Force of Execution

• Directed by Keoni Waxman
• December 17, 2013

A crime boss in a southwestern town requires help from his former hitman to fight a threat to his criminal empire.

Sometimes believe it or not Steven Seagal DOES try with his movies. Not always but sometimes. Force of Execution begins then proceeds like it wants to be a complex or philosophical crime thriller. But is it? Not really despite having some small positive moments.

The movie opens with some semimetal sounding dialogue delivered by Steven Seagal in character as crime boss John Alexander. He speaks in his usual low mumble/whisper making it hard to hear and ruins the whole moment. Sometimes you even think he’s rewriting dialogue on the fly. He may be the most powerful name in the movie but stick to the script!

Somehow Seagal got Ving Rhames to show in this as Alexander’s rival Ice Man. Every actor does paycheck movies but Ving Rhames strikes me as a man who has some standards and is looking out for his career. Seagal is a bit of a pariah these days and I can’t see doing a movie with him as helpful to your career.

The great Christopher Lee said that every actor does bad movies and that the trick was to not be bad in them. Rhames is not bad in this. He is aiming for Oscar territory though Force of Execution would never get one. You believe his villain is truly dangerous and intelligent. There is a threatening charm in every word though until the finale he engages in very little violence.

Calling this a Steven Seagal movie is a bit erroneous. His John Alexander doesn’t do too much. Alexander could have been added after production was complete or late in the scripting process. It’s more some young punk that engages in action that movies the story than he does. He is there to collect a check yet demonstrates some mid-tier skill. When paired with Rhames he does managed to step up his game. Or so it seems like. Ving overshadowed him, but he gives a good effort to not be drowned out.

In this Alexander has plans on retiring until Ice Man moves into his area and it’s a battle of two criminals. How is this an issue? Sell your territory or whatever and LEAVE! Force of Execution does its best to frame Alexander as an antihero of some type, but the DUDE IS A CRIMINAL THAT HAS HAD PEOPLE KILLED AND HAS A PENCHANT FOR HOOKERS! A bit of Steven Seagal’s real life bleeding in but he’s on the side of right? 

Most of the action when it DOES happen is handled by supposed Alexander protégé Roman Hurst (Bren Foster) yet if I followed the plot right early in the story Alexander injured Hurst’s hands though no idea really why or if that is how it played out. Action scenes aside, storytelling is a mess. Hurst in a Batman-after-Bane must climb up from the figurative pit and redeem himself or something. Not sure why.

Danny Trejo plays Oso who is a bit of the Obi-Wan or generic mentor to Hurst. The character is nothing special, but if it weren’t for Danny Trejo it would be far worse when he kind of takes Hurst under his wing. When they first meet, Oso is taking out trash to a dumpster. Normal enough scene but it seems like Oso is transferring the trash from one side of the doorway to the other though dumpsters are on either side. It is very awkward and unnatural.

This is no great movie. The parts without Seagal that are necessary to the plot are good. Not great but good low budget fare that tries to be deep. It is only good because of the moments of action. The film is thrown together in a haphazard in what appears to try and cover for a lack of actual story. Characterization is barely existent. Even in the dumbest movie you need an idea of the characters and why they are involved. Like who is that blonde girl?

Force of Execution is okay. It’s nothing to be ashamed of mostly because it keeps Seagal’s presence to a minimum. You could do worse but probably not worth seeking out.