Brendan Fletcher is always great but the FBI agents were cringy as all hell, they were unbelievable characters played by unbelievable actors. Lots of silly plots holes too like trying to hide from the FBI but texting a bunch of people as well from an iPhone? Guy kills the president while the FBI sit around doing no actual work and have cringy hot topic arguements similar to that of 16 year olds. But like I said, Brendan Fletcher is the best.
63 Reviews
Could have been better.
hollybellet8 January 2017
The first and second one were way better. This one just wasn't as intense and too much talking going on. Not saying it was terrible but could have been better. They need to be more logical with what they're saying. No one is going to believe that Britney Spears and George Bush were killed. Too hypocritical and talking about terrorists. We didn't even see the president and his secretary's being killed so they just left that out. It seemed a little died down. There was a lot of hype about it and it didn't meet the expectations. But usually the third sequel isn't always that good. They didn't even explain how he met his wife crystal and what happened after Bill died. What's going to happen to Billy also? He's never going to see that DVD.
Slightly Hypocritical
adamjones-657199 December 2016
I've enjoyed the first two movies in this series incredibly.
However this particular film ends in utter nonsense.
It is a movie about an extreme left-wing radical and yet, they make a bold claim in the final scenes regarding right-wing terrorists which completely negates the entire premise of the film. Right when I was about to finish watching, satisfied with the content, they throw this statement into the film which completely destroys the continuity of the story.
That being said, if you would like to see a movie about a terrorist democrat, it's a good watch. Far from the quality of the previous two however.
However this particular film ends in utter nonsense.
It is a movie about an extreme left-wing radical and yet, they make a bold claim in the final scenes regarding right-wing terrorists which completely negates the entire premise of the film. Right when I was about to finish watching, satisfied with the content, they throw this statement into the film which completely destroys the continuity of the story.
That being said, if you would like to see a movie about a terrorist democrat, it's a good watch. Far from the quality of the previous two however.
So bad that I just can't begin to immerse myself
gangsterdinosaur11 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Go watch the first and second movie in the trilogy, and just skip this heap of junk. I have seen better acting in a high school play; it was just awful. The effects were there, but the fact that the movie is so low budget is all too clear as the action scenes were poorly choreographed, lacked much gore at all, and were edited in a way that was obviously trying, and failing, to cover up the bad acting job of the soldiers. The plot holes were so significant, it was impossible to even begin to immerse myself. The way the SWAT teams conduct themselves are so far from reality its ridiculous.
This is not at all believable, and makes any suspension of disbelief difficult through its obnoxiously bad acting, action choreography, and plot. It was just an awful end to a decent series.
This is not at all believable, and makes any suspension of disbelief difficult through its obnoxiously bad acting, action choreography, and plot. It was just an awful end to a decent series.
Self-aggrandizing, patting one's self on the back...
Mack Lambert14 October 2016
That's what I would describe the latest (and hopefully last) entry of the Rampage series from director Uwe Boll. This recent film is a huge disappointment given previous films like Postal, the first Rampage, Assault on Wall Street, and Tunnel Rats 1968 seemed to signal a maturation as a filmmaker.
This film focuses on Bill Williamson solidifying his legacy as a voice for the oppressed, but ends up coming off as a Che Guevara by way of Osama Bin Laden. He's a terrorist who somehow successfully assassinated the President and others in the Federal Govt. And we're also supposed to believe that Williamson's followers would have infiltrated the federal agencies trying to track him down, essentially nerfing them. This is a fantasy movie with little to no basis in reality.
The film mostly covers Williamson proselytizing to his followers and the FBI trying to find him. The screenplay was written by Boll and actor Brendan Fletcher, who plays Williamson. This is basically Boll stroking his own ego, trying to show the world he knows what needs to be done to make our planet a better place. He tries to make Williamson a sympathetic figure with moments showing him as a father and husband. Makes sense. Some women have wanted to be the wife of Charles Manson or Richard Ramirez.
As a viewer, I was more sympathetic to the FBI agents, Molokai and Jones. They were given depth. We knew about them, they became more relatable. They were real compared to the cartoonish Williamson.
What struck me the most was the fixation of explosions and violence done to police. Yeah, some cops are dirty and corrupt, just like anyone of any race, creed, what have you. We see so many shots of them flying through the air and being blasted with gunfire. This is anarchy cop murder porn.
The first Rampage film was an interesting look at a nihilist becoming a mass murderer, and how ideology can lead to extremism. And that's where the series should have ended, by not becoming a series.
I would rate this two stars because Steve Baran and Ryan McDonell as the two FBI leads are the stand outs and deserve to be in a better film.
This film focuses on Bill Williamson solidifying his legacy as a voice for the oppressed, but ends up coming off as a Che Guevara by way of Osama Bin Laden. He's a terrorist who somehow successfully assassinated the President and others in the Federal Govt. And we're also supposed to believe that Williamson's followers would have infiltrated the federal agencies trying to track him down, essentially nerfing them. This is a fantasy movie with little to no basis in reality.
The film mostly covers Williamson proselytizing to his followers and the FBI trying to find him. The screenplay was written by Boll and actor Brendan Fletcher, who plays Williamson. This is basically Boll stroking his own ego, trying to show the world he knows what needs to be done to make our planet a better place. He tries to make Williamson a sympathetic figure with moments showing him as a father and husband. Makes sense. Some women have wanted to be the wife of Charles Manson or Richard Ramirez.
As a viewer, I was more sympathetic to the FBI agents, Molokai and Jones. They were given depth. We knew about them, they became more relatable. They were real compared to the cartoonish Williamson.
What struck me the most was the fixation of explosions and violence done to police. Yeah, some cops are dirty and corrupt, just like anyone of any race, creed, what have you. We see so many shots of them flying through the air and being blasted with gunfire. This is anarchy cop murder porn.
The first Rampage film was an interesting look at a nihilist becoming a mass murderer, and how ideology can lead to extremism. And that's where the series should have ended, by not becoming a series.
