Sniper: Ghost Shooter

I watched this on a bootleg site that was all written in Arabic. The copy of the DVD had Arabic subtitles. I couldn't help wondering how that audience receives a movie like this, let alone do they enjoy watching it? Maybe they don't care, they just pirate the movies and make their money.

Anyway, I've been out of the "Sniper" loop since about the second one (What are we on now? 12?) so I needed to do a little catching up. I have to say that this wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be. Sure the visual fx were pretty cheesy and the dialog was, at times, embarrassing. But over all it far surpassed anything Steven Seagal has done in the last decade or so (with the possible exception of The Cockpuncher) So, in doing a little research I discovered that just about anyone associated with these films is either trying to get a career started or pretending their career isn't yet over.

There was, in fact some decent acting. You can tell a good actor when he delivers the cheesiest line in a way that almost makes you believe him (or her)

But the one overlying factor was that whenever Dennis Haysbert was on screen I kept expecting him to say, "That's Allstate's stand. Are you in good hands?"

Sniper was a good action film. It moved along at a decent pace, played the tension between old hand and up-and-coming newbie well and threw in a fair amount of tension.

In accordance with the law of diminishing returns, this one barely registers. Sure, if you like mindless running around "having a gunfight" every 20 minutes with people taking impossible shots and dying in "throw your arms and legs out" style you'll probably enjoy it.

If you're looking for a half decent plot, characters who are bit more than 2 dimensions and a "twist" that doesn't telegraph its arrival in neon lights then look elsewhere.

As former military, I'm particular about realism. Although this movie had it's share of cinematic liberty, for a sniper movie, it was actually quite good. As soon as I saw "Billy Zane" in the opening credits, I groaned a little. He has matured quite a bit since "Sniper"...plus, they didn't play up the role of GMSgt "Gunny" Beckett too much (the lead role is his son, Brandon Beckett), so that made it less like a sequel and more like a continuing story line. It was just a good, action-packed "heavy on the sniper action" flick. If you like military movies, specifically sniper movies, you'll enjoy it. You won't say it's the best sniper movie ever, but you'll watch it to the end without puking.

Not as good as Shooter (Mark Wahlberg), not as good as the original Sniper (Tom Berenger), but a darn close third place, with every other sniper movie falling way behind IMHO. A little too much cheese at times, but countered with some slightly comedic moments (the Russian talking about John McClane from Die Hard...yippie-ki-yay, MF'er, etc). It had it's snicker moments for sure, but pretty much action-packed from beginning to end, which I love.

Overall, a definite watch. Maybe not a "keep forever and watch again and again", but unless you're one of those people who want to dissect cinematography (really well done here), or the director's mood or previous works and how it compares, you'll enjoy it for what it is. Lots of sniper shots, lots of "Semper Fi" moments, and just a decent movie. I'd watch it again, but not anytime soon.

So, i was disappointed that they didn't say how the enemy got the equipment.. was kind of expecting that. Like if that was the main thing holding up the story you think they would talk about how the breach happened and what they did to fix it.

Also this requires a minimum amount of characters in order to leave a review, so allow me to use the rest of the space as a fill-in. Thank you for taking the time to read my review, and I hope it finds you in good spirits. This movie was good but overall I would not watch it again as pieces of the plot could have been addressed better. But the actors did well.

It's amazing that the Tom Berenger / Billy Zane thriller Sniper (1993) franchise has made it this far. Has this series cultivated a secret fanbase? Or do the producers believe there is a fanbase and keep on making sequels anyway? It just seems hard to believe that the first film would have made such an impact on viewers. It was well executed movie yes but the crew attached didn't have filmmakers like Steven Spielberg or Clint Eastwood in the director's chair. The man behind the first film was Luis Llosa, the director of The Specialist (1994) and Anaconda (1997). These were both films that people viewed as fairly silly movies. This is probably Llosa's best entry in American cinema but it still won't hold a flame to a lot of other well made popular films. When a series like this has gotten this far in making sequels with no public critical reception, it truly is an anomaly. So how does this sixth entry hold up in the array of sniper films? Well it certainly isn't unwatchable,...yet. Thankfully it works but it has warning signs.

