Shooter (2007) Poster

(I) (2007)

User Reviews

Review this title
294 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Exciting flick. Leave your disbelief suspended at home.
rooprect13 March 2020
"Shooter" is a tale about a patriot who gets used & abused by the government that he swore allegiance to. Even worse, they do nasty things to his dog. It's the kind of movie that makes you want to run off to Canada, not because you hate your country but because you hate the goons who are running it. But don't pack your hockey stick just yet because the story provides enough satisfying turns to keep things entertaining rather than depressing.

"Bob Lee Swagger" (Mark Wahlberg) is an Army sniper, one of the best, who is given the assignment of planning--but not executing--an assassination. That's all I'll say about the plot because the fun part is riding all the twists & turns that follow. Danny Glover plays his government liaison while at the top is Ned Beatty playing a questionable senator.

What follows is an action packed political conspiracy thriller along the lines of a Tom Clancy story ("Clear and Present Danger", "Patriot Games") but with the noticeable difference that our hero Bob is a total badass, sort of like a dash of "First Blood". And that's what makes this movie really fun when he starts to take things on the offensive.

My only criticism is, as I implied in my title, a few preposterous things happen so be prepared. You know, stuff like when a person gets shot multiple times but is still able to swim across the Delaware River. (I mean bullets, sure, but all that Jersey waste'll kill ya faster than battery acid.) But if you can go along for the ride without raising too many eyebrows, this flick will definitely keep you riveted from start to finish. Bonus points for being shot in Philadelphia, the perfect city for a story like this.
21 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Recipe for a fantastic, intelligent action film
Surecure13 March 2007
If you were to take the best parts of Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan series (Patriot Games, Clear And Present Danger, Sum of All Fears) and mixed in the best parts of the only good Rambo film (First Blood) you would end up with something akin to Shooter. Shooter is a smart, engaging and all out enjoyable action flick that never pulls its punches and always surprises you when you least expect it.

Mark Whalberg plays the role of Bob Lee Swagger, a former military sniper who quit the army following a disastrous mission where his best friend and spotter is killed when they are left behind. Three years later he is hired by a Colonel (played with gusto by Danny Glover) to figure out how a suspected assassin is going to attempt to kill the President from over a mile away, a shot that few could make. Swagger figures out how it is going to be done and is asked to supervise locating the sniper on site. But on the day of the supposed assassination, Swagger is set up with the assassination attempt that kills a visiting diplomat. Swagger is then left on the hunt while trying to prove his innocence.

Shooter twists and turns with an elaborate conspiracy that is very convincing, though of course the writers wimp out and take the cheap road of drawing international oil into the plot (can't writers think of an original plot device?). However, this is hardly a drawback since the rest of the film is solid as a rock. The film really puts you into the shoes of a sniper and gives an impressive overview of the mindset that it takes to be as accurate as someone of the character of Swagger.

The only real distractions in the film would be Elias Koteas, whose psycho performance is heavy-handed and does not fit the film, and Kate Mara who has little to do throughout the film but appear upset or in distress. The film could have done without either characters or their respective actors. As well, some of the character relations seem forced at time, particularly in the relationship between Michael Peña's character of Nick Memphis and his FBI confidante Lourdes, played by Rhona Mitra. Their almost effortless camaraderie comes off as less than convincing.

