Redundant and unnecessary.

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

It was not bad, but the same old stuff that we'd seen in so many other films. It was actually based on the book and directed by the 'Taken' filmmaker. An international project, takes place in three different countries, but opens and ends in Congo. It centres on an assassin who had successfully executed a high-profile job in Africa. But a few years later, after giving up those kind of work, all the sudden it comes back to haunt him when some unknown men comes looking for him. So he decides to find who's behind it and why.Even though it is a familiar theme, very much enjoyable. But the problem is the hero remains unhurt and somebody else dies for him which so cliché. The acting was good, and obviously that is Sean Penn in the lead. The action sequences were okay, but the pace of the film was the reason for me to sit on-board for over 100 minutes.So if you are not expecting a good story and the stunts, it will do okay, particularly for the time pass. Yes, it had a chance to become a better film, but I think it wanted to replicate the book which is a couple of decades old and in the meantime pieces from it was used in the different films, hence this one looked so old. The critics did not like it, but it is much better than they say, as well as not good as some people claim.6.5/10

At first it is hard to imagine Sean Penn in an action film and harder in a lead marksman role, but then I watched this . Wow, but I don't get how such a good almost full in all aspects action film could get 5.8 !!!! May be people lost their taste of a realistic action film. It's certainly 7-8 stars. If we consider Penn's role only, it's flawless, the other actors could have done better job.Except Sean Penn other actors kind of look faded, a bit more prominent action star group could have made this film better. The guys in negative role did an okay job but kind of pulled down the overall hotness of the film. The beginning of film seemed kind of a bit too little too short and a little more action and length in the beginning context would certainly do more favour to the overall story line.

Pretty hard to fathom why this film got such a bad rap in the media while too many cheesy formulaic crowdpleasers from the Hollywood hit factory get 4 and 5 stars from well reputed outlets. This is a smart, superbly cast and extremely well shot international thriller - the sort that rarely gets made these days - and why such an intelligent production that actually aims to be credible and somewhat educative scores so much lower with critics than the endless parade of Bonds and Furious 7's with their ridiculous jumping cars and chewed up one liners, I have no idea. For once the story and script are actually believable, a rarity in modern action cinema, and Penn and Bardem give great performances that are perfectly matched by beautiful dynamic cinematography of a fair few exotic locations.I'm not easy to please with thrillers and action movies but found this one utterly enjoyable.

From the Director of the original Taken comes what is essentially Taken 2.0, re-skinned, rehashed and re-marketed for a different audience to puke back up. But this is Penn's show, a self-obsessed project. Highlighting what a great human being he is. Look at all the humanitarian work he does! Protect the environment! Guns are bad! The last statement though, isn't entirely true. Penn uses guns many a time, so its message is somewhat conflicted. Like the overall point of the film. What are the filmmakers really trying to say about the current economic climate? The answer though is simple and its, well nothing.Penn's character, a bland individual that doesn't deserve the honour of being named, is an ex-sniper or gunman if you like. He's out of the business. For good. That is until his demons of the past force him to confront his fears and health problems. Because what would an action film be without an aged actor, mediocre director and the threat of heart problems in the long run?The Gunman is solid proof that Hollywood has run out of new ideas. Instead the film plays out like a poor man's Bourne Identity, not stylish enough to offer thrills, nor thoughtful enough to make a meaningful statement about the economy. Instead it ponders along boring everyone in its wake. Maybe I would like The Gunman more if it didn't insult my intelligence at every turn, didn't bore me from tears and didn't make me long for the days of Liam Neeson as an action hero. That's how bad this film is. Take note because with a poor script, inflated runtime, zero characterisation and a dull po faced story, The Gunman is not worth your time or money.D