Where do I start? When the movie first started, I wondered if there were a problem with the image quality and with the way it was filmed ! This is the same quality of a cheap porn. Did they use the same camera ?

Secondly, to reinforce this image of a cheap porn, the actors/actresses's acting skills are very poor and they all look like porn actor/actresses: male all bodybuilded on steroid, female all bimbo !

Add to that the very poor special effect (explosion made by my little brother, no real stunts (green screen), no military expertise...) ... This movie is very disappointing ! I don't mind bad acting in a "action/navy seal movie" but this is quite bad and I expect at least credible explosion !

Oh and did I mention the massive clichés...this movie is so stereotypical and predictable

Playing Ghost Squad or Rainbow 6 on your xbox is more realistic ... I put a 2 because I saw worse ..

This straight to DVD release is the third installment of the 2001 film staring Owen Wilson and Gene Hackman. Personally, I didn't even know there was a sequel to the original, but considering this is a WWE produced film staring Mr Kennedy, who was I not to watch this? The storyline is pretty basic, navy SEALS organize an attack on Colombian Special Forces to clear their names and rescue a hostage which is one of their own. After watching this I can see why this was a straight to DVD release, it was really bad! The acting was remarkably horrible, and the storyline was equally as bad, but I wasn't expecting anything more then a cheesy action/war film with cheesy one liners, and that is exactly what I got! My Rating: 3.5/10

For more Movie and TV News, Reviews and Rumours go to: www.facebook.com/tvmovienews

Well, This movie have some good details about marks in uniforms but no more... I was in Colombian Army in 1992 and still respecting the FAC, not FARC, maybe our soldiers are bravest in the world, fighting the oldest guerrilla in the world, sure we have corruption as every country, but this movie gets a lot of mistakes, as Disney movies, handle the reality for ignorant audiences who think after the movie that was a real history (Disney put El Dorado in Mexico, not in Colombia as it really is)... If you really want to know about our conflict, don't see American movies, watch our news, not European news... Colombia it's so beautiful and if you watch movies like that, could think that the whole territory it's a battlefield, a jungle. See this movie just for entertain you some weekend but don't see it as a documentary.

Wow i'm surprised no one's commented on this film yet, as it stands this is a highly compelling action film that manages to make the action scenes exciting without resorting to lots of shaky cam editing. Plus the cast gives it they're all and impress, especially Keith David. The plot twist is a little predictable side though and the film does depend on contrivance to drive the plot more then once, but undemanding viewers such as myself either won't notice or care about that too much. The film also seems a little disjointed at times as the opening has all the main characters introduced with hilarious text like in Feast, but then in the next scene in Colombia, a guy loses both his wife and child in a bombing, so the effect is pretty jarring to say the least though very effective admittedly.

Behind enemy lines: Colombia, is not the best war movie ever made. The premise is that the US Government, military and intelligence community work alongside the Colombian Government in it's 40-year-long war against the internal rebel/freedom-fighter/terrorist group FARC. As part of it's $1bn-a-year military assistance, the US send in a crack unit of Navy Seals to do reconnaissance on a FARC camp. It all goes horribly wrong when the "black op." is denied by the CIA, FARC are stronger than expected and the Colombian Government is a bit annoyed that the military incursion is done without their explicit knowledge or permission (get the idea?).

The storyline is weak, acting wooden and the plot very clichéd. It seems to be a rip off of a number of other movies, notably "Clear and Present Danger", "Navy Seals" and "Rambo". As a result, the was very little new in the movie and the tension was non-existent. Another annoying thing was the glorification of FARC as a fully professional national army as opposed to terrorists who kidnap and kill to protect Colombia's cocaine industry, and, the "never leave a man behind" US kick a** feel good aspect. Throw in a bit of betrayal and the needing to get evidence to clear their names and you have a war movie that is not worth spending the time to watch.

On the plus side there is plenty of action with lots of "enemy" combatants getting killed (although only two "good guys"). Some of the special effects are a bit dubious. It does raise awareness of some of the issues in South America when focus tends to be on the Middle East.

