UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Action >

Belly of the Beast

Belly of the Beast (2003)

December. 30,2003
|
4.6
|
R
| Action

Jake and Sunti go to meet Mongkol, the leader of the Abu Karaf. Mongkol confirms that ever since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Jantapan has worked to corner the narcotics and arms markets. Jake must engage in a battle that will put both his physical and spiritual powers to the ultimate test.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Micitype
2003/12/30

Pretty Good

More
Lucybespro
2003/12/31

It is a performances centric movie

More
AshUnow
2004/01/01

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

More
Raymond Sierra
2004/01/02

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

More
shakercoola
2004/01/03

There are similarities to Taken and other films involving kidnappings, but Seagal's presence still provides sustenance to fans of this films. The main criticism is Seagal is portly for his fight scenes and so there was slo-motion camerawork and wire-work and body doubles, but this is somewhat tempered by the down-to-earth feel to the film which doesn't pretend to be anything other than its budget level. There's good location work, nice scenery, which makes this show tick along. Thanks to the direction of Siu-Tung Ching, it was executed rather well in comparison to other films Seagal had been involved with during this period, especially in creating some tension. It also had reasonable production values for a video release, and although it suffers from its pacing and script, it delivers plenty of action to stick around for.

More
DigitalRevenantX7
2004/01/04

Jake Hopper is a former CIA agent now working as a high-tech thief. His daughter Jessica & her friends are kidnapped by the Abu Karaf, an Islamic extremist group while on holiday in Thailand. Jake returns to the country & asks his old friend Sunti for help. Sunti, now a monk in order to atone for his past where he accidentally killed a woman in a shootout, joins Hopper in pursuing the Abu Karaf. But they soon realise that the group are innocent & are being framed for this by a Thai general who is also a devil worshipper & who plans to get the CIA to eliminate the Abu Karaf in order to stamp out his opposition. Jake & Sunti have less than 72 hours to free the kidnapped & stop the CIA from making a costly mistake.After the utterly pathetic Out for a Kill, Steven Seagal tried a slight change of tack & signed on to make Belly of the Beast shortly after completing work on the previous film. This time, the director is Ching Siu Tung & has actor Tom Wu, who starred in Out for a Kill as a Chinese mobster, playing another villain.Belly of the Beast has been somewhat savaged by the same crowd of critics who saw Out for a Kill, dismissing Belly as more of the same. I, however, tend to disagree. Belly is not a particularly great film, but it is light years ahead of Out for a Kill due to having a better written script & some good action scenes. The acting is also better & there is plenty of dark humour thrown in for good measure. This time, Seagal faces off against a corrupt Thai general & his dark master, as well as a former friend & a ladyboy assassin (in case you don't know what ladyboys are, they are a unique breed of gay men who pose as women until they get their gender reassignment surgery). Seagal also has plenty of dark one-liners to throw in, making the film a laugh riot in terms of enjoyment. The action scenes tend to go to the absurd but are still enjoyable, while the climax, placing Seagal up against Tom Wu's corrupt general in a fight that is assisted by chanting monks fighting the evil priest.The acting is better than usual. Seagal has some issues with his dialogue, with some lines coming out in a slightly different accent, but acquits himself well. Byron Mann makes a good backup & Tom Wu is superbly sinister as the evil general.

More
swedzin
2004/01/05

You know, love Steven Seagal films, especially his older films. From that time when he was somewhat tolerable, and he was thin and charismatic. He had a screen presence and star power. And his characters, no matter how they look all the same, the were, again, more tolerable. But from the beginning of 2000s... That one was pure mistake. Look at him, he is fat, not that super, boring, slow, disgustingly decadent... Just like every new character in straight to DVD films. Now, the story is simple just like in every Seagal's film, he is the former operative, they kidnap his daughter, he goes after her, blah blah blah... He wins in the end he saves her, everyone's happy, except for the villains, blah blah... This film offers really dumb martial arts scenes, Seagal very rarely uses Aikido, he turns more to some Ta Chi, or Kung Fu.. Wtf? Seagal is constantly dressed as a Buddhist monk, only because you are a member of that religion, doesn't mean you need to do it your films. But, alas, Seagal being stubborn when it comes to his views of the world, he always plays himself, so don't expect some good performances, not from him, not from anyone. Everything is plain bad in this film, action, music score, cinematography... Very amateurish. There is a scene, where Seagal is attacked by a transvestite fighter, I don't know what did they try to do with that. What was the point in that scene? let's put some bizarre opponents in this film, and they were just there, they had a fight, nothing more... No charisma no development, nothing new within these characters. Also, this is the funniest stuff in the film. There's a Buddhist temple, from where Seagal draws power to fight (yes, that happens in the film. The power of Buddhist monks), also the villains have their own dark Buddhist monk... What a hell?! I think that Seagal, not only that he wants to promote his own world views (just like he did in "Fire Down Below", or in "On Deadly Ground"), but he also decided to promote his own religion. Remember, when you promote religion, or force it to your audience, that can only turn bad and repelling. So, I don't recommend this film, because it's a silly Buddhist-action film with no characters and meaning. Mindless garbage!

More
ianlouisiana
2004/01/06

Give us a break Steve,how long do you think you can keep on getting away with this sort of stuff?This isn't merely "Direct to Video" it's "Direct to Charity Shop". But at least he's got a sense of humour - any movie of his with the word "Belly" in it is going to give his long - suffering fans a wry chortle............... Still,at least I watched it for free on TV last night. Our man is getting careless,not content with losing a son in an earlier movie he now loses his daughter,albeit to a kidnapper.Come on Steve,you really should take better care of your kids,y'know? Whoever he owes money too is certainly getting their pound of flesh.Or about 50 pounds,actually.

More