Reseñas de usuarios

This movie had decent cinematography, and the directing was a mish mash in various aspects (worked well with visuals but poorly with the actors).

The writing/screenplay was very bad and had too many plot holes and was predictable. The story/concept in itself was not bad and somewhat entertaining, but was executed poorly from a bad screenplay and sub- par directing.

The score was either absent when needed, or atrocious when present. Was it some high school students on strings the entire time?

Finally there's the terrible acting for 2 of the main characters - the little boy (excusable as a young amateur actor but should have been cast or directed better) and Bruce Willis. Seriously Bruce, put some effort into your acting, you used to be convincing. That straight- faced smug look and monotonic voice is passé. Bruce needed part of William DeMeo's over-acting, of which made him unconvincing as well.

Gethin Anthony as Levi had the best performance, and the only character that was convincing. Hayden Christensen was OK, but not even close to convincing in his character. Also poorly cast or directed.

Considering all the "In Association With.." production companies shown at the start that were involved in this movie, I expected much better.

It's only a 6/10 from me.

I read the reviews and I wasn't expecting much, but I'm a fan of Hayden so I gave this movie a try. To be completely honest I enjoyed this! It was easy to watch, intense, suspenseful but also (surprisingly) heart warming! I'm no film critic, but I truly don't get all of the bad reviews. Is it the greatest movie ever? No. But was it enjoyable? Yes! I was engaged the entire time. Highly recommend giving this a try if you're in the mood for a thriller!

The film crafts a brilliant atmosphere and tension, Hayden is usually stamped all over by critics for his acting but here it feels genuine and real. He has a believable relationship with his child and while not he greatest film in the world it provides some brilliant entertainment and deserved better than it was given.

Absolutely one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Can't believe Bruce Willis is in it, and even his acting is horrible. The Dad character is just a punk kid trying to say all of the right things to his son who's acting ability is just as bad as everyone else.s. The Mom character couldn't get an audition in a middle school play. To top it all off is the never ceasing awful music that is constantly playing in the background. Could not watch the whole thing. I just walked out.

There has been much written about this film in the negative, but this film has many good qualities if one looks closely. Much to the credit of the director this film was made in 13 days that is incredible. The acting of the boy Danny (Ty Shelton) an unknown has a career ahead of him. Danny's relationship with Levi (G ethic Anthony) is very well acted out on screen. Anthony is british and does very well with his screen accent. Take note of the work of:cinematography, art direction out of very little material to work with, and the subtle choice of costume director with the spot of red used in Danny's clothes which pops out on screen. The music score is to pay attention to especially at the end when there is the summation of the story with only the music. Finally, what a pro Willis is he did all his scenes 25 pages of dialogue all in 12 hours of shooting. Yes, the story is not terrific, but for holly wood film making today there is much to observe in this film, and to the credit of director Mr. Miller. Check it out and look for what I listed to notice.

Okay, this was not one of Bruce Willis' shining moments ... forget the Nakatome Building, or whatever it was.

But, this is a decent movie. It was obviously a collaboration among a gaggle of movie and production companies, presumably so they could afford Willis.

No spoilers here, but the seemingly irrational behavior of the main character in the first half, will later seem rational based upon what's learned in the second half. I was glad I didn't doze off or let the WTF reaction stop me from making it to round two.

If they'd had any nuance at all in early character development, this would have a "great" movie. But, don't let all the negative press (esp Rotten Tomatoes) stop you from watching it. The sheer irony of round two is worth the watch.

The kid is being bullied. Logically, his dad takes him on a hunting trip, spinning the various virtues of killing animals. It takes courage to hunt, the dad says, and what could be more courageous than shooting a deer from a distance with the telescopic rifle? He needs to learn to stand up to himself, the dad says, and apparently shooting animals is the best way to learn that, and to avoid being bullied.

The action sequences are OK. The movies does not suffer from excessive logic.

The ONLY redeeming thing about this movie was, that I didn't pay to see it. I got it from the library. But, it is 2 hours I will never get back. Willis is horrible in this. To be fair though, his lines are meager and of few syllables. The casting of this film is abysmal. However, what's worse, is the cinematography: the whole jiggle the camera and shoot only close-ups style is so yesterday. It's nothing but a distraction. The only bigger distraction might be the so-called "music". It's that new-age mood garbage and it plays throughout the entire film like tinnitus. I will echo the sentiments of other posters: this is THE worst film of the last 10 years, by far ! It should be seriously considered for MSTK3 fodder in the future.

Wow, three are some harsh critics out there. It wasn't one I would watch again, but it was enjoyable enough.

Saw 'First Kill' because Bruce Willis has done good films and given good performances in the past, 'Die Hard' is a genre landmark and his performance is iconic in that. The title and poster also intrigued. Have an appreciation for action and the idea for the story sounded interesting. Expectations were not high though, because Willis has been past prime for a while (several bad films in recent years and has looked tired and disengaged a lot).

