The Hunt For Eagle One Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
The only thing harder than combat is rescue.
A group of US Marines are sent to rescue captured a US Marine and a Filipino Captain while stopping a group of Al-Qaeda-backed local rebels from launching biological weapons.
| Mark Dacascos | Lt. Matt Daniels |
| Theresa Randle | Capt. Amy Jennings |
| Rutger Hauer | Gen. Frank Lewis |
| Joe Suba | Capt. Seth Cooper |
| Zach McGowan | Spec. Hank Jackson |
| Joe Fozzy | Spec. Jeff Parker |
| Rey Malonzo | Lt. Narcisco Montalvo |
| Ricardo Cepeda | Maj. Aginaldo |
| Joe Mari Avellana | Gen. Romero Panlilio |
| Ronald Asinas | Sgt. Tonito Bangayan |
| Robert Escutin | Cpl. J.P. Daomilas |
| Jerry Corpuz | Pvt. Amador Magtuto |
| Troy de Guzman | Pvt. Marvello Abaya |
| Reiven Bulado | Pvt. Don Tubayan |
| Joel Giray | Pvt. Benito Duran |
| Brian Clyde |
3.60 out of 10 (501 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Good
posted on 29 Jun 2009I saw this movie at Blockbuster and I was like "why have i never heard of this movie?" i watched it and i loved it. good action scenes and good plot to say the least.i'm not going to lie but it fell short on acting, especially on the female pilots role(not because she's a woman just bad acting on her part) and a few other characters also realism fell short. being a military buff and all i can safely say helicopters do not get blown out of the sky from RPGs. the movie said stinger missiles but they showed RPGs. also if any marine saw this movie and saw a Lt. salute a 1 star general with no cover on would be disgusted oh and by the way, the rank Spc(Specialist) is not in the Marine Corps, they are definitely in the Army but good movie all in all. i am definitely watching the second
Not a box office hit, But still not bad
posted on 11 Jun 2009Not a bad movie overall but lacks some special effects to beef it up, The Plot is at times a little weak, And I cant get the thought that the production team may have worked on the A-Team(Once you've watched the movie you'll understand). I Have seen better but its still entertaining and if your into Modern war films you will enjoy it. Of the new war movies this is not as hardihood as "Jarhead". As Another reviewer states it does seem a little on the low budget side but this doesn't detract from the fact its worth watching,The lack of training by Military ad visors does show with particular relevance to the handling of the weapons used by actors(anyone that has served in the Military will know that its a cardinal sin to bury the muzzle of a rifle in the dirt and that real weapons actually eject shells whilst firing). My advice is not to pick holes in the movie as i do or you maybe disappointed
kill me billy!!!
posted on 12 May 2009This was the worst war movie I have ever been able to finish. The budget apparently was not big enough to hire an adviser with even a minimal amount of military knowledge. At the beginning they say the night before they did some bombing to clear out a valley, but they try to convince you that they are performing some kind of covert special ops mission.One problem, it is daytime. Also the prior days bombing not only did not enable them to land on the beach without getting fired on, it probably alerted every bad guy that was nearby. Also the soldiers are getting picked off left and right at the beginning. You would have thought it was the Swedish or Belgian troops prancing their way to talk the terrorists into a willing plunge off the nearest cliff. And of course the terrorist are not Arab. I mean everybody knows that a majority of terrorist attacks are carried out by Phillipinos out on a major Jihad. Overall I give it a 2.
Another bird down...a chick is down.
posted on 24 Apr 2009Not like BLACK HAWK DOWN(2001)being the paradigm, this movie is very predictable and just lacking in the ability to sustain interest. Blame director Brian Clyde? Or executive and famed/infamous producer Roger Corman? General Frank Lewis(Rutger Hauer)commands a controversial tactical unit in the Philippines to capture rebel terrorist. Lt. Matt Daniels(Mark Dacascos)leads this special team and is called upon to rescue Captain Amy Jennings(Theresa Randle)after her helicopter is shot down by the enemy. While deep in unfriendly territory, Daniels stumbles upon a secret anthrax lab. The rescue is no picnic. But what hurts this movie is what seems to be over use of stock footage. Maybe I'm wrong, but at times this flick looks just plain shabby.
