The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Wesley Snipes has had tax issues for years, so he's gone down the route of Steven Seagal, Dolph Lundgren, Jean Claude Van Damme, among others. That doesn't excuse how abominably bad this movie is. It's just over 90 minutes long, and it feels like well over two hours with how excruciatingly laborious it is. It has stock footage from the movie Navy Seals, Iron Eagle, among other things, and no action to speak of, aside from extremely boring shootouts. I don't know how much this cost to make, but it's really cheap looking, and filmed in Romania. I feel so bad for Wesley Snipes, because he is such a talented action star. He is very adept at martial arts, and is quite charismatic. He has barely any lines here, and phones it in. I don't blame him one bit. He's clearly trying to make some quick cash, but he looks bored to tears. He even appears dubbed on a couple occasions. They try to give him this mysterious character, and it fails miserably. He does no fighting here, so even die hard Snipes fans will be disenchanted. I admittedly lost focus on a number of occasions here. It really is that boring. It has many scenes, filled with uninteresting & poor dialog, which seem to go on forever. It's too boring to be so bad it's good, the action is mostly gunfire. Snipes had barely any dialog. It fails on every level. If you wanna see Snipes at his best, check out Demolition Man, or a Blade movie. This movie belongs in bargain bins, and it'll make you weep about how Snipes has succumbed his standards to this drivelDUD

The plot was so implausible, the movie was reminiscent of bad American ethnocentric military might movies of the Eighties. The acting was atrocious. Wesley Snipes who has put out some reasonably decent movies looked like he wished he was somewhere else for most of the movie. Low budget movies can be forgiven for archaic special effects but not for replaying the exact same bad special effects repeatedly regardless of context for such insignificant details as night/day and appropriate camera angles. The action scenes were stilted, the old simplistic formula of dozens of bad guys with machines guns can't hit the side of a barn while they are standing in it while the good guys naturally have a one shot one kill habit. Red neck NRA card carrying American patriots will probably feel some kind of in-the-pants-rise for this movie, everyone else, do yourself a favour and look elsewhere for your cinematic escapism.Bad. Bad. Bad.

Normally, Wesley Snipes and action movies go hand-in-hand like bacon & eggs. But this is an awful film.I've not seen a movie that was: Poorly written Poorly directed Poorly edited Poorly acted Poorly costumed all at the same time.The best thing about the movie was Emma Samms. Not that she put in an excellent performance, but the fact that she still looks good for a mature woman.The editing was choppy, making it hard to follow the film. The screenplay was awful, making it even harder to follow what was going on in the film. The costuming was a joke. I've seen better costuming at an airsoft skirmish! The direction was just bad...about as bad as the acting. Snipes is a good actor, but bad direction, bad script and choppy editing may be the cause for his bad performance. The support actors did not do a good job at all, either. There is some gratuitous nudity at the beginning of the film. The "Ranger" squad was at a strip club. That brings up another problem...you'd think they could've hired someone (who was actually in the Army) to advise them on how military personnel speak, act, etc.Overall, it's not even worth a rental.

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.