What drew me into seeing 'Blood of Redemption' in the first place? The reasonably likeable cast, a potentially intriguing story and that it was part of my low budget completest quest and popped up in my recommended for you section. Was also a bit apprehensive, with a less than favourable rating and generally reviews that were lukewarm at best.'Blood of Redemption', when checking it out, certainly could have been much worse. There are definitely worse films about, of the genre and overall. Is it a good film let alone a great one? Not even close. Did it use its potential? No. Is it that bad? Not quite. Does it has redeeming qualities? Yes, but not many. To me, while having learnt not to trust ratings and not worry about going against the grain (though am in the minority here who respects critics opinions and tend to be on the same, or slightly above or below, page as them), the rating is about right and do have to agree with the criticisms here.Dolph Lundgren, Billy Zane and Gianni Capaldi do serviceable jobs and are the reasons as to why 'Blood of Redemption' wasn't any worse, Lundgren being the best thing of the film.Some of the story intrigued, namely the early stages, and the music while not the most memorable is at least listenable. Unfortunately, Vinnie Jones and Robert Davi are poorly served and used. Jones overdoes it and shouts his way through a stock character and Davi is saddled with a clearly fake accent and spends the whole time looking uninterested. None of the characters are developed enough and are very difficult to get behind. 'Blood of Redemption' looks cheap, especially the badly organised and sometimes incomprehensible editing and catastrophically awful visual effects, so fake looking and doesn't blend well with the setting at all. The action is both dull and chaotic, there is nothing exciting and it's choreographed with no enthusiasm or finesse.The script is too talky and has no tautness, the pace is flabby and the story gets far too complicated with the twists not being that much of a surprise. The direction seemed indicative of lack of experience or ease.Overall, not horrendous but severely lacking in many areas. 3/10 Bethany Cox

Cool, a new Dolph Lundgren, thats what i said when i found out about this movie. I watch most of the stuff he did in recent years and one thing that always comes to mind, minus the Expendables(which is awesome), his movies are always decent, minus a few exceptions. They never give me any "wow feeling" but they are honest DTV release.This one... isshhh, i want to like it, but there is major problems. As some people mentioned, holy cow the special effects where terrible... I mean i expect some very cheap CGI in an episode of the Angry Video Game Nerd... but not in a real movies. Gunshot sounds and effects where horrible... And if at least the shooting was decent... but way too much "guy stand in the open, kill everybody in 1 bullet, never get shot" Fist fights where below average, especially when it came to the ladies in this... felt fake as hell... Speaking about fake, we have the pleasure of a cameo of Tasha Reign and Rikki Six, two well known pornstars with fake tits in this, which made me smile. But to come back to fist fights, well a couple ones where decent but again the noise of them... felt very cheap 80s movies...Finally the story... decent. Overly complicated a bit in some part but the whole scenario was interesting and all.In the end i would say thanks god they manage to get decent B actors like Dolph and Vinnie(also Billie Zane), which is probably the reason why a bunch of guys like me watch it in the first place. But in the end, not a movie to be remember. I know the budget may not had been the best, but please guys... i saw better gun wounds and effects in 80s movies...

I was curious about how this film is and I must say that I'm happy that I've allocated the time to watch it.I must reckon that Dolph Lundgren was one of the reasons which lead me to this. I've seen recently a few new films with some 'action- colleagues' that aren't anymore in their first youth and I must say that Lundgren is still in a good shape. And the film helped him.He's somehow involved in all the events as an observer, but he keeps himself away of the things... and when he's in everything is developing in a fast sequence.Considering the budget I think that they've done a good job that deserves some credit.The plot is quite full of suspense and the way on how everything is told is quite attractive. You have action, situations that don't look as you would think and a few sex scenes.As a conclusion, a very pleasant action film.

Once again Serafini, Lundgren and Capaldi hook up to make a Movie. And they fare somewhat better this time around.Plot: small time Corleones need to step down to avoid jail time. They cannot agree on how among themselves, but some are prepared to kill to get their way...Rush, which I reviewed a couple of Days ago, was far too complicated for its own good due to too layered characters although 3,1 is too low a rating. On this Point Blood of Redemption succeeds much better with not so complicated characters.On the other hand, the plot twists and secrecy gets the better off of this one. In this Movie the writers try too much to create suspense whereas in Rush they try too much to create interesting characters. Perhaps the next Movie will get these things right. I like Movies that have different groups of people and/or individuals with different goals that at the end Clash together because they usually tend to be entertaining. but here it does not quite convince which may be due to lacking script, budget and acting performances.However, the current rating is 4,1 which I Think is unfair. The acting is good enough and Lundgren, Zane, Jones and Capaldi do their job (at their capacity anyway) and the action sequences are decent enough, at least to the level where they do not bother you. the only thing that bothered me is that some of the bullet holes/blood splatters looked like CGI work to me, which is something I do not appreciate (CGI or not, they still look bad).I give it 5 out of 10 because it is entertaining enough. The quality of the Movie is like Caught in the Crossfire, Nico, Marked for Death and Under Siege 2 for instance.