MovieChat Forums > Against the Dark (2009) Discussion > Why was Seagal hardly in this?

Why was Seagal hardly in this?

posted 15 years ago by therobinmasters
5 replies | jump to latest

This could have been one of the best films ever if Seagal had been in all of it, kicking, shooting, and murdering mutant/vampires.

Sadly, a film with all that huge potential is wasted by Seagal being in the film for less than 20 mintues.

[–] nicholas-47 15 years ago

Same with Executive Decision, after 30m I turned it off as it was just crap after such a disappointment.

[–] mmarcopolo 15 years ago

Well he can't hardly complete the other 20 lame azz straight to video movies he's working on if he has to devote more than half an hour to every one of them can he???? I didn't miss him anyway.

[–] jim_burt 10 years ago

Perhaps he was embarrassed?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sillyspaghetti 9 years ago

I was disappointed by the lack of Steven Segal killing zombies. I gave it a 5 because the scenes that he WAS in kicked ass. But the rest of it was cliched tripe, really. Also he was the only character I wanted to live as I hated everyone else.