Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

Seagal plays a native American who is corresponding with a very young American girl (?) in a Polish orphanage. This in itself is a bit creepy and he writes things like 'Remember Napolean and be strong'. What?People from the CSA (British readers may envisage the Child Support Agency here) are out to get him but they are no match for an ageing overweight hippie with dyed hair and strange skin tone. Strange voice too – not Seagal's.Meanwhile, over in Poland an even creepier group of old men pick the prettiest girls and take them from the orphanage. These 'actors' are really Polish apparently and so struggle with English, and acting.Seagal flies over to Poland as the girls are being transported somewhere. Ah, the gang v Seagal. Only one winner. Seagal murders one (no police action). He is questioned. But no charges, even when evidence is found linking him to one of the girls who has been killed. The Police inspector just buys him a drink! Seagal invites a young boy into his hotel room and feeds him fruit. He helps the police with their computers before returning to the room and the boy who is now drinking alcohol provided by Seagal. There is probably enough evidence against him now for him not to be returning to America for a long time! But nothing happens. In fact the Police Inspector uses Seagal as a designated driver because she has had too much to drink. Then she returns to his hotel room where the young boy is in another bed. They act like a little family of three for the rest of the film! The coded message in the hors d'oeuvres is brilliant – three round ones, some onions, three square ones, some onions, three round ones. Oh, the round ones have olives on them. Seagal can interpret this as 'this is a trap'. Brilliant. I think he got it slightly wrong - it really says 'this is c**p'In the fight scenes (in fact in all scenes) Seagal moves so slowly he reminds me of The Mummy. And the final scene is really really stupid. It's easy to spot where the stunt double is being used. If it moves, it's the double.The acting in this film is almost universally woeful. Bristolian Nick Brimble provides the only glimmer of talent. Quite possibly the worst film I have seen.

Out of Reach had a truly wonderful idea to work from, and as a film it had the potential to be powerful and compelling, but turned out to be neither. For me, the two only reasons why Out of Reach isn't any lower as a score is the idea it had to work from and final sword fight, which was the only well choreographed and performed action scene in my opinion. Steven Seagal looks unkempt and his performance both in the delivery of the dialogue, where he sounds monotone and bored, and the action sequences, where he looks as though he can't keep up with the speed of the choreography, is truly lazy. To be fair though, the film also does have several other things that bring it down. The acting is dire from the whole cast, nobody is believable and it doesn't help that the characters are written and explored badly, while the film making and direction are inept. The pace is sluggish, and this is including in the action which is not very well shot or choreographed excepting the final sword fight, the story is derivative and the dialogue is awful. All in all, there was a good movie in this somewhere but for some reason the good movie didn't come out. 2/10 Bethany Cox

Same as all Steven Seagal Movies he gets the bad guy, but why not I like a movie where the bad guys get the crap kicked out of them, too much thinking goes into some of the negative reviewers we are not all into arty camera angles , I like the thought that it was shot in Poland, why should the US have all the bad guys, and as for the acting seen worse soaps that people are glued to most nights of the week, so I give the film a thumbs up I like it simple and brutal.Could watch it again just to see the fight scene where the villain gets his,think I blinked when the killer blow was struck , So I think our Steve still got the talent, and a shame he can't get along with his fellow actors or directors more, think he has some films left in him yet, and I don't like him for his arrogant way he treats other people in real life , but he's still got that certain something.

Steven Seagal plays William Lansing who investigates the disappearance of several orphans in Poland. Agnieszka Wagner, an experienced TV actress, joins him as the Polish police woman Kasia Lato. She is ready to suffer, apparently, as she has Lansing cut a bullet from her shoulder the wild west way, although a hospital and doctors are nearby. The villain Faisal is portrayed by Matt Schulze at his most eccentric, from a black leather coat to a white fencing suit, doing meaningless things like burning a rose or drugging someone he already holds hostage, but always looking cool. Looking cool is really the point here, especially the duel in the white palace is as surreal as the ending of "2001 - a space odyssey". They must have said that if the script doesn't make any sense, we can at least make it look interesting. Something which worked extremely well is the child actors. The boy who helps Seagal as well the girl who communicates in a secret code are portrayed by very talented kids. Ask any director how annoying kids can destroy a movie, and he can probably tell you a story or two about that, but in this case, they both make an important, successful contribution.You can accuse this movie of anything except mediocrity, and I actually enjoyed watching it enough to vote 6 of 10 here.