IMDb > Killers (2010) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Killers
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Killers More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 12:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 120 reviews in total 

141 out of 202 people found the following review useful:

Post Modernist Tedium

2/10
Author: Haisam Abu-Samra from Egypt
2 June 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There are two kinds of bad movies: The so-bad-it's-good, and so bad-it-hurts. But then, there is Killers; an amorphous blob that exists in a vacuum where no films has ever been made before. It's not a comedy in the sense it's assembled out of jokes and humorous conflicts -- Killers constructs its own parallel universe reality and giddily makes fun of it. And it's not an action in the sense that good guys and bad guys chase one another -- Killers' has a snake-eating-its-tail moral stance. Killers is Meta in the truest sense of the word, and it's not even aware of it.

Critically analyzing Killers is like reasoning with an alligator before it eats you alive; it's a waste of precious time better used for self reconcile. The only shinning piece of the film is Heigl's teeth. The script seems to have begun its existence as a Mr. & Mrs. Smith book report, rewritten by a conspiracy theorist, and finally polished by an ESL student. It tells the story of sweet Jen (Heigl) who while vacationing with her parents (Selleck and O'Hara) in France, meets the ripped Spencer (Kutcher), and instantly falls in love. Spencer is a professional assassin, but after a few minutes with Jen he decides to leave all that behind him.

The film is not in a hurry to tell is story, mostly due to the fact there is none. The couple gets married, move together and three years later (and half way through the film) his old boss calls him again, 'you're ain't going out that easy' he promises, and he's right on the money. All hell breaks lose, and almost everyone who gets introduced during the first half turns out to be a gunman hired to kill Spencer.

Kutcher is detail-oriented twitterer, and as an actor, his goofiness is unmatched. Up until the end, Kutcher monotone performance came across as lack of talent. But after the surreal note the film ended on, it made perfect sense. Him and Heigl have the best anti-chemistry, and casting them together was an unintentional stroke of genius; He's the Laurel to her Hardy.

Enjoying the Killers depends entirely on your expectations and gullibility. Despite the film's colossal shortcomings, it still manages to make you laugh with its idiosyncrasies. You'll laughing mostly out of confusion, but it's laughter never the less; Kutcher's latest installment in the Dude Where is My Car tradition.

Was the above review useful to you?

94 out of 146 people found the following review useful:

Made with the best intentions...

4/10
Author: tommyboy00783 from Belgium
2 June 2010

Let's start of with saying that Robert Luketic knows how to direct, the pace in the movie is good, he never takes this film to serious and he know how to film a couple of good scenes.

Katherine Heigl has shown to us that she can be funny in comedies, check the ugly truth if you need proof. Ashton Kutcher however.. is not good. Which hurts the film because he's the leading man in this film. They've made better actors then him do straight to DVD films.

I don't want to spoil much about the movie, however the trailer practically tells the whole story and shows some of the best bits of the film. But the pace is good, sometimes it's funny and the action was good. But it has all been done before and in better films.

So it's not rubbish, but it's not good either. I recommend you wait until it's released on DVD and hope that Knight and day will be better.

Was the above review useful to you?

73 out of 107 people found the following review useful:

Lower Your Expectations -- It's Not That Bad!

6/10
Author: 3xHCCH from Quezon City, Philippines
23 June 2010

The story of "Killers" is familiar, with a twist. Jen (Katherine Heigl) is vacationing in the very scenic town of Nice with her straight-laced dad (Tom Selleck) and alcoholic mom (Catherine O'Hara). There she meets the suave Spencer (Ashton Kutcher). They fall in love and eventually get married. Little did Jen know though, that three years later, the ghosts of Spencer's old job will come and wreak havoc on their seemingly perfect suburban life.

This is the first movie of Katherine Heigl that I have seen. I know she is in TV's "Gray's Anatomy", but I do not watch that as well. I liked her very much as the geeky beauty Jen in "Killers". She is sexy, funny and bubbly. Ashton Kutcher could never really escape the dumb persona he has built in "That 80s Show" or in "Punk'd." He does try his best here to play an action hero, and I think he passes muster. I think the two of them do have some sort of goof-ball chemistry because of their likable personalities.

The execution of the script is OK. I sort of liked the outlandish plot points and the over-the top comedic violence. I am surprised to see a lot of harsh reviews here. Hey, I am sure you do not watch a film like "Killers" expecting a serious screenplay and award-winning acting. This film is lightweight, silly and adrenaline-driven for the most part, and I think it delivered well on its shallow objectives.

Was the above review useful to you?

