The Sunday Mail
The most frequently asked question l have encountered over the years is how I identify the good movies from the bad ones.
I have always told one big fat lie: “If I tell you, then that would ruin the whole mystic of what I do.”
The truth is quite simple and l will reveal it in this instalment. There are two basic ways of identifying a good movie from a bad one.
The first option is to apply a scholarly approach, that is, analysing the basic tenets of literature, texture, themes, performances and a breakdown of the main plot and sub-plots.
The second option, which l use more often, is gut feeling. Something about the movie simply has to stick out and capture my attention for it to be a good movie.
If that doesn’t happen, then that will a bad movie. For this week’s review, l explore an example of the latter option.
“Hitman-Agent 47” failed to capture my attention. Video adaptations are some of the trickiest genres. Given that the few attempts that have been made over the years have yielded very poor results, shame on me for expecting less than a train wreck.
“Hitman-Agent 47” is such bad a film that I found myself fighting the temptation to gouge my eyes out for fear of never being able to “unsee” what I was watching.
The movie tells the story of Katia, or is it Agent 47, the result of a secret genetics experiment that transformed presumably dead people into an elite force of killing machines or assassins as they call them.
Katia is on the run from a secret organisation called “The Syndicate”, whose sole purpose is to find her and use her to track down her father who happened to be the one who created and fathered these assassins.
Oh, and did I mention that these assassins do not have names, they only use numbers for identification.
Though l do not intend to reveal any spoilers for the movies l review, this movie has to be an exception.
Its twists and turns, which are usually a powerful device in films, are totally wasted and virtually play no part in making this film great.
They come so thick and fast that by the end of the first act, the writers Skip Woods and Michael Finch had given up so much information, thereby ruining the film. It was so anti-climactic.
For instance, Katia is first introduced as our damsel in distress, then hits a complete 180 degree turn to become one of the killing machines — the most skilled and deadliest of the crop.
To make matters worse, this twist is hardly explored as she spends the entire film clinging and jumping from one male lead to another.
Here Finch and Woods miss a golden opportunity to give Hannah Ware, or should I say Katia; a ScarlettJohansson (Lucy/Avengers) or Milla Jovovich (Resident Evil) dominant kind of female character.
Her skills are mostly mentioned but barely put to good use. The only time she demonstrates any kind of growth in her character is during the final fight scenes though the scenes still fall flat given the lack of development.
Agent 47, who is her brother of sorts, is the movie’s good guy and Zachary Quinto’s John Smith and Thomas Kretschmann’s Antonie LeClerq had the ‘honour’ of being the film’s bad guys.
LeClerq is the Syndicate’s head while Smith is his top henchman. The two actors also fail dismally in their performances since the film writers had pushed too many one-dimensional characters down our throats.
The film only shines in some of the fight scenes and editing. The choreography emits a Jason Bourne meets The Matrix kind of feel.
Here kudos go to director Aleksander Bach for fusing some great CGI with state of the art martial arts fight scenes with good camera work. The slow motion technique was also a nice touch.
And when Rupert Friend lacks in dialogue and strong character build up, Bash made up for that with gory violence, excellent camera work and your Matrix kind of fight scenes.
I also enjoyed watching Friend breaking the bones, kicking up a storm and leaving a bloody trail in his wake.
Handled properly, “Hitman-Agent 47” could have become a cult classic.
