Green Street 3: Never Back Down

It left only to include Van-Dam and Angelina Jolie. Same history, no personality in the characters, only a copy-paste of the same original story, everything make as Hollywood style. What a waste of time.

"Green Street Hooligans: Underground" attempts to revisit the world of football hooliganism with a new story and a fresh set of characters. However, this installment fails to capture the magic and intensity of the original film. Despite its efforts to deliver a compelling narrative, the movie suffers from weak character development, a lackluster script, and a general sense of predictability. The film introduces a new protagonist, Mike, played by Scott Adkins, who finds himself thrust into the dangerous world of hooliganism. While Adkins gives a committed performance and excels in the action sequences, his character lacks the depth and complexity of previous leads. The supporting cast, although talented, is also hindered by underdeveloped roles and limited screen time. While the fight scenes attempt to recapture the brutal energy of the previous films, they often lack the impact and visceral quality that made the original "Green Street Hooligans" so memorable. The choreography feels uninspired, and the editing fails to generate the necessary tension and excitement. As a result, the action sequences become repetitive and fail to hold the viewer's attention. One of the main issues with "Green Street Hooligans: Underground" is its predictable and formulaic plot. The story follows a well-trodden path, offering little in terms of surprises or fresh perspectives. The script lacks the sharp and authentic dialogue that characterized the earlier films, and the pacing feels sluggish, with unnecessary detours and subplots that do not contribute to the overall narrative. While the film does provide a glimpse into the underground world of football hooliganism, it ultimately feels like a missed opportunity. It fails to capture the emotional resonance and thematic depth that made the original film so engaging. "Green Street Hooligans: Underground" will likely appeal only to die-hard fans of the series who are curious to explore the universe further, but even they may find it difficult to overlook the film's significant shortcomings.

Scott Adkins brother gets killed by some tasty football hooligan, so he comes home, says bye to him, gives his mum a hug, has a cup of tea, and then enlists some minor British actors to join his firm, and maybe catch the beggars who killed his brother. These Football hooligan films are now being released every week, and even though you shouldn't watch them, you can't help but carry on turning them on, laughing at the poor dialogue and the silly use of swearing. My favourite part of these types of movie is having the old school bloke from a firm ages ago, wearing the brown coat, having the short grey hair, and saying 'tasty' a lot, very realistic. But to be honest, if Adkins wasn't in this, I wouldn't have bothered. If your not a true action movie fan from the eighties and nineties, you may have recognised him from The Legend Of Hercules, or the on who gets killed by Statham in Expendables 2. To every one else, he's a phenomenal action star, holding his own against Van Damme, and resurrecting the direct to Blu Ray action movie with Ninja. But sadly, it's just another silly football movie badly hiding the fact that it's copying everything from Rocky IV, bar the 'change' speech at the end. The fight scenes are unrealistic, the score is way too jolly, and even Adkins is tolerable, he cannot save this film. A huge disappointment

Was there need for a third film in this dreary franchise? the bigger question is how on earth they got Scott Adkins in it?! I guess if you like violent rumbles between large groups of moronic football 'fans' then you might get a kick outta this. Of course I use the word fans in a very loose sense as we all know its about footie hooligans. The plot is merely a replay of the first two films, more excuses for cockney battles in the street. But wait! no its not! its actually about one young hooligan getting killed and his brother comes back to London to sort it out. When I say sort it out...I mean find the culprits and beat the hell outta them with his hooligan buddies (his firm), so yes actually it is the same. So as Adkins is the main character here you may have already guessed that martial arts will be involved...and you'd be right. Although its not a full on martial arts fest as you'd expect from Adkins, its still mainly a large old school ruck but with the added extra of the odd martial arts moves. Clearly they have tried to incorporate both styles and alter the plot, we find out that the world of hoodlum fighting has become more organised and turned into an underground tournament with no rules. It appears the thugs have upgraded their skills with more precision squabbling, actually turning away from booze and becoming lean fit fighting machines. This is all well and good but it kinda removes the whole gritty footie fan battling aspect that made the very first film reasonably fun to watch (aside from seeing Wood getting his head kicked in). Now you simply have yet another fight tournament flick with semi muscular blokes doing martial arts, the perfect vehicle for Adkins and obviously tailored around him. Its good they have tried to come up with a fresh idea here but firstly...it ruins the premise of the franchise and secondly, why make a third film anyway only to change it completely? I still can't quite fathom out why Adkins agreed to make this when its clear to see its a low budget go nowhere flick. This film doesn't even have a wiki page so far! that's how unknown it is! The main problem with the film aside from poor acting and hokey cockney accents is the fact the fights aren't even that good, too obvious basically, you can see the punches and kicks aren't connecting. Had the fights actually looked good then you could forgive all the rest as fighting is the name of the game bottom line. Unfortunately its all pretty bad truth be told, a football hooligan film without any actual footie hooliganism, not that I'm condoning footie hooliganism of course but that's what you expect here, dagnabbit. 3/10