In summary, an action movie rather than a war movie which is OK if you are prepared to switch your brain off and have time to spare.

Who can blame them?, is a failed attempt to make a mediocre action film, based on a successful franchise. Predictable, lousy visual effects and even worse performances by really mediocre actors. But that's not the worst. The worst thing is that I'm a member of the Colombian Armed Forces and that's an insult against every member of Colombian Army, Navy or Air Force; yet the introductory footage was pretty real years ago and the FARC is much worse in the real life, now Colombia is a safer place and very modern compared to the landscapes in this film.(same stupid Bogota footage in Mr. and Mrs. Smith) The military forces are strong and very successful in its war against a lot of enemies. Guerrila/jungle war is awfully worst than dessert or regular war. Isn't Vietnam enough to teach that to Hollywood? Colombia is a beautiful country entirely filled with good people.. we have our problems like every nation in the world, but is it responsible to make things appear worse than they really are? That's wrong even in a cheap mediocre film. But they don't make their homework, they don't have budget, they don't have good actors, they only had a camera and a Home-PC video editing software... Who can blame them?

I didn't know this was the direct-to-home sequel of the original BEH, and watched it only to understand how betrayal takes place in military operations.

The direction is good but the cameo wasn't. The main characters HAVE the potential to keep the movie going but if the flaws like those stated in the goofs part are to be believed you won;t enjoy this. The soundtrack is pretty awesome!

Watch it for the adrenaline and Mr. Kennedy! The dialogs also are to be appreciated! Could've done better with the details, though!

For more - bit.ly/TEJAS

Well, I managed to watch this movie on HBO2 this morning, an it was totally like a COD deathmatch. I think the other reviewers are all Colombian, but hey, the Colombian army in this movie is a well organized, deadly force. Come on, the Seals marines are on the run in the whole movie. Now, there were words about bad acting, bad effects, bad filming technique, bad direction, bad dialogues. I must tell, that none of these are present. Acting: the three Seals are good. The dialogues have no problem at all. Alvaro, the enemy force leader is good as well. Effects: the explosions are not the best, but its OK. Weapons and Fight: They are all well done, All COD fans will have flashback. Highly recommended movie.

This is all crap, starting with navy seals in Colombia, what's that. Our government doesn't make that kind of things since like 20 years ago, and then, these guys in the middle of our jungles, against Colombian guerrilla, they would get killed in 30 minutes, without counting all the land mines placed in our jungles, by the way the war against guerrilla comes from 50 years ago. But it's not only against Farc but there are other groups like ELN or Paramilitares.

and all the stupid people who thinks guerrilla is good for our country, they are wrong, I hate people saying that people like Manuel Marulanda or the mafia boss Pablo Escobar are heroes.

Please don't believe Colombia is like this. all you see in us movies about Colombia is a big lie.

This movies was terrible, I think is important have a complete information about the subject that they will work. No is necessary travel to Bogota (CAPITAL) of Colombia, because is many information in Internet about this city. We don't have a hot weather The lowest temperature ever recorded was −8°C (17°F) inside the city and −10°C (14°F) in the nearby towns of the savanna. The highest temperature ever recorded was 25°C (77°F). but always is 10ºc this is during all the year, secondly Bogotá is also the largest in Colombia, and its altitude (2,640m) makes it the third-highest major city in the world (no is the jungle) is a normal city with 8,089,560 of people. And the other subject about la Farc and army is terrible, how is possible that they can give a solution like that. this is really funny!!!! was really bad

I rarely have an opportunity to watch kind of a movies like this. There is of course audience that like that kind of entertainment: simple story, action packed etc., but if you look on it more seriously, this movie is better to avoid. It don't have any character, only cheap presentation of low level quality entertainment and highly predictable plot. I can't give you complete review of the movie because I could not watch it more than an hour, but as far I saw, from the camera work to the actors presentation and directing it is really one of those movies recommended for drive in movie cinemas. Behind enemy lines original was quite watchable movie, the sequel I did not see, but this one... will they go further with this devastating concept? Anyway if you want to see this movie better rent it first, because if you are serious movie admirer don't waste your time in the cinema or worse, don't buy it. For other kind of audience it is up to you.