Overall, Shooter certainly delivers as an entertaining thrill-ride that is certainly not dumbed down in the least. If you want an intelligent action film with lots of impressive gun play and several elaborate, thrilling action sequences to boot, Shooter is right up your alley and will not disappoint. 7.6 out of 10
311 out of 425 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Surprisingly Good!
chris-976-33284621 June 2011
I watched this film, expecting to be let down. However it really did tick most of the boxes for me. I found it engaging and entertaining all the way through, for me a film where you want to watch through to the end because you WANT to watch, not out of a masochistic urge to "find out what happens". Mark Wahlbergs performance was top notch. Although there are a few "no chance" moments in the film as there always are with these type of films, the majority of it was for me within the realms of possibility. The soundtrack was also excellent and melded well with the action on screen. Both myself and my Fiancée enjoyed this film greatly. I can't really think of any negatives for this film and can only recommend it.
62 out of 81 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Engaging, worth seeing.
StevenAWebb13 March 2007
I had the opportunity to catch an advance screening of this film the other day. Similarities to other projects aside, I was impressed by the use of some of the newer military technology involved. The film was both engaging and entertaining, and Mark Wahlberg did a very good job of portraying the character in all of his idiosyncrasies. It was good to see Danny Glover again as I have not had the opportunity to see him in any films of late. His character was not exactly multidimensional but I would assume that it was what the writing called for, and certainly different from the one he portrays in the "Lethal Weapon" series, not much comedy here. Now if I could only get a hold of the script... Needless to say, my wife and I enjoyed the movie very much and would definitely recommend to go and see it.
111 out of 154 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Amazing
thecrow2224 March 2007
I came into this film with loads of skepticism, but I came out feeling completely the opposite. Shooter takes you into the life of retired Marine Scout Sniper Bob Lee Swagger, who retired after a mission went completely wrong. He is called back to give information as to how someone would be able to kill the president from over a mile away. He ends up being framed for the attempted murder of the president, and the murder of an archbishop of Ethopia, and must prove his innocence, at any cost.

Mark Wahlberg does a perfect job of portraying a detached veteran who has no respect for the government, and really brings the character to you. He is backed up by an outstanding Michael Pena and Danny Glover who add to the film like no one else could. The only real complaint is that Kate Mara's character, the widowed wife of Swagger's best friend seems to only play two emotions, distressed, or hysterical, and it does get annoying, though she plays the part well. Elias Kosteas did a good job playing Jack Payne, a borderline psychotic government agent, though at times his part seems over the top.

All in all this film blew me away and I couldn't have loved it more. Anyone who is into action movies of any kind definitely needs to see this movie.
295 out of 445 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Wahlberg may be next Bruce Willis
jpanyard23 March 2007
Mark Wahlberg might be the Bruce Willis of the new generation. His taciturn Bobby Swagger is perfect. The action is basically nonstop and very gritty. Bobby is a sniper who has retired to the mountains after being screwed by the government in an event which finds his sidekick dead. After being set up, he is stone cold killer. Think Jason Bourne as someone who remembers his past is really p.o.'d about it. The acting is good all around, with Glover and Beatty as bad guys you love to hate. Underlying all this a morality tale about what this country and its government have become. Many situations, of course, stretch the imagination , but watching a sense of honor prevail, no matter how briefly, is worth the price of admission. No Oscar nominations here, but a big bundle of money for the producers will be no surprise.
227 out of 340 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Still Invincible
ThatMonkey23 March 2007
I was surprised in many ways by shooter. #1, I was surprised by the release. I follow movies and I didn't hear about this title until early this year. #2, I was amazed by Marks ability to sell me on his acting skills. #3, By the fact that the most established actors in this title, Ned and Danny may have given career killing performances. I think Tony Todd and Stephen Root would have been solid choices, but my guess is the two poor performances were bought for name recognition.

To me this had Eastwood written all over it. At times I thought I was watching Line of Fire at others Unforgiven, but in the end it was just really good entertainment, much like The Bourne movies.

I think it's worth the watch and the story although not new was presented in a fresh manner. This one will go in my collection when available. I'm sure it will have a host of deleted scenes and alternate endings.

Solid film!
204 out of 313 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Very good at illustrating the systemic aspects of Imperialism
hitchikingalaxy14 May 2008
I was quite skeptical at watching the film, and didn't even get around to watching it until just last night(5/13/08), well over a year after it came out. What I saw was a pretty good political analysis as to what the major cover ups are and the cause of this Imperialist oil war.

Yes, they do sprinkle a big ole plop of conspiracy theory, notably burying the snipers who did JFK in the desert. The line, "I still have the shovel" was quite amusing. Yes, the protagonist is a superman with the penchant for arriving in the nick of time and the ability to kill everyone. Chuck Norris isn't as bad as this guy.