I would rate this two stars because Steve Baran and Ryan McDonell as the two FBI leads are the stand outs and deserve to be in a better film.
Awful, 99 minutes of agony
wfrazierusa6 October 2016
This is one of those movies that if I could give it a 0 (zero), I would. It consists of some of the most unbelievable acting I've ever seen. The characters just never develop into anything resembling real people.
If you want to watch political harangue, disguised as entertainment, this might be a movie you enjoy. But for a movie under the genre of action, crime, thriller; well, the only genre it fits would be crime, and the crime would be the fact that the movie was ever distributed in the first place.
Apparently this is part 3 of a 3 part trilogy. I never had the misfortune of seeing the other two parts, but judging from this film, I guess I haven't missed anything.
I would suggest that you save your money, time, and sanity. Go watch (or buy) something else.
If you want to watch political harangue, disguised as entertainment, this might be a movie you enjoy. But for a movie under the genre of action, crime, thriller; well, the only genre it fits would be crime, and the crime would be the fact that the movie was ever distributed in the first place.
Apparently this is part 3 of a 3 part trilogy. I never had the misfortune of seeing the other two parts, but judging from this film, I guess I haven't missed anything.
I would suggest that you save your money, time, and sanity. Go watch (or buy) something else.
despite low budget and weak script; EXCELLENT!
lightbeing-4826112 September 2016
I didn't really have expectations with "President Down", I have seen the first two movies and for me there's a darkness and chill that suggests that the trilogy is closer to horror/thriller than action. Brenden Fletcher seems to look madder and scarier and as an anti-hero you get the feeling he's not that likable a person; highly intelligent yet potentially volatile, not the type of person you take home to mother...
Somehow I was gripped by President Down, low budget and weak script aside, the message is powerful, the fantasy of one person making an impact whereby "the people" take back their power and follow the (somewhat jumbled) message...
However, the message is powerful and although the use of violence/control to instigate a potential egalitarian society never works; the sophomoric use of action and sensationalism at least will attract some people that need the message/parable to casually sink into their subconscious.
Overall it's a worthwhile watch if you want your noodles cooked (brain stimulated) but don't expect high end action or deeply choreographed fight scenes. President Down deserves a watch as the thinkers will find it intriguing...
Somehow I was gripped by President Down, low budget and weak script aside, the message is powerful, the fantasy of one person making an impact whereby "the people" take back their power and follow the (somewhat jumbled) message...
However, the message is powerful and although the use of violence/control to instigate a potential egalitarian society never works; the sophomoric use of action and sensationalism at least will attract some people that need the message/parable to casually sink into their subconscious.
Overall it's a worthwhile watch if you want your noodles cooked (brain stimulated) but don't expect high end action or deeply choreographed fight scenes. President Down deserves a watch as the thinkers will find it intriguing...
Don't waste your time
jimkirk-110 June 2018
Aside from the lousy acting, the blunders of the cops and FBI, and the goofs and things that don't make sense - going after a terrorist in the woods in coat & tie - this rot is full of anarchist/communist propaganda that makes me want to puke.
Why did anyone waste time or money on this piece of trash?
Why did anyone waste time or money on this piece of trash?
Not bad for the end of a trilogy, but a bit disappointing.
chaioldmalastar5 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Before I get into the meat of it all, I'd like you to know that I am biased on the subject, as I very much enjoyed the last two films in the series, and I probably would not be as lenient if it was not the end of Rampage. Fans of Rampage will be happy to know that numerous elements found within the first two films have made their way to the third. Bill extensively plans his attack, and the film successfully builds a lot of tension and releases it in a bloody climax.However, unlike the others in the series, budget issues are glaringly obvious. The majority of the film seems to be shot within the same limited scenes, which, unlike the second film, does not have the interaction between Bill and his captives to keep it interesting. A great deal of action takes place off of the screen, only being referred to in text messages or by news reports, which do their job of a low budget method of building tension. Unfortunately, the hour or so the film takes to build said tension is not proportional to what it all leads up to, and left me feeling disappointed.
Interestingly, a significant chunk of the movie is used to build Bill up as a human being with emotions and compassion. This is achieved through his interactions with his wife and infant son, Billy. I was honestly surprised at how tasteful it all was. It wasn't done to justify or downplay Bill's actions, and it really did give his death more impact, as a human being was killed rather than a total monster. These scenes are some of the best in the movie, being well written and acted. Speaking of which, boy, does the acting get goofy and BOY, are some of the characters unnecessary. I could go on about it for more time than I have, so I'm going to restrict my criticism to a single element. Remember Chip, the news reporter from the second film? He had a personality, character development, and was very much a major part of the movie. The reporters in this, however, seem flat and uninterested and only exist to fill us in on scenes that Boll did not have the budget to shoot, and also to be executed by the hobo from the second film.
I can't help but believe that Uwe Boll wanted to make a much larger film, but didn't accommodate for a smaller budget, hence why President Down has major plot points being shown in small clips under ten seconds long, if they're even shown at all. The most glaring example of this is the use of neutron and nuclear weapons, which is what gets people to rally to Bill's cause and wreak havoc in the ending of the movie. The bombings and the massacres are both shown through news reports, and then barely mentioned again. I suppose I can forgive the latter, as it's the ending of the film, but that doesn't make it any less a disappointing ending.
Despite all its shortcomings, the third installment of the Rampage series does have its good points. Brendan Fletcher's acting is some A grade stuff, and many of the positive points of the previous films, despite now being shackled by budgeting, are still alive and kicking. I also quite enjoyed the explanation of Bill's transformation between the first and second films, turning from a bank robbing mass murderer to a political terrorist. The movie manages to do a good job of creating a world without showing you it, using news reports and Bill's messages to and from outside of his hideout to show the happenings of the world and how he has affected them. That being said, it's still disappointing that these events did not get fleshed out scenes of their own.
