A mediocre sci-fi thriller, Hitman: Agent 47 is a mindless action film that’s mildly entertaining at best. Looking to reconstitute a defunct super-solider program, a group known as the Syndicate tries to find the daughter of the elusive doctor who created the program in the hopes that she can lead them to him. The plot is really convoluted and hard to follow. And, the acting is piss-poor; with the exception of Zachary Quinto, who plays to type. However, the fight scenes and chases are exciting and keep the film moving. Overly complicated and too focused on fan service, Hitman: Agent 47 is a hot mess.
Wannabe John Wick movie. Hitman 47 was all about Stealth. This guy is shouting people out in the open, crashing chopper into the building. Fun flick but butchered the Hitman 47 theme.
1/3rd as good as the 1st one and felt like twice as long.
The actor that plays 47 just reminds me of a little boy playing pretend. Movie has some elements that Hitman fans will recognize, but overall movie is over dramatic and plot is pretty lame. I also can’t stand how 47 talks, it’s like a bored high schooler in class
Not enough like the video game. It is actually pretty goofy and makes the first movie look like a good adaptation.
Great non-stop action. Really worth a watch :thumbsup_tone1:
I'll give this movie credit for one thing: It's a fucking blast to watch with some friends at a party. This is the perfect terrible movie to riff and bash for the entire runtime. The acting is some of the worst I've seen, sadly coming from some very talented people. The story is a blatant almost exact copy of The Terminator, and the fucking camera work + editing leaves me at a loss for words. I can't even describe how bad the editing is. You just have to see it for yourself. So, here you go. Enjoy it in all it's glorious shittiness.
Good Movie With Extremely Good Ending
i hate when there's a reboot that doesn't include the original stars, in this case, Timothy Olyphant.
Hollywood did the same thing with the Transporter franchise and fucked that up too.
"No, Mr. Sanders. You are locked in here with me: and you just brought me mine."
Both this film and the previous Hitman adaptation with Timothy Olyphant aren't good adaptations. There's no doubt about that. This one is considered the worst of the two; the previous one was better made from a filmmaking perspective, whereas this one had a lot of visual effects, making it seem a little too artificial. Generally, the previous one was more well-put-together, although most people disliked that one, too; only this one, way more.
If you've read my review of that film, you'll know I found it serviceable. I wished it was a good adaptation because I feel like the source material, when faithfully adapted, would make for a pretty good film. I thought it could've been better on its own, but it was decent enough despite being a somewhat shoddy adaptation.
Regarding this film, I thought it wasn't as well-made, and everything about the story was a little too generic and not as atmospheric and immersive as the first film, specifically in a similar way as it was in that film. Despite that, I think I enjoyed it slightly more. It was the same outcome as before, when I watched both movies for the first time, except then, I liked this one more and rated it to the limit. Now, I care more and am more particular with that sort of thing.
Performance-wise, Rupert Friend seemed to fit the character better than Timothy Olyphant, even though the character's writing wasn't necessarily Agent 47-esque. Rupert was more properly villain-like, in the sense of having a commanding presence with a slight terrifying nature about him: as well as more monotone, which I'm pretty sure is how the character is in the games; I've never played them myself, only watched Let's Plays, and my memory of how he seems regarding that aspect is a little hazy. Timothy seemed too human. Does that make sense? But I seem to think, or remember, in a vague way, that 47 is humorous sometimes in the games, but still in a deadpan, monotone manner, and Rupert was doing so in a too (facially) expressive way, including not being monotone enough, generally; too many emotive instances. That's my only criticism.
And the other performances were decent. Hannah Ware, Zachary Quinto, Thomas Kretschmann, and Ciarán Hinds delivered decent performances. Hannah was a little one-note (more so due to the character), but she displayed noteworthy moments. Ciarán stood out the most to me, although I guess Zachary is a close second. Thomas (despite not having much screen time) had somewhat of a presence and appropriate line delivery, so he was decent, too.
While the story was generic and the filmmaking lazy, including the visual effects and whatever else: whether it has to do with the cameras used or something along those lines, that seems to be typical with multiple films (The Hitman's Bodyguard comes to mind), making them look similar, the score by Marco Beltrami, who has quite the résumé, was pretty good.
I suppose the cinematography by Óttar Guðnason was decent enough: although something about how the film felt sometimes or looked (that almost artificial look, which seemed prominent in The Hitman's Bodyguard and plenty of other films, I'm sure) isn't the way to go. And the action/fight sequences were as well.
A sequel would've been welcome. This film was enjoyable enough. Seeing Rupert Friend and Hannah Ware return to these roles for another film, especially given how the characters are close now, has an appeal to it. That hasn't happened yet, and it's been over seven years already, so it probably never will.
I know, I know, this movie is rather superficial and simple. More effort has been spent on cool action than on depth of the story. Well, you know what? I do not care! I quite liked this movie. Agent 47 is cool and kicks ass. The bad guys gets plenty of ass whooping. The action is good. There is quite a lot of high tech and gadgets. What is there not to like?
