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

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Well the problem with this movie is there is obvious flaws that are just too obvious for the general public.First my DVD box said it had multiple languages and subtitles, when it had only English with no subtitles... I tough at first they could had mix the DVDs but it seem i was not the only one. So i watched it in English and could experience the awful dubbing of some of the rangers army team(especially the captain). This alone make it seem like awful acting.Wesley is really soft spoken, maybe a bit too much for your obvious action movie fan... The gun sounds also seem a bit off, they don't have that noisy noises(even when silencers) that we are used to hear in movies.Hand to hand combat for what there is seem extremely cheap and bad too(but its very limited to only a few scenes) The plot is like the general 90s action movie type, i will not get into detail but i will say its very simple, and the villains are very under used all movie long.But despise all of these flaws, as an action movie, without being "very good", it ain't as horrible as some people wanted it to be. The production just seem too cheap, thats the main problem, cause the rest, its done decently for an action movie with gunfights, an OK story, and a military theme. In any case i will never say it was a good action movie, but its certainly not as bad as some people want to put it...

This is the kind of movie that gives the "Direct To Video" genre a bad name. Everything about this movie screams "CHEAP!".Modern movie-goers are sophisticated enough to notice things like the same clip being used over and over again to represent something different. They notice it when a Russian MiG and a US Tomcat have the same ejection seat, and the same fire control panel. Plainly put, the production values in this movie reek. Horribly. I'm prepared to lay reality aside somewhat when watching a flick, but this one stretches credulity beyond all reason.Wesley Snipes must have either owed Producer Andrew Stevens a freebie, or he did it to fulfill a contract he just wanted to get out from under. I can think of no other reason for his appearing in this. He could have phoned his performance in.Speaking of Andrew Stevens, his production company has 13 films in release and 2 listed as "In Production" (as of 1/27/09). Of those in release, SEVEN of them went direct to video. Make of that what you will.I gave this a 2 out of 10, and it's only that high because I have a soft spot for Emma Sams.

Oh my gosh! this movie rules see it! watch it in slow motion , rewind and all speeds of fast forward it is that good.I just love the way it uses great actors to portray its realistic, original story.(takes envelope of cash from movie studio)Watch it! Watch it!if you like any kind of movies watch it.Best movie ever.I love the cool explosions and when Wesley Snipes fights the man with the bread knife classic...Hoping for a sequel could be called something cool like Marksman 2 or Marksman vengeance or Marksman 'X'treme i would pay double for that 'X' could wesley pull off amovie as good as this i think he has the talent deserves an Oscar and a star on the Hollywood walk of fame unless he alredy has one.

I only watched it to the end because it was a rental - had we gone to see this at the cinema I'd have asked for our money back.Some glaring problems here - the sound recording was sub-standard, so you couldn't hear the lines properly. The dialogue was clumsily delivered - almost stumbled through - something any half-decent director should have spotted right away.I think they could have made the film passable had they sorted the sound & dialogue, and took the time to focus the action. The whole thing felt hurried and low-budget.Disappointing FX for an action movie - either stock footage, cheap sparks/fireworks or studio overlays. I've only seen it one time through (That's quite enough), but it's probably been shot with only 4 or 5 locations, with stock for the rest.One redeeming feature was the lighting. For obviously hurried shots, digicams and cheap locations, the lighting crew did a good job and brought some of the only atmosphere to the film. Some credit has to go to camera there, but the scenes seemed so half-thought-through it must have been difficult to bring imagination to the movement - Photography is routine and adequate.The last word on technique and the second redeemer is editing. Whoever edited this obviously has talent - how anybody could string this carnage together is beyond me - and just got away with it.Overall? This wouldn't get any respec' from even your most chavved-up action junkie. The Marksman is blatantly written, directed and produced by accountants with no imagination or inclination to bother - so don't.