Message Man

I'll make this short and sweet, with no spoilers.

First, it should be noted that the basic storyline & plot is nothing prophetic. Heck...nearly every Clint Eastwood western has a similar plot, so...yeh...it's been done. It's been done A LOT! But it's never been done in beautiful Indonesia, and aside from Paul O'brien, it's an almost completely local (ie Indonesian) cast.

Second, by filming in such an amazingly picturesque locale - even in the slums of one- the cinematography really shines. The first 30 minutes or so emphasizes the location as the backstories are provided. Interestingly, even though it's the "same old story," by having no-name actors in an unfamiliar place, it doesn't feel like the same old thing.

With respect to its specific characteristics, the film is fairly well done. The directing is very good. There was obviously a clear vision for this film and the director captured the story well. The acting is also good. The script, at times, tries "making" the characters more descript, which was unnecessary, as the actors did not need this treatment. Beyond this minimal positing the script was adequate. The editing was a little shaky at times, but more related to the action sequences. When not working with seasoned martial artists it can be tricky to film major action sequences, so there are some scenes that aren't as fluid as could be. This is not problematic, however, but a personal note. My biggest gripe, which is small, was the use of CGI blood and stylized violence. Personally, I prefer practical fx but for indie movies (ie low budget) it's often cheaper and easier to add blood in post. It's not a big deal and didn't ruin the movie, but a personal preference.

Overall, it was a fun watch. The 90 minutes went by in the blink of an eye, which is often the mark of a good movie. This film would appeal to any action movie fan.

Re: parental content:

• there are a couple of instances of profanity, but they are few and far between.
• there is no nudity of any kind, other than some scantily clad dancers
• no drug use, but a couple scenes with alcohol. It is not gratuitous in any way.
• loads of violence and killing. While there is NO gore content the body count on kills is high. Lots of stabbing, gun shots, severed limbs, and blood, but none of these are lingered on it shown in graphic detail. If blood is not your thing then this is probably not a movie you would enjoy.

I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it others. It is NOT a $100M Hollywood production so don't expect $100M worth of fx and extras. This in no way hampers the overall experience. At least not for me.

Can't believe it's got a 6 stars rating. It starts off predictably and carries on being so. We've all seen the film's like that. Bourne too. Predictable but I enjoy them. Only this one doesn't have Damon in it so it's better. Hats off to the whole production team. Even better than the Bond franchise. And by that I mean the good ones. Daniel Craig. I do hope there's a follow up.

Very law budget but cinematography has tried to cover up and make it not feel like that low budget,

This is watchable because of. Paul O'Brien who has very strong screen presence and demand your attention , he did a good job for a role of a guy who speak less and can be very lethal.

Corey Pearson direction is good and so are action scenes which are driven by strong emotions so as a viewer you feel impact.

Do not compare this with other VoD garbage, it seems they really wanted to make good movie with limited budget they had.

Give it a shot on Saturday noon or lazy rainy day.

Wow, much better than I was expecting, especially considering this is a non-Hollywood international (Indonesian and Australian) low budget B-grade film.

When I review a film, I don't compare apples to oranges, and thus rate it on its production merits. This is the 'first' ever film by director, writer, editor and producer Corey Pearson. WOW did he hit this one out of the ballpark - especially considering all the hats he wore for his first film!

Right from the start, the cinematography and directing seemed like it came from a seasoned film-maker. Excellent shots - pans, zooms, angles, etc. - all perfect.

Sure we've seen many of these types of hit-man films, but this one still felt refreshing, especially due to the films location setting. The films 91 min length was perfect, and the pacing was spot on.

The casting was mainly no-name actors or C-listers, but all performed really well, although I wasn't too impressed with Paul O'Brien's performance - or even as the casting choice. He seemed very stale, and in the beginning, uninteresting.

The choreography for the fight scenes was decent, with a surprisingly perfect amount of gore. The sound/score was on point.

Overall this was a real treat to watch, especially knowing that this was Corey Pearson's first dabble in film-making. His production was better than some of the big budget Hollywood-backed A-list productions I've seen lately. This film-maker is certainly one to watch!

It's a well deserved 9/10 from me, and if anyone questions my review as being fake, click on my username and you will see my almost 600 reviews and 1000+ ratings. Ignore the haters and wannabe critics and watch this film, I'm sure you will be as surprised as I was.

I get it when people compare this to John Wick ... remember though this has not nearly that budget Wick had. So this is low budget action and it shows at certain points (or even throughout). One of the main things is the CGI blood. I don't mind it, but it is quite obvious and some may take offense to it.

So a nice action movie with some interesting stunts. Some feel a bit cheated (when there is many cuts, but that is someting that bigger budget movies do too, so don't be offended by it), but there are also some elaborate longer shots that have been choreographed quite well. Story wise there is not a lot ... and the message man is not quite alone (which would be another major difference between him and Wick - or how Wick began at least) ... Watch it if you like B-Action movies