Overall, I found Rampage: President Down to be a fun watch, despite its numerous flaws. I would not suggest rushing out to buy it, but I'd personally be happy to purchase it with the rest of the trilogy.
Interestingly, a significant chunk of the movie is used to build Bill up as a human being with emotions and compassion. This is achieved through his interactions with his wife and infant son, Billy. I was honestly surprised at how tasteful it all was. It wasn't done to justify or downplay Bill's actions, and it really did give his death more impact, as a human being was killed rather than a total monster. These scenes are some of the best in the movie, being well written and acted. Speaking of which, boy, does the acting get goofy and BOY, are some of the characters unnecessary. I could go on about it for more time than I have, so I'm going to restrict my criticism to a single element. Remember Chip, the news reporter from the second film? He had a personality, character development, and was very much a major part of the movie. The reporters in this, however, seem flat and uninterested and only exist to fill us in on scenes that Boll did not have the budget to shoot, and also to be executed by the hobo from the second film.
I can't help but believe that Uwe Boll wanted to make a much larger film, but didn't accommodate for a smaller budget, hence why President Down has major plot points being shown in small clips under ten seconds long, if they're even shown at all. The most glaring example of this is the use of neutron and nuclear weapons, which is what gets people to rally to Bill's cause and wreak havoc in the ending of the movie. The bombings and the massacres are both shown through news reports, and then barely mentioned again. I suppose I can forgive the latter, as it's the ending of the film, but that doesn't make it any less a disappointing ending.
Despite all its shortcomings, the third installment of the Rampage series does have its good points. Brendan Fletcher's acting is some A grade stuff, and many of the positive points of the previous films, despite now being shackled by budgeting, are still alive and kicking. I also quite enjoyed the explanation of Bill's transformation between the first and second films, turning from a bank robbing mass murderer to a political terrorist. The movie manages to do a good job of creating a world without showing you it, using news reports and Bill's messages to and from outside of his hideout to show the happenings of the world and how he has affected them. That being said, it's still disappointing that these events did not get fleshed out scenes of their own.
Overall, I found Rampage: President Down to be a fun watch, despite its numerous flaws. I would not suggest rushing out to buy it, but I'd personally be happy to purchase it with the rest of the trilogy.
Bad Writing, Bad Effects
erik-541218 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
There are many movies that can tip the tables in the favor one company over another. This is definitely not one of those movies.
Where to begin, how about the fact that the protagonist is a terrorist but is apparently portrayed as the good guy. The movie is very anti-rich and assumes that the majority must resort to violence in order to have a say in what happens. Everyone believes the rich can only get rich because they have broken the rules to do it. However someone can get rich because they make something like the safety pin.
The production value is terrible, the reused the news set for the FBI HQ. That would be fine if it weren't for the fact that the set was terrible to begin with. They didn't even change a single thing about it. And the news itself doesn't come close to something that can convince you it is an actual news network.
In addition the guns don't sound like guns when they fire and when there is an explosion you don't see any damage on someone who was caught in it. The same holds true for bullets Many thing aren't addressed, such as how the protagonist was able to get things such as land mines and rpgs.
The acting IS something to write home about though, but not in a good way. It is slow and dull and I don't know if this was their idea or not, but it seems like they tried to spice it up with excessive swearing. Seriously, how many F-bombs do you need? Anyway, the film ends with riots in the streets as people are killing anyone who is doing better than them (they say the rich, but no one looked like an aristocratic). Furthermore, they blame it all on "Right Wing Anarchists." It also uses the stereotype of a white bald guy with a gun as one of these terrorists.
I would continue more and try and take apart this film piece by piece but 1,000 words isn't enough to tell you how bad this movie is. Plus I don't want to dwell on this movie any longer as it literally gave me a head ache.
If I had a physical copy of this movie I would put it in the burn barrel, light it on fire, pour gasoline on it, light the flames on fire, take it's ashes and then burn those. I would then take the ashes' ashes, put them in a jar, send them to the director and writer and burn those.
So to sum up: I don't like this movie.
Where to begin, how about the fact that the protagonist is a terrorist but is apparently portrayed as the good guy. The movie is very anti-rich and assumes that the majority must resort to violence in order to have a say in what happens. Everyone believes the rich can only get rich because they have broken the rules to do it. However someone can get rich because they make something like the safety pin.
The production value is terrible, the reused the news set for the FBI HQ. That would be fine if it weren't for the fact that the set was terrible to begin with. They didn't even change a single thing about it. And the news itself doesn't come close to something that can convince you it is an actual news network.
In addition the guns don't sound like guns when they fire and when there is an explosion you don't see any damage on someone who was caught in it. The same holds true for bullets Many thing aren't addressed, such as how the protagonist was able to get things such as land mines and rpgs.
The acting IS something to write home about though, but not in a good way. It is slow and dull and I don't know if this was their idea or not, but it seems like they tried to spice it up with excessive swearing. Seriously, how many F-bombs do you need? Anyway, the film ends with riots in the streets as people are killing anyone who is doing better than them (they say the rich, but no one looked like an aristocratic). Furthermore, they blame it all on "Right Wing Anarchists." It also uses the stereotype of a white bald guy with a gun as one of these terrorists.
I would continue more and try and take apart this film piece by piece but 1,000 words isn't enough to tell you how bad this movie is. Plus I don't want to dwell on this movie any longer as it literally gave me a head ache.
If I had a physical copy of this movie I would put it in the burn barrel, light it on fire, pour gasoline on it, light the flames on fire, take it's ashes and then burn those. I would then take the ashes' ashes, put them in a jar, send them to the director and writer and burn those.
So to sum up: I don't like this movie.
Not as intense as #1 or 2
casablancavic8 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
The first Rampage had some awesome dark humor and the 2nd film had the important and effective monologues which made those 2 films just wicked.
I waited 2 years to see this and was hoping that this would supercede them both.
