Commentaires des utilisateurs

This action pic is handled with surprising verve for a first-time director. You find yourself caught up in it and wishing it could be better.

Unfortunately, the script is burdened by some credibility-straining plot turns such as an artist boyfriend who's able to become a skilled killer at the drop of a hat, and the preposterous notion (not to mention cliché) of the elected official who has scads of thugs at his beck and call.

Aside from some gratuitous editing gimmickry (especially during the Senator's speech), the technical credits on this movie are above average for a low-budget film. The cinematography is especially good.

Johanna Black has an interesting character, an innocuous boyfriend in Matthew Olver who works in an art gallery and a father/figure mentor who is a contract killer and the film opens with the two at a day in the office. But one fine day she and mentor Laurent Imbault get set up during a job and they Imbault is killed and Black becomes the object of a hunt by US Senator Billy Dee Williams.

Seems as though back in the day Billy was in Black Ops himself and did a lot of this work and he's going around eliminating those who might remember that. So Black and Olver go on the run and Olver for such a mild mannered dude shows some surprising skills that Black never knew he had. Must be osmosis in bed.

Billy Dee Williams looks like he's having a ball as he gobbles away in this Thanksgiving special of a film. It's what you do when you know you're in a turkey.

The acting here is weak at times, but the story is fairly interesting. This is a low-budget film with some likeable actors. The camera likes Johanna Black, and she does a good job in the lead role, showing a soft side to her boyfriend, who gets dragged into the mess, while doing a decent turn as an action heroine. The story has its weak points, but I think it may be a sign of things to come from Black, much as Above the Law was for Steven Seagal (not that she's going to be an action star). In fact, there are some similarities in the two stories. I gave it a high score, because I liked it despite some wooden acting in the smaller roles and one or two problems with the writing. If felt like a Hong Kong Jackie Chan or Jet Li movie, where you just ignore the bad parts and enjoy what's left (hopefully it's more than half of the run time--in this case, it is).

This is among the five worst films I have ever seen. Billy Dee must be flat busted. Oh how the mighty have fallen. This mess is boring, poorly acted, poorly scripted, pointless and a waste of good film stock. I can't even think of any clever insults for it. It's the pits.

This film is bad & I mean awfully bad in every single aspect. The story of contract killers is old hat by now, This film must have been scripted by Western Union-------The next scene is telegraphed beforehand. The acting is below atrocious by all concerned especially by Billy Dee Williams....He either was on a controlled substance or in desperate financial straits to take this role of an Politician who is more corrupt than the assassins. Normally even in the worst films, there are good production values,nothing is even fair, not even the music & the sound is atrocious as well. Rating 1/2* 19 out of 100 points 1 on IMDb

JAY HARRIS------SIRBOSSMAN

What is the difference between good and bad filmmaking. I'm sure it is several things, but if there is anything I always notice in films clearly not made by our average professional is pausing between dialogs. The idea behind the film is not all that bad, and compared to what the actors had to work with they did OK. But the camera work or cutting is very bad indeed. There are so long pauses between the dialogs, that it seems that each actor said their sentence and then the other actor waited for a cue in order to say his part. The film is also full of strange statements about what the characters are about to do next. "I'm going to lie down now, as I am very tired" etc. Not to mention the big holes in the storytelling, with half of the story just not making any sense. Hardly worth watching, unless you like C-Movies, and not worth writing more about. 2/10

This movie its ups and downs mostly due to a poorly written script that had some unrealistic scenes but there were also some intense action scenes. The actors did a good job considering what they had to work with and the cinematography along with the special effects were mostly well done.

Beautiful, tough, action girl. I've seen worse fight scenes. A movie to watch with your girlfriend. She'll like the action heroine girl. Unless she's the jealous type. Then, she won't.

What is good about this?

Not much.

Lying in bed and it's a rainy cold day. I'm watching The Contract - and aside from another lame hit-man movie - it's not anything near exciting, mysterious, interesting or even logical.

Though I'm no CSI technician, when they do decide to show up after the echoes of gunfire blast throughout the city, they will have multiple amounts of evidence to get prints and ID from.