I cant believe how BAD this film is!
posted on 06 Apr 2009The opening scenes are poorly acted out and the suspense level is not even noticeable. If I were a pilot that had just gotten shot down, I would be a WEEE bit more hysterical. No name actors and a no name producer with a no name production company = a no name film that has no value. I would give it a great big "0" if I could, even negative numbers are too high! I tried to watch this film with all of my imagination, but it was really hard. I just couldn't get my mind around it. I have been in the military and I know that people just don't act like that when under pressure. The human element just isn't there. The female pilot is too robotic in her verbal responses and I just thought it was quite boring. I was truly underwhelmed. Save your money and get the Bourne series, a much better series of films and a recognizable acting team. BTW, what was the budget for this loser film anyway?? Probably a six pack of beer and a bag of chips.
just terrible...
posted on 17 Mar 2009Why are rebels using mask in the middle of the jungle? This is a film tailored for retarded guys in the US military... Acting is terrible from start to end. The torture scenes were pathetic, man I lost 2 hrs. of my life watching this crap. I just came back from Afghanistan(Canadian Army) and I will buy the DVD just to have a good laugh with my team. This is in my opinion a very, very, bad propaganda film. The bad guys are surely still laughing. The uniforms used were brand new, and always clean with the faces of the soldiers very dirty, not at all convenient for fighting in the jungle, and what about the glasses? and Lt. Daniels suddenly with a clean face at the end. If you really are into war flicks you have to watch full metal jacket from Stanley Kubrick, now we're are talking.Hurra!!!
Pretty Average Stuff!
posted on 15 Feb 2009This Roger Cormon produced action/war flick is reasonably well made but ultimately as shallow as most of it's rival DTV action films. The film shot on a clearly microscopic budget manages to deliver some competent action scenes however the lead Mark Dacascos has been used to far better effect in other movies.Following in the vein of Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down this film has the requisite battle sequences, which are shot well enough to mask the low budget, however unlike Scott's film and Spielberg's film, this lacks the character and depth of those movies. The cast is not too bad and everyone does reasonably well with their simplistic roles, but we never really care about any individual characters, particularly Dacascos in the lead. Dacascos is essentially playing a his character in solider mode all the time, he's in battle mode, showing little emotion or personality. Dacascos convinces as a solider but is given little humanity to convey. Also Rutger Hauer appears to chew scenery in a quick and wasteful cameo. Unfortunately Theresa Randle is quite wooden in perhaps the most fleshed out role.Overall there are many films better than this but similarly this isn't too bad. **
Not a bad movie
posted on 10 Jan 2009This is not the worst movie ever made... I don't know what is. Mark Dascasos puts in a solid performance here. I think this movie should have been publicized more. Therease Randle is a little rusty in here opening moments but for the rest of the its solid. Now don't get me wrong, this movie is low budget, and it shows. You won't see limbs being blown off or even that much blood. Sometimes the people look like they just tripped but they were being shot at so that made me figure it out. One of the big flaws about this movie is they're using Hueys. The last time they were used was only a few years after Vietnam. Anybody who is in the army is interested in the army, has seen other great war movies, even just played the video games knows that America has been using Black Hawks since before Mogidishu. Now, I don't think that was matter of low budget. Because the only Black Hawks that were ever used in a film was in Black Hawk Down. And they had to ask the armies permission and they just barley let them have 2. Another thing is bullet shells. Bullet shells are only visible on machine guns in this movie. But every gun, this is a basic, has a shell encased around a bullet and the force of the shot will push a bullet shell out, or it will be down manually such as sniper rifles or World War II rifles. And then the next shell and bullet will go into the chamber. All in all, I think an average war flick, that puts in for the most part, solid performances, in need of a better budget and director. This is probably a rent not a buy. The movie is considerably short compared to most modern war movies. Only if you really like Dascasos or the others would you pick this one up to own.
Acting, I mean line reading, is so bad I couldn't finish it....
posted on 22 Sep 2008"Oh...no.....we....are....going.....down....this.....is.....it....." Seriously, if the lines the cast delivers in the first 10 minutes we said by robots (with no emotion or comprehension of what they were saying) they would sound more natural. Everything from the press conference to the lines of the soldiers were so horrible in delivery that it totally ruined the effect.I am not a movie maker, but if casts like this one can get funding, maybe I should start. The actual visuals are not that bad, but the Vietnam era helicopters and the stupid tactics of sending in rescue teams right after a helicopter was shot down, before the area is secure, make what happens in may cases totally predictable. I recommend not taking the time to check this "not even made for TV" movie out.