Sadly, it didn't. #2 drove home some very strong themes and the first created the real anti-hero.
#3 missed a very crucial point....the killing of the head man in the White House and his second in command.
That was a very important and integral part of the story from the first movie and built it up in the second...only to fall and fail in the third.
Not only was that missed, but the planning stage of the assassination of the Pres and the vice pres.
He also missed how Bill eluded them for 2 years and how he got to meet Crystal, his wife.
There was another 1/2 hour that should have been but wasn't there and was badly needed to put the entire saga into a finale which would just blow every other film away.
Yes, the budget wasn't as big as the previous...but there should have been ways to do it - otherwise some lesser known politician should have been the focal point of the manhunt and this would have played out far better.
With a kill count well into the hundreds, Bill's story with him doing in 3 key people in the White House missed the mark severely, which is sad - because the entire concept has a massive potential and appeal to build a massive audience to the series.
However, the forest shootout scene was very well done and the editing was clean for the FBI shootout.
This film shows signs of being low budget and should have had the budget 3 times that of the previous to efficiently and effectively make this a masterpiece and a classic in the same vein as Taxi Driver was and still is.
I would have loved to see what was edited out in the film, because I am close to certain that maybe would have pushed what is one of my favourite series into another few notches not only on IMDb but also in film history to be a classic and memorable and important film for decades to come.
Uwe has done some wonderful films - yes, and some poor ones too, but this was to impact generations during the crisis of economics, political landscapes with dramatic new up and coming changes for the next presidency election and world matters..and this could have made a brutal and crucial impact and changes on very important topics for legislation and voting and how society will accept our new leaders and policies in these unstable times.
A film as violent as the first and as dramatic as the second with brutal delivery from Brendan Fletcher to his followers in a locked TV station doesn't bring nearly as much punch to the 3rd as expected.
In a way I was very let down...Bill Williamson stood for our outrage against injustice and greed and in some cases just plain old stupidity...here, he misses that important point and the story just seems to pass by without nearly as much interest or emotion or importance.
There was no memorable dialogue which whacked us in the head and woke us up and no dark humor to hammer it in deeper.
Thanks for the closure Uwe, but I would have wished that this piece was like the best and biggest explosion ...like a 10 megaton nuclear bomb exploding for us to sift through the rubble and pick up tiny pieces and fragments of our shattered life while we are scarred and ripped to shreds hoping for something that we can cling to for a chance of a meager last breath of life.
Instead it was like a firecracker which left little destruction and quickly disappeared for us to admire....only for us wanting to see more.
Well, at least it was better than Batman VS Superman!
I waited 2 years to see this and was hoping that this would supercede them both.
Sadly, it didn't. #2 drove home some very strong themes and the first created the real anti-hero.
#3 missed a very crucial point....the killing of the head man in the White House and his second in command.
That was a very important and integral part of the story from the first movie and built it up in the second...only to fall and fail in the third.
Not only was that missed, but the planning stage of the assassination of the Pres and the vice pres.
He also missed how Bill eluded them for 2 years and how he got to meet Crystal, his wife.
There was another 1/2 hour that should have been but wasn't there and was badly needed to put the entire saga into a finale which would just blow every other film away.
Yes, the budget wasn't as big as the previous...but there should have been ways to do it - otherwise some lesser known politician should have been the focal point of the manhunt and this would have played out far better.
With a kill count well into the hundreds, Bill's story with him doing in 3 key people in the White House missed the mark severely, which is sad - because the entire concept has a massive potential and appeal to build a massive audience to the series.
However, the forest shootout scene was very well done and the editing was clean for the FBI shootout.
This film shows signs of being low budget and should have had the budget 3 times that of the previous to efficiently and effectively make this a masterpiece and a classic in the same vein as Taxi Driver was and still is.
I would have loved to see what was edited out in the film, because I am close to certain that maybe would have pushed what is one of my favourite series into another few notches not only on IMDb but also in film history to be a classic and memorable and important film for decades to come.
Uwe has done some wonderful films - yes, and some poor ones too, but this was to impact generations during the crisis of economics, political landscapes with dramatic new up and coming changes for the next presidency election and world matters..and this could have made a brutal and crucial impact and changes on very important topics for legislation and voting and how society will accept our new leaders and policies in these unstable times.
A film as violent as the first and as dramatic as the second with brutal delivery from Brendan Fletcher to his followers in a locked TV station doesn't bring nearly as much punch to the 3rd as expected.
In a way I was very let down...Bill Williamson stood for our outrage against injustice and greed and in some cases just plain old stupidity...here, he misses that important point and the story just seems to pass by without nearly as much interest or emotion or importance.
There was no memorable dialogue which whacked us in the head and woke us up and no dark humor to hammer it in deeper.
Thanks for the closure Uwe, but I would have wished that this piece was like the best and biggest explosion ...like a 10 megaton nuclear bomb exploding for us to sift through the rubble and pick up tiny pieces and fragments of our shattered life while we are scarred and ripped to shreds hoping for something that we can cling to for a chance of a meager last breath of life.
Instead it was like a firecracker which left little destruction and quickly disappeared for us to admire....only for us wanting to see more.
Well, at least it was better than Batman VS Superman!
Entertaining but ludicrous ...
randyp-7287319 December 2017
I enjoyed the movie but it almost comes off as a training/inspirational video for Communists/Anarchists like the Antifa scumbags who have been polluting our streets. Especially at the end, it got particularly ridiculous when the love of his life actually states that he wasn't a terrorist. LOL. Then the dumbass news bitch actually calls him a RIGHT-wing anarchist. OBVIOUSLY he was a left-wing nutcase although a pretty bad-ass one. Antifa's time will come and I will surely enjoy contributing to it.
Better than average
jpnewmanone8 January 2017
The plot, acting and cinematography of this latest installment were slightly better than average... It's not easy to produce high quality film with a limited budget, especially when everyone want to get as much money as possible for their work..