(Somehow and it's still not explained how in any capacity - you can find out where an email comes from and trace it by using graphic code- whatever that means.)

There are multiple means of tracing email - but using graphic code is not listed anywhere as one of them. Not in any single website is there a way to trace an email using graphic code. Maybe you need to use Photoshop or Microsoft Paint to track an email - after all, that is graphic code.

Bad movie in general - like so many others.

Lousy writing and directing. How producers think they can make a decent film with stupid stories like this - still boggles my mind.

Waste your time and money somewhere else.

First off, to blow off some steam (I've just paused halfway through the movie), I was extremely dissapointed about the part where they trace the sender of an e- mail, and it's THE MOST STUPID THING I'VE EVER, EVER SEEN!!!! Graphical code - My hiney! They don't know s-t about WTF they're talking about! To kick my self to talk about the movie in general:

The acting is somewhat flawed, but I'm guessing it's nog because of the actors, in fact, it's the directors job (And casting- crew) to direct the acters to do a fine job, clearly, this was NOT the case in this flick....

For instance, the scene where the "cops" plants the evidence, the script should have contained another row saying "badguy wearing gloves.

I think I'm blessed with the ability to see movie- flaws, I'm not bragging, but after about 2 minutes into the movie I saw that the lighting, the colors, and cast was out of alignment. Then there was the constant repeatings of scenes, like kicks and blows. Just like commercial they just had to show it aleast 3 times just to let the viewer know that "That's what you saw" - BAD EDITING! Ok, so I'm not a movie criticist, but I do see a heck of a lot of movies. Also I'm somewhat technical and so, and I know what a computer does, and does not! (Eg. The Mangler 2.0 to state the obvious!) Also, about the cloak & dagger shown througout the movie, one can tell that the filmcrew have not done anything like this before, or seen any of the more professional movies.

For instance. The girl Johanna, wrong character for this role, she should have been more cold, not so friendly, and most of all, not so blueeyed. Like when her friend Luc gets killed, she brakes apart. If she's been a professional killer, she shouldn't have shown that much sentimentallity.

And then the boyfriend she's having.. What a joke, an artist picking up a gun like if it was attached to him from birth. =0/

Please notice that I tend to rabble abit as I'm quite tired, and annoyed due to the film.

Do not (NOT!) rent or even buy this film, it's a waste of talents, and of course, your beloved money you could spend on better stuff that this crapper! Oh, yeah, my personal rating would be 2 of 10 (The Mangler 2.0 was dreadful, and only worth 1, just to compare another movie, not related to this one in any kind!)

I wish I was consulted when it comes to technical stuff... I'd be a lot better than most others out there...

First, I should point out that I have nothing against low budget movies. In fact, I watch them all the time. I've found that a low budget movie can overcome its financial limitations with stuff like ambition and careful planning.

"The Contract" is a low budget movie, but it's more than that. It happens to be a BAD low budget movie. It fails in just about every way you can think of. Take the production values, for example. There's a weird made-for-TV feeling throughout. (Make that a weird made-for-Canadian-TV feeling, which is even worse.) Throughout, it looks like there was little to no effort to spruce up the locations - it seems that they set up the camera, shot the scene, and packed up in less than an hour.

The action scenes are just as bad. The awkward use of slow motion is used throughout to try and spice them up, but it just makes the scenes more clunky to the eye. There is no additional effort in trying to make the shooting and hand-to-hand combat scenes exciting, it's just point and shoot by the camera.

The script has a number of questionable aspects to it, ranging from the protagonists killing relatively innocent people to the heroine's boyfriend committing actions either dumb or unbelievable.

I could go on for some time pointing out the flaws of this movie, such as the songs on the soundtrack being some of the WORST songs I've listened to in an action film. But the worst thing about the movie is that it's not an entertaining mess. All this ineptness is made to be incredibly dull and boring. I had to pause the movie several times while watching it because I was finding it unbearable to watch. There is no reason I can think of to see this movie.