64 out of 102 people found the following review useful:

Takes awhile to get its act together

6/10
Author: napierslogs from Ontario, Canada
5 June 2010

"Killers" is a romantic comedy action film, but starts out by failing on all accounts.

Katherine Heigl plays the romantic comedy lead, she got the sexy part and at least tried on the funny part, but she was a very disjointed character that at times was really hard to care for or relate to. Ashton Kutcher played the action lead, and he got the sexy part but was very awkward when he tried to play the romantic comedy lead.

The film then spent around an hour showing us their boring suburban life. Boring being the key word.

When we finally got to the action, the film started clicking. The romantic leads developed some chemistry, and the many known comedic actors appeared to be there for a reason. The film then flew by with a pretty good medley of comedy and action, and a healthy dose of reminders that this is for fun not serious.

Beware if you're looking for a romantic comedy or a quick action flick. Watch it only if you are willing to stand an hour of nothing to finally get to a fun, ridiculous, sexy, and funny light-weight action film.

Was the above review useful to you?

68 out of 116 people found the following review useful:

Kill me now

2/10
Author: benhall_uk from United Kingdom
1 July 2010

ONCE in a blue moon there comes a movie which hits every criteria spot on, and Killers has honed all of its attributes in order to make a truly, unequivocally bland and forgettable hour and a half-worth of tosh. Newly single Jen, played with no charm or skill by Katherine Heigl, is on vacation with her parents when she meets her ideal man Spencer, just about acted by perennial action figure Ashton Kutcher. The pair fall in traditionally quick fake movie love and get married. Little does Jen know though, her new husband is actually a secret government spy who kills people for a living and is trying to settle down. The fact that Kutcher looks in or around 30 years old and is playing the 'I don't want to kill people any more, whimper and sniffle' card does nothing for the integrity of the storyline. It wasn't until I looked at my watch either that I realised nothing more than that had actually really happened for the first 45 minutes. The trailers portray the premise of the film as an unwitting and clumsy Jen being dragged into a kill or be killed quarrel between Spencer and assassins hired to kill him because he's a liability in suburban life. However, it's nigh on an hour into the woeful film before anything of significance even happens. They say start as you mean to continue, and director Robert Luketic has done just that; he began with a barrel-full clichés played without any conviction and then went on to provide the audience with nothing more than an homage to every action rom-com in a drawn-out montage. Admittedly, neither Kutcher or Heigl has strayed far from their comfort zones, which in many ways has served against them as the pair seem almost complacent in their efforts to make the characters believable. At times there is a childlike playfulness between the two, but even that serves to the detriment of the film as the standard appears not wholly dissimilar to that of an amateur school drama production. Even the dry wit of Tom Selleck fails to provide much consolation. He brings experience and a touch of class, but the poor dialogue he is handed just proves too much for him to salvage. In fact, probably the best thing about the film is probably Tom Selleck's infamous moustache, partly because it doesn't get any lines. Occasionally in the movie industry there will be two promising actors who carry a film, perhaps struggling to shoulder the burden of a lacklustre supporting cast which doesn't communicate well through inexperience. However, it is never a good sign when you literally find yourself wincing throughout a film at the sheer lack of chemistry between its two leads. Perhaps the best testament to the lack of quality in the film is that Katherine Heigl cannot even scream convincingly, which is strange seeing as she has so much practice throughout. The shining light of Heigl's career so far was Judd Apatow's Knocked Up, which seemed to set up a potentially promising career. That being said, she now seems intent on penning her name to any bit part rom-com coming her way. Yes, she may have got the kooky, loser-in-love part down to a redundant tee, but it is evident from this that she needs a charismatic cast and script to support her, otherwise she appears as nothing special at all. As for Kutcher, the six foot-plus husband of contrastingly skilled Demi Moore could quite easily have been replaced by a large slab of granite with more personality. By all means, if his niche is sub-standard romantic comedies where he can run around topless for as long as possible, he deserves a typecast Oscar. If he wants to be taken seriously as an actor though, it's time buck up his ideas or just take on twittering full-time. Couples eager to find a movie which suits them both should undoubtedly hang on for the hotly anticipated Cruise-Diaz summer smash Knight and Day. Such a promising movie would really have to go some to lower the bar set by Killers. From the trailers, Knight and Day looks to straddle the line of satisfaction for both sexes incredibly well, whereas Killers attempts to do the same but gets lost in an insipid void somewhere in between. Maybe I've been a tad harsh, it was never intended to be an Oscar winner or one that would go down in the record books I'm sure, but I just can't help thinking you'd have to be void of at least four out of your five senses to really enjoy this.

Was the above review useful to you?