Uwe Boll's correctly identified some of the current issues facing society, however, his suggested use of violence to correct those issues will only make things worse, not better for the 99.9% that he wants to represent...
Let's see if Boll will attempt to make another installment to improve the series and his message... There are plenty of people who came out of "retirement" to do what they love... and his fight for a better society is far from over...
Uwe Boll's correctly identified some of the current issues facing society, however, his suggested use of violence to correct those issues will only make things worse, not better for the 99.9% that he wants to represent...
Let's see if Boll will attempt to make another installment to improve the series and his message... There are plenty of people who came out of "retirement" to do what they love... and his fight for a better society is far from over...
100 Minutes of Propaganda and Talking
warpedmentality006 February 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I'll start off by saying that I haven't seen the first two movies although I doubt that I'm missing any critical information. I'm actually surprised that I made it through the whole movie.
First off, despite the title of the movie being "Rampage," there's surprisingly little action. The first 5 minutes and the last half hour or so has lots of gunfire and explosions but the other hour of the movie consists of talking. Either conversations between law enforcement agents, conversations between Bill Williamson and his equally delusional girlfriend/wife/baby mama or Bill Williamson's paranoid rants to the camera. The continuous, repetitive rants yearning for some kind of weird, hybrid socialist/libertarian nation becomes tiresome after a while. It's obvious from watching that there was little to no script before filming started. Bill Williamson preaches hatred and violence towards the rich yet has amassed an arsenal of weapons including C4, automatic rifles, grenades, drones, landmines, remote controlled machine guns and an underground bunker in the forest. I guess the best part of the movie comes from realizing that Bill has become one of the hypocrites that he so despises. Either that or the not-so-subtle indication at the very end of the movie that Uwe Boll may finally stop churning out his crap movies.
If you've seen the first two (which I'm told are far superior), then go ahead and finish up the trilogy. If you're randomly floating through Netflix and the title catches your eye, give it a pass.
First off, despite the title of the movie being "Rampage," there's surprisingly little action. The first 5 minutes and the last half hour or so has lots of gunfire and explosions but the other hour of the movie consists of talking. Either conversations between law enforcement agents, conversations between Bill Williamson and his equally delusional girlfriend/wife/baby mama or Bill Williamson's paranoid rants to the camera. The continuous, repetitive rants yearning for some kind of weird, hybrid socialist/libertarian nation becomes tiresome after a while. It's obvious from watching that there was little to no script before filming started. Bill Williamson preaches hatred and violence towards the rich yet has amassed an arsenal of weapons including C4, automatic rifles, grenades, drones, landmines, remote controlled machine guns and an underground bunker in the forest. I guess the best part of the movie comes from realizing that Bill has become one of the hypocrites that he so despises. Either that or the not-so-subtle indication at the very end of the movie that Uwe Boll may finally stop churning out his crap movies.
If you've seen the first two (which I'm told are far superior), then go ahead and finish up the trilogy. If you're randomly floating through Netflix and the title catches your eye, give it a pass.
this was a terrible movie
patcarlson-1825910 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This movie has no one of redeeming value, the protagonist is an awful human being that tells people to go out and kill anyone rich (wtf is that about). This plays out like a left wing terrorist manifesto, I was routing the hold time for the FBI not this lunatic. People like this main character are the ones that need to be shot not people that are successful in life. I understand that I don't know Bills background story as I didn't see the first 2 films. But I can not see them being able to give him a just cause for the carnage he dose, and causes. everyone of the people rising up at the end should be shot in the head. How is shooting some one that has had success in life a rightful thing to do?
Progressive leftist propaganda
davorslistdepot2 October 2016
Action and violence seem beyond the point after a protagonist, a bad guy, recites the entire progressive world-view as his motive to kill.
Otherwise I'd give this piece of garbage a solid 7 for action, and well spent low budget. But the magic was spoiled after the climate change and gun control tirade.
The funniest part, the riots that are motivated by a same Marxist following are declared right-wing extremists. Tell me about deliberately missing the point.
So as an aftermath - what did I learn after watching this litter? Don't trust people peddling Marxist ideologies.
Otherwise I'd give this piece of garbage a solid 7 for action, and well spent low budget. But the magic was spoiled after the climate change and gun control tirade.
The funniest part, the riots that are motivated by a same Marxist following are declared right-wing extremists. Tell me about deliberately missing the point.
So as an aftermath - what did I learn after watching this litter? Don't trust people peddling Marxist ideologies.
Avoid like the plague.
masonjon8929 April 2018
Against the grain
easywind-6086927 January 2020
I imagine there will not be lots of folks who will enjoy the diatribe of this movie but Hollywood only backs movies where the so called good guys win.
I stumbled upon this movie, never saw either of the first two movies or saw a review of this and the character Bill Williamson is spot on with some of his remarks.
I'm a 76 year old Vietnam veteran and strongly believe that those in service to the country, cops, the armed forces etc are nothing but tools for the 0.1%
Rampage President Down: An unpleasant finale to an unpleasant trilogy
Platypuschow23 May 2018
I have a tremendous amount to say about Rampage 3 so bear with me.
Rampage: President down is the third and hopefully final movie in a Uwe Boll created franchise that is very uncomfortable viewing. Written by him and lead star Brendan Fletcher the story of all three movies is essentially an angry young man who dons body armour and automatic weapons and goes on rampages killing countless innocents. And he's the lead, therefore it's very hard to care about the protagonist or rather the films don't have one. Throughout the films he spews his reasons which are a combination of left and right wing politics.
Now to be clear much of what he says makes perfect sense and I agree with him, but they are in no way reasons to kill innocent people let alone bring about the finale of this film.
This is the movie creator Uwe Boll went on a rant about online. Because he couldn't get in funded on Kickstarter he attacked the public verbally claiming they were stupid for watching Hollywood films and being sheep. Boll was already hated, this didn't help his case.