What I found to be impressive though was that the movie placed the blame on a consortium of haves. It did not narrowly define exactly who the enemy is, so much as allow for a broader condemnation of capitalism and imperialism. The FBI agent sympathetic to the hero even goes so far as to wear a Che t-shirt.

So, when the aptly named Swagger tells Sarah Fenn, his buddies ex-wife, that the reason he took on the mission was because he fell for patriotism, we are given a quick condemnation of the flag waving jingoism that the US is trying to use to recruit young people for their imperialist wars. The WMD's are brought up, and are quite resonant in the context of a system without morality and only haves and have-nots.

I was impressed with the film.
76 out of 113 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A Nutshell Review: Shooter
DICK STEEL5 April 2007
Never mess with someone who can drop you with his gun from miles away. Snipers somehow has this aura of mystique and sexiness associated with the motto of "one shot, one kill", as exhibited in movies like Enemy at the Gates, or memorable war characters such as in Saving Private Ryan. In Shooter, this gets demystified for a while, hitting home that not only should one be gifted with the pulling of the trigger from incredible distance, a sniper is also a master mathematician, having to compute the trajectory of the round with factors of humidity, wind direction, angle etc just to hit the target.

Mark Wahlberg stars as Bob Lee Swagger, whom director Antoine Fuqua makes him literally walk with a swagger in all the silhouetted slow motion shots. A battle hardened veteran with ghosts from the past (don't they all), he gets tempted back to assist the authorities in order to feed his patriotic adrenaline, only to find himself screwed and framed for a treasonous crime he did not commit. It's cat and mouse as prey becomes hunter, and tries to exact justice and at the same time, to try and prove his innocence. Expect the usual guns, explosions, and plenty of blood and gore.

Shooter plays off like an urban Rambo meeting The Fugitive, only this time Dr Richard Kimble has biceps the size of melons and fights back with deadly accuracy from his rifle. He runs from the authorities, firmly put as the scheming villains involved in shady deals and the existence of a covert group of greed ala X-Files, one of whom is played by Danny Glover, in a rare turn of alignment to the dark side. No self-respecting beefcake wannabe can do without some DIY operation scene to keep alive, or some montage in gathering and making new weapons (pipe bombs, napalm anyone?), and half the time I was wondering about Mark Wahlberg being the quintessential new generation action hero.

Gone are the days when Hollywood action movie were ruled by the Stallone-Schwarzenegger- VanDamme trio, and surprisingly there are no permanent beefcakes who can readily step into and fill the void. Wahlberg has been slowly inching his way in my opinion, though Marky Mark's filmography of The Italian Job, the Planet of the Apes remake, The Perfect Storm and the more recent Four Brothers, do suggest that more should be done to cement this status, hence Shooter. I can't wait for his Brazilian Job to hit the screens, though that one plays more like an Ocean's Eleven rather than the individual one-man-saves-the-world action hero type. The Departed was a vulgar bit role, so that doesn't count.

Antoine Fuqua is no stranger to directing action movies, or movies with the hero caught up against unfair odds. From Training Day to Tears of the Sun, you can see earlier influences creep their way into Shooter, making it a little familiar territory visited. There are many sweeping shots used to try and epic-ize the movie, and set action sequences take priority, reducing character development to the token time available between scenes, and sometimes at the expense of plausibility.

The supporting cast was fun to watch, as Michael Pena (World Trade Center, Crash) almost stole the show with his rookie FBI character being caught up in the wrong place at the wrong time, and almost against his training, wishes and protocol, forms and becomes an important ally for Wahlberg's Swagger. The woman folk however get relegated to backseat roles, as per the usual Fuqua movies with Eva Mendes, Keira Knightley and Monica Belluci. Don't expect Kate Mara or Rhona Mitra to do much. As for the rest, they are your token cardboard characters, there to chew the scene.

