The Hitman’s Bodyguard (2017) (mini-review++)

(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)

(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)

acting 7

directing 7

effects 7

editing 7

writing 7

SW SCORE 35

3.5 out of 5 🐙

++

I’m not getting deep here. Well, I don’t really get deep often. This is a fun movie carried on the backs of two gentlemen who have varying levels of screen charisma. Samuel L. Jackson plays the Hitman and Idon’t think there are ten actors ever with this energy. Ryan Reynolds isn’t on that tier but he’s always struck me as a charming, nice guy who can augh at himself. That’s not so common in a world of actors who often take themselves far too seriously.

The conceit is pretty simple; it’s in the title. The setup is also pretty rote: the two principals can’t stand each other at the beginning, but guess what, they grow to begrudgingly appreciate each other by the end. In between, there are some cool action set pieces and Gary Oldman serves as a reasonable nemesis. Penelope Cruz is in the film, but she portrays a spicy Latinx woman. Really, they couldn’t give her a role that wasn’t entirely based on race? I know the movie is silly and not serious and it’s probably just a joke and I’m not really mad. It just seemed kinda lazy. There aren’t many hilarious action movie lines. But there are plenty of funny moments:

Samuel L. Jackson sings a few lines. I don’t know if he was purposely singing badly, or he did it for laughs, but it was really, really bad, which just made it more funny. At one point there is an obligatory long and disastrous car chase that ends with the principals’ car is completely totaled just one foot outside the parking garage they are heading for. There was a chase scene through the Amsterdam canals which I think is legally required of any production that films in Amsterdam. But it was pretty fun.

The whole movie is pretty fun and funny. Don’t be guarded. Hit this up.
.

.

.

.

.

.

(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.

(2) Octopuses (0-5 🐙, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)

(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feeling…not that SW score is scientific…but this one is even less so

(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant)

Leave a Reply