Now I don't mind him, I think the man is an idiot but as a film maker he's fine. Yes he's made some stinkers, some really bad films in fact and I think this franchise is the crown jewel of crap.
Next something has to be noted. As I mentioned our leads rants are a combination of political stances, and for that reason it was inevitable you'd have people make the whole film politically motivated (Which it clearly isn't). The highlighted review on the IMDB page is a gentleman claiming the entire film is "Leftist" propaganda. This demonstrates to me that he doesn't understand left stances and certainly doesn't have a clue what propaganda is. A movie involving a character talking about subjects that you disagree with is no more propaganda than Black Panther was for African American succession.
Have you ever noticed how people treat left/right like football teams, vigorously defending them to the point of hostility? Have you noticed how all the derogative terms come from one side? Leftist, Libtard, Snowflake all aimed at the Left from the Right. The side that supports guns, has a history of bigotry, homophobia, racism and theocratic views is the hostile one? Does this surprise anyone?
This movie isn't propaganda for either political stance, to claim so is pitiful and screams agenda. The person in question who made such a ridiculous claim has a profile made up of the VAST majority of films getting a 1/10. Hateful individual which again isn't much of a surprise. Get a grip.
This final movie is well written and certainly has talking points but as a form of entertainment it is very much lacking. I fail to see the point of 90 minutes of a man killing innocent people.
The Good:
Matt Frewer
Well written for the most part
A great movie for "Talking points"
The Bad:
Uncomfortable viewing
Who am I supposed to be rooting for?
Things I Learnt From This Movie:
White people CAN be referred to as terrorists
Claiming real living celebrities are dead in a movie is really rather unpleasant
Rampage: President down is the third and hopefully final movie in a Uwe Boll created franchise that is very uncomfortable viewing. Written by him and lead star Brendan Fletcher the story of all three movies is essentially an angry young man who dons body armour and automatic weapons and goes on rampages killing countless innocents. And he's the lead, therefore it's very hard to care about the protagonist or rather the films don't have one. Throughout the films he spews his reasons which are a combination of left and right wing politics.
Now to be clear much of what he says makes perfect sense and I agree with him, but they are in no way reasons to kill innocent people let alone bring about the finale of this film.
This is the movie creator Uwe Boll went on a rant about online. Because he couldn't get in funded on Kickstarter he attacked the public verbally claiming they were stupid for watching Hollywood films and being sheep. Boll was already hated, this didn't help his case.
Now I don't mind him, I think the man is an idiot but as a film maker he's fine. Yes he's made some stinkers, some really bad films in fact and I think this franchise is the crown jewel of crap.
Next something has to be noted. As I mentioned our leads rants are a combination of political stances, and for that reason it was inevitable you'd have people make the whole film politically motivated (Which it clearly isn't). The highlighted review on the IMDB page is a gentleman claiming the entire film is "Leftist" propaganda. This demonstrates to me that he doesn't understand left stances and certainly doesn't have a clue what propaganda is. A movie involving a character talking about subjects that you disagree with is no more propaganda than Black Panther was for African American succession.
Have you ever noticed how people treat left/right like football teams, vigorously defending them to the point of hostility? Have you noticed how all the derogative terms come from one side? Leftist, Libtard, Snowflake all aimed at the Left from the Right. The side that supports guns, has a history of bigotry, homophobia, racism and theocratic views is the hostile one? Does this surprise anyone?
This movie isn't propaganda for either political stance, to claim so is pitiful and screams agenda. The person in question who made such a ridiculous claim has a profile made up of the VAST majority of films getting a 1/10. Hateful individual which again isn't much of a surprise. Get a grip.
This final movie is well written and certainly has talking points but as a form of entertainment it is very much lacking. I fail to see the point of 90 minutes of a man killing innocent people.
The Good:
Matt Frewer
Well written for the most part
A great movie for "Talking points"
The Bad:
Uncomfortable viewing
Who am I supposed to be rooting for?
Things I Learnt From This Movie:
White people CAN be referred to as terrorists
Claiming real living celebrities are dead in a movie is really rather unpleasant
Not what I hoped, but Uwe gave it his A-game.
jackfwoodward2 February 2017
Warning: Spoilers
The final film in the Trilogy, Uwe Boll raps up the political message massacre of Rampage with a hit, yet sour high note of the series.
You can tell this film didn't quite have the same budget as the first 2 films at times, but regardless of that, this film concludes the tonal message that Bill Williamson had tried to achieve, and ultimately accomplishes, somewhat, by the film's climax. Ultimately, this is what the film is about, delivering the message and hitting the final nail into the coffin of his tireless crusade against the 1%, regardless of the casualties by the end. Capital Punishment road the line between necessary violence and delivery the message, but President Down attempts to take that line and little bit further, but has it's snags along the way.
While it tones down in the action/bloody massacre department, it strives to make up in character composition and being "at it's height".
You can tell this film didn't quite have the same budget as the first 2 films at times, but regardless of that, this film concludes the tonal message that Bill Williamson had tried to achieve, and ultimately accomplishes, somewhat, by the film's climax. Ultimately, this is what the film is about, delivering the message and hitting the final nail into the coffin of his tireless crusade against the 1%, regardless of the casualties by the end. Capital Punishment road the line between necessary violence and delivery the message, but President Down attempts to take that line and little bit further, but has it's snags along the way.
While it tones down in the action/bloody massacre department, it strives to make up in character composition and being "at it's height".
Waste of film
johnkenerson2 August 2017
This movie was a complete waste of film. Uwe Boll has got to be the worst director since Ed Wood, and the fact that he and his "star" wrote this abortion will solidify the fact that he sucks as a writer too.
This movie is nothing but a leftist propaganda wet dream (the irony being that most leftists are afraid of guns). Bill Williamson comes as nothing but a petulant punk, someone who thinks he has it all figured out, but is literately nothing more than a retard in a suit of ballistic armor.