Shooter is an action fan's fodder, and it is nothing more than a guilt trip watching a cowboy of a hero mopping up the town's scum, exactly in the way we like to see justice served - without remorse, exacting, and served extremely cold. A satisfying actioner with the usual thrills and spills.
106 out of 163 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Wahlberg is a modern day McGuyver... but better looking.
Miss_Jena24 March 2007
finally, a movie in theaters WORTH seeing!!!! i just saw "Shooter" and i was thoroughly entertained. the plot kept me intrigued from beginning to end. mark wahlberg is fantastic... he's like a modern day McGuyver, but better looking and more sarcastic. his character is cunning and smart. wahlberg excels in playing characters who are determined to make an impact. i'm not a huge fan of action movies, but this movie was so packed with plot that i just kept moving along with it. i bet most of the naysayers of the film are going to be people who believe every word their government tells them. yes, this film depicts government officials in a bad light, but what or who doesn't? i'm sure in reality it's much worse. don't let political beliefs interfer with seeing this film... it's a good time no matter what side you are on. the screenplay was well-written, excluding ONE, minute one-liner about anna nicole smith marrying for love which was obviously written before her death. (plus the story takes place in 1997 anyway!!) other than that detail, viewers should have no complaints with this film. it's intense but not overbearing. easy to follow but complex. and you'll be impressed with wahlberg's character... go see for yourself!!
124 out of 204 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Entertaining action film with controversial viewpoints
johnslegers17 September 2009
Although not accurate all the way, this film is one of the more realistic action thrillers I've seen. It's one of the few films where the main character actually spends a lot of time taking care of just two gun shot wounds (without vital organs being hit), one of the few films that puts governmental corruption in a more or less correct perspective, one of the few films where the lone hero needs a sidekick to help him with the planning, etc. On top of that, the film is entertaining from beginning to end and character motives are believable.

But then again.... this film is not for everyone. Left wing supporters are likely to be offended by its pro-gun message. American right wing supporters are likely to be offended by the strong anti-US government viewpoints clearly expressed in this film. Pro-constitution anti-federal government paleoconservatives and right wingers outside of the US without an in depth knowledge of sniper rifles are probably the only ones to enjoy this film to the fullest. And boy oh boy, how little are they in number... which probably explains why this film did not become the blockbuster hit it could have been.
33 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
What Happened? It started out so well......................
toytrainbob9 April 2007
I knew nothing of this film in advance other than it starred Mark Wahlberg. I was surprised how good it started out and set in Philadelphia, too!!! Although the action was violent and graphic, it had an energy and flow that was mesmerizing. This was going to be a good night. This film would be special and as good as the Bourne movies. The characters were developed well, Wahlberg's unique style and quirkiness was coming through, perhaps the next Bruce Willis. I cared about these characters. The quality of the filming was top notch, the angles excellent, often the film was vivid. The story was humming along, an assassination conspiracy slowly developing and unraveling. Then just beyond the half way point the movie crashed. BANG. The plot line made little sense, a tiresome anti-American film. Ho Hum. Over acting and over reaching by Ned Beatty and Danny Glover. Beatty a cartoon character, and Glover so over the top and implausible in any position of authority my head started to throb. What did they do? They ruined a film with such promise and destroyed it with a half baked story line that just appeared to take shots at the government. Where was the press? Want country are we in? The FBI is the Keystone Kops? Death to any intrigue. All believability gone.......a night ruined. A shame too, and almost criminal, because it had such a strong start, such a solid feel to it. To be reduced to the keystone cops with evil men so shallow no one could take them seriously. Oh, there may indeed be evil men in our government, but Glover's character would not have lasted one week. I love Ned Beatty, I hate his performance. If he wants to do a caricature of a powerful clandestine operative, then do a sequel to Hopscotch and make it a comedy. And the final scene was so dreadful, so implausible, that is was the perfect ending to this miserable failure of a film.
41 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Stephen Hunter fans will hate it
gore_loses_200416 April 2007
I was eager to see this movie because I'm a fan of Stephen Hunter's books about Bob Lee Swagger, but I was quite disappointed after seeing it.

Fans of mindless action might like it, but people who've read "Point of Impact" will not.

First, it strays from the book. I know this is necessary in movies, but there were important details in the book that didn't need to be changed, but were anyway.

Second, it contains a lot of Bush-bashing. OK, we get it, Hollywood doesn't like Bush. Enough, already.

