Hitman - L'assassino

Being a big fan of the Hit-man games, I was fairly worried when I heard that they were going to make a movie based on it because movies based on video games don't tend to be very good movies...

But after seeing it last night, I must say I was pleasantly surprised. It was actually quite a good movie. It may not win an Oscar or anything, but it's amazing to see Agent 47 up on the big screen. Timothy Olyphant does a surprisingly good job of portraying him too.

The love interest is a bit awkward to anyone who knows Agent 47's nearly complete lack of emotion in that department, but despite what the trailer may lead you to expect, it really doesn't go very far outside of what you've come to know in the games (and what happens when she tries to seduce him is absolutely hilarious and very much in the Agent 47 tradition).

It is indeed a violent movie, and 47 is as cold-blooded as you'd expect him to be. Seeing it tends to make me wish other movie heroes had the same level of guts, just to shoot the bad guy in the face instead of letting him live or anything silly like that. The fight scenes with the other assassins from the Agency are also very well done and quite a treat to see.

All in all, it's quite a good movie. Definitely worth paying to see in the theaters. Hopefully there'll be another one!

First, I've heard mostly mixed comments about this movie. But, I'm glad that for the first time in a long time, an "action" movie has had an in-depth plot. Not to mention, they captured the personality of 47 near perfectly. When I went to see this, I didn't think I would like it because Timothy Olyphant played such a convincing geek in Die Hard 4, but he did an incredible job of changing roles. The basis behind the movie is that the hit-man is sent to assassinate someone, but it goes bad, which results in him picking up Olga Kurylenko. Now, they tried to add some jokes in, and he does do some things that are completely out of character (such as smiling), but for the most part, he plays the part very well. Now, the hit-man games aren't known for the best plot of all time, but, since the movie focused more on plot then on actual action, it feels a bit refreshing since the games are basically "Target, Money, Kill". I'd like to see the next Hit-man game focus more on the plot.

Anyway, it's got a great story, 47 is for the most part, played as he should be, and there is enough action to keep you from getting bored.

Ranking wise, it's definitely no "Die Hard 3" or "Big Fish", but it is probably one of the best video-game to movie transitions thats been done in a long time.

Hitman (2007) tells the story of Agent 47, a hitman with a barcode on the back of his neck. Watching the film today, it feels old but not bad. It has an engaging atmosphere, decent-to-good action scenes, and occasional slow pacing that gives the audience time to breathe instead of keeping them in constant high tension - these are the things the film does well. However, what it doesn't do well keeps it from becoming a classic. The script is mediocre - not terrible, but far from great. Although the ending is unpredictable, there are moments when the story doesn't make you curious about what comes next. The action scenes are generally good, but sometimes the gunfights look like the shooters don't know how to use guns, which rarely but noticeably breaks the immersion. Overall, it's a good movie, but one that's best watched just once.

I found this solid and competent. The curious thing is that what it did well, it did not because of what it is, but because it did not stick closely to the world of the video game. This is also why the fan base rejected it.

Apparently, the agent in the game is one of the 47th generation of clones, where the movie has him as the best of a collection of specially trained orphans. Instead of a name, he simply has the number 47.

I also liked the mashup, conventional as it is: Russian mafia, secret supercapable murder enterprise, worldwide conspiracy of priests. Its the spice of the priests that matters, after the Dan Brown conspiracy to make it seem ridiculous and taking the style out of it. It is easier somehow to believe a cabal lead by a Moscow Patriarch instead of the inept Rome.

The girl does what the girl is supposed to do: claim that she is sexually exploited, and then proceed to be exploited by us in much the same way. The assassin does what he is supposed to and does it well: show us unexpected ways that he can manipulate the world, anticipating coincidences and odd subplots. Our designated watcher, the typical American detective, also does his job: watching at a distance.

Why this film deserves a comment and others I see do not, is the way it ends. The form here is reverse noir. In noir, we have a hero, an everyman, who is manipulated by the world of the viewer. He is subject to cosmic coincidences that come not from any natural unfolding, but from our need to have a structured narrative. The watcher unconsciously manipulates the character.

In reverse noir, the character somehow can control the world, so that minor coincidences are anticipated, even controlled by a plan he has that we do not know. We, the viewer, are placed in the thing to be befuddled as we end up as the manipulated soul. I am not sure when this reversed form first appeared; I am hoping a reader can advise. But the form is common enough now to have some endemic problems, the most challenging of which is how to end the film.

This film does that admirably, and it can be said that all the automatic stuff in the middle of the film is arranged to set up this satisfactory ending. The film starts with the beginning of that ending, with the remainder an implicit flashback (meaning only that the story is recalled and not repeated aloud). The ending is set up emotionally as our hit man is incapable of controlling the world so far as a mate, a family. We see him tortured about this. Yes, it is a juvenile portrayal of such an emptiness, but we get it.

So the only way he can get the pleasure of a family is the same way we get the pleasure of killing scads of bad guys: by watching. So while for 90 minutes our detective has been our surrogate watcher, giving us expected thrills and surprises, we reverse once again at the end: now the hit man is the watcher of love and family. We know he will never approach 'the girl' or the detective again, but that he will watch, which we see him doing through the only instrument available, a rifle sight.

This is good writing my friends, where the screenwriter understands the form well enough to manipulate it and us. He was able to give the fanboys something; he was able to give the studio bosses their key elements (boobs, explosions, creation myth, societal anchoring); and yet he was able to give himself a cleverly well ended story. Of how many films can you say that? I see he is working on the next Bruce Willis 'Die Hard.' Bet it is well written too.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

My first big question is: - Was this movie originally produced in French? It seemed to me that the Lip-sync was totally English, although I was told that it was produced in French. Technology has improved so much, so please let me know. The action scenes were fantastic. Very interesting storyline, but it was funny how they all dropped their guns and fought with their hands. I liked Olyphant for Agent 47, but I think he could have showed more action. He was a bit laughable at times. However, it was fun looking at the film. I did not expect too much when I started looking at the movie, but I must say that the action was placed at the right time, so it kept me interested. I also liked very much the girl, Nika, if I did, then I am sure she was a favourite.