User reviews

Around the time of the US invasion of Panama the CIA decides to make a deal with some contra guerilla fighters. Mel decides to recruit some buddy of his, Becker, who is currently a mess because his wife died. Along for the ride monitoring things is another agent, Burns. Becker is supposed to make the deal happen: he has to buy a Soviet chopper from some bad guys in Panama and deliver it to the guerilla guy. The Panama guys are involved in drugs and Becker has to go undercover and work in a casino where the gets to meet hot girls and the partying bad guy who is supposed to sell him the chopper. He is also contacted by a DEA agent who offers help if he helps them out in turn. Things of course don't turn out as expected at all and Becker ends up stabbed in the back from all sides just as the full invasion breaks out. Yet he somehow has to make it out alive and try to make some deal happen.

Panama has a good idea and story. The cast does the best it can. Mel always delivers but here he is a tertiary character. Kiara Liz is absolutely adorable. Cole Hauser isn't the most compelling lead but does alright. The problem of course is that this was done with a 3rd of the budget necessary to make it a solid international spy undercover thriller. It's not as bad as the rating here suggests but this is an unfortunate case, where they should have really desisted with the project unless they could procure the appropriate budget but instead went ahead and ended up producing a C-level movie.

The one thing I can say about Mel Gibson is that unlike Bruce Willis, he still brings his "A" game when he's trying to make a buck, but the rest of these no-acting clowns wouldn't make it in a high school play.

Really amateurish acting, stupid effects in the fight scenes, and chock full of goofy, you should steer clear of this one.

Mel Gibson was the reason I had to watch it. He hasnt got a big part in this movie though, which is mostly filled with B/C-listed actors, who usually would only star in cheap tv series.

From the very start I felt everything was wrong with this movie: the photography was boring, no thrilling action whatsoever, very cheaply filmed. The sound score is just wrong. Of course the acting is mediocre at best. And finally the story is an incomprehensible mess.

Not any good then? Well, it's not completely garbage. They made an (amateurish) effort, but an effort nonetheless. But it is tedious, incredibly tedious to watch.

Not nearly a 3 score for me. More like 5.

Then again, I personally am not a hater and dislike every film.

The film has major flaws. But Mel Gibson and Cole Hauser are awesome.

I think it was marketed so badly because it leads you to believe it's more action than it really is.

It's espionage and a little bit of action.

This is a turn-your-brain-off film.

I recommend for fans of Cole Hauser.

5/10.

And not one of them noticed the sloppy incoherent lazily-written convoluted and cliched nonsense of a so called screenplay? And they all greenlit the final cut to market? Like what was with the long dragged out and boring intimate scenes? It seems the writers put all their effort in those parts. Everything else seemed like a bunch of screenplays for this genre were put in a shredder then randomly pieced together for this story. To make things worse, this was directed by the Crank movie series Mark Neveldine. Isn't experience supposed to make you better, instead of giving the viewers this sub-par 1980's slow-mo-filmed amateur nonsense? I guess we now know that Neveldine's partner in the Crank series Brian Taylor was clearly the brains and talent of the two. I'm assuming this was a low budget film, but the horrible shaky cam filming is inexcusable. A handheld gimbal stabilizer for an iPhone only costs $50. This felt like it was filmed on a flip-phone by someone having a seizure. Between the horribly confusing writing and shaky camera work, I still have a headache. The only thing this film was missing was Bruce Willis. Then I could understand the failure. But I feel bad that Gibson got stuck in this mess, he's better than this. It's a generous 3/10 from me, all going towards the hotties (only worthwhile viewing) and sympathy points for Gibson.

Only watched because I like Cole in Yellowstone. Where do I start, load music played over every conversation, you can't hear a word people are saying. It looks like it may been filmed using an iPhone 1, camera is constantly shaking. No plot to speak of, but that may be because I had to stop watching 30 mins in. Do not waste your time.