Third, the ending is very UNcharacteristic of Hunter's Bob "The Nailer". I can't believe he allowed his name to be in the credits.

Most importantly, there's absolutely no character development. I realize if they stayed true to the book the movie would be so long it'd be unwatchable, but this was ridiculous. Even people who liked the movie wonder why certain plot points happened.

It's as if they tried to cram too much of the various plots in the book into the movie to satisfy the "Point of Impact" fans, but had to change it around and edit the hell out of it to satisfy the average action movie fan. They ended up failing on both fronts.

Except for Ned Beatty, all the primary characters were totally mis-cast. Danny Glover has got to be the worst actor in America still getting work.

If you can't make a movie based on a book the right way, you shouldn't do it at all.
30 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
NOT "Point of Impact" A political "message"movie
smfinkel26 March 2007
I, like every other sensible person, count Stephen Hunter's Point of Impact as one of the world's best books. And I was enthusiastic about "Shooter" starring Mark Wahlberg. I've seen it. And despite my positive attitude, it isn't worth much. Though I can tell you why it has good reviews.

The good news is that Wahlberg does a good job of playing a straight-up Rambo action hero. There is no hint of backwoods or "country" in the character, and the words "the nailer" are never spoken. He talks like a midwestern Harvard MBA. Kate Mara as Sarah Fenn is just beautiful and definitely Kentucky. It is a standard action flick with head shots, fights and explosions. If that's all it was, it might be worth it just to see Kate Mara in that thin t-shirt.

However... it is a strong and obvious POLITICAL "message" movie. The enemy is the US government. The "hero" wears a "Che" T-shirt and the bad guys have offices adorned with portraits of Republican presidents (HW Bush, Teddy Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover and Ronald Reagan). The Abu Ghraib reference and "sitting Secretary of Defense lying" speech are typical of the movie. This movie implies a 9-11 government conspiracy and accuses our soldiers of killing women and children (for an oil pipeline,naturally). The big battle (with homemade bombs)is not with the South Americad drug cartel of the "Panther Batallion", but with US soldiers who recently committed a massacre. The old gunsmith talks about how he was lied to about artificial sweeteners and WMD's in Iraq. The US is the source of world tragedies. Swagqer is led down the wrong path by "patriotism". He has never been to Vietnam, as that would imply heroic Americans might have been there. Sam Vincent the country lawyer is not there. Nick Memphis is just another FBI guy.

The reason it is getting good reviews--other than it is an adequate action movie--is because of the leftist message adored by the media. It's an action movie for whacky libs, conspiracists and Bush-haters. I'm sure others will see this move. I'll be surprised if they don't report that it is more like "Michael Moore does Point of Impact(A George Soros production)" than the book and character we all admire.
18 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Standard Issue
mcgredo24 March 2007
Standard issue action flick. Huge government conspiracy: check. Fireballs in the background frame the protagonist as he walks away without turning around: check. Slimy, over-acting henchmen: check. Crooked senator: check. Gigantic plot holes that move you to the next shootout: check.

All the usual tropes, including the standard-issue anti-American stuff. They even used the standard shot of a Reagan portrait on the wall of the evil cabal's lair. Reagan hasn't been president for neigh-on 20 years, but the shot is still trotted out to prove what a deep thinker the director is.

I was hoping for more technical shooting descriptions as Swagger prepares his equipment and shots, but it's mostly just trigger pulling.

Some nice outdoor scenery.
24 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Movie Review: Shooter
andydreamseeker7 April 2007
"Yesterday was about honor. Today is about justice." The movie tagline accurately justifies what the film Shooter is about. Mark Wahlberg stars as the marksman or elite marine scout sniper who was betrayed on a "peace-keeping" mission. Later after surviving the betrayal he was called upon by his country again, this time to stop a presidential assassination. For honor he accepted the mission but history repeated. Framed and on the run as presidential assassin, this time he want justice.