28 out of 43 people found the following review useful:

Decent, but silly

6/10
Author: chaaa from Ireland
12 July 2010

In this day and age, the standard of fluffy rom-coms has sunk so low that any film of that type that doesn't leave me fuming and offended as I leave the cinema gets a tremendous amount of goodwill from me. It sounds like the easiest thing to do; make a silly piece of brain candy that is so fun and silly that you forget that it has no cultural or artistic value whatsoever. Well, unfortunately, if recent memory serves me (and believe me, it does, vividly) there have been some absolutely horrific examples of the genre in the past year. Killers, fortunately falls into the former category of inoffensive nonsense that provides giggles, thrills and a good spirit. Killers opens with lovelorn Jen (Heigl) on holidays in Nice with her parents, disturbingly comic alcoholic Catherine O'Hara and protective and stern Tom Selleck. As they check into their hotel she meets half-naked Spencer (Ashton Kutcher) and, as any woman would, falls head over heels in love with him. What she doesn't know is that he is a CIA hit-man who is in town on a mission to blow up a helicopter. However, soon after he meets Jen he decides he wants a clean slate and quits the CIA forever. Soon they are married and loving every minute of each other and their life. However, it isn't long before Spencer's old life catches up with him. This film is not very inventive, nor does it tickle the funny bone as much as it could but it really is an enjoyable romp with a genuine sense of good intentions. The chemistry between the leads is great and, as a couple, the characters match well enough for the audience to engage with them. Heigl is a bit bland as always but she is likable enough as the vulnerable and fastidious Jen. However, it is surprisingly Ashton Kutcher who provides the warm heart of the film. We all knew he could achieve levels of comic genius at time with his portrayal of lovable moron Kelso in That 70's Show, but who knew he could give an underwritten character like Spencer some depth. There is a pleasant mix of heroic integrity and underlying sadness to Spencer, and this lends the film some subtle but much-needed poignancy. I suppose one of the most admirable things about this film is that it allows the audience to feel for Spencer but without falling into the third act sap trap. This is a silly film, with nothing much to say. It is 100% fluff and doesn't pretend to be anything else. But Ashton Kutcher proves a likable leading man and a pretty cool action hero, which raises this to the status of decent popcorn movie. Do not expect anything inventive with this film, but take it for what it is and you might just have a great time!

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 49 people found the following review useful:

No, just no

2/10
Author: mjk280 from Pittsburgh, PA
27 June 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm sorry but there was no way I was ever getting into this one. Beforehand the title annoyed me (did anyone really think this would be edgy in the least bit?) and I was not buying Ashton Kutcher as a spy and it was pretty obvious from his past work he wasn't going to "suck me in" as the movie went along. I know everyone is sick of Tom Cruise these days and frankly he plays a spy way too often, but at least someone like him looks the part. Kutcher in this role is just Hollywood trying to usher in a new generation for these movies and it's just better off left to someone a little older with some better acting chops (Clive Owen or someone? I dunno).

The movie commits a pretty big sin in my book right from the get go: The couple meet in France, have a great time, and the movie fast forwards to Kutcher trying to get out of the spy game because he's just so in love with her. *Sigh* I hate when the filmmakers basically just say "you pretty much know what happens here so we'll just skip it." Jeez at least try to hide the fact that the movie is just a way to make a quick buck for the studio.

Anyways 3 years after getting married Heigel finds out Kutcher is a spy and all these people from his daily life start coming out of the woodwork to try and kill him. All of a sudden fat coworkers are skilled knife fighters and goofy neighbors are lugging around automatic weapons to try and get him. Ugh. This transition from normal suburban life to a mine field of would-be assassins takes place so fast and not in a good way. Plus again the whole time Kutcher is trying to harness that "eye of the tiger" his character used to have back when he was a cold blooded killer and nobody buys it for a second.

At the end we find out Selleck was involved with a government agency and had all these people planted into Kutcher's life to make sure he really was on the up and up. When Selleck realize Kutcher was contacted by his old boss, Selleck released the hounds on him. WTF? Whatever, I'm too bored and annoyed to care. The couple has a baby and the movie ends. Good god.

The worst part is the movie tries to create humor by banking on the chemistry Heigel and Kutcher have. It doesn't work because they have none, but it's not totally their fault. The whole "couple arguing while under duress" thing is so overdone by Hollywood. They figure some people still haven't seen it done a million times so they do it anyways. The jokes are lame and we've been there before. I gave it a 2 out of 10 because I did indeed chuckle a few times.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 36 people found the following review useful:

Not for those who like things to make sense

7/10
Author: Neil Welch from United Kingdom
17 June 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Killers, I am certain, is a film which is going to irritate all those who are not easily pleased, because it is stuffed to the gills with major unlikelinesses. Fortunately, I am easily pleased, and I quite enjoyed it. But it's a bit of a weird one.

Gorgeous, intelligent, funny Jen (Ketherine Heigl) has just been dumped by her nerd boyfriend and joins her affluent parents (uptight control freak Tom Selleck and alcoholic Catherine O'Hara) on holiday in Nice. While checking in at the hotel she bumps into Spencer (Ashton Kutcher), a CIA assassin who has decided to quit, although his controller tells him that he can't leave just like that. They fall in love and we roll forward 3 years to a point where they are enjoying conventional married life in small-town USA. Then Spencer's controller resurfaces. Spencer rejects his summons and, all of a sudden, pretty nearly everyone Spencer knows turns out to be a would-be assassin looking to collect a vast bounty on Spencer's head. This understandably alarms Jen, and the last half of the movie is an extended action sequence as the two of them escape countless attempts on Spencer's life while wondering what to do next, until the final - and very silly - explanation and resolution.

I cannot overemphasise the vast improbability of nearly every element of this film, not to mention the many unanswered questions (not least of which is what happened to all the dead bodies littering the town where they live). The light rom-com in the early part of the film - which is well done, incidentally - doesn't sit easily with the genuine jeopardy in which the two find themselves, and the occasional laughs seeded into the otherwise straight action sequences feel weird.

Katherine Heigl does comedy well, and is always pleasing to look at, and there is a bit of - 'ow you say? - cleavage oriented eye candy for the chaps. This is balanced out by Ashton Kutcher's abs, on display for the girls. Kutcher makes a decent fist of Spencer, Tom Selleck plays Jen's father nicely against type, and Catherine O'Hara is funny as mother, although her disastrous drinking is a) played for laughs and b) never commented on.

But if you like your movies to be credible, stay away from this one.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

Not as bad as it's made out to be

7/10
Author: XM1973 from United States
12 June 2011

This one's not half as bad as most of the reviews here make it out to be. The film makers aren't pretending to make a classic or even competing for the Oscars. It's a fun film that you will either like or not like. It doesn't take itself seriously. How can a movie that has Ashton Kutcher playing a trained killer working for "some" government agency. Ashton plays it a little campy, almost like a comic book character and that works, Katherine Heigl is her usual self. It's always good to see a beautiful Hollywood actress not looking like skin and bones. Tom Selleck plays Heigl's dad, a slightly predictable character. While the movie might be very predictable, it has its funny moments and while the pace isn't break neck, it does keep you entertained. Well, it entertained me.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 31 people found the following review useful:

Rubbish

3/10
Author: cartidge from United Kingdom
5 July 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In my book, a comedy has to be, first and foremost, funny. Killers was not funny. I didn't laugh once. The film was predictable, tedious and shockingly performed. The plot is also utterly incoherent.

It goes basically something like this, Katherine Heigl plays a rebounding officer worker type called Jen, who having ended her relationship with her previous partner goes on holiday with her parents played by Tom Selleck and Catherine O'Hara. While on holiday she meets Spencer (Ashton Kutcher) with whom she forms a romantic relationship. However, what she doesn't know if that Spencer is actually a CIA assassin and on a working 'holiday'.

Upon meeting Jen, Spencer has a clichéd change of heart regarding his work, and concludes that it is time to retire. Upon learning of Spencer's decision his CIA boss declares (again in banal clichéd style that we have all heard in this type of film) that nobody ever quits their vocation. Regardless, Spencer returns to the States with Jen, marries her and begins a life of middle-class suburban domestic bliss, with his new neighbours. In the meantime Spencer begins to form a cool relationship with his father-in-law.

However, all is not well in middle-class suburban domestic bliss, as Spencer's erstwhile boss sends him a coded message, which is noticed by a suspicious Tom Selleck. At this stage Spencer and Jen's various colleagues and neighbours suddenly turn out to be highly trained assassins out to kill Spencer, and bloody hilarity in suburbia is supposed to ensue, complete with pregnancy tests and machine guns. Unfortunately, it simply isn't funny. It lacks any charm, wit or spark, save for the presence of Tom Selleck, without whom this film would not have achieved the generous three star rating I have given it.

The plot is grafted together from films we have all already seen, and uses every cheap ploy available to increase the films attractiveness to its target audience. For the female audience it shows a topless and ripped Ashton Kutcher, and for the teenage male audience it has Katherine Heigl in her bra for no real reason other than eye candy.

I have never stormed out of a cinema in righteous anger, but this was a close call.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 12:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history