The Losers

2010 "Anyone else would be dead by now."
6.2| 1h37m| PG-13| en
Details

On a mission deep in the Bolivian jungle, a team of elite commandos finds itself on the receiving end of a lethal betrayal. Now presumed dead, the men join forces with a mysterious operative named Aisha to hunt down their enemy and even the score.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 7-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever
SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie
Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.
AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.
GonzoDanMan I am stunned at the number of 5-plus star reviews; did everyone see the same film? I think a lot of people are star-struck that 'Negan' has a big role, but they must also admit that the guy CANNOT act. Rugged handsome, yes, but a C-rate actor. The only reason this got 2 stars instead of one or even zero is because there was effort made to make a good movie, it just failed MISERABLY. Everything was just preposterous. They toss their dog tags into the wreckage of the crashed helicopter, and that works to convince everyone (investigators included) that their 5 bodies are in the ash. They hijack a helicopter on a freeway that has ZERO traffic in either direction for what amounts to hours. They endure wounds that heal within moments, but they can get face punched a hundred times and not a drop of blood. A helicopter with a big magnet can lift an armored car and carry it away all while being shot at by men with huge machine guns. A jet plane is going to take off from the docks at a port full of shipping crates. E-gads, this was the worst movie ever. The only reason I stayed through to the end was because I have a mental condition; once I'm 25% in to a movie, no matter how bad it is I have to watch it. I should see a doctor, I know.
The Movie Diorama For me, this is a difficult one to judge. It's full of bumbling personalities, exciting set pieces and comedic one liners, yet it lacks depth. A dull clichéd plot that is as unmemorable as the eponymous group. So do I view this as an exercise of mindless action, or take it as a decent adaptation of the graphic novels? An elite black ops group are tasked in preventing a mysterious individual, simply known as Max, from unleashing a device that can dematerialise the vicinity that it is activated within. A "Snuke". It quite literally sucks nearby mass into oblivion like an obese person hoovering up the crumbs of the pizza they had last night with their mouth, leaving no trace of its existence. Environmentally friendly and explosively potent, how thoughtful. Much like the plot device, the narrative is rapidly paced. Lightning fast dialogue, each bursting with unique characterisation, that humorously creates an enjoyable flick. It is undeniably watchable, no question. The onscreen talent makes it even easier to sit back and relax, knowing that Morgan, Evans, Saldana and Elba are powering through the script. The bombardment of action set pieces enhances the entertainment value substantially. Yet despite all of the above, there is a sense of mediocrity. A sense of familiarity. Ahhh yes, 'The A-Team' remake that was released in the same year. These two films draw impeccable comparisons that unfortunately deters from any originality that this film attempted to acquire. The plot in itself was rather generic, filled with clichéd character choices that you could see coming from a mile away. White's directing style was far too frantic with extreme usage of zooms, quick cuts and lack of camera focus that made certain combat scenes hard to follow. The visual effects were noticeably awful, particularly explosions such as the motorbike crashing into the jet scene. The antagonist was far too mysterious that actually he made no impact to the story. Needless to say, The Losers is unmemorable and consequently is not a winning blockbuster.
mairire Will someone please put Jeffrey Dean Morgan in more intelligent dark humor action leads? He is just amazing as a charming rogue leader of the marry band, and Chris Evans is an unexpected comic relief with nuanced performance and expansive range of acting. Interesting take on comic book based action flick. It never looses a momentum or pace, it's through and through fun, but if you pay a bit of attention, you will see darker undercurrents and rather deep connotations. Well directed, well paced and entertaining all the way through.There is no pretense here, but that's why the depth of characters and the story comes through in those shining moments. This would be action flick for cool guys and thinking girls.
callrath i want to watch this but have no time because fully of working. is it violent? is it good movie? how much did they get it? When did they play? is it the top show movie? how many like it? is there any thing else? what is the feature? is it in USA?Women, on the other hand, seem to be more ambivalent. After all, less than 1/4 of women in one study reported caring about the length2. This might be partly due to the fact that women have a positively skewed view of penis length. One study, for example, found that only 6% of women thought their man's penis was below average, while 24% thought they had a well-endowed beau1. Statistically speaking, ladies, that's just not true. (But hey, what matters is that they're satisfied, right? Because the vast majority of those women – 84% – are.) Of course, what people say and what they really feel aren't always synonymous. While many women say that's it's not 'the size of the boat' but instead 'the motion of the ocean' that counts, empirical studies have called them out on their bluff. For example, a study in China found that women found images of men more attractive if they were altered to have a 22%-33% increase in length3. Furthermore, the more partners a woman has had, the more likely she is to think length matters (and those with experience would know best, wouldn't they?)4. But is bigger really better? Well, that is the question, now isn't it? When I say "better", I'm really referring to one of two possibilities: 1) that size correlates strongly to pleasure experienced by the woman or 2) that increased size enhances reproductive success for the man. The two aren't entirely unrelated, as one might expect a highly talented man to have many willing partners. But in the latter, I'm more interested in a direct effect, as in length correlating to how much sperm is deposited, or the depth into the vagina somehow leading to higher chance of