Freedom Strike

1998
Freedom Strike
3.7| 1h33m| en| More Info
Released: 26 September 1998 Released
Producted By:
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

When a peace treaty between America and Syria is thwarted, the renegade head of the Syrian army retaliates in a major way. He steals a nuclear weapon that only the Freedom Strike team can stop! Cue an action-packed race against time to save the world.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Trailers & Images

Reviews

tom-1081 well this movie is so crap. The story was rubbish, the actors were all b rate. The only plus side is that they have used a whole lot of unused aerial shots from the filming of top gun. There was even one shot that was in top gun that they used. This was a highlight being a top gun fan and an f14 fan. The tomcat was the only thing that made me watch past 5 minutes. I believe the f-14 squadron who did the flying looks to be the red lightnings that were disbanded in the early 1990s. I would love to watch all the aerial cinematography that they filmed for top gun but didn't use. Does any one know of any way this can be done???any way freedom strike was overall really really really bad. avoid it if you are not an f14 fan.
MichaelM24 Even though I own the DVD and am a Michael Dudikoff junkie, I don't think I'd call this one of his bests. The story is average (U.S. forces fight against terrorists), the execution lackluster, with some limp direction (and editing) here and there. The quieter moments between Dudikoff and beautiful co-star Felicity Waterman are nice, showing a slightly-romantic side of Dudikoff that is rarely seen. I think he would do well in a romantic comedy. Tone Loc is okay, and the guy who plays the terrorist leader hams it up well enough. The action scenes are typical for these kind of low-budget movies (gunfire from ordinary machine guns seem to cause explosions upon impact, lots of bad guys die, some characters do stupid things like hesitate too long before firing, etc. etc.), the direction looks like it was phoned in, and it seemed like the writers changed plots twenty minutes into the film. Not among Dudikoff's best, but it would beat an infommercial late at night.
phluphie But I did work on it.First off, Michael Dudikoff, heck of a nice guy. Not $40k/day nice but great to the crew. I was amazed at how cheeseball this production was. The USS Lane Victory (a WWII frieghter) was substituted for an aircraft carrier. And the carrier island scenes were shot in a parking lot next to a wall that was painted grey. For the flight scenes, they got the front end of a real Tomcat to stick the actors in. It wasn't gutted or anything so it weighed a few tons and we wound up placing it on a trash bins (that it crushed) so we didn't get the warehouse we were shooting in, in the shot. The F-14 wasn't secured at all and each actor was risking death being in the thing. Kudos to them. Then there was the nuke plant. A power generator in Sun Valley, just down the street from Babylon 5 actually.I did try to watch it once but failed. But, I thought you all might be interested in what doesn't go into these straight to video wonders.
fiona davidson As a bit of a Michael Dudikoff fan I sat down to watch one of his good old-fashioned actioners - I'm still waiting.The film is based around a group of US commandos trying to get rid of a bunch of Syrian terrorists who have taken over a nuclear reactor. Maddie Reese (Felicity Waterman) was an English member of the commando unit and of course she became romantically involved with Tom Dickson (Dudikoff). I must ask since when have the Brits had female SAS members - as far as I know if they are ever needed they are got from other sources. Even if they did I can pretty much guarantee they wouldn't be as wet as Maddie Reese. I would also think that Tom Dickson would be a little more responsible in his position - or have I lost the plot?! I know there is always the romantic angle in these films as it helps provide the feelgood factor, but does it have to be throughout, especially when there's more important things to be taken into consideration - like nuclear warfare!The signing of the treaty on the US aircraft carrier intrigued me. The "sacred pen" as carried by one of the supposed TV news crew - are there were no security checks to find out who or what goes on board one of these ships, especially with the calibre of people that was on it. Mind you if there was, I suppose there would be no story.I could go on, but when it got to "inner body bomb defusion" in order to safely remove a bullet I gave up on the action drama movie bit and enjoyed it for the comedy it actually was.By the way, would a news reporter really say "Downtown Damascus"??