Where was the plot, the story was all over the place and the acting woeful ,why was this even made...a low budget film not worthy of being on the screen, avoid at all cost.

Yes count them in the opening credits 35 -to make this incoherent bumbling mess -even Mel Gibson cant save this and the gunfight scenes were the stupidest i have ever scene -tbh j i only lasted 35 mins but i sincerely doubt it got any better. But i bet it coulda got alot worse AVOID.

I realize that this wasn't a Jason Bourne film, nor was it a Mission Impossible movie, but in the Era of streaming service flicks, we need to lower the bar s little. This was an average movie, with enough interest to keep me going until the end. The 1 star reviews are called for, and honesty it wasn't terrible.

The plot was fairly simple, and the twists weren't mind blowing, but I enjoyed the film.

Had the keyboard warriors been dialed back, I would have rated this as a solid 5. Worth the free watch, and I wouldn't have been upset, had I rented it for $4.

Who doesn't want to see a little more 'Rip' in their lives?? And Mel, while only on screen for 5-7 minutes, delivered exactly what we want from him. Solid performance from him.

It's a decent enough, I've seen worse over the years... 3.3 rating is harsh and that's generally because if the haters of Mel Gibson that will go above and beyond to tarnish his films. Ignore wannabe critics and watch it with your own mind not others. The only issue I had was the camera could be all over and can mess with ones eyes... I don't mind Hauser but I'd rather see Michael Parè and Gibson in something like this...

What a shock! Mel Gibson did a movie absolutely unwatchable? Cole Hauser, a great actor who caught my eyes in Yellowstone, turned executive producer of this nightmarish crap? Who's the camera man? Slap his face and kick him out of the movie industries, please. Who's the editor? Fire him yesterday! Who were the monkeys who wrote this horrible screenplay? Avoid them like pandemic!

I don't even know how to describe this so-called "Movie". Is it a movie? Could we call it a movie? No. It's absolutely UNWATCHABLE.

Not even Cole or Mel could save this unimaginative story with cliché cardboard characters and a freshman-level script. The dialog was remarkably poor, spotted with unnecessary narration and definitions and, of course, incompetent bad guys that have guns but attack with their hands, then miss every time by firing wildly. The pro-level production was wasted on this borefest.

I cannot believe I actually sat through 45 minutes of this, its gained 1st place in my worst movie of the year.

Mel Gibson starred in the first 5 minutes of the film and that was it...I get so fed up with film producers putting an A lister in their films just pull in an audience..

To say the film was boring would be an understatement, I've seen more action at the over 75s community knitting evening. It was all over the place, one minute there in bed (which also would make anyone flacid) then in a helicopter and onto motorbikes riding through a jungle...I didn't even know what it was about and began to lose the will to live.

Please avoid at all costs....it really will send you to sleep.

Mel is always the tough guy. Mel is always great to watch.

Mel says Cole is The tough guy. No. He's not the tough guy. I don't know what he is, but it's not the tough guy. Why is he even in this movie?

No, no, no!!!

Not, the tough guy. The stupid looking guy. That's it.

Skip this one its a waste of time. Cole Hauser has not screen presence. It could have some historical significance but it gets too caught up in machismo. Cole must think he is a lover boy but I cringed during the love scenes and he holds no attention against the other thugs.

I put 4 stars because the director managed to at least make it look like a local TV movie. You would have given MG a theoretical or artistic contribution to the production, MG if you continue like this, better go into horror movies, I think it will be more emotional than seeing this type of demotivating action movie.

In the action parts of the movie, I don't know if they wanted to put the slow effects like the matrix movies, they were tremendously slow and boring in my opinion.

This is not bad but the wtf camera shaking drives me nuts!

Gibson is the only good actor here...unfortunately he can't save this.

Might be good unless you're hungover.

If you take a good thriller novel and simply filmed it, then this would be the result. It has terse, great dialog that is direct and to the point ... like reading a good book. The scenes aren't over dialoged.