The suits that greenlit this movie should have the crap kicked out of them. The fact that Boll has a career, even after failure upon failure is a testament to the lack of creativity in Hollywood.
This movie fails on all levels, storytelling, directing, action, political commentary, social commentary. There is not a single redeeming thing in this movie. I wish I could sue the filmmakers to get the half hour of my life I spent watching this piece of garbage back. If I could give less than one star, I most certainly would.
Spend your time watching something else. This movie sucks.
This movie is nothing but a leftist propaganda wet dream (the irony being that most leftists are afraid of guns). Bill Williamson comes as nothing but a petulant punk, someone who thinks he has it all figured out, but is literately nothing more than a retard in a suit of ballistic armor.
The suits that greenlit this movie should have the crap kicked out of them. The fact that Boll has a career, even after failure upon failure is a testament to the lack of creativity in Hollywood.
This movie fails on all levels, storytelling, directing, action, political commentary, social commentary. There is not a single redeeming thing in this movie. I wish I could sue the filmmakers to get the half hour of my life I spent watching this piece of garbage back. If I could give less than one star, I most certainly would.
Spend your time watching something else. This movie sucks.
Quit our whining!
bbobbcommunist16 September 2016
Did Scorsese, Coppola or Spielberg always hit a Home Run? No. This is a good movie that perhaps could have been a bit better. But you are missing the point. The important thing is Bill Williamson delivering a message to the camera. All the other stuff is frosting. The message is the cake. Some people are in it just to lick the frosting because they cannot handle the cake. There is so much wrong with our "world" today that it would take many Bill Williamsons to "cleanse" the corrupt lice out of here. Of course if you are a 1% person with way too much money then you would not like Bill (or Uwe for that matter). Take a good look at what is being offered to Americans for Presidential candidates. No wonder the rest of the World is laughing at us. The two over-stuffed couches we get to choose from sure makes Bill seem like the logical solution. So there.
The idea is better than the execution
deloudelouvain1 September 2017
Bill Williamson is back. He's not done with his crusade against the establishment, against the rich, against the so called elite. Brendan Fletcher plays again the role of Bill Williamson so there is not really a change. I didn't watch the second one but it really doesn't matter to follow this story. It's basically a guy killing a lot of people from the government this time, a guy angry against society. Rich people will probably not understand this movie but the rest of us might enjoy it a bit. This one is not better then the first one, it almost never is, but it's still watchable. The way of filming looks sometimes a bit like done by an amateur, so that's not great. It's just a movie good enough to watch once and then forget about it.
This movie was so bad, that I ................
kduclos201422 July 2018
...... quit watching it after about 20 minutes to find some reviews to see if anyone else thought it was as bad as I.
I felt like the author was anti-America and wanted to put his personal views in a movie. Everything this Bill Williamson stood for I stood against. It was about as dull as a butter knife. It was very unrealistic. Slow, dull and boring. No thanks. I'm glad I didn't pay money to watch it because I would be demanding a refund. Truly pathetic.
I felt like the author was anti-America and wanted to put his personal views in a movie. Everything this Bill Williamson stood for I stood against. It was about as dull as a butter knife. It was very unrealistic. Slow, dull and boring. No thanks. I'm glad I didn't pay money to watch it because I would be demanding a refund. Truly pathetic.
"Rampage: President Down"- Uwe Boll's final film is appropriately both one of his most ambitious works... and also one of his messiest. Still, it's a watchable finale.
TedStixonAKAMaximumMadness18 January 2017
I admire Uwe Boll. Honestly. The man loves his job... he loves making movies. And despite the constant (and well-deserved) backlash he received throughout the great majority of his career, he never stopped doing what he loved. So I gotta give the man some major respect. He might have made terrible films, and he might have been a bit... overly "abrasive" and "passionate" when things didn't go his way, but he struggled and fought to do what he wanted. And that's more than many can say.
In some ways, it seems all too appropriate for Boll's (alleged) final film to also be the concluding chapter in his genuinely popular "Rampage" trilogy. Since the release of the original film back in 2009, this particular trilogy seemed to be the thing that kept Boll completely and utterly invested in his career as a film director. You can tell that they are perhaps his most personal work and that he's actually putting his heart and soul into their creation. And you get a sense that anything else he's made since 2009 has only been side-projects that he worked on out of obligation.
In a strangely subdued narrative in comparison to the trilogy as a whole, we again follow Bill Williamson (played wonderfully by co- writer Brendan Fletcher) as he struggles with the ramifications of his previous "rampages"- most notably his recent assassination of the President of the United States. Williamson is now a father of an infant son, and he worries that his message is being lost by a media that is more focused on his body-count than on his attempts at delivering a misguided message. As the authorities try to crack down on him and take him out once and for all, Bill prepares himself for what might just be his final rampage... Desperately hoping that his philosophies will finally get through to the public once and for all.
I wasn't a massive fan of the original film, but I did find it one of Boll's more palatable works and also one of his most stylish. It was a decent enough movie about a man pushed to the brink and lashing out against a society that he feels increasingly oppressed by. However, I found the second installment ("Capital Punishment") to be a preachy mess that was far too in love with its own flawed ideals to really function properly in any capacity. It's musings and ideologies were half-baked and self-aggrandizing nonsense, and it became too obviously a shallow attempt to appeal to the teenaged and 20-something wannabe armchair- revolutionaries that have been popping up more and more recently. Thankfully, I think "President Down" improves on the second chapter and probably sits just below the original. If you enjoyed the first film, I can't imagine you'd be disappointed by its concluding chapter.
Star Brendan Fletcher is the main draw for this final chapter, and he's giving it his absolute best shot. I've always really enjoyed Fletcher as a performer, and it's really a shame that he's not more widely recognized and is constantly saddled in low- budget B-movie roles- the guy can act his heart out and has a lot of appeal. I also feel Fletcher's contributions to the writing are invaluable, given his insight into the character of Bill Williamson. It was also quite clever for the film to spend more time with Bill as a person first and a "terrorist" second. It gave the film more of an emotional impact... something that was desperately lacking in the previous installment. You actually do kind of care about Bill this time around, psychotic thought he may be. It's quite ambitious, being Boll's most character- intensive work to date.
