I do not kid when it comes to proclaiming films as heinously poor.
One look at my ratings will tell you as such.
What makes Direct Contact such a poor quality feature is the shoddy editing, overuse of stock footage, failed dialogue in both content and delivery and a plot riddled with unexplained and largely unnecessary nuances.
The film will under most circumstance draw laughter that was surely not intended. I say this having shown the film to well over two dozen people who I felt had a wide range of tastes.
This is literally an ideal reference for bad filming.
The fact this feature apparently cost six million is astounding, that's 6 million in case you missed it. Naturally I am inclined to assume the majority of the budget went to Mr. Lundgren and severely overpaid crew.
While some of the action sequences that were originally filmed were far from the worst I have witnessed in some other low quality action films, this did not raise the stock to a modest degree.
Many may give this film a 1 but I gave it a 3 based on the following defaults:
1. The video quality was satisfactory, albeit made for television. 2. Some of the original action sequences were somewhat spectacular. 3. Although the story was sub-par, it was not itself painfully horrendous.
In my opinion, any feature length film with even the slightest effort that has a quantifiable beginning and end merits a 1, and in most cases a 2 due to adequate completion. By default due to some of the more expensive action sequences, I have it a 3.
Rest assured however I will never recommend anyone see this film for positive entertainment unless it is for reference of failure or based off the pleasures to ridicule.
One look at my ratings will tell you as such.
What makes Direct Contact such a poor quality feature is the shoddy editing, overuse of stock footage, failed dialogue in both content and delivery and a plot riddled with unexplained and largely unnecessary nuances.
The film will under most circumstance draw laughter that was surely not intended. I say this having shown the film to well over two dozen people who I felt had a wide range of tastes.
This is literally an ideal reference for bad filming.
The fact this feature apparently cost six million is astounding, that's 6 million in case you missed it. Naturally I am inclined to assume the majority of the budget went to Mr. Lundgren and severely overpaid crew.
While some of the action sequences that were originally filmed were far from the worst I have witnessed in some other low quality action films, this did not raise the stock to a modest degree.
Many may give this film a 1 but I gave it a 3 based on the following defaults:
1. The video quality was satisfactory, albeit made for television. 2. Some of the original action sequences were somewhat spectacular. 3. Although the story was sub-par, it was not itself painfully horrendous.
In my opinion, any feature length film with even the slightest effort that has a quantifiable beginning and end merits a 1, and in most cases a 2 due to adequate completion. By default due to some of the more expensive action sequences, I have it a 3.
Rest assured however I will never recommend anyone see this film for positive entertainment unless it is for reference of failure or based off the pleasures to ridicule.