The movie starts of with a quite cool sequence introducing Agent 47. I have to say that I got into quite a bit of “wow” mode right a way there. The movie continues with plenty of action sequences with just a wee bit of slowdown in between. Actually the first-half, at least, of the movie is pretty much one long chase.
Perhaps I should point out that I have not played Hitman and do not really know what the original story is about. From a lot of the comments I have read it appears That this might be to my advantage when it comes to enjoying the movie.
Some people are probably complaining about bad acting since Agent 47 do not really show much in terms of facial expressions or emotions. Well, news for you, he is not supposed to! He is supposed to be a cold emotionless killing machine so stop whining. Personally I found Agent 47 to be an excellent character. the re is on scene in particular that I liked where Agent 47 intentionally allows himself to be caught in a embassy. Once inside he, to no one in the audience surprise starts to tear the place apart. You have to see it to know what I mean.
The second part, or perhaps just the last third, of the movie turns into more of a search and destroy for Agent 47 and his new “partner”. this part is of course as action filled as the first part of the movie. Naturally it all leads to a big show down between the Agent 47 & Co. The end itself did not really deliver any surprises but was satisfying.
The one thing in the movie that annoyed me was this subdermal armor stuff. The idea was not a too bad one but they really overplayed it. Come on! Just shoot him in the head or an eye or some other “sensitive” part for Christ sake. Bulletproof my arse!
I honestly do not understand the low rating this movie has received. 5.7 at IMDb is really a bit harsh. Rotten Tomatoes rating is, not very surprisingly, abysmal. Rotten Tomatoes and their “critics” ratings must be the worst of any ratings site. When these dickwads rate down a movie, that’s when I start to get interested. First step is to drill down into the real audience ratings which more often that not gives a different picture.
Any way I digress. Bottom line is that, for me, this is a simple, straightforward, high octane action movie and I quite enjoyed it.
Nice action sequences, but that's about it. Generic plot and characters, not a lot to take away from this one. Not a bad way to spend and hour and a half if you want a good distraction. It's a far cry from the original. Timothy Olyphant is the man.
I had to take a break and watch futurama in the middle of it. that's how boring it is.
As far as action goes this isn´t bad. If nothing else it´s entertaining. Know what to expect, you don´t get dissapointed.
I can not what to see it lololoololololl
The first film was the ultimate example of a failed film adaptation, this one is the opposite. I had very low expectations, so I was quite surprised that the result of Hitman: Agent 47 was actually a very good sit-through. Of course it won't make any arthouse fan fall in love with it nor will it rake in loads of Oscars, but it sets up a decent action movie that could even be watched more than once. It lacks some depth on the drama part, but that is something Hitman will never achieve due to the character itself. It does not achieve greatness like 'John Wick' or 'The Punisher' could do last year, but it keeps you entertained for a good and fun evening. I would rate this a solid "watch it? oh well, why the hell not" 6/10
The idea to put the stands in CGI was not that good. the plot was a bit off and didn't make much sense i say don't bother
Quinn is such a badass.
Just like everyone else here already stated: thats your typical entertaining popcorn movie, gets the job done I guess.... Oh and nice to see Sylar back in action!
Well... Like others said about it, it was okay. 6/10 just because Rupert Friend was there and I like him in Homeland (what have you done to your hairs!). Otherwise, 5/10.
The special effects are nice too but not transcendent. With a $35 million budget, we all have seen better.
The story could be more dramatic or dark I think, too many fights which doesn't let enough space to the story to evolve. This movie isn't interesting if it's just to show... well, fights. I mean, we don't need $35 million to make it happen, right?
It's always difficult to adapt an existing work, I get that, but I think Aleksander Bach didn't took a lot of initiatives about the character or the story itself.
Hitman's got enough background to make a movie with potential without being dependant of the game serie, I'm sure of it.
By the way, is anyone seen Emilio Rivera in the movie? Apparently, he's in the cast but I didn't saw him... Or maybe on a Syndicate bike ;)
Don't waste your time. I gave up after 20 minutes.
Well, was fun after all. I don't know why such bad reviews, I mean, it's an action movie based on a video game, what are you going to expect? Definitely it's not good, and the camera's move (mostly in the fight scenes) was really bad, but is made to entertain and it does.
I enjoyed it. Fun and entertaining.
this reboot it´s not an improvement but it´s always nice to see in action one of my favorite characters in video-games. even if they couldn't quite get the essence of him right.
I entertained and to hang out longer valid
It was okay and some parts of the effects weren't fantastic. I prefer the first one with Timothy Olyphant.
Believe it or not, I knew nothing about Hitman. But good movie and great entertainment. The visual effects are very well done. I would recommend the movie to anybody!
Shout by Jim222001VIP 6BlockedParent2024-01-31T02:32:03Z
Not the case where they learned from the mistakes of the previous version. Instead it makes the Timothy Olyphant movie look good.