Close Range

2015 "Colton MacReady...is coming home."
5.1| 1h20m| NR| en| More Info
Released: 11 December 2015 Released
Producted By: Bleiberg Entertainment
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: https://www.facebook.com/closerangemovie/
Synopsis

A rogue soldier turned outlaw is thrust into a relentless fight with a corrupt sheriff, his obedient deputies, and a dangerous drug cartel in order to protect his sister and her young daughter.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Prime Video

Director

Producted By

Bleiberg Entertainment

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Michael Ledo This film starts out like a Liam Neeson film ends...young girl getting rescued from bad guys. In this case it is the Mexican Cartel and the girl is his niece (Madison Lawlor). Colton MacReady (Scott Adkins) is ex-special services and some sort of lone wolf who managed to rescue his niece. Her step-dad is involved with the cartel as is the local sheriff (Nick Chinlund). The plot basically has no twists or real imagination. It is not hard to figure out where the story leads. The film is done grindhouse western style. The drawn out climax scene was laughable. I didn't know if it was meant to be serious or they were spoofing western showdowns. The dialogue lacked classic lines and the acting left something to be desired. It needed Danny Trejo. Maybe the next one.Guide: F-bomb. No sex or nudity.
Finfrosk86 Wow, this movies is like a roller-coaster ride. Not in a very good way, unfortunately. The action is varying to say the least. Some of it, mostly the fighting, is pretty cool. Not shaky, you see whats going on, decent choreography, pretty cool at times. Not overly edited, either.But the gunfight are not that good. Some of the shoot-outs just keep going, on and on, with no progress. The same shots recycled several times. Goes on for several minutes (felt like) then they change spots, and repeats the same thing. That's pretty dull. It reminded me of how in a video game, if you're in a gunfight, and your objective is to reach a checkpoint or something, but as long as you don't go forward, the gunfight just keeps happening, with no real progress. Get it? No, yes? Anyway, that's the feeling I got from some of the action scenes.However, super generic gunfights are followed by pretty awesome fights. (well, one or two times, at least one!) My guess is that the second unit director made some of the filler gunfights, and then the main director made the better ones. (Or maybe the other way around?)Close Range has a couple of sweet moments, the first action scene is probably maybe the best one, but mostly it's just very generic. Too much filler, dammit.
latinfineart This film was fairly hard to sit through. The characters were all out of a cartoon. All cardboard. The corrupt sheriff. The Mexican gangsters. The ex-husband of his sister. All poorly written. There was not much to hold my attention. Not ever much satisfaction derived from the bad guys going down, as there was nothing invested in any of the characters. Adkins is capable of so much more. Unfortunately, his stunts were kind of wasted on this turkey. I cannot recommend it, with any degree of sincerity.Hollywood, it seems, is running out of action stories. How anyone green lighted this film, is beyond my comprehension. It could not have looked good on paper.
Phil Hubbs Cementing his place as the new JCVD? well Adkins is certainly churning out the movies, alas none of them are nowhere near as good as JCVD's earlier offerings. This movie seems to follow the same kind of themes as JCVD's 'Nowhere to Run' if you ask me, to a degree...OK visually maybe. The plot is breathtakingly basic and revolves around MacReady, a soldier gone A.W.O.L. who must protect his sister and niece from a drug cartel. The reason being his sister is married to some low life fool who gets caught up with the drug cartel and the corrupt local sheriff over merchandise and a flashcard containing important information. MacReady was serving overseas but assaulted his commanding officer apparently, he then ran off, as you do. Yet somehow he pops up back in the USA ready to take on the bad guys (how did he manage this?).K so lets get down to the nitty gritty here, we're all gonna watch this for one reason alone and that's Adkins kicking ass. Does he do this in satisfactory form? meh...kinda, I guess, why you asking me? no wait scratch that. So what we get is Adkins taking on Mexican drug dealers with haircuts of varying degrees of stupidity, and amazingly all of them know martial arts. The formula is simple enough, Adkins creeps around a bit, surprises a couple guys, gets into a rowdy mixed martial arts fest, eventually winning. Wash rinse and repeat this scenario all the way through the movie as he takes down the small team of bad guys. Even though the location changes from the great outdoors of California to within the confines of a small ranch, its all still the same. What's even more disappointing is the fact that the fights all look the same too, literately the same choreography for every bloody fight, same moves, same camera angles etc...Its not all fisticuffs though, there is quite a bit of gun action thrown in there too. Alas that's even more ridiculous than the repetitive fights because you can clearly tell everyone is using blanks. Why you ask? well because at numerous times the characters cross paths and shoot at each other at near point blank range, yet everyone seemingly misses each other and there are no bullet holes or destruction. Quite often I was thinking to myself, why aren't you hit? how are you missing? this is like watching a glitch ridden game of 'Call of Duty'. There is some car chase action too but that's pretty naff frankly, again you can clearly tell the vehicles are travelling quite slowly.The movie really tries its best to be ultra cool and grown-up, but it fails miserably in my opinion. The bad guys role call sequence near the start was a hilariously bad idea for starters. Firstly who cares, we don't know these guys and you won't care about any of them further on down the line, they're all meat for Adkins to beat. Secondly why would we need this information, why do we need to know their stereotypically stupid names? like I said they're all mere fodder. Thirdly, it just looks so f*cking stupid, each one looks towards the camera with a stern, I'm well 'ard glance. Stop it! you're all so tough and scary I'm starting to sweat through my pants.But the most amusing and daft moment of all, the real clincher was at the very end. Adkins shaven headed anti-hero stands directly opposite the corrupt sheriff (Nick Chinlund), a shotgun and set of handcuffs lie before the sheriff. MacReady had given the sheriff an ultimatum, cuff yourself or go for the gun, your choice. What follows is the most dreadful laughable cloning or homage, of the classic finale scene in 'The Good, the Bad and the Ugly' between Eastwood, Wallach and Cleef. Its not even remotely intense, it doesn't have any of the scope and the two helpless females watching on from the sidelines makes it feel so hokey. Oh and I should mention that the beginning credits sequence actually has little snippets of the actual movie in it! Yeah so you're actually seeing key moments of action in the title sequence before seeing the film, great decision! A title sequence that harks back to Sergio Leone classics I might add. Adkins and director Florentine have definitely got a thing for Leone classics.Yep so its another pile of crap from Adkins I'm afraid. Yes I'm sure if you enjoy his work then you'll enjoy this. Yes I realise he's making a certain type of movie that some people demand, and in that sense it delivers exactly what some people want. Yet despite all that, and the fact I am partial to a good fight/action romp, this simply looks and plays exactly like what it is...a cheap, lazy, dull, boring, pointless movie. Yes you can argue that Adkins is only doing what previous stars like JCVD did back in the day, but the difference in quality and the fact that it was more original back then, always trumps that call.3.5/10