Shooter

The film may seem like a B-movie product in every way to most of the audience, but I always manage to enjoy it. The plot isn't innovative at all, and the film doesn’t offer much action in the end... yet the simplicity of Shooter always grabs my attention and keeps me engaged as a viewer. Mark Wahlberg is one of my favorite actors, so subjective feelings definitely play a role here; I can’t imagine Bob Lee Swagger being portrayed by anyone else. The story doesn’t come with any clever twists, and the main twist is probably predictable for most viewers. On the other hand, sometimes the most straightforward script brings the best results, and it moved along nicely while offering some punchy, juicy moments. The cast is high quality; Danny Glover fit perfectly, and Kate Mara likely opened doors to Hollywood with this film. It’s a bit of a personal favorite that I won't let go. It has its flaws, no doubt, but I always have fun and overlook the minor cosmetic issues. I give it 85%. (10/20/2019)

In the currently fashionable trend of building action on fast editing and lots of CGI effects, Shooter is a very likable old-school alternative, which does not hide its ambitions to be a stylish B-movie. In addition, its plot and narrative style, built on basic clichés, blatantly refers to the genre mannerisms of action films of the late 1980s and early 1990s. Fuqua understands that well-mastered craftsmanship can do a lot. Therefore, despite its 2-hour runtime Shooter is a very enjoyable time spent in a whirlwind of compelling action that centers around the divine Mark Wahlberg, who never lets his pissed-off expression drop and makes you think of the greatest action fighters who dominated similarly-themed films 15 years ago. And if he had sharper catchphrases, I’d give it five stars! For the genre-devoted viewer, this is the ultimate comfort food, whereas for the rest of the world, based on other reviews, it’s not everyone’s cup of tea. (06/15/2007)

It is a well-known fact that fans of the action genre do not need a film to have a good script, because an action film is based on other values, and Shooter is a typical example of this. The script is ridiculous and is a condensed collection of the most clichéd elements, complemented by typically pathetic-patriotic speeches about democracy, love for the homeland, justice, etc. It is actually a typical Seagal movie, though (even though routine) better handled in terms of direction and above all, significantly better acted. Mark Wahlberg fits well into these types of roles. For genre fans, it is a decent film with several uncompromising fights, an invincible hero, and wicked villains. Others will probably suffer during the dull dialogues, obvious inconsistencies, and predictable fights. Overall impression: 25%. (10/25/2009)

A simple and straightforward action film, where the screenwriter probably got fired in the middle of the shooting and then it was just improvisation. Fortunately, Antoine Fuqua can still do it, and Mark Wahlberg is good with these badasses, so in the end, it's an inoffensive average. (04/22/2007)

We’ve known that the government (mainly the American one) is a bitch for a long time and Shooter was probably supposed to prove it. It’s fine that this kind of old-school movies (Commandooo) still appear from time to time, even though they didn’t have to overdo the old school so much here (the hero living in a hut in the mountains, for god’s sake). The screenplay is unnecessarily slow-moving and full of cliché. Shortening the movie by about half an hour would have helped. Wahlberg delivers more or less what’s expected from him (an honorable tough-nut) and Kate Mara is a beauty you never tire of. But Danny Glover pleased me a lot, in this movie miles away from Rod from Lethal Weapon. He’s simply a superb, decrepit bastard. And there’s no end of dead bodies here (that’s a plus:). Fuqua should start looking around for a great screenplay, because Training Day shows that he can do better. (07/05/2007)