I enjoyed the film, a lot more than i thought i would. BUT they could have done this film with no connection to the Green Street name. I would have respected it a lot more, but none the less it was a fun film. Worth a watch. It had good acting (i was surprised by this, i always expect a load of rubbish with these types of films) The story was solid and got me engaged in the story. I really wanted to see how it all panned out even though it was predictable it was still a good story. The choreography of the fights were good, not great but it still looked and felt like a fight even with all the spinney tricks that you would not expect in a film about British football hooligans were there main HQ is a pub, My rating would be a 6 because i know many films that are better that i have rated 8's and 9's but 6 seems low so for this i rate a 7. I think it has earned that extra star for surprising me after i went in to it expecting another rubbish money grab film.

The original Green St didn't need a sequel but we got one all the same and to be fair STAND YOUR GROUND was watchable down to the fact it was unintentionally funny . After all it's not every day you watch a film entirely filmed in an American prison trying to convince its audience that it's set in Britain . To be fair this follow is probably mindful of this hence we get constant establishing shots showing us we are indeed in a cold and cloudy London . This unfortunately is the only thing the film manages to achieve NEVER BACK DOWN is a cynical exercise in marketing a film as a sequel to another film it has absolutely no connection with . There's no reason what so ever for the words " Green " " Street " or 3 to prefix NEVER BACK DOWN and in reality could easily be a star vehicle for Jean Claude Van Damme since it revolves around martial arts rather than unsophisticated fists and boots The need to showcase martial arts is what the film concentrates on and as other people have pointed out explanation and exposition is sacrificed to show the protagonists fighting skill . From the outset we get a dialogue free sequence that ends with a couple of heavies getting a good slapping . We also get a long sequence of ramping , ie constant fast motion followed by slow motion most famously seen in 300 . In short it's a film of style over substance that won't appeal to anyone who is after a dramatic movie

First of all, I have to say that I haven't seen the first two movies, and I don't know if I have missed anything. But if you deem this one a autonomous movie, then I can say a few points about it. Regarding the story, it is your everyday martial arts movie story. Our hero's brother is murdered in a tournament (firm!!!), and the hero enters the tournament and avenges his brother. I don't think I can even this review as containing a spoiler, because this kind of story has been known and predictable since the good old days of Bruce Lee. But there are many plot holes. We don't know what's the point of the fight at the beginning of the movie. We don't know why the two police officers release Scott. and some other "we don't know"s. Scott Adkins' acting is acceptable, though not an Al Pacino. The guy who plays his kinda fat friend, though, outdoes Scott in acting. The saucy girl who is done by Scott wasn't bad either, she was, however, casted for something else as you know, not for her acting. Regarding the fight scenes, we have almost none of them till the middle of the movie (except for the short meaningless fight at the beginning of the film). The final fight is surely the best one in the whole movie. All in all, it's quite an average flick, but Scott can be very higher than that. I hope he gets more picky in his choice of movies and makes better ones in the future with all the talent we know of him. Good Luck everyone. my Score: 5/10

This was even worse than Green Street 2 and that was pretty bad. I did however enjoy Scott Adkins in this movie. The man has some incredible skills. I did prefer him as Yuri Boyka (The most complete fighter in the world) and this was nowhere near that performance however a few nifty moves but him at-least a little watchable in the movie. The football is just a tiny background on this movie which was what Green Street was all about. You don't even see a player kick a ball and there's only one tiny scene with the GSE at a game. They should of left Green Street out of this movie and just made one of those low budget fighting movies we see every year.

The truth is that this part of the trilogy Green Street is not like the previous movies. It's completely different from the other two parts, especially the first. This film doesn't care about the violence between the football fans and its bad consequences. The movie is just showing us some people, who are training to compete in an underground fighting tournament. Of course the leading actor is looking for revenge about his brother's murder, but the viewer doesn't really care about it. I enjoyed a lot Scott Adkins in the movie. I prefer him with tattoos, beards and more wild style (I'm talking about Yuri Boyka in Undisputed 2, 3) but he was enough good here too. I like his style of fighting and the way he trains his team in this movie. Definitely, there is a lot of fighting scenes and that's why this is not a dull movie. If you are looking for an action movie with people kicking some asses all the time, this film is a good choice, without thinking. Watch it. But if you want to see a drama like Green Street Hooligans 1, you won't be satisfied.

Part 1 was the best but part 2 failed big time now we got a sequel in name only but a worthy reboot in any sense. scot is great in those roles and u even get a love story in the mix which u love it as scot and that chick had a great chemistry. the fights were plenty and if u are in to films like "undisputed" franchise and "never back down" movies then this is for you especially if u love scot. scot is more known for his supporting roles in van damme and stallone films but he has a bunch solo decent films of his own like this one and the undisputed films and "close range" get also to see his latest gem "the accident man" which is one of his best.