Director - Martin Campbell
Cast- Eva Green, Maria Bakalova, Ruby Rose, Jojo T Gibbs
Duration – 104 Minutes
 
If you’ve been a cinephile for more than a decade, chances are you know Martin Campbell, the veteran director behind GoldenEye and Casino Royale, two of the best Bond movies ever made. Now, at 81 years old, Campbell has unleashed Dirty Angels, a gritty action film starring Eva Green as an Army Ranger tasked with rescuing a group of kidnapped girls in Afghanistan. The problem? The movie feels like a tired echo of better films, with too much exposition and not enough punch. But, hey, it’s Martin Campbell—he knows what he’s doing. Mostly.
 
Let’s start with the good. The film’s setup is solid enough. Green plays Jake, a no-nonsense, hard-as-nails operative with a deep sense of duty—someone who will never leave a soldier behind. She's leading a team of female soldiers (Ruby Rose, Maria Bakalova, and a few others) to rescue a group of kidnapped girls in Afghanistan, five of whom are the daughters of high-profile figures. The team is, of course, heavily underprepared, navigating a web of geopolitical intrigue and enemy forces who are, unsurprisingly, very bad people.
 
So far, so good. Green is perfect as the brooding, tough-as-nails Jake, a role that feels like she’s channeling Casino Royale-era Bond’s darker side, and the supporting cast holds their own. The relationships among the team members, particularly Jake’s bond with two local brothers, give the film a moment of emotional warmth amidst the chaos. Campbell’s action staging, when it finally happens, is sharp and visceral. There's a brilliant rack focus shot during the climactic battle that zooms in on a sniper’s face and rifle—a nice touch that reminds you Campbell still has those old-school action instincts.
 
But here’s the rub. Dirty Angels is more about the setup than the payoff. The first real action sequence doesn’t arrive until 50 minutes in. Fifty! The entire first half is basically one long reconnaissance mission—team prep, political wrangling, and some light intrigue. For a movie called Dirty Angels, there’s precious little action until the last 15 minutes. It’s like watching a heist movie without the heist, or a war film without the war.
 
Now, the film spends a lot of time trying to make you care about the geopolitics of the region and the characters’ complex relationships, but the dialogue feels too shallow for anything profound. Sure, the film introduces local power players and double-crossers, but the political commentary lands with a thud. If you wanted a nuanced geopolitical thriller, you’re in the wrong place. The movie’s script feels more like it’s trying to check off boxes rather than telling a story that truly resonates. The political dynamics feel as if they’ve been lifted from an episode of 24, which in 2023, feels incredibly outdated.
 
Let’s talk characters. There’s an issue here. Aside from their nicknames—Jake is "Jessica Rabit" (pronounced Ra-BEET, mind you), and everyone else goes by monikers like "Shooter" and "The Bomb"—they remain largely underdeveloped. The film doesn’t bother to give us much to care about. Ruby Rose’s character has a fling with the doctor (played by some guy), which is the emotional arc of the film—until he’s unceremoniously killed off. Green’s Jake spends most of the movie in two emotional states: grumpy and glum. She’s only allowed to truly cut loose during the final rescue, but by then, it’s a bit too late for the audience to feel invested.
 
Campbell’s films have often balanced action and heart, but here the heart feels entirely absent. The women on this mission are supposed to be a beacon of “girl power,” but the film never allows us to truly see them as individuals, only as cogs in a machine. The characters’ potential to shine is overshadowed by a script that doesn’t know what to do with them.
 
To top it off, Dirty Angels gets downright grim in its portrayal of violence—there are teenage girls thrown off roofs, executions, and harsh depictions of the brutality of war. It’s powerful, sure, but it’s also overwhelming and feels a bit too grim, especially considering the movie is also trying to be a high-stakes action flick. The tonal mismatch makes it hard to know what kind of movie we’re watching—serious geopolitical drama or high-octane women-in-action fun.
 
Ultimately, Dirty Angels falls into the trap of being "competent but forgettable." The action that does show up is well-executed, but it feels isolated in a movie that’s more concerned with plotting and world-building than it is with creating an engaging narrative. By the time the film delivers its big rescue sequence, you might find yourself wondering if it was worth the wait.
 
In conclusion, Dirty Angels is a well-made but flawed film, one that feels stuck in the past. It’s certainly not a disaster, but it’s not the kind of action film that will make you sit up and take notice. Maybe Campbell, with his 18th film under his belt, is showing signs of age. Or maybe Dirty Angels just isn’t the vehicle to prove that even in your 80s, you can still deliver something fresh. If you’re a fan of Campbell’s past work, this is worth a watch. But if you’re looking for a new action gem, you might want to look elsewhere.