Such a frustrating disappointment

So much average

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

The plot in Icebreaker is such a mess that it doesn't merit much discussion. A group of terrorists descend on a Vermont ski resort looking for a downed plane carrying a nuclear device. In the end, however, the nuclear device is all but an afterthought as the head baddie sets his sights on the lesser goal of blowing up a ski gondola with one person on board. Ski patrol member Matt is on the case to stop the terrorists and save his fiancé (who is quite naturally the person on the gondola).How in the name of all that is Holy did the makers of Icebreakers get a cast that includes Sean Astin, Stacy Keach, and Bruce Campbell? Were these guys that hard-up for work? Do they enjoy skiing so much that a free weekend on the slopes of Killington was enough to entice them? Did the producers have compromising photos? I just don't get it. Astin may be a good actor, but he's not my image of an action hero. When I think of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chuck Norris, and Rob Van Dam – Sean Astin is not the next name that comes to mind. Stacy Keach phones in his performance from the State line. It's obvious he has no interest in Icebreakers. As for Campbell, as much as I love him, not even he can save this thing. Bruce's charm, so evident in the Evil Dead Series or Brisco County or even Burn Notice, is not here. Like Keach, he doesn't look overly interested in the project. But the acting's not the problem – it's the muddled plot. I watched the whole thing and still have no idea what was motivating the terrorists. They want the nuclear device simply because that's what a terrorist would do. The take-over of the ski resort seemed so unnecessary. Their plan had not gone so off-track that they still couldn't have secretly gotten their weapon and disappeared. Why bring so much attention to their activities? The answer – it's in the script. The whole thing this is a complete mess. Character motivation in Icebreakers makes absolutely no sense. I'll give Icebreakers a generous 3/10.

While, this movie is cover with icy flaws like cheesy jokes, bad editing, awful special effect, and mostly mediocre acting. This poor man's version of 1988's film, Die Hard action concept mixed with a 1993's film, 'Cliffhanger', snow settling is still a fun watch. After all, where else, would you see somewhat intense scenes involving snowboarding, snowmobiles, ski lift, and even a snow plow!? Because of that, this movie is somewhat a guilty pleasure for me, because how entertaining, the action scenes were. It remind me, a little bit of 1969's On Her Majesty's Secret Service with 2002's Extreme Ops, with its plot. Directed and written by David Giancola, the movie tells the story of an everyday ski patrolman, Matt Foster (Sean Astin) trying to stop terrorists when they to attempt to take over a mountain ski resort with a stolen nuclear weapon. Without spoiling the movie, too much, I have to say, the jarring things about this movie is how unrealistic, some of the plot elements are, and the filmmakers choices for the main leads. First off, the choice of Sean Astin as the lead. I like him, as an actor, but he really doesn't makes a very convincing main lead action-hero. His stunt work is pretty damn poor. Yes, he has some heroic like qualities; but most of the time, Sean Astin's character acts so selfish, clumsy, and dumb-founded, that some people might hate his character. Not only that, but Matt Foster's stupid decisions, would had cost the death of the hostages, and himself, a million time, over if this was really happening. Honestly, who throws a snowball at a man, holding a rocket launcher gun or a VHS tape at a woman with a machine gun? Even a candy pez was used as a weapon! It's a bit funny that the only reason, why he survive for so long in the film, was because of bad writing, pure luck, and bad decision making by the villains. A good example of this, is when the villain capture him, only to let Matt Foster free, later on the film, because the main terrorist, Carl Greig (Bruce Campbell) felt that he needed to die, better. What type of villain does that? I get that, Carl Greig might be dying, and he felt bad, for Matt's wimpy behavior, but we never really got to know, what his motivations were. It's confusing; because one minute, he's killing everybody like a mad man, and the next, he giving people, a fair fight. Another thing, that doesn't make sense about the bad guy is how he wants to detonate a nuclear bomb in a city, but due to an absurd turn of events, he has only has a few weapon-uranium in a winter-based settling of Killington Peak. There is no way, he could set off a bomb, even if he want to, on the "Beast of the East". First off, the negative temperature is coefficient of reactivity. 2. He doesn't have the critical mass to unleash the weapon and third, his choice is Killington, a small town, 6.2 miles away, with a population least than 800 people. Even if, he get the bomb going, his target of Killington is way too far away. I guess, the fallout from the blast, could be bad, but everybody would had been evaluated from Killington before the bomb is set off, because of the hostage situation. His plan doesn't work, well. Despite that, the bald Bruce Campbell is fine in the role even if he looks weird. I just wish, the movie would explain, what illness, he was indeed dying from; because it's seem like Campbell working with no information about who his character was. Another thing, that was unclear, is why his henchmen would go along with this plan, since it clear in the movie, that they value their lives. For the most part, the supporting characters weren't so bad. However, some of them, were a bit too cartoony. A good example of this, was the forest ranger, Beck (Mark 'Woody' Keppel). The actor that played him, was a little over-the-top comedy relief. Even the crazy actor that play, the lodge owner, Clay (Rick Kincaid) would had told him, to tone it down. Still, they were somewhat a hoot to watch. One of the better performance in the film is Stacy Keach who plays Matt Foster's father in law, Bill. I like how, badass, they made him, be. One character that I can do, without is the Will Langley (John James), the FBI agent. He was pretty much, pointless. Adding nothing to the plot. Thank God, he wasn't in the film, long. Another thing, that didn't do much for me, is the 90 alternative rock music that came along with the film. It felt like a lame early winter X-Games commercial, most of the time. Second off, when the movie felt like using classical music. They played it way too long. Beethoven 9th symphony is a good example in the beginning of the film. We get it, it's "Ode to Joy", an obvious nod to "Die Hard", can you start the movie, now. It just doesn't fit, well, with the tone of the film. However, I do like the establishing shots, they got from filming at Killington Ski Resort. It made me, want to visit there, one day. Overall: This directed to video movie is watchable. Not a terrible film, but more of a rental than a purchase. Check it out, if you like cheesy action flicks.

This is a cute movie. What I found wonderful was that it was meant to be a movie with two big Hollywood actors, but it turned out to be a dumping ground for struggling Vermont actors. If you live in the state and hang out in the Burlington-Essex area, then you might recognize a few faces. Anyone who went to Showtime Video will recognize at least one face if not more. The main cast seems to have just been along for the skiing opportunity, and its the small timers who are trying to get their foot in the Hollywood door. Still, worth seeing or renting. Find someone who owned this when it came out because they enjoyed Rudy. That might be your best bet.

This is not the best movie, but for a Sean Astin fan, it's a must see. As always, he is incredible in every role, as is he in this one. If you like action, you might enjoy this movie, but the special effects aren't that great. I know it must not have gotten many good reviews, but I would still recommend it to anyway. If you don't like it, at least then you'd be able to say you saw it and you know for sure. Sean Astin as always, is fantastic.