Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Shooter (2007)

This is topic Shooter (2007) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001252

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 03-23-2007, 10:39 PM:

Ever since I saw THE REPLACEMENT KILLERS 9 years ago, I've been in love with Antoine Fuqua. He is undoubtedly one of the finest visual masters working in the industry today. The number of action directors that are better than him can be counted on one hand. But coming off of KING ARTHUR and LIGHTNING IN A BOTTLE, his two worst movies, I went into SHOOTER with a sense of unease. Was Fuqua really just a flash in the pan? Had he lost his touch?

Of course not! SHOOTER is his return to form, doing what he does best. A message movie wrapped up in a classicly beautiful action package. Like TRAINING DAY and MEN OF HONOR, SHOOTER is better at raising questions than it is at answering them. But the questions raised are very good ones, and the set pieces are very skillfully rendered.

MINOR SPOILER:

I read an interview with Fuqua where he talked about how the ending was reshot because test audiences didn't find it very satisfying. They wanted revenge. That terrifies me. It also makes for a pretty stupid ending.

Posted by Kyle Anderson (Member # 3504) on 03-24-2007, 03:11 PM:

Here's an idea: follow the book!

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 03-25-2007, 09:14 PM:

It's not great, borrows from many other movies, but I still liked it. They blow things up real good. It has the ending I would have voted for. [Wink]

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 03-31-2007, 04:54 AM:

I too am a huge fan of Fuqua's work, never failing to dissapoint with his tense action sequences.

This film is not his best work, but it worked for what it was. I did enjoy it, but not enough to buy the DVD. I really think that is what should be the guiding factor in recomending movies, is if you would actually buy the DVD.

quote:
Here's an idea: follow the book!

Aww I hate that argument! Respectfully of course!! If every movie followed the book, it would be a terribly long and boring film. Most books cannot be translated verbatim without being eighteen hours long and tripeful, if that is even a word.

However, I do agree that the spirit of the film should follow the book that it claims to borrow from, otherwise you just have two hours of explosions and Marky Mark.

Ciao

Posted by Kyle Anderson (Member # 3504) on 03-31-2007, 12:17 PM:

In this case ( at least in my opinion ), following the book - not literally, of course, but more so - leads to less character incongruity (characters doing things you would definitely not expect them to do - such as SPOILER burning the phone with the real shooter's talk about the grave in Ethiopia or whatever END SPOILER - the Bob Lee Swagger from the book would have (and did) shot all those retards on the spot. Though the ending that was finally put in did make up for this somewhat - it just doesn't have the same feel the book was crafted into giving.

Posted by Justin Gorka (Member # 3727) on 04-15-2007, 02:33 PM:

Sorry, this film is just crap. The remote control helicopter looked like to a 70's Charlies Angeles episode. And since when does a house explode 30 seconds after the gas has been turned on?
No tension, nothing, watch the trailer and save yourself the time!