Armstrong (1998) from Tuna

Armstrong (1998) is a grade Z action film from Menahem Golan. First, the characters. We have a CIA agent/ex SEAL instructor, his wife, who completed SEAL training, an ex SEAL turned mercenary named Armstrong, and the one honest Russian military officer as the good guys. For bad guys, we have American Mafia, Russian Mafia, corrupt Russian military and corrupt Russian politicians. Now for plot. Charles Napier, the husband, arrives with Kimberly Kates, the wife, in tow in Moscow. He is there to expose a murky plot to sell soviet nuclear missiles to third world terrorists. 
It is clear that Richard Lynch as a soviet Colonial is one of the leaders, as is Joe Lara as the American Mafia representative, who is chief honcho for all of the bad guys. Frank Zagarino as Armstrong agrees to help the good guys, which is good for Kates, because her hubby is killed off early in the film and, unlike most of the people killed in the film, he does not reappear later.  


see the main commentary
 This is one of the weakest plots I have seen, and is full of continuity errors. The one I followed with glee was a supposedly continuous chase scene on foot, where the stunt double went from white panties to dark panties to white panties with pantyhose. On the other hand, the photography, while not tricky or innovative, is very clear.

DVD info from Amazon.

  • no widescreen

  • no features

Now for the exposure. Kimberly Kates is in the shower when the Mafia, disguised as room service, knocks on the door. We know she is nude in the shower because she showers with the curtain half pulled back, and also because we can see her nude reflection in the tile behind her. No through the curtain stuff here. First, we see buns, then a hint of nipple, then a breast and a hint of pubic hair. Then she slowly climbs out of the tub facing the camera, bends over and gets her skirt, then puts it on. At this point, we know for certain she is a natural redhead, and can see more than just pubic hair between her legs. Then she puts on a sheer blouse, and spends the next 20 minutes of the film running all over Moscow in a transparent wet shirt. This is possibly the best exposure I have seen from a mainstream actress (she has 34 credits at IMDB) in a non-porn film. 

The Critics Vote

  • online

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 4.4, and that should drop as more people vote 
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, the film itself is a D+, with far too many plot holes and continuity problems for anyone to stomach, and sappy dialogue as well. You might want to rent it and watch the shower and wet blouse sequence with the sound turned off.

Return to the Movie House home page