The Gunman movie full length review - pretty good and very watchable
don't know why and how so many viewers didn't like this movie and gave it unfair low ratings. to me, this film is quite good and very watchable. if you really have to criticize and so split-hair, so hard to be pleased, there are maybe several things that the production team should be reminded:
1) the storyline was not very smooth, so the details of it were not quite clearly developed, sometimes it's a bit vague to transit from one scenario to the next one, viewers might have to use their own editing skills to link them together for better understanding.
2) so it means the editing was not good enough; it gave you a random frog-jumps edited feeling, the connection between two scenarios and plots were not logically linked.
3) there was a very stupid costume and accessories arrangement when the guy escaped the hit after the water well digging scene, when he decided to find out who was behind and tried to eliminate him. so he traveled from Congo, Africa to Europe, having a cammo pattern backpack that was so ugly and at the same time so easy to be tracked when he tried to sneak back to Europe. that backpack was such a poor arrangement when the movie was trying to tell us that he was travel incognito to avoid being traced. only a fool would think by wearing a dark sunglasses to cover his eyes meaning 'incognito', while shouldering a unique patterned easy-to-spot-and-follow backpack would give him more undercover. with that stupid backpack, he immediately became an easy target instead.
4) after the assassination, the suddenly darkened screen showed you three words: "eight years later". yeah, right, after 8 years, nobody who showed 8 years before showing any sign of aging. Sean Penn, Jasmine Trinca....everybody still looked the same.
this stupid time span crap is perhaps the mostly randomly used by the stupid script writers and the directors to goofy the storyline for an easier omit of a story, yet most of the time, they overlooked and forgot to appropriately change the faces of the characters with logic aging process.
the worst flaw that a movie committed in such overlook is the Oscar winning movie, "The Pride of The Yankees", asked the already 41-year old Gary cooper to play "10 years later" still under or around 18-year old Lou Gehrig, and his mother also, still looked the same after 10 years! yet this lousy cashing-in movie won tons of Oscar in 1941!
here, i have to use this opportunity to point out another stupid arrangement when Hollywood movie companies did, by putting many old, or very old male actors to play young romeo characters and forced the much much contractual young female actresses to fall in love, even to make love to these old gizzards who in fact could and should play their daughters or grand daughters:
Fred Astaire (the worst oldest ugliest disgusting romeo!),
Gary Cooper (the 2nd worst oldest guy to play a younger romeo!),
Randolph Scott (a western genre dude often playing younger romeo),
Humphrey Bogart (yuck!),
John Wayne (same as Randolph Scott, another western old guy who often playing younger romeo),
Gary Grant (a gray haired, square faced old guy who often played young romeo and was always loved crazily by much much younger women),
Joseph Cotten (not too often).
i felt so deeply sorry for those beautiful young actresses, especially the most often being abused young actress by these old guys, the forever beauty, Audrey Hepburn. her only role in her films not being so unfairly abused by older guys was "Roman Holiday", when she played a young princess who later unknowingly fell in love so naturally with the older, more sophisticated journalist, a gentleman, Joe Bradley, played by Gregory Peck.
5) why the Interpol guy would suddenly showed up in front of Terrier? (what a lame and wimpy name for an assassin! it's a name specifically for a dog species!) why he would prefer cutting him a slack? 6) if the team was doing secret jobs, why they would allow terrier to openly video them?
7) in the later scene, it already showed that Terrier was in the later stage of dying, he vomited lot of blood, couldn't stand up, lost memory, fell over and couldn't get up, suffered fatal gunshot and in critical condition and a long term imprisonment, yet when he reappeared and showed up in front of his eternal lover, he just looked so healthy, still looked like nothing happened during another, say, much years, long period of time, no memory lost....well, what kind of miracle medicine and nutrition formula so wonderful that would have made him recover 150%?
BUT after these not so big-deal issues, i have to say, i like what Sean Penn did in this film. if there are things to criticize, hey guys, just blame the screenplay writers, the director, and the editing guy, okay?!