Directed again by Don Michael Paul from Sniper: Legacy (2014), fans are once again brought back to Sgt. Brandon Beckett (Chad Michael Collins) in the field doing what he does best. Unfortunately after hesitating on an assignment and lashing out at another officer, Richard Miller (Billy Zane) puts him on probation with Russian sniper Andrei Mashkov (Ravil Isyanov). Meanwhile the Colonel (Dennis Haysbert) and assistant lead Robin Slater (Stephanie Vogt) try to find a "ghost shooter" by the name of Gazakov (Velislav Pavlov) who's looking to stop a certain business pipeline. Written this time by Chris Hauty, the screenplay works to some degree but fails to make certain connections clear and answer some questions. For Hauty, this is his fifth writing credit of which this is his first related work to this series. This is possible as to why not everything is clear, but Hauty has written for three other sequels so he should have had some idea as to what constituted as a narrative that continued the story at an engaging level.

Unsuccessfully this isn't the case here. Hauty's inclusion of the probation period for Beckett was okay until it became unnecessarily extended for an action shootout sequence. That in fact could have been substituted in for time with Beckett's other team members like Barnes (Enoch Frost), Cervantes (Nick Gomez), Aungst (Presciliana Esparolini) or just cut it out completely. Ravil Isyanov as Mashkov does have some comical quips with Beckett but the development really should have went to somebody closer. Then there's no explanation for missing persons. What happened to Sanaa (Mercedes Mason) from Sniper: Legacy (2014) or even Beckett Sr. (Tom Berenger) for that matter? Where did these characters vanish to? Where's the consistency? When starting the second trilogy, you brought on Billy Zane, then dropped him for Tom Berenger and then did the reverse again? Fans should demand to see Billy Zane and Tom Berenger on the same screen again. Those are the two old men who started it all, so get them on the same screen.

Now although Zane and Berenger are still not on screen together, Billy Zane returning as Richard Miller is still acceptable. Zane still looks like he's having fun in the role and enjoys playing the sarcastic wise cracking supervisor of Beckett's son. Miller even has a few comments that don't even really make sense but the way he says it is anyway. When it comes to Beckett Jr.'s team, few of them get much development. Sure they have a few moments of flare but nothing really makes the viewer want to see more of them and hope they survive all the shootouts. Of the members, only Cervantes (Nick Gomez) has some kind of arc. Everyone else is just kind of there. As for other actors, there's also appearances from Dominic Mafham and Navid Negahban as a blind connection to Gasakov. Negahban playing a blind man had a great look. Foggy contacts make him look like someone who's real clever and full of knowledge. Mafham as Bidwell "Bulletface" sadly gets less screen time than he did before but when he is shown, it's good to see him.

Action sequences were well executed again. There might've been not as much carnage edited in but it still got fairly messy. The shooting throughout this film is quite abundant so there's bound to be explosions and RPGs. In addition, there are also drones in which are used in firing missiles. Those perhaps are the weakest looking parts because obviously they wouldn't have real drones. The camera-work provided by Martin Chichov looked good. It wasn't easy to tell what was green screen and what was actually filmed. Much of the scenery looked authentic and shot on sight. The film also may not be the ultimate widescreen but there is a number of establishing shots that get a lot of the landscape and it looks great. Composing the musical score for the second time in this franchise was Frederik Wiedmann. Regrettably again, Wiedmann does not have or bother to create a memorable main cue for this franchise but that thought seems to have died long ago. As for music in general, it's decently composed with guitar and Middle Eastern instruments.

Now that this series has completed its second trilogy, maybe the producers and filmmakers can get back to basics once more. The main actors, music, action and camera-work are fun but it's all brainless. The connections are lazily tacked in and some scenes could've been utilized more efficiently.