Steineded How sad is this?

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

Dirtylogy It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

twoneness We read the Reader's Digest condensed version, and quickly put the DVD in the 1st spot slot of our NetFlix queue. Had dinner, then sat down and got ready for the movie. Three hours long. I honestly believe that this waste of film belongs in the top ten list of Mystery Science Theater 3000!!! I ad libed just as MST3K would have throughout this video. Delightfully entertaining my wife who responded with peals of laughter. It had the tension, action, and suspense of a cheese stick!As a party popper, one could play it and amaze everyone with the 'psychic demonstrations' of telling what will happen next with accuracy. The sound track was as genuine as one of a porn film.After this, we may dare to watch "Dirty Dancing" and groan for Patrick The author also wrote: Day of the Jackal, The Odessa File and The Dogs of War. PLEASE tell me that Hallmark didn't produce these!

Robert W. I am still hanging on there for Patrick Swayze. A huge fan, always have been and always will be even if it's just hanging on to the hope that Johnny Castle will get another great role and if it's straight to video for him than so be it...I still think he's great. Icon is an absolute B movie if not because of the budget for any other reason. It must be rated with the fact that it is a "B" movie in mind. That being said Icon is a decent little flick with some definite highs and some definite lows. I am quite confident that with a different director and a different screen writer (perhaps Frederick Forsyth himself) this film could have been done very very well. If nothing else Icon is a great Russian film. I have not seen any other film that embraces modern day Russia with a great respect and treats it as good as a political thriller in the US would treat America. The story is good enough although a little confusing at times with some scenes that are unnecessary and a little complex, most notably the opening scene which I am still a little confused about.Patrick Swayze takes the lead role as Jason Monk, an under cover operative, who is former CIA and is coaxed back into Russia with the promise of being reunited with his estranged daughter who he hasn't seen she was a little girl. It still pains me to see Swayze look so old in the face but the guy can still move, he is in great shape and plays the action role just fine. His acting is a little campy at times but it really is the writing and the film that is at best B quality. He certainly shines in the role (I thought) and I think Jason Monk is a marketable character for sequels but they have a lot to change. The supporting cast in the film is also quite notable. Joss Ackland as the reclusive Presidential candidate General Nikolayev is good in his scenes and very convincing as a Russian dignitary, Patrick Bergin is fantastic as the evil "Icon" of Russia who wants the Presidency and is behind the plot to poison different races of Russians in Hitler style. He's cold and calculating but very personable and believable. Steven Spiers is also great as Swayze's friend and partner Viktor. He's lovable and you are drawn to him but he's kind of underused in the sidekick role. Michael York, who unfortunately is best known as Austin Powers' boss Basil plays Swayze's boss and you can't help but remember him as Basil which kind of ruins his role. Jeff Fahey also does a great job as the sleazy America Political spinner who helps Komarov get elected. Annika Peterson plays the main female lead Sonija Astrov and she does a good job too, as good as Swayze does. She handles action well and her and Swayze have decent chemistry. All of them play Russian quite well and I know many complain about the cheesy accents and the fact that barely anyone actually speaks Russian when they would in reality but it's a movie that has to be done in English so to me it was just a matter of assuming they would be speaking Russian normally but in order for us to watch the movie without subtitles...it's English. The cast is absolutely not the issues with the film but rather the reason to watch it. The film style of the film immediately reminded me of another low budget series which I have really enjoyed the "Left Behind" series which coincidentally enough director Charles Martin Smith played a part in the third installment. He wasn't right for this film and I don't think he knew how to properly piece together the story. There was no need for the film to be in two parts or to be as long as it was. Much of the story could have been cut down. Sometimes the sound editing was dead awful as well. Watching characters' mouths move and be out of sync with the words was annoying at times...annoying enough for me to mention it. Or it's the fault of screenplay writer Adam Armus who has a tendency to drag out films (ie: King Solomon's Mines...also a Swayze masterpiece.) When it's all said and done it's not so bad. It's worth watching, maybe not all at once, but a little at a time but it's put together with a very low budget. The special effects and stunts aren't bad but it seemed like the production of the film and the DVD got some poorly budgeted effects which does effect your experience. It's a shame it wasn't better handled because the ideas and possibilities are there. Just not fully realized. 6/10

smintjes I recently rented this promising mini series, I didn't even know they had adapted it for television. I was really looking forward to it since the book Icon is one of the best spy thrillers I have ever read. What a disappointment it was. The plot only loosely resembles the one in the book, the characters are completely miscast and there's some appalling acting. A shame really. The story behind Icon is perfect for the silver screen, but I think television budgets just aren't big enough for a decent adaptation of this spectacular book.Forsyth deserves much, much better than this. Avoid and stick to the book, which is a must-read.

gabryant Frederick Forsyth's books are always so intricately plotted, with twists and turns, and usually a great surprise ending. This adaptation had none of that.So much of what was great in the book (the history of Monk and the betrayed agents; the plot to influence the outcome of the Russian election) were completely missing in this adaptation. Instead, there's this completely new plot about bio-weapons that was a yawner.Forsyth's protagonists always operated in the shadows, forever just slightly beyond the reach of the antagonists. The joys of his books have always been the machinations of carrying out their mission. This film resigned itself to gunfights and car chases early on.Swayze's Monk might as well have hung a sign around his neck saying "I AM A SECRET AGENT" for all the attention that he called to himself during the film. And with all of that attention, the amount of time that it took the bad guys to catch up to him was surprising.Granted there was some energy to this film, which is why I'm giving it a "3" instead of a "1". It was also great to see some underutilized pros like Patrick Bergin, Ben Cross, Michael York, and Barry Morse.I hope that someday, someone will once again do justice to a Forsyth film adaptation like "Day of the Jackal" did.