VALUTAZIONE IMDb
3,8/10
4028
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Un dramma ambientato nel mondo del traffico di armiUn dramma ambientato nel mondo del traffico di armiUn dramma ambientato nel mondo del traffico di armi
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
La La Anthony
- Mona
- (as LaLa Vazquez)
Recensioni in evidenza
Val Kilmer and 50 Cent have been cranking out a lot of direct to video gems these days. They did "Streets of Blood", which I actually really enjoyed, and then did "Blood Out", which got worse. "Gun" seems to be the nail on the coffin in a strange relationship.
Val Kilmer plays Angel (what kind of name is that for Val Kilmer?!), a man released from prison after taking the rap for his gun-running friend played by 50 Cent. Angel immediately goes back to his old ways, and helps 50's rising ring come to glory in battle-scarred Detroit, despite the efforts of a relentless detective (James Remar).
An interesting plot that covers many bases, ie the gun-control problem in the U.S. (particularly Detroit) as well as the violence guns ultimately cause from their simple existence. I took "Gun" to be a film lightly promoting Gun Control, which is an admirable message from the film's screenwriter 50 Cent.
The script is well-written, which is a definite plus. Several of the scenes are very compelling and concerning, especially those with James Remar and John Larroquette. But several other scenes seem thrown in, without any sort of analysis or reason for them being there. One such scene is where 50 tells Val of how guns killed both his parents as a child. The irony is something that I suppose is obvious, but it's not covered well in the film. The scene seems shaky, and doesn't represent all that it could, or is really supposed to.
The acting really lacks. Val Kilmer has put on weight, his eyes are lifeless, and his performance here seems forced. He seems to read his lines from a poster behind the camera. But 50 Cent is just awful here. Whatever acting talent briefly blossomed in Streets of Blood had gone under for this performance. I hope he gets better, because 50 has a lot of potential. Though James Remar really makes up for both of them, he's very good and turns in a great role. John Larroquette has a fantastic couple of scenes at the end, and by the end of the film he's the light at the end of the tunnel. Danny Trejo has a small cameo as well.
"Gun" is a film with a lot of potential but few gears that get the machine moving. If you're willing to look past glaring errors and some wooden acting, you might enjoy it as much as I did.
Val Kilmer plays Angel (what kind of name is that for Val Kilmer?!), a man released from prison after taking the rap for his gun-running friend played by 50 Cent. Angel immediately goes back to his old ways, and helps 50's rising ring come to glory in battle-scarred Detroit, despite the efforts of a relentless detective (James Remar).
An interesting plot that covers many bases, ie the gun-control problem in the U.S. (particularly Detroit) as well as the violence guns ultimately cause from their simple existence. I took "Gun" to be a film lightly promoting Gun Control, which is an admirable message from the film's screenwriter 50 Cent.
The script is well-written, which is a definite plus. Several of the scenes are very compelling and concerning, especially those with James Remar and John Larroquette. But several other scenes seem thrown in, without any sort of analysis or reason for them being there. One such scene is where 50 tells Val of how guns killed both his parents as a child. The irony is something that I suppose is obvious, but it's not covered well in the film. The scene seems shaky, and doesn't represent all that it could, or is really supposed to.
The acting really lacks. Val Kilmer has put on weight, his eyes are lifeless, and his performance here seems forced. He seems to read his lines from a poster behind the camera. But 50 Cent is just awful here. Whatever acting talent briefly blossomed in Streets of Blood had gone under for this performance. I hope he gets better, because 50 has a lot of potential. Though James Remar really makes up for both of them, he's very good and turns in a great role. John Larroquette has a fantastic couple of scenes at the end, and by the end of the film he's the light at the end of the tunnel. Danny Trejo has a small cameo as well.
"Gun" is a film with a lot of potential but few gears that get the machine moving. If you're willing to look past glaring errors and some wooden acting, you might enjoy it as much as I did.
well i guess i did it again, wasted another hour and so of my life, i probably would have gotten more out of it by just "beeing", no seriously i'm not going to glorify how awful i thought this movie was, and to be honest i really hoped it would be somewhat watchable but no,, i really hope 50 will stick to music and let people with movies as a profession do what they know best, or at least with all that money get a proper storyline, the acting wasn't bad, and ever washed-up Val did a good job..
but then again if it wasn't for poorly made movies like this one wouldn't appreciate good movies so,, thank you?!?!
but then again if it wasn't for poorly made movies like this one wouldn't appreciate good movies so,, thank you?!?!
Well I can't say it was really so bad. The images and sounds are entertaining enough and the story is simple enough, just one bullet is more than enough.
Interesting how the dealer here is so quick to turn against his own crew and stick a new guy (who he met once in the past and was saved by him) and promote him to be number one guy, without knowing anything about him.
I'd say the reality is that these guys got to hang out, and get to know each other pretty well.
Val Kilmer was just so sulky and suspicious looking that he wouldn't have made it further than the first meeting.
Interesting how the dealer here is so quick to turn against his own crew and stick a new guy (who he met once in the past and was saved by him) and promote him to be number one guy, without knowing anything about him.
I'd say the reality is that these guys got to hang out, and get to know each other pretty well.
Val Kilmer was just so sulky and suspicious looking that he wouldn't have made it further than the first meeting.
Wow, what is up with Val Kilmer? His performance is as dead as they come. I mean, he's supposed to be the best actor in this movie, right? ..and he is by far the worst.
Val Kilmer is totally lifeless, it's like an alien is using his body as a suit. An alien with no acting skills.
Val Kilmer acts like this is the first time he acts. Like he's to shy to open his mouth.
Val Kilmers performance is so flat that the corpses in this movie has more charisma.
Val Kilmers face is so wide, that I had to connect two screens side- by-side to see his whole face in one shot.
Val Kilmer's face is so wide, it's like he Stewies father.
OK, enough of that. But he totally sucks here.
50 Cent on the other hand, is pretty good in this,. I mean he actually acts, you know. He's pretty believable too.
This is a short, straight forward movie. Some acting here and there, shooting, some violence, it's alright.
The movie is called Gun, and it does have a lot to do with guns. Looks like they have real guns here. Not a lot of cg muzzle flashes. Also, they use squibs it seems. That's nice. In a movie about guns, titled gun, the gun-stuff should be good, and it is.
With that said, this is not a movie you'll remember forever, perhaps except Val Kilmers wide, uninterested face. It does not stand out in any way, but it's not horrible.
Val Kilmer is totally lifeless, it's like an alien is using his body as a suit. An alien with no acting skills.
Val Kilmer acts like this is the first time he acts. Like he's to shy to open his mouth.
Val Kilmers performance is so flat that the corpses in this movie has more charisma.
Val Kilmers face is so wide, that I had to connect two screens side- by-side to see his whole face in one shot.
Val Kilmer's face is so wide, it's like he Stewies father.
OK, enough of that. But he totally sucks here.
50 Cent on the other hand, is pretty good in this,. I mean he actually acts, you know. He's pretty believable too.
This is a short, straight forward movie. Some acting here and there, shooting, some violence, it's alright.
The movie is called Gun, and it does have a lot to do with guns. Looks like they have real guns here. Not a lot of cg muzzle flashes. Also, they use squibs it seems. That's nice. In a movie about guns, titled gun, the gun-stuff should be good, and it is.
With that said, this is not a movie you'll remember forever, perhaps except Val Kilmers wide, uninterested face. It does not stand out in any way, but it's not horrible.
Though I have no clue how the gun trade works on the streets, and I have no real insight in the world of this kind of crime, the movie proved somewhat interesting.
The movie did, however, move forward in a somewhat slow pace. There wasn't a lot of drive to the movie, but it was bearable. And the moments that there was action, it was direct and to the point.
As for the cast, well I am not a fan of musicians turning to acting, and I believe this is actually the first movie I have seen with that '50 cents' guy in it, and I wasn't impressed with his acting. However, Val Kilmer put on a really good performance in this movie. He was very well casted for his role, and he carried this movie, though he had some help by James Remar who played the lead detective.
The ending part of the movie with Val Kilmer was actually quite good, not predictable and it was sort of a good way to close off the movie.
The movie had a lot of really nice camera angles, and I liked the way that it showed off a lot of really good city shots, where you got to see the alleys, worn down houses and such everyday stuff from the street-life.
However, now that I have watched the movie, I sit here with a somewhat empty feeling and the thought "was that really it?". There was something missing from the movie to make it grand and unique. It came off as an ordinary run of the mill semi-action movie, which was sort of a shame, because I think it could have been much more. I guess that I wasn't perhaps in the target audience for this particular type of movie. Perhaps you need to be from a certain aspect of society and life? Who knows...
The movie did, however, move forward in a somewhat slow pace. There wasn't a lot of drive to the movie, but it was bearable. And the moments that there was action, it was direct and to the point.
As for the cast, well I am not a fan of musicians turning to acting, and I believe this is actually the first movie I have seen with that '50 cents' guy in it, and I wasn't impressed with his acting. However, Val Kilmer put on a really good performance in this movie. He was very well casted for his role, and he carried this movie, though he had some help by James Remar who played the lead detective.
The ending part of the movie with Val Kilmer was actually quite good, not predictable and it was sort of a good way to close off the movie.
The movie had a lot of really nice camera angles, and I liked the way that it showed off a lot of really good city shots, where you got to see the alleys, worn down houses and such everyday stuff from the street-life.
However, now that I have watched the movie, I sit here with a somewhat empty feeling and the thought "was that really it?". There was something missing from the movie to make it grand and unique. It came off as an ordinary run of the mill semi-action movie, which was sort of a shame, because I think it could have been much more. I guess that I wasn't perhaps in the target audience for this particular type of movie. Perhaps you need to be from a certain aspect of society and life? Who knows...
Lo sapevi?
- QuizJackson routinely showed up not knowing any of his lines, nor knowing how to act. Other actors had to teach him blocking.
- Citazioni
Sam Boedecker: [on Rich] The ni**er is always the expendable part of the process
- ConnessioniReferenced in Bad Movie Beatdown: Set Up (2013)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Gun?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 10.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 22 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Arma micidiale (2010) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi