Held for Ransom (2000) User Reviews

The only script in this movie is Dennis Hopper using profanity.

[FloridaFred · 5/10 · 26 May 2021]

How many times can character "J. D." say Ef You in a movie? Were they going for a record here?

Aging dolls Joan Van Ark and Morgan Fairchild are brought in for name recognition. They get 3 lines each! And there is no epilogue after the mastermind behind the crime is revealed.

Interesting plot, good story line. But the movie just drags on with Hopper cursing and swearing. It could have been much, much better.

5 stars out of 10, only because the suspense is good.

Spoiler: Dennis Hopper falls from grace in this one.

[jbiglit · 1 April 2001]

If the "F" word were deleted from this film, there would be no dialog. Actually, it's a "B" movie, which shows how far Dennis Hopper has fallen. Of all the films that Hopper has made with twenty-somethings and teens, this one is incredibly weak.

There is no plot and the storyline is hopeless. There is a minimal twist at the end, but it appears to be so ridiculously inconsequential that it lacks any true meaning.

Hopper plays a character that is supposed to be brutal, but even that element is watered-down. No sex, no nudity, and violence in this film amounts to Hopper slapping around the oldest kid from "Home Improvement."

A dud? You betcha. Suspense? Not even.

Rubbish

[scotthumphries · 2/10 · 9 April 2009]

Yes, the popular opinion on this board is correct - despite some good acting (with what they had to work with, I mean), this film is rubbish. It's nothing you have not seen before except with prettier kids.

Like another reviewer I only got it see Morgan Fairchild and Joan Van Ark, both of whom look good but have very small parts. Fairchild looks lovely but has only 3 scenes; Van Ark plays her standard quivering mother with a similar number of scenes - she does not even get to react to the "twist" at the end! As for Dennis Hopper, it's a part he could play in his sleep. Obviously this was one of those "pay the mortgage" films.

To be fair though, some of the music on the soundtrack is okay.

"Awful" is the nicest thing I can think of to say about this movie.

[mowglisj · 1/10 · 8 March 2002]

I will never see that $4.25 again. Why did I rent this movie?

I sit here, in utter shock at just how terribly awful this movie was, on practically all accounts. Oh, how naive I used to be, to think that even the worst movie would have some redeeming qualities. This one had none whatsoever.

The wretchedness of the acting was obscured only by the abysmal script. The basic plot line (high school students from wealthy families, kidnapped and held captive in the Everglades), if it had been used to its full potential, could have become a C-minus teen thriller.

I would typically call a poorly developed character "two dimensional." Now, to call ANY of the characters in this waste of perfectly good celluloid as "one dimensional" would be an obsequious compliment. There WERE no characters in this movie. Just bad guys and worse guys.

My recurring thought throughout the movie was "Please, please, Mr. Alligator, just eat SOMEBODY, ANYBODY, EVERYBODY." In this small thing I was not disappointed.

Stay away from this movie! Stay away! Please, please, for the love of all that is good and decent, STAY AWAY!

Five Teenagers Held Hostage

[Rich-307 · 1/10 · 16 June 2001]

Held For Ransom starring Zachery Ty Bryan, Jordan Brower, and Randy Spelling, among others is set in the swamps of Florida. It centers around five high school students whose school bus is hijacked on the way home when they are the last of the passengers. The five teenagers taken off the bus, tied up, and taken deep into the swamps to a small house where they are to be held hostage. The kidnappers take an instant disliking to their male hostages. While the girls are untied, the three boys have their hands tied behind their backs the entire movie. The boys spend more than a few scenes locked in a small, hot shed. Bryan is even threatened with an alligator. The film has a basically good story. However, it is ruined by frequent use of foul language.

Actually a pretty good movie

[jam-35 · 6/10 · 24 November 2000]

I picked this one up from Blockbuster last week. This was a straight to video release, which usually puts up some red flags. It was actually quite good for the budget. There were several past stars in this movie, Morgan Fairchild, Joan Van Ark, The oldest Son from Home Improvement and Dennis Hopper. I would recommend this for a rental but not necessarily one to buy.

A good thriller

[jetfi · 10/10 · 28 January 2001]

This film had quite a bit of action and a good cast. I was especially impressed with the plot twist at the end. Overall, its nothing incredible.... But, Dennis Hopper still did a great job in this one. Hopper's eccentric characterization of "J.D." was pretty awesome -- it made this direct-to-video film rate above average (in my opinion, anyways).

Nothing spectacular, but quite acceptable

[suchenwi · 7/10 · 24 January 2009]

"Easy Rider" it of course isn't. It's not big cinema at all, just a low-budget TV film, which shows us an old Dennis Hopper, 45 years after his debut in Rebel Without A Cause. And in my opinion, not awful either (nor was I offended by realistic language).

They didn't do chases, but I liked to see those propeller boats in the Everglades (also the dog race - things that aren't so often shown in movies). They did hardly do any action, it was mostly talk, but sometimes that is quite welcome to me - for a late-night mildly thrilling film. The psychology of kidnappers, victims, parents, and the internal conflicts in these groups were illustrated, more or less convincingly. Police didn't really achieve something, the kids basically took care of themselves. Witness the final voice-over.

This film was sold in January 2009 with the German SFT magazine, together with "Finder's Fee". At 3.90 euro, I didn't think of it as a bad investment (and haven't seen the other film yet :^)

Pretty Cool for a...

[galpinmotocross · 9/10 · 5 December 2002]

I actually enjoyed this old-school suspense thriller. Better than most, not as good as some -- but all in all a good rental when HBO, "Skinemax" and Showtime are running re-runs! Dennis Hopper is his normal, crazy self and many 70's stars appear.

Not THAT bad, honestly

[ljs00b · 8/10 · 27 January 2006]

This movie is certainly not a box office wonder, however it is relatively entertaining. As someone who has seen their fair share of movies that should never under any circumstances been viewed by the public, I can say that this movie is not one of them. The plot is fairly well contrived, with a delightful twist at the end that I was not expecting. The actors do a fair job, not worthy of an Oscar, but tolerable. The suspense is believable, I in fact found myself yelling at Bruce to run. It can suck you in if you go into it, not expecting to see the greatest thriller of all times, but simply...well I guess the best way to describe it is Hallmark Hall of Fame quality, only its a thriller, not a drama, and there is no cheesy love lesson at the end.

C'mon, why was this so bad?

[Jack the Ripper1888 · 14 August 2002]

A strait to video release, you have to give it some credit. HELD FOR RANSOM is based on the Lois Duncan novel and you can obviously tell that it is a low-budget film. But the fact that it was based on a book helped give it some more famous actors to star in the film.

The film was a little suspenseful you have to admit, but I still don't understand why everyone hated this movie so. I mean, we get to see Tsianina Joelson strip down to her bra and panties. No, but seriously the film was pretty enjoyable for me. It is very realistic as to what some people might do in a hostage situation. It is somewhat different from the book as the film takes place in the sweltering Everglades and the book is in the icy cold mountains.

I seriously didn't think it was that bad. HELD FOR RANSOM gets 4/5.

Just awful

[blackie-5 · 2 January 2001]

I only rented this movie to see Morgan Fairchild and Joan Van Ark, who turn out to each have about three lines of dialogue in the movie as the kidnapped teens' moms. I don't understand why these well-known women were hired only to be given three lines... Anyway, this is one of the most boring, stupid movies I've seen in a long time. It was absolutely awful. It's confusing because Dennis Hopper and Debi Mazar, who are in lots of other things, are in this trash. Why would they bother with doing such a low-budget movie?

Why Dennis, why?

[julesrules · 13 May 2002]

I will never stop wondering why a basically good actor like Dennis Hopper finds himself in a movie like this. Several things aren't just awful, but really, really bad: - the plot, - the acting, - the music, - the script, - etc etc The movie is rated 16+ (why? the once-in-a-while "f***-s" in it?); 12 year olds might be excited by the teen-actors. The story would most likely bore. A 3 out of 10.

I think I've gone blind.

[morakanabad · 12 March 2003]

Wow... nine comments thus far, and four of them are positive. (Well, maybe three... it's hard to tell if that "4/5" rating is supposed to be read as "four out of five" or "four-fifths of a point", presumably on a scale of 1 to 7319.) Consider this my attempt at tipping the balance back a bit closer to where it should be, namely in the "If you value your sanity or self-respect, for gawd's sake stay away from this load of crap!" category.

If I had to say something positive about the movie, though, I would point out that my roommate and I had a perfectly good time trying to remember what those bayou-trash boats that look like they have lettuce centrifuges nailed on sideways behind the driver's seat are called, and that we enjoyed hurling abuse and obscenities at the screen throughout the movie. Oh, and it also ended before the tape ran out.

Bad things: not only does the teen starlet who has to strip down to her underwear not get mauled by baboons or fed to the Sarlacc, but you're also forced to spend the better part of an hour pretending that you are going to be surprised when the unscrupulous parental unit with the failing business turns out to be the guy responsible for the brilliant kidnapping plot that involved traveling into the swamp to find some toothless crazies who will kill a couple of people in order to net himself a tidy ransom. Also, I don't believe that any of the cast or crew were injured by flying circular-saw blades during the making of this movie, and that's an injustice of cosmic proportions.