins and other highly experienced cast members.
Distribution rights to the original movie, One Shot (2021), were purchased by Screen Media Ventures, LLC (trading as Screen Media or Screen Media Films). Its parent company Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc went bankrupt in 2024 after declaring over half a billion dollars in losses during 2023. Oops!
All in all, I rate One More Shot as Watchable – no more, no less. I won’t level it up to “OK” because that would be setting you up for disappointment since it’s certainly not on the level of the movies that I have rated OK. But I also won’t say it’s intolerable – I genuinely watched it from start to finish and it kind of sustained my interest and was worthy of a review. I would have switched off within about 15 minutes if it were anything less, but it delivered, and to be honest, after the dead first few minutes, I had to scan ahead to make sure it gets better, then go back and continue from where I left off. The other movies I’ve rated watchable include performances from pretty much all the best action movie stars of all time – they’ve all done some stinkers in their time, so it’s nothing to be terribly ashamed of, but make no mistake, they’ve all done much better too, Scott Adkins included. That’s not to say his performance here was terrible – he actually did quite well, considering what he was working with. He was his usual self, with a bit more weight on his shoulders, and a bit more baggage hanging on his coattails. Fair play. Don’t write him off as finished just yet. He deserves one more shot. Ba-dum tss!
Under Siege 2: Dark Territory (1995) has a very similar story to the original Under Siege (1992) where Seagal’s character, an ex SEAL working as a chef, found himself on a military battleship that got hijacked by pirates led by a crazy ex-CIA man, except this time it’s a public train he’s on that gets hijacked by a different crazy ex-CIA man.
While some people prefer this sequel, most people agree the original was slightly better in pretty much every way, myself included – I rate this sequel as OK, just one level below the original which I rated as Decent. I feel like the original had a bit more of an atmosphere – a bit more stage setting – a bit more general production value. Still, they’re near enough alike that it’s well worth watching this sequel soon after watching the original. They follow on quite nicely from each other, since the first had a bit more of a backstory and the second gets stuck in sooner with less building or questioning.
This time, Steven Seagal‘s character Casey Ryback is on board the hijacked train with his only remaining relative, his niece (Sarah Ryback, played adequately by Katherine Heigl) – the daughter of his recently deceased brother who was also a decorated military hotshot but not quite as decorated as himself.
The main baddies in this movie are also played adequately by Eric Bogosian (the brains) and Everett McGill (the top braun). Everett McGill in this movie looks remarkably like the Tekken 3 character Brian Fury who I would be willing to bet was based on him since that game was released into arcades just under 18 months after the release of this movie. Everett also has a bit of a Clint Eastwood vibe about him, while Eric Bogosian seems to have shared hairdresser with Elliott Gould.
Under Siege (1992) was the fifth movie in Steven Seagal‘s career, and in most objective movie buffs’ perspective, remained his biggest and best role of all.
This movie is generally very well made. It has good timing, good acting, good budget, good sets, good sound effects, good camera work… It’s a decent movie all round. The plot is a bit simplistic and this makes the movie a bit one dimensional but it’s generally well executed and is right up there as one of the best movies in Steven’s career, if not the very best – some people prefer Under Siege 2 although most believe the first was the better one, and some people prefer Glimmer Man, but Under Siege is still right up there in everyone’s eyes as one of the best if not the very best movie he’s ever made.
Cast includes Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Busey as the main baddies – they both do a decent job, if a little unpleasant but that’s probably the fault of the director more than the actors; and Erika Eleniak plays the lead female role – not very impressively in my humble opinion but I guess she’s just doing her job and is not there to act like a trained navy seal, she’s there to play the role of a bimbo and that’s exactly how she comes across so maybe she deserves credit in a way? Fortunately she doesn’t take up too much screen time, so it’s not a big problem. Many other supporting cast members put in strong performances – too many to mention right now.
All in all, I personally rate this movie as Seagal’s joint best performance – roughly equal to The Glimmer Man – on a par with most of Van Damme’s above-average movies like Inferno and Assassination Games. Under Siege is not just an OK movie, it’s better than OK, it’s rather decent. I wouldn’t go so far as to describe it as pretty good, but it’s only one level shy of that. It’s just a couple of levels shy of Very Good. Indeed, the entertainment value of Under Siege is solid and quite consistent. Any boring bits are rare and don’t last long. It’s a fairly strong product that was quite deserving of its sequel.
In its day, this movie was easily the best so far in Steven Seagal’s career. He later went on to make one or two more on a similar level, but this is a level he never significantly topped, if ever at all.
The best moment in this movie is probably when the bad guys, having just taken over the ship and locked away all but one of its crew members, get hold of the captain’s personnel files and realise the harmless Cook running loose (played by Seagal) is actually a former Navy SEAL.
Sequel
If you enjoyed Under Siege (1992) you should definitely check out its sequel Under Siege 2 (1995), which has a very similar style except in the sequel Seagal is re-taking control of a train instead of a ship.
Van Damme stars in this movie, as a soldier brought back to life as a kind of Terminator 1 style cyborg, who then gets taken and kind of “woken up” by a journalist. Dolph Lundgren plays his main adversary – another member of the same cyborg squad, tasked with bringing Van Damme’s character back in, or killing him.
This movie has a very creative base storyline, with credible lead acting, and the odd awesome scene; but it gets a bit boring towards the end as the writers run out of creativity, which makes for less interesting re-watching.
Fortunately there’s at least one decent sequel to keep you entertained if you enjoyed this movie.
The whole saga, in summary
Safe to say, every movie in the Universal Soldier saga (excluding those that did not feature Van Damme) is about a couple of levels worse than the one before it.
The original was fresh & inspired – it had the potential to be one of the best movies ever made – but it dragged its heels towards the end, with an over extended fight scene that gets boring for rewatchers.
The second movie was also quite creative with the computer taking over, and had some great new cast members (especially Goldberg). Its script was quite one dimensional but it was still a decent movie, with decent cinematography and decent entertainment value throughout.
The third movie had a slightly interesting concept and featured some interesting new cast members, but was quite poorly made. Cold and soul-less, almost like a B movie. At times it seemed like it was about to catch fire but it never really did.
Then the fourth and final movie in the series took coldness & soullessness to a whole new level. It never really seemed like it was ever going to catch fire. It was really a chore to sit through the first hour – I think I must have tried to watch it a few times but switched off early every time – I only tolerated it once for the benefit of this review, so you don’t have to!