'First Kill' is not a good representation of him, if not as bad as the recent 'Reprisal' and 'Vice'. 'First Kill' is a better film to that while having similar, actually even the same, faults. It fails in the action stakes, faring very unfavourably in relation to other films seen in the genre, and while anything involving abductions and rescues have been very engagingly done on film 'First Kill' manages to portray it with no thrills complete with dull pacing, lots of silliness and endless predictability. Not hating it with pleasure, it's my honest opinion and my negative feelings towards it are regrettable.

Will say that there are more visually amateurish films around, there are moments where there is slickness and style and the photography is nowhere near as disorganised as that for 'Reprisal' or 'Vice'.

Gethin Anthony gives the best, and only halfway decent, performance of the film, actually looking as if he was trying.

However, Willis spends the whole time looking tired with the world and like he wanted to be somewhere else but coerced into doing the film instead. Hayden Christensen fares marginally better but completely lacks intensity and even charisma, very anaemic. Everybody else is bland and annoying, excepting Anthony.

Visually, the film does lack cohesion on the whole. The music is too loud, should have been used far less and some of the placement is inappropriate. There is just no energy, momentum or finesse in the direction and the non-action oriented parts are handled so indifferently. Dialogue from the very start to the contrived climax is riddled with clichés and cheese, some real howlers in the misplaced humorous elements, and the story has no surprises, fun or tension, is very pedestrian in pace and suffers most from throwing in too many elements/turns that it all becomes confusing.

Tension and suspense are non-existent. 'First Kill' goes overboard on the ridiculousness and lack of plausibility and at other points it takes itself too seriously. The action-oriented scenes are clumsily choreographed, sloppily edited and not exciting or suspenseful at all. The characters are not compelling or easy to get behind, due to not being developed properly and the relationships being uninteresting. Do not expect every character in every film to be likeable when characters in numerous films purposefully aren't, but it is an issue if there are characters meant to be rootable and 'First Kill' has that problem.

Concluding, weak but not a complete shambles. 3/10 Bethany Cox

For a Bruce Willis paycheck movie, this modest thriller isn't half bad. Willis himself is half-asleep throughout, and, as in the same director's "Marauders", he's outclassed by the more animated second lead, in this case Hayden Christensen. Yes, Christensen upstages Willis, and he's throughly believable as a young businessman who wants to teach his initially wimpy son how to be a man. The plot (Christensen takes his son on a deer hunt, then witnesses an attempted murder, complications follow) has its fair share of holes, but is generally compelling and twisty, even if you can predict the final twist a mile away. And that's entirely Willis' fault - his acting, his mannerisms are just too revealing. The camerawork and editing have a nice fluidity, and there are many visually appealing scenes, partly due to the forest setting. The actions scenes are well handled, too. Miller knows how to stage chases and gunfire. There's some dopey dialogue, and with one exception, the side characters remain anonymous and underdeveloped. Christensen delivers a solid performance, and Gethin Anthony shines in the role of a sympathetic bank robber (we don't get to see the actual heist). Some of the plot twists are a bit farfetched, but they'll keep you watching. Overall, a step up for the prolific Steven C. Miller, even though Willis is asleep through some of it.

I watched this with an open mind until it became clear that the scriptwriter/director/producers must have been in the employ of the American motor industry.

The protagonists drive into the woods in a Range Rover only to be told by Over-The-Top-Aunty, that their chosen 4x4 won't get them anywhere and they should instead drive her yankee pick-up.

A nitpick some might say, but anyone knowing anything about cars knows the Range Rover is the singular best off-roader in the world (apart from its more utilitarian predecessor: the Land Rover). A small point but it marks a complete lack of knowledge, understanding and research.

Then later on the same OTTA offers them yet another truck... and I'm pretty sure that character wasn't running a garage.

I don't know why this movie have such low rating. I find it extremely well done. Script is very good, actor is awesome. Predictable, hence, minus one star. Otherwise, I really enjoy it. Without meaningless sexual content or bad language.

Its a bit too tence for the younger children. But, perfect for 11/preteenager. Good family moral. I recommend new father or father that questions about what a man should do for his family, watch this with his whole family. Learn some moral and characters what a family man is.

Trying to guess how high the corruption went kept my attention. i gave the best performance to Gethin anthony as the good/bad guy. Willis and Christensen gave solid performances. This was a much better and complex storyline than other reviewers have allowed.

This movie is awful, awful direction, awful script, predictable, boring, meaningless thriller soundtrack. By the way, why is there so much zoom in the face of Hayden Christensen? This movie sure has everything you wouldn't want in one, an example of how you shouldn't do a movie. If you see it's poster in a cinema, run away as fast as you can, you'd be better off by going to the beach or having a nice dinner. Don't waste money on this movie.