Second in Command - Ray's Review

OFFICIAL PLOT SYNOPSIS:

"Jean Claude plays an official who's just been appointed as Second In Command to the U.S.Ambassador at an American Embassy in a small, turbulent Eastern European nation.When local insurgents attempt a coup d'etat, the nation's President takes refuge inside the embassy.The embassy is then besieged by the well-armed insurgents.The U.S. Ambassador is killed in the ensuing action, an now it's up to Jean Claude and the embassy's small detachment of U.S. Marines to fend off the attackers."

INTRO:

I believe action films come in two main varieties:

1. The hero mold: Where the protagonist is front, right and centre stage. The whole film revolves around him and there are only the bare minimum of scenes regarding additional characters and story. The filmmakers have no fear when it comes to really making the hero larger than life and provide him with countless show-off scenes and money-shots. They are films which focus exclusively on the hero at the cost of story, but which enable you to really root for your hero (like Bloodsport for example).

2. The story mold: Where the protagonist is just a cog in a larger machine, swept along by the narrative, and often has less screen-time as a result (while the filmmakers connect all the dots of their story). He is often a little more realistic too, as the more complex stories (even the stupid ones) require him to advance the plot and don't provide the hero with enough moments to just be 'the man' (which is the case with Second in Command).

I think it is particularly painful to watch the "story mold" films when they are low budget, because the scripts are usually poor, yet for some reason they are unnecessarily complicated as if the screenwriters have gotten so wrapped up in their cliche ridden story that they have forgotten to create "hero scenes", which then just seem like an afterthought, randomly inserted into the overly convoluted plot to appease audiences. But they've got it around the wrong way! Their plot should be there to simply support the hero and to provide him with countless action scenes where he can shine (and I believe it doesn't have to result in a stupid story either). These days it's like filmmakers fear taking the over-the-top "80's" approach and don't want to glorify their hero, and as a result there will never be another Cobra, Commando or Bloodsport, just more limp, overly plotted films like Second In Command that don't satisfy our action-hero cravings.

REVIEW:

Even with my expectations low I came away very disappointed by Second In Command, this is simply not the kind of film I - as a huge and loyal Van Damme fan - want to see him in. The recent 'Wake of Death' and 'In Hell' were much closer to what works for Van Damme and were a step in the right direction - as reviews indicated - after the tepid 'The Order' and the shockingly inept 'Derailed', alas Second In Command is a step backwards. Like I stated in my intro: Second In Command is not the type of film which plays to his strengths or allows a true action-hero like Van Damme to 'do-his-thing', it merely leaves him standing around as the plot advances, providing him with only an occasional moment to shine (and even these moments are handled poorly, particularly the final fight scene).

If this was a larger budget film, with a more original plot and stronger actors to deliver it, we might have ended up with a solid war film, but the low-budget-direct-to-DVD market is simply not the place to make these types of films. Sure, Second In Command looks good in the basic shoot-out scenes, but once things escalate (and the terrible CG helicopters arrive) things look terribly fake and as a result it's impossible to suspend your disbelief. I didn't see real military men, I saw actors in uniforms trying desperately to seem authoritative and failing. Even in huge-budget war films it can prove difficult to convince audiences of its authenticity (such as in Windtalkers) let alone in a small budget production like this.

Yet sometimes a low budget film can rise above its limitations with the help of a talented director, but this is not the case here. Simon Fellows gets the job done - and the production looks good considering the budget - but he has little grasp on what makes action cool. Take one look at the best action directors and you see the flare, precision and skill they bring to even the most brief and seemingly unimportant action scene. Second In Command is the worst kind of action film-making, the director simply shoots a bunch of 'coverage' and then edits it together later on; you have no sense of geography as the shoot-outs occur, it simply edits from a shot of a 'good guy' firing a gun to a shot of a 'bad guy' firing his gun... and so on until one of them falls over dead. It's not dynamic or cool, it's just there. Trust me, I'm as sick to death as the next guy of poor imitations of John Woo's style, but if this is the alternative, I'd take a cheap imitation of Woo any day.

So what bits are good? Well Van Damme himself is looking good for his age, his face is getting more creases and as a result he looks more rugged which suits him, he's put on a bit more muscle which is a relief to see as he looked a bit emaciated in some recent films. Van Damme's acting comes off as pretty good, which is a feat in itself when you consider how dull his character is. One thing you can say is that he's still charming and has a strong screen presence (particularly evident when acting against such a bland supporting cast). The few fights and the countless shoot-outs are all unexciting and frankly tedious, but there is one highlight where - after saving some hostages - Van Damme crushes a guy's balls, then kicks them, then knees them and then - as if that's enough already - sticks his thumbs through the guy's eye sockets... now that's what I call Van Dammage! More violence like that would have gone along way.

CLOSING THOUGHTS:

If you want an heroic and exciting action film go rent something Van Damme made long ago. If you want a TV-movie-style-War-film where Van Damme stands around nodding and occasionally shoots a gun this is everything you could ever ask for. But seriously, the bottom line is this is one of his weakest films and only worth seeing if you are a huge fan who will take whatever they can get.

Second in Command - 4/10

If you want to know where I'm coming from, here's how I'd rate Van Damme's previous films:

Great:
Bloodsport
Lionheart
Kickboxer
Hard Target
Double Impact
Universal Soldier
Timecop


Good:
In Hell
Replicant
The Quest
Sudden Death
Cyborg
Nowhere to Run
Death Warrant

Poor:
Inferno
Legionnaire
Double Team
Maximum Risk
Knock Off
Black Eagle

Terrible:
Second In Command
Derailed
The Order
Universal Soldier: The Return
Street Fighter: The Movie