Dark Asset (2023) User Reviews

Could have been good, but not on this budget

[HorrorFilmHellion · 3/10 · 26 September 2023]

I'll go ahead and blame the budget on this one.. and also some uneven direction. Ultimately, this movie has the ingredients to be something fun and interesting, but it would rely on better choreography and filming style, a more engaging script, a serious round of editing, and set pieces that are a grade above the cafeteria across from the movie set. The acting is pretty decent (at least for the mains) when they are bantering through kill machine discovery.

Unfortunately, it feels like a 3-hour movie, but it is watchable for some mild entertainment in parts if nothing better presents itself. Lower your expectations though.

Worth watching. Once

[Cheezebaal · 5/10 · 27 September 2023]

A fairly good story hampered by a lack of Budget.

More cash would have gotten this movie a better tech advisor, stunt and or fight coordinator, armorer, military advisor, special effects and another editing pass or three. Did they rent a steady-cam and run out of funds? Various shots look like they did. If not I think it was a poor decision.

I DID like how they played the story out through various flashbacks over drinks. Nice choice there.

The acting by most of the main cast is solid but the secondary cast not so much.

As is it's worth watching once for what could have been a pretty great movie.

Super soldier, not so super movie

[rharley · 3/10 · 25 September 2023]

The story isn't particularly original - guy with a chip in his head that makes him a super soldier goes rogue. The whole thing is very contrived from the start and leaves the viewer with so many questions. How come there's no way to shut down the chip except from one tablet computer? If he's so dangerous, how come there isn't better security? Why do the guards not take cover and instead just run into bullets? Why do we have a computer screen helpfully telling the audience things like "Door unlocked"? Why do we have to have the gender ideology agenda being pedalled again? These and so many more questions in what is a cliched, highly unoriginal and utterly predictable storyline. The acting is bordering on wooden and you simply don't get invested in the characters. Even with the short 85 minute runtime this movie is ultimately disappointing.

Decent cast, interesting plot, poorly made

[stevelivesey-37183 · 4/10 · 26 September 2023]

This is a bit of a shame. It could have been really good. It's got all the ingredients for an interesting movie. Modified humans used as weapons...count me in.

It's got a interesting cast of recognisable actors such as Terminator guy and The A- hole from the big short. The structure of the movie is well done flicking backwards and forwards in time to make an decent structure The problems are that the budget doesn't allow for any interesting sets and thus the film looks quite samey. The editing is also awful and kills any notion of coherence or pace in the action sequences which is a death sentence for an action movie.

Activate Female Assisstants

[nogodnomasters · 2/10 · 2 October 2023]

The film opens with 1980s font and a bad soundtrack. It doesn't get much better. John Doe (Byron Mann) is a Special Ops agent with a chip planted in his head. They can use a computer and place suggestions in his head. It is the brainchild of Dr. Cain (Robert Patrick) who is career is quickly sliding. John Doe goes rogue and shoots up the place killing a bunch of heavily armed folks. He drives to a hotel where he meets Jane (Helena Mattsson- "Species 4" beauty) and tells her a story. It is about everything that has happened to him and about the project. None of which she believes. But he offers her his Lamborghini to listen so she does.

The film had potential, but unfortunately a small budget. The acting and dialogue were not great and the plot was one of those that you knew was going to get better as you watch it with teasers, but it never happens.

Guide: No swearing. Brief sex. No nudity.

Really weak storyline, but saved by the action...

[paul_haakonsen · 3/10 · 9 May 2024]

Writers Michael Winnick and Terri Farley-Teruel didn't exactly put together a script and storyline that had a whole lot going on for it. It was pretty straightforward, but also way too simplistic. There just simply wasn't enough of neither entertainment value nor much of any cerebral contents. And that made sitting through "Dark Asset" somewhat bland. In fact, you can just zone out, lean back and munch on the popcorn while the bland story progresses on the screen.

There were two familiar faces on the cast list, that being Byron Mann and Robert Patrick. The acting performances in "Dark Asset" were okay, but the actors and actresses weren't given all that much contents to work with in terms of script and character gallery.

What keeps the movie afloat is the action and fight sequences. Though I love how several fully automatic weapons on burst firing modes were unable to shoot through that thin wooden restaurant table that John was hiding behind in the restaurant scene, but hey, at least it provided me with a good laugh.

While I did managed to sit through all 90 minutes that the movie ran for, I have to say that I bet I will blissfully have forgotten about the movie come tomorrow.

"Dark Asset" is a movie that came and went without leaving a lasting impression. And it most definitely isn't a movie that I will be returning to a second time. Nor is it a movie that I would recommend you to rush out and get to watch.

Not the greatest of movies, sure, but watchable enough for the mindless entertainment it was. My rating of director Michael Winnick's 2023 action thriller "Dark Asset" lands on a very generous three out of ten stars.