What a great film... it is full off valuable facts plus the quality of the production is just stunning!

To summarise a few of the best facts and contributions of this film in my life: - A blind guy with a digital camera produces a better footage that this people. - All the north American girls are hot (like bimbos) - All the north American guys are ripped (specially the soldiers) - All the south Americans are fat, sweaty and wear hats. - Bogota is a hot and humid city (did not know that) - Colombia's conflict could be ended using between 3 to 5 soldiers (americans of course)

ARE YOU F#@#$# SERIOUS... I would like to be able to give negative points in IMDb!

I watched this movie with the first two Behind enemy lines in mind. I was so wrong! There is no good actors/actress in this movie. You can tell it was a low budget movie with terrible plot lines that don't make sense. Some of the lines were so cheesy. It just makes you laugh and think you can direct better than how this movie was made. It makes you think it was the director's first movie, even then it's horrible. He's a director for crying out loud. You have to make sense in some scenes. You have to impress the watchers via something but just about everything seemed unnaturally filmed etc... I will never watch this movie again nor would I recommend it to anyone.

COLOMBIA is the third of the BEHIND ENEMY LINES film series and a definite step up from the godawful mess that was BEHIND ENEMY LINES II: AXIS OF EVIL, although that's not to say it's a good film. It's still below par for the most part, but at least veteran actor/director Tim Matheson knows how to shoot his film properly, without all of that annoying shaky camera stuff that ruined the last instalment.

The plot is a simplistic skeleton on which to hang a framework of low rent, high firepower action sequences. Expect one shootout after another here, along with some cheesy camaraderie and macho heroics. A SEAL team is sent to Colombia to sort out some FARC terrorists, only to find themselves framed and betrayed, and forced to fight their way out.

COLOMBIA benefits from a star-studded cast incorporating the likes of Keith David, Steven Bauer, Matheson himself, and Yancey Arias. The lead roles are taken by the tall and wooden Joe Manganiello and wrestler Ken Anderson, which gives you some idea of the level of acting talent here. Like many recent American B-movies set in South America, this one was filmed in Puerto Rico. I also noticed it was made made by WWE Studios, which explains the presence of the wrestler.

This is kinda terrible, plus I'm having trouble seeing how it has anything to do with the original 'Behind Enemy Lines' with Owen Wilson. They're not even remotely connected except maybe the tired premise. This is a WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment) film and went straight to DVD (which seems appropriate) so that should give you an idea of the quality of plot etc.

Non-stop action though which somehow makes up for the lack of script and bad acting. Tons of bullets whizzing about, explosions galore and a decent hand to hand fight scene towards the end with Joe Manganiello and Alvaro -the main bad guy who actually had a reasonable back story.

This "stars" WWE superstar "Mr Kennedy" although he doesn't get much dialogue and is mostly background as SEAL #2 despite his face on the poster. The story follows him and Joe Manganiello as two of a squad of navy seals attending South American peace talks that explode into violence and murder, leaving the soldiers framed for the bloody events. Somehow they must rescue a hostage and clear their names.

As a weird point of interest Keith David is Commander Scott in this, the guy fighting for their return back in the states -he was good, in the original David Keith played Master Chief Tom O'Malley back on the ship. Things that make you go hmmmm? 2/24/16

I watched the trailers and read the story line and checked who the director and cast was. There was nothing that compelled me to watch it on that basis. All I was hoping for was some reasonably believable action adventure I could watch until something better came along. I was concerned that it would be so poor I would give up before the end. This movie, when it comes to production value, is not close to "Green Zone (2010)", "The A Team (2010)", "The Losers (2010)" or even the fantastic "Strike Back" TV series, but until that next one comes along and you are in need of an action movie in the genre, you can watch this third instalment of the 'Behind Enemy Lines' franchise (not really a franchise) without the risk of giving up before the end. It is certainly better than the two previous, 'Behind Enemy Lines' movies; it has none of the actors or key operation production of those two earlier ones.

In words we can all understand: It's not bad at all. Yes I was pleasantly surprised that actors I did not know or know to be second rate only, by virtue of their past roles, managed to do a good enough job to have me watch it all the way through. It is predictable in many respect, which is not a plus for action movies, but the action scenes themselves and all the high-tech instruments of covert ground war were featured as well as split screen simultaneous action you see on screen showed a real effort to bring us quality production, not to mention darn good fighting sequences. The ratings are unfairly low and do not represent the real effort put in to the production. It is what it is, not a meal of a movie but a very good snack that will tide you over. More action seekers will like it than not and so I suggest you consider it on that basis.

The terrible story is so obvious from a mile away and the acting is some of the worst I've eve seen. The story is basically about a group of seals (Why send seals anyway? Don't they just do water incursions?) that get into trouble and have to do various things to escape. Every action is so predictable and the acting is some of the worst I've seen. Its meant to be an action but the characters are often joking at times when no sane person would be. IE: In the middle of the gunfight they start joking with each other... Its a shame as the original behind enemy lines was somewhat enjoyable.

I really want the time that i wasted watching this movie back. If i could give it 0 stars i would have.

Oh my God, what kind of movie is that? I think we can not blame to the actors, maybe they did their best but what do you say about how well-informed the writer and producer are? Bogota a warm and sunny city?? Hahaha please! and what about the "colombian accent"? no! better, what about the "colombian president"? It seems that they think that Colombia and Puerto Rico are the same! (film was recorded in Puerto Rico)...and the "gringos", do they think that people from Colombia is stupid?

Poor movie in all senses, acting, music, special effects and specially credibility...

I completely agree with everything said in the negative reviews above (whether written by Colombians or not). Did Tackleberry direct all the action scenes ? Unlike some other American films, I was impressed they were able to spell Colombia properly in the title (check out Steven Segal's Above the Law), that's what my 1/10 star was for. This is one of those ridiculous films you put on in the background when you have your mates over for a few snacks/drinks. No need to have the sound on, you can work it all out from every 3rd or 4th scene. I found the scene where the guy is underwater swimming through the pipe quite amusing, what are all those weeds in there? Enjoy it if you can... I didn't.

Before the movie became a cheap franchise it had good actors, an actual plot and some emotions. This movie lack of those 3 all and besides, it is full of mistakes regarding what Colombia is about, beginning with the geography, the accent and slangs of the actors and actual context. I wonder where is the rush when Hollywood producers make a movie about Colombia, as they always depict the country as it were somewhere near Tijuana, showing not only the cheapness of the movie but the lack of previous investigation.

American soldiers are no longer seen as world heroes but, on the contrary, abusive, corny and ridiculous persona that are trying to make their best impression with poor-special- effects and cheap explosions.

Far too often Hollywood pushes the appeal of sequel money too far and make a piece of crap movie, this is one for sure.

I can forgive an obvious plot and, if the action sequences are done well can even overlook relatively poor acting, but when all three are preset plus they throw in poor cinematography then I feel robbed. Don't get me wrong, if I choose to go see a sequel such as this with no-name actors (and I think one was a professional wrestler), then shame on me if I expect anything more; but if I don't warn others what they are in for then double shame on me.

But I always try to see some positives in my reviews (this is only my third), so if you like cheap B action movies with big guns and the jungle that will allow you to pass 1 1/2 hours then give it a go. Just be warned that your time may have been better spent watching something like "Enemy at the Gate" or the original "Behind Enemy Lines" for a second or even a third time.

Navy SEAL team 7 is in Colombia to battle the FARC and the drug cartels. Lt. Macklin (Joe Manganiello) leads his men to a compound deep in the jungle. There they find a peace conference between FARC and government troops. Suddenly mysterious forces attack the conference and the SEALs. The SEALs are framed for the whole incident.

The action is much better the BEL 2. They've got rid of all that horrific cheesy effects. It's a much better looking movie. Joe Manganiello is a good lead actor. They have a pretty good movie going when they get to the compound.

The story is questionable. The whole conspiracy is questionable. But how 2 guys with barely functional language skills could take on so much is too unreasonable. One bad guy asked if he thinks he's Rambo. The guy comes back saying he's more John McClane. No! This is full on Rambo.

first of all look at the very first film behind enemy lines starting Owen Wilson is a great film then a second film came axis of evil which was bad but this third film is a solid mess i would never call these 2 last films to be attached to the original film by director john Moore lets just pretend that there is no trilogy these films are separate from the first best film.there are several reasons for it.

will someone tell me why the world wrestling entertainment produced this movie and it starts Ken Anderson aka Mr Kennedy is he an actor i have seen him in WWE getting beat down by undertaker and Kane he maybe a good wrestler but in a film you need acting i would have to say i am wrong few films don't need acting it just have to start some famous guy like John Cena,the rock,Goldberg,big-show even Kurt and Kane all these guys made films but only rock films clicked it it a fault a fault of Mr Kennedy no the fault of producers the spent a lot of money on a budget but not the script,this is what happens here there is no script of this film it looks like a few kids playing in afternoon in garden with guns and ammo.

the plot:Navy seals have to rescue a hostage to do this they have to attack Columbian special forces.

the cast,direction,plot and execution is flawed not worth discussing at all even action is disappointing try to ape the Bourne supremacy 2004 will not help it sir director.

this is the third film in the BEL Trilogy but fails,heavily there is only one film that is worst watching and is the best its called behind enemy lines 2001 with Owen Wilson.so don't bother watching this.

My Rating for behind enemy lines:Columbia 2009 is 1/10 an awful experience even if this film went theatrical or direct release it don't matter now it was a failure when it was in production.Skipp it

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

WWE productions has moved it's weight into this third instalment of the Behind Enemy Lines franchise, with a film that shows how far it's come from it's original source material. While the original was little more than a forgettable, clichéd action film with two big name stars to propel it along, here the series has moved into a whole new ball game. Opening with a monologue about how the notorious FARC guerrillas have waged a war of terror on Colombia for many years and how US interference has worsened the situation in the manner of a public service film, what follows is a remarkably cheap looking film that looks like it's been filmed with a cheap video camera. Wrestling sensation 'Mr.Kennedy' is touted as the big star, but he feels more like a supporting player throughout, leaving the rest of the no name cast to go through the motions, including rent-a-supporting-star Keith David who'll seem to pop up in any old dross like this. Truly not a plus point in sight. *

Two navy seals (Joe Manganiello & Mr. Kennedy) who, along with three others, have been sent to investigate some shady deals in Colombia have to rescue one of their own after he's captured by terrorists in an ambush, as well as avenge two other fellow seals who've died in the same raid. If that's not bad enough Colombian officials have blaming them for the killings (and the CIA isn't arguing).

Yet another brain numbing, badly acted, action-oriented WWE film hoping to propel one of their wrestlers into stardom utterly fails. The action is marginally all right at best, but the script itself is lacking. The first Behind Enemy Lines was a fun, decent watch, the second was a muddled disaster, this one is much more the latter than the former. And as much as I truly want to say that I'll avoid WWE films from now on (which is understandable), I'm still going to watch 12 Rounds if only for my fondness of Director Renny Harlin. So when I think I'm out, they pull me right back in.

My Grade: D-

DVD Extras: Commentary by Director Tim Matheson, and actors Jom Manganiello & Mr. Kennedy; Second commentary by IGN Fans; 6 featurettes with a play all option (running 38 minutes in total); and trailers for "Babylon AD", "X-files: I want to believe", "Joy Ride 2" & "the Betrayed"