Shooter the movie is based on the novel, Point of Impact by Stephen Hunter. Bob Lee Swagger (Mark Wahlberg) is the main character for the story. His expertise and dedication to the craft of shooting became his poison. He is the best and the best is often sort after but not always look after. There are treacherous people around us with evil agendas. Things are not always what it seem. It is just when you thought you had everything figured out that you start falling, a little wisdom spoken by the film.

Fortunately for Bob Lee Swagger, an honorable man with a distinctive ability earned him allies in the form of rookie federal agent, Nick Memphis (Michael Pena) and the widow of his former scout sniper partner, Sarah Fenn (Kate Mara). Through their help he seeks to restore his honor, balance the beam of justice and uncover the bigger conspiracy that surrounds him.

Honestly this film really began very well. Bob Lee Swagger displayed his mettle of an elite sniper. The gun fighting action raised the adrenaline and expectation of the film. The film director is Antoine Fuqua of Training Day (2001) after all. There was conspiracy, car chases and hard-hitting actions. What is most impressive is Bob Lee Swagger's ability of survival and unsurpassed marksmanship. The very system that trained him to survive now wants him dead. How much more exciting can it get?

Perhaps there were too many targets to aim for with just a single sniper. No doubt Mark Wahlberg played his role very well as the expressionless, cool and intimidating marine sniper but the film in general was missing a lot of targets and thus lost much intensity and grip. As much as the degree of expertise Bob Lee Swagger demonstrated, there was little to engage the audience into the inner world of his, and what this main character of the movie is really about. That focus or the lack of it was not present.

The greater scale of the story of having a conspiracy seems to have taken an ill effect. It was not sure what was to figure. Was it the shooter or the conspiracy?

In the end Bob Lee Swagger became the invincible, much like Rambo, but less charm, only the brawns and immense shooting ability to kill. That in his own hands became his justice.

Which guy doesn't like guns and which gal doesn't like a hotshot? Impressive shooting but the target might not go down. Not by a long shot.
11 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
High -octane action movie with a violent and revenger hero,Mak Whalberg
ma-cortes18 April 2007
The picture talks about a marksman(Mark Wahlberg:Italian job,Perfect storm,Planet of Apes) living into woods ,he's retired with solely company his dog .The sniper is enlisted by government agents(Danny Glover: Lethal Weapon,Elias Koteas)for last mission,the preventing a assassination against US President.However happen death an archbishop and he's double-crossed and accused.He tries to discover the authentic murderer and find out who actually set him up.All the forces FBI;CIA,Military,police are looking for him and he's attacked and pursued from all sides.Using his natural abilities and a whole lot of attitude he's making desperate attempts to escape.He must combat a clever organized and ruthless enemy far beyond the scope of his great experience and investigating in the high politic world with senator included(Ned Beatty : Deliverance).He's only helped by a widow(Kate Mara) and an inexperienced agent(Michael Peña: Worl Trade Center).The movie packs maximum suspense and tension from the subsequents attempts of starring to get away and resolve enigma about the crime.

The picture displays frenetic action,emotion,thriller and a little bit of violence as shots in the chest and forehead,stabbing in the body and exploding corpses.Movie is exciting and tense ,besides is plenty of action,pursuits,shoot-outs at time brilliant luster and big budget.Although turns out to be a standard actioner with some flaws ,however is fast movement with atmospheric action set pieces and extremely entertaining .The film gets a certain remembrance with ¨Most wanted¨(David Hogan)with Keenan Ivory Wayans and John Voight but has a similar argument,besides the Mark Wahlberg character likeness to Charles Bronson-¨Death wish¨ but he makes of judge,jury and executioner, acting like a real avenger.The film contains a riveting cinematography(Peter Menzies Jr) and atmospheric musical score(Mark Mancina).The motion picture is well directed by Antine Fuqua ,he's an expert action movies director(Bait,Training day,Tears of the sun,King Arthur).The flick will like to Mark Wahlberg fans.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
I'm gonna see it through…Shooter
jaredmobarak9 April 2007
Director Antoine Fuqua has a style and filmography that I have enjoyed in the past. With Training Day and King Arthur, he delivered some action packed movies that had both story and popcorn pyrotechnics. I will say that after seeing the trailer for his new film Shooter, I was a bit underwhelmed, but until I went to one of his works and was not entertained, I would at least give it a shot. I'm glad I did as Shooter ended up being a well told, nicely paced actioner that knew what it wanted to do at all times and lived up to its goals. We are never led into a situation that may twist in a way that will bring us out of the reality of what is happening; our hero has been framed and he will do anything necessary to find justice. Fuqua tells us who the good guys and who the bad guys are at all times. There is never an opportunity for the audience to second guess someone's motives because the filmmaker is willing to appreciate our intelligence and spin a linear tale of revenge, trying to set things right against a corrupt government.