Unfortunately, the film suffers for Boll's continued wonky direction, his obsession with the shaky "morals" on display and a cripplingly low budget. Boll is one of those directors... he seems to understand the "language" of film and can wrap his head around what works and doesn't work on a technical level. But he doesn't seem to grasp how to use this knowledge to put together a scene. And thus, the film comes off as amateurish as ever from a directorial standpoint. Much like many of his recent film, he relies on shaky-cam style camera-work to a fault, and seems afraid to let any shot go on for more than a few seconds, which gets distracting far too often. His sense of story structure is also pretty suspect, as is his continued insistence to try and elevate the film into something more than it is. You can tell Boll thinks the movie is an important piece of fiction. And he relishes in letting Bill expound ridiculous amounts of preaching dialog warning of the dangers of the social and political institutions at play. But it's all common knowledge for anyone with half a brain. And given that this is the same film series where Bill executed a woman over yoga of all things in the second entry, it comes off as flat and "false." You can't take it seriously. And good lord, do the budget cuts show on-screen. The film is laughably cheap-looking, with the majority of sequences taking place in the same three or four small, cramped rooms and the big, titular "rampage" being a mere portion of what was on-display in the other installments.
Still, I do think that the ambition on display with the honest attempts at character development and the powerhouse performance by Brendan Fletcher make it worth it a go if you were a fan of the previous films. It might not quite measure up to the depraved insanity of the original, but it's at least watchable and serves as an appropriate cap to the trilogy. And for film buffs, it's worth seeing as the supposed final film from one of cinema's most infamous figures. Part of me will miss you, Boll.
I give "Rampage: President Down" a sub-par but watchable 4 out of 10.
In some ways, it seems all too appropriate for Boll's (alleged) final film to also be the concluding chapter in his genuinely popular "Rampage" trilogy. Since the release of the original film back in 2009, this particular trilogy seemed to be the thing that kept Boll completely and utterly invested in his career as a film director. You can tell that they are perhaps his most personal work and that he's actually putting his heart and soul into their creation. And you get a sense that anything else he's made since 2009 has only been side-projects that he worked on out of obligation.
In a strangely subdued narrative in comparison to the trilogy as a whole, we again follow Bill Williamson (played wonderfully by co- writer Brendan Fletcher) as he struggles with the ramifications of his previous "rampages"- most notably his recent assassination of the President of the United States. Williamson is now a father of an infant son, and he worries that his message is being lost by a media that is more focused on his body-count than on his attempts at delivering a misguided message. As the authorities try to crack down on him and take him out once and for all, Bill prepares himself for what might just be his final rampage... Desperately hoping that his philosophies will finally get through to the public once and for all.
I wasn't a massive fan of the original film, but I did find it one of Boll's more palatable works and also one of his most stylish. It was a decent enough movie about a man pushed to the brink and lashing out against a society that he feels increasingly oppressed by. However, I found the second installment ("Capital Punishment") to be a preachy mess that was far too in love with its own flawed ideals to really function properly in any capacity. It's musings and ideologies were half-baked and self-aggrandizing nonsense, and it became too obviously a shallow attempt to appeal to the teenaged and 20-something wannabe armchair- revolutionaries that have been popping up more and more recently. Thankfully, I think "President Down" improves on the second chapter and probably sits just below the original. If you enjoyed the first film, I can't imagine you'd be disappointed by its concluding chapter.
Star Brendan Fletcher is the main draw for this final chapter, and he's giving it his absolute best shot. I've always really enjoyed Fletcher as a performer, and it's really a shame that he's not more widely recognized and is constantly saddled in low- budget B-movie roles- the guy can act his heart out and has a lot of appeal. I also feel Fletcher's contributions to the writing are invaluable, given his insight into the character of Bill Williamson. It was also quite clever for the film to spend more time with Bill as a person first and a "terrorist" second. It gave the film more of an emotional impact... something that was desperately lacking in the previous installment. You actually do kind of care about Bill this time around, psychotic thought he may be. It's quite ambitious, being Boll's most character- intensive work to date.
Unfortunately, the film suffers for Boll's continued wonky direction, his obsession with the shaky "morals" on display and a cripplingly low budget. Boll is one of those directors... he seems to understand the "language" of film and can wrap his head around what works and doesn't work on a technical level. But he doesn't seem to grasp how to use this knowledge to put together a scene. And thus, the film comes off as amateurish as ever from a directorial standpoint. Much like many of his recent film, he relies on shaky-cam style camera-work to a fault, and seems afraid to let any shot go on for more than a few seconds, which gets distracting far too often. His sense of story structure is also pretty suspect, as is his continued insistence to try and elevate the film into something more than it is. You can tell Boll thinks the movie is an important piece of fiction. And he relishes in letting Bill expound ridiculous amounts of preaching dialog warning of the dangers of the social and political institutions at play. But it's all common knowledge for anyone with half a brain. And given that this is the same film series where Bill executed a woman over yoga of all things in the second entry, it comes off as flat and "false." You can't take it seriously. And good lord, do the budget cuts show on-screen. The film is laughably cheap-looking, with the majority of sequences taking place in the same three or four small, cramped rooms and the big, titular "rampage" being a mere portion of what was on-display in the other installments.
Still, I do think that the ambition on display with the honest attempts at character development and the powerhouse performance by Brendan Fletcher make it worth it a go if you were a fan of the previous films. It might not quite measure up to the depraved insanity of the original, but it's at least watchable and serves as an appropriate cap to the trilogy. And for film buffs, it's worth seeing as the supposed final film from one of cinema's most infamous figures. Part of me will miss you, Boll.
I give "Rampage: President Down" a sub-par but watchable 4 out of 10.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