Not bad at all
posted on 10 Sep 2008This is a surprisingly good movie, considering it is basically low budget. It is fairly realistic, too. The weapons sound like the real weapons. The actors act like real Marines and soldiers.There are some lapses in dialog, though. Some of the things the Marine lieutenant says would not be uttered by a Marine.Far and away the biggest lapse is Rutger Hauer. He is starting to show his age - unfortunately. Plus, with his long hair a scraggly 3-day-old beard, he looks more like a street person than a Marine Corps General.That notwithstanding, the military advisers did a much better job than in other movies of this genre. It held my attention, even if it wasn't Saving Private Ryan.
Save yourself from this
posted on 15 Aug 2008A dull plot, one dimensional characters and no money for special effects. Worst shooting ever! Magazines are emptied without hitting anyone at 20m distance and only the marines have hand grenades. Killing the bad guy is celebrated in a repeated slow motion but when he finally falls over miraculously none of the rifles caused any exit wounds. Of course what once has been just rebels now has ties to AKD (supposedly Al Qaida) and manufactures biological WMD's who just happen to be sitting right next to prison cell, very convenient. Maybe they should have called the movie "Counter Strike" like the game, so one would know what to expect.
Good movie, why the bad reviews?
posted on 18 Jul 2008I thought that this movie was great! For its limited budget and not so known actors it was a good movie, filled with action and excitement. Some things are not so good though, but hey, its a B- movie. Mark Dacascos delivers as always. Teresa Randell known from Bad Boys also plays her part as Captain Jennings quite good. The bad rating that this movie has received her, I can not understand. This movie is better than its current average points. It also has a political touch to it, since the enemies are Al- Qaida and the rebels are a part of a network under them. I am looking forward to watch the next movie: "The hunt for eagle one: Crash point".
It's not Hollywood but it looks real....
posted on 29 May 2008I think we have been used to seeing a lot of Hollywood films with its big budgets, flashy PR and amazing special effects that we sometimes fail to appreciate the beautiful simplicity of other films.Of course the "The Hunt for Eagle One" is not without its faults, too many in fact such as inaccurate translation of the Filipino language, and bad acting but then again, if you read the cast list at the end of the movie, there are only a handful of real actors, both American and Filipino in the movie. The majority are actual members of the military from the US and Philippine Marines which I think lends to the realism of the film. I'm former US military so I may be a little biased ;) The movie is set in the jungle where technology and air power is of no use. It's a simple movie about the simple realism of jungle warfare in Southeast Asia where battles are fought by the grunt hoofing his way through the thick vegetation with only a rifle and minimal supplies for a long range patrol and with no effective air support and minimal logistical support due to the impassable terrain. Also, it is an accurate movie about a handful of US military advisors embedded with the Philippine military who are not as technologically equipped as their American counterparts.There's not enough drama in this film for plot development and sometimes, that's the way I like it... less drama and more shooting. This movie definitely has a lot of shooting. The basic no frills firefight is what I want to see when watching a war flick. The way everyone maneuvers seems very real to me and Mark Dacascos plays a good Marine Lt.The way the terrorists were portrayed was accurate as well. They're not the fumbling and poorly trained irregulars as they are typically played by Hollywood. Both Philippine military and rebels alike have been fighting since the 1950's and both groups share the same level of combat experience.Basically, it's not "Hollywood" but it's "Real" so I like it....
Bah humbug
posted on 20 Mar 2008This is one of the worst films I have ever seen. I completed watching it ( for some reason unknown to humanity ) the acting is not worthy of a 1st grade school play.Why Rutger Hauer is in this movie is beyond me. Mark Dacascos as Lt. Matt Daniels is the only actor that had any of my attention during this horrible excuse for a movie ..A few assault team characters were tolerable too but not even close enough for me to even take the time figuring their names out . The rest was poorly made bad threaded and without any form of passion and nothing I'm going to recommend to any friends of mine to watch.If all you live for is war movies then by all means have fun just don't say I didn't warn you about this one .Gimme more Jarhead though :) not anymore of this ..Ever ..