As for all the very negative 'reviews' it looks like all the arm chair old time would be Sandinistas wrote the negative reviews here based on politics.

If you like Elmore Leonard and those type writers put to screen to tell a story of action then this is a good way to spend a couple of hours. Recommended.

Mark Neveldine sure as hell fell from grace. After a string of great actioners that made decent bucks and an early Marvel production before MCU kicked in and Disneyfied everything, he broke up the partnership with Brian Taylor and soon enough we realized Brian was the talented one. Brian made HAPPY a brilliant classic of Peak TV insanity and MOM & DAD with Nic Cage while Neveldine shot mediocre VATICAN TAPES.

So, even though it's clear Neveldine is the less exciting of the CRANK guys still the notion of him making a film with Cole Hauser and Mel Gibson sounded like an irresistible proposition.

However, the film he got to make was shot in only 14 days - at least Neveldine claims so and as such a modest production it actually shows quite an instinct he has. Cole Hauser is the leading man. Mel Gibson is spirited and energetic in his supporting role - the kind he does now in geezet teaser films. But this film is not a geezer teaser film.

Geezer teasers are made by some by the numbers hacks - mostly stuntmen based on screenplays that play out almost as mock busters. PANAMA is made by a legit director and I said Neveldine's instinct shows. He does everything he can to keep things moving and visually interesting. When there is a convoluted dialogue exchange there is always a skimpily clad girl standing around. In some action sequences details show that there was a person trying insanely hard on this shoot. Details like the Contras guerilla leader performing air guitar with his Kalashnikov or Mel Gibson telling his victim in advance what he will do are nice touches that show Neveldine tried real hard.

If it wasn't for the score and the sound design which are beyond scandalous, PANAMA would feel at least 15% better than it feels now and this sound design is scoring fiasco is a bit of an enigma for me.

PANAMA has a great poster with Mel Gibson and Cole Hauser evoking the LETHAL WEAPON era and it fails in every respect to deliver on its promise. Like most of the VHS era flicks did but we still loved them.

And there is still a lot to like in PANAMA. There is Mel who is a galvanizing presence, there is Cole Hauser or shall I say Rip Wheeler from YELLOWSTONE. Not a lot action but some decent showdowns when we come to that. But overall there is director Mark Neveldine giving his all.

That's why I actually liked the film and given the budget it's tough to imagine something far better than this.

I made it through it. It had its moments. But even down to the music...it was kinda cheesy. The dirt bike scene was horrible. And too many unrealistic events. Very dissapointed. The best part was probably rhe attractive ladies. To not see the Colonel die kinda sucked too. I watched this movie also because I dig Mel Gibson and Cole Hauser. Mel's parts were short but he always does a good job. Cole is believable, but I think he should've went with his natural red hair...this ain't Yellowstone. It almost felt like a movie that was actually filmed in the 80s, not just set in the 80s...it felt low budget and I'm assuming it must be. Better luck next time on this one. More money should've been spent and I think it would've been a better made movie. The plot was there. It just kinda never took off to me.

Did you like Narcos? Do you wish that there was something like Narcos, except complete trash?

If so, then this movie is for you.

Every single thing about this movie is awful. Awful sound production. Ridiculous characters. Uninteresting story. Poorly choreographed action scenes with excess shaky cam. This movie really has it all...

Ignore Mel Gibson playing minor, cheesie support in the awful "Panama" and it's seemingly weighty subject (USA's pre-invasion role in Panama's violent late '80s turmoil)... cos it is ABYSMAL crap to avoid. Charismaless Cole Hauser (dreadful) is a horribly clichéd, grizzled special-ops killer sent to Panama (by Gibson) to do a deal helping Nicaragua's Contras - but as that inexplicably drags he takes on hookers & booze while events (apparently) overtake him, and bullets & double-crosses fly. Daniel Adams & William Barber's dreadful script (with laughable dialogue & voice-overs) stinks even worse than Mark Neveldine's dire direction. An utter turd.