A big part of the film's success lies in the performance by Mark Wahlberg. I have never been a real fan of his acting prowess, but I must give him credit for getting better each time he is in front of the camera. In my opinion, he was horrible early on in his career in movies like Fear. Sure he had a great turn in Boogie Nights, but I hold that true because he was basically playing himself—a young man new to the entertainment industry, trying to understand his role in it all. Only when he came out with possibly the best role in the phenomenal movie I Heart Huckabees did I finally say to myself, "this guy may be able to do the job after all." Wahlberg is wonderful as Bob Lee Swagger on his journey to find out who is behind the conspiracy that led to his being framed in a Presidential assassination plot. The role may not be very demanding as far as range goes, but that is OK, because he does all he is asked and is believable as the ex-army sniper. All the weaponry jargon that spews from his mouth may sound like gibberish, but he sells it that he knows what he's talking about.

The supporting cast help prop up the film as well, allowing for some nice sequences. Michael Peña is great as the FBI agent who sees that something isn't right and becomes willing to help uncover what truly happened the night of the shooting. Ned Beatty has a nice turn as a corrupt Senator, and although I kept waiting for him to mumble "yes sir, Mr. Luthor," he did a nice job. Also, mention must be made for the fantastic Elias Koteas. When he is given a role that he can really run with he takes it over and is electric. He plays the villain perfectly and between the slimeball moves and the hilarious scene at the end, (I love that he takes his belt off in the background while on the ground trying to make a tourniquet—most actors would probably just squirm there after what happens, but even when not the focal point he tries to bring the role out), you got to love the guy.

Besides the competent acting and some nice camera-work, (when Wahlberg enters what he knows is a trap, the camera composes each view of him in a way to show a vast space behind, making you think that someone will be turning up to take him out; the framing makes the suspense rise even higher), there are some problems. Sure the story is a convenient one, smart enough to get where it wants to go, taking the usual liberties action- flicks of this kind take, but it is effective and straight-forward. I don't mind this shortcoming because it is better than trying to be more than you are, ruining any credibility you might have had. What I do mind is bad acting. Upon viewing the trailer I thought I would be pulling my hair out listening to Kate Mara's fake hick accent, however, she wasn't that bad. The atrocity actually came from Danny Glover. Whether it was his decision or the director's, I don't know, but his mouthpiece-causing lisp was terrible. At first I was wondering if he got that old he was wearing dentures and they were falling out, but when looking closer you can see a clear mouthpiece on his bottom row of teeth causing a bad speech pattern. I cringed each time he opened his mouth.

At the end of the day though, Fuqua delivers the action and his actors do the job at pulling it all off. Shooter is by no means a masterpiece, but who actually goes to these types of movies expecting one? If you have two hours to spare and want to be entertained with a minimal amount of brainwork to pull you through, I can think of many worse things to do instead of checking out Wahlberg's one-man fight against the tyranny of influential people in high places.
14 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Just another generic, clichéd action movie.
theshadow90815 April 2007
Shooter is the story of an expert military sniper named Bob Lee Swagger who becomes a recluse after his partner is killed in battle. Some government officials track him down and tell him that an assassin is planning to shoot the President from a mile away. They want Swagger to use his expertise to tell them where the assassin might be shooting from. Swagger agrees, but when he is framed with the shooting himself, he sets out on a journey to find out who set him up and why. There's nothing particularly bad about this movie per se, it just doesn't stand out among the countless other films like it.