lots of technical mistakes and poor acting
posted on 11 Feb 2008At one point in the movie, where the captured captain is being tortured, when they electrified her and other people were holding her, the captain felt the shock and other people didn't feel a damn thing. Even a primary grade student would also know that if someone is holding other person and if the other person feels the shock then the first person would also feel the shock.to put it in the simple way "A Bullshit movie". Very poor acting, low budget, insane direction and no use of brain. The rebels just jump in front of marines without thinking that if they are able to kill one person from that point, they can kill more but it seems that director think that rebels have no brain and they don't use any tactics then he is doing a huge mistake. I think the director of this movie should go and train marines. They might win the "the war for oil and safer Israel" :D
Simply Awful!! *** may contain spoilers ***
posted on 31 Dec 2007I rented this flick simply because the DVD cover looked like it was a good flick. I was in the mood for a guy flick and the DVD cover caught my eye, the premise written on the jacket was decent and also I didn't feel like watching any films that are really deep (plotwise)at the time. Well, to my surprise the DVD Cover was the only thing redeeming about this flick.Supposedly, this is based on a joint operations between the Philippine military and the U.S. Marines in the hunt for the Abu Sayef Brigade (thugs more like it) in the Southern Philippines (Mindanao). Well it was a good idea for a flick but very bad execution in more ways than one.The plot is a rip off of "Black Hawk Down". How so, you may ask? Well, there was a mission (that is the capture of thug/terrorist Abu Bakkar), a chopper went down, the pilot was captured, there's a sub-mission: that is to rescue the pilot (since you know, Marines never leaves anyone behind), the bad guys die, some of the good guys die, then the heroes bury their dead etc. All that is nice and good except it was badly done even for a small budget flick. Oh yeah, did I mention the even some of the scores were very similar to BHD. Simply pathetic.The acting is sub par. The woman who played Capt. Jennings seemed like she's reading the script rather than acting. Rutger Hauer, for such a good actor seemed like he did not want to be in this flick. Mark Dacascos performance is halfway decent. Of course, it doesn't help if the dialogues were poorly written. The dialogues simply lack realism. It's obvious the writers never had any military background. At the very least, know the basic military lingo to make the lines a little bit more convincing. The cinematography is decent. It did try to copy BHD but it simply fell short. I could understand why, as it is not easy to shoot war scenes, not too mention working on a limited budget. This is evidenced in the set design and lack of military consultants to at least train extras on rules of engagement, weapon handling etc.I do think that watching this flick is a waist of money (and time) but if you just happen to be in the mood for a bad flick on a cold rainy Friday night; then go ahead and rent it.
Not really that bad of a movie
posted on 02 Nov 2007I felt like I was watching something that could be akin to a video game produced by the United States Army (or maybe something from Clancy). The maneuvers seems like those that I have seen in training films, historical films, et cetera. The action is what is important, not the character development, think of this movie as one 90 minute examination of modern day combat against terrorists around the world. It isn't Shakespeare, but it isn't meant to be. Don't expect intricate dialogue and philosophy.
The story was not that bad of a story, in my opinion, at least it wasn't the Rambo "I can shoot a thousand bullets and hit every one of the enemies, and then they shoot a thousand toward me, and not hit me once" mentality of some movies out there. The movie is not a perfect movie, I wont say that it is. The story deals with terrorists and how terrorists can be found anywhere and everywhere just like real life. This isn't paranoia, this is brutal fact that there is always danger against freedom.
The torture scene, I wish to point out, is not realistic. The torture of humans is a bit more complex and a lot more bloody, though I find its inclusion in the film a good point to be made--that all these liberals whine that America "tortures" our captives, when the Islamic fanatics (not to be confused by the more peaceful Islamic) go all out of their way to torture people, especially those who are Christians (which does happen, Islamic fanatical countries do go out of their way to torture and brutally kill Christians).
Most of all what I appreciate about this movie is that it doesn't degrade the military like Hollywood tries to do in so many ways these days. For Hollywood, anyone who fights against terrorism anywhere and at any time is considered "evil" and "intolerant" simply because they are trying to protect our freedom from these criminals (then again calling terrorists criminals is "intolerant" anyway, or so says the liberal media). The men who live and die and fight another day for we who are at the home front should always be respected and honored.
Unbelievable!!!
posted on 19 Aug 2009I saw an advanced copy of this movie and I was simply blown away (no pun intended). I love Rutger Hauer, so I thought I would give it a chance and I was so impressed by the direction and the all the actors. Why isn't this a theater release? Who knows? Amazing...