The movie is written rather well and the plot isn't too bad. In fact, this is probably one of the most realistic films about a sniper that's out there. I actually learned in this movie just how much comes into play when you're planning to pick someone off, and it's not as easy as other movies make it seem at all. For instance, even the spin of the Earth itself comes into play when you're firing a sniper rifle. Scenes like that were done well. My main problem was the rest of the movie, though filled with some decent gun fights, fist fights, and explosions, is just so bland. It's the same action movie I've seen dozens of times. A guy gets framed and starts a one man war in order to prove his innocence. I can't think of any other way to describe this movie other than meh, or perhaps blah. It's just one of those movies that's just there. It's not advertised a whole lot, it isn't a failure at the box office but it isn't much of a success either.

The acting was okay. Mark Whalberg gave the only good performance. After Saw, and now this, I am quickly losing all confidence in Danny Glover. Everyone else in the movie is just alright. No outstanding performances.

Overall, the movie wasn't terrible, but I'm not going to watch it again.

5/10
11 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Hollywood junk
stephenllewellyn200324 June 2008
This movie is absolutely dreadful! More proof that monkeys can't write scripts, and pop video directors can't direct - not exactly a recipe for good or engaging entertainment. Once were the days when Hollywood could produce cynical, intelligent thrillers. I'm thinking of great paranoia films like Three Days of the Condor and the Parallax View. Both were directed and written, not to mention acted, by people who had talent - something conspicuously absent in this film. Sadly, this is another example of cinema that only becomes thought provoking when you reflect on the kind of people that watch and enjoy seeing such stuff. Overall, just another fine example of America's self-implosion and cultural decline - truly awful!
16 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
How to ruin an excellent Stephen Hunter novel
lexvmi7 April 2007
'Shooter' starts fairly well, and then takes a precipitous downward spiral that never recovers. "Point of Impact" is an excellent action novel that is the first of a series of Robert Lee Swagger novels. A Viet Nam sniper who barely survived his war demons, he lives alone in Arkansas with his dog. He is consulted on an assassination attempt, when implicated in that assassination attempt, he hunts for the killers to clear his name. This is where it deviates from the book and descends into a comic book Bruce Willis type action film that loses all credibility. The terrific end of the novel is missing in this movie. To the detriment of the screen writer, he butchered the novel--he did not improve on the novel at all. My girl friend enjoyed the movie; I found the movie very unsatisfying, so much, I have to give it a failing grade, 'F.' Even Mark's beard looked pretty awful. Read the novel; do not see this movie, it was awful.
16 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Mark
maura-roberto27 March 2007
I thought the movie was amazing! This is a action packed movie with a little bit of romance. There were so many head shots in it. This movie will keep you on the edge of your seat! Also, Mark Wahlberg was hotter than ever in this movie. He had to work out even more than what he usually does. The role as Bob Lee Swagger did require a lot of physical stunts. He is really becoming a better actor now that he is doing movies that he really enjoys. Mark plays a very tough marine in this movie but I don't think that is his personality in real life. I defiantly recommend this movie to anyone that likes guns or Mark Wahlberg.
19 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Gun go brr
bjornar-1332729 August 2020
Very good: Direction, Production Design, Special Effects, Editing, Pace, Dialogue.

Good: Plot, Themes and Tone, Acting and Characters, Cinematography.

Fair: Score.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Action that you will enjoy...
akshatmahajan18 July 2020
Based on novel "Point of Impact".

Nice action entertainer... Film could have easily span a franchise!

Yes, there were some plot holes but at the end you will enjoy it till the end..
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
great movie full suspense and action
trashgang5 May 2020
Even as the story is predictable still this flick is full of suspense and action. And luckily not a love story because it's just on the edge sometimes that I thought, oh no here we go again, You know it, best friend is dead and his ex is falling in love with you, Well, maybe they do feel a thing but it's left out of this flick.

And each time I thought, okay, the movie is over something happens or a twist is coming and we are back on track for a few minutes. They even fooled me in the beginning.

Not a superhero like Bond or those kind of flicks but a pure action/revenge. Well done.

Gore 1/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 3/5 Story 4/5 Comedy 0/5
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed