THE GUNMAN Review: .50 cal Sprays Of Gray Matter

I went into The Gunman expecting a possibly enjoyable but probably forgettable gunslinger flick. Years ago, I and most of the general movie-going public went into the original Taken expecting the same. Many came out of that film having witnessed an unexpectedly profound experience. While The Gunman isn't a fraction of the revelation that Taken was, I nonetheless find myself compelled to write about it in an attempt to wrap my head around the experience.

2008's Taken was lightning in a bottle that redefined a storied career, created (or at least resurrected) an entire film genre, and captured the cultural headspace of society in a particular moment in time. A pretty spectacular set of feats for what was, in essence, a typical run of the mill action B-movie. This innocuity of its intent is part of what made it so fascinating; despite not appearing to have any specific thematic statement, political agenda or overriding thesis, the film is overflowing with subtext about outdated defense initiatives in a post 9/11 world, international sovereignty, xenophobia and even traditional gender roles and the decline of the nuclear family. Now with The Gunman, it appears that director Pierre Morel (who helmed the original Taken as well as the French action blockbuster District 13) is looking to reboot his aging badass killer movie template with a new old man, this time in the form of a very chiseled and game Sean Penn. Moreover, it appears that Penn's real world leanings towards social and political activism have a decidedly more explicit and intentional role in the plot. All in all, The Gunman is a propulsive and fairly well-crafted action film like its predecessor. Unfortunately, it suffers far more from its barely functional screenplay and plot. Because of the additional historical context that a slew of subsequent Liam Neeson Dad-Action movies have unintentionally wrought in the past several years, the generic, tired, played-out beats seen in every other aging-hitman-doing-one-last-job film become painfully amplified and it feels much more like a barefaced cash-grab Taken ripoff. Still, a combination of the social issues and tangible details present some interesting flourishes in an otherwise rote production.

The film begins with Penn as Jim Terrier, a Private Military Contractor on assignment in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Under the guise of a security detail for humanitarian efforts, Terrier is there to kill a local national minister at the behest of a shady multi-national corporation bent on pillaging resources in the wake of continued unrest. Terrier's successful kill shot forces him into hiding, leaving behind Annie, the humanitarian doctor he fell in love with, played by Jasmine Trinca. Returning to the Congo years later, he becomes the target of a hit squad himself, sending him on a quest for revenge and redemption as he seeks out his old team leader Felix (Javier Bardem), and everyone else involved in the assassination.

The strangest thing about the story is that the stance against international interference and western exploitation of African resources, which plays heavily in the first part of the movie, seems at odds with the globe-hopping elite force gunfire action, suited to more conservatively styled espionage thrillers, which plays heavily in the latter part. The film, on one hand, says, "We shouldn't be trouncing around other countries' back yards leaving death and destruction in the name of our national interests," but then seems perfectly okay with bouncing around exotic locales amassing collateral damage and a pile of bodies, because that's just how these action films go.

More so than Taken, I actually found a lot of similarities between this film and The Bourne Identity, particularly in how it deals with shady Black Ops dealings in Africa and the gun battles and car chases that take place in Europe in their aftermath. Jim even suffers from intermittent incapacitating headaches (though here the Brain Fever plot contrivance is the result of post-concussive syndrome due to IED blasts, not secret government experiments). In addition, the regret and redemption theme plays big throughout the story, as Jim even says aloud, "I don't want to do this anymore," a beat recognizable from Bourne's climax. Further comparisons lie in the framing of the action itself: lots of brutal close-up frenetic shaky-cam fist and knife fighting; loud and fluid gun battles that are less concerned with geography and more concerned with amplifying the feeling of overwhelming ferocity; and close escapes achieved with a mix of high-speed tacticality and common sense practicality.

Speaking of the tactical and practical, another thing that got my gears spinning - that not everyone may appreciate - is The Gunman's attention to detail regarding military equipment and its use. There are touches of real items and how they might be used that lend a tangibility to the story. Not that the globe-trotting and havoc-wreaking are realistic, but the film had small, realistic elements that kept me in the story more than the typical boilerplate assassin movie. Things like Jim's CRKT knife or the henchmen's APC9 submachine guns help bring the audience into the nasty combat a bit more. Some of the items did admittedly make me laugh, like when Jim is under surveillance, being tailed, and they call his position out by his completely conspicuous American ACU camouflage pattern backpack in the middle of London (where you'd think he'd try to keep a less obvious profile). The funniest part, for me, were Jim's Lowa tactical boots; they're actually well-regarded by operators, but Jim wearing them along with a casual suit to dinner might be beyond their specified intent (though I have seen many a soldier curiously deciding to wear their boots under jeans while out at the bar - guys, that shit is gauche. Just buy some regular shoes).

Beyond all the decent action elements, the movie falls flat pretty hard. Sean Penn himself seems to be into it, but he doesn't bring anything special to the tired old regretful gunslinger character...well, other than the body of a well-cardioed, functionally fit, young-30s surfer, despite the fact that his character is a heavy smoker. Homeboy must've jumped on the HGH-train full speed like my man Stallone and all of his Expendables crew. It's somewhat impressive visually, but ultimately pretty pointless to the narrative. In fact, "pointless to the narrative" describes the inclusion of the high-caliber supporting cast, as well. Bardem is relegated to a slurring, stuttering opportunistic coward rather than a legitimate threat. The great Ray Winstone plays Jim's clandestine support connection Stanley, but he doesn't do much beyond providing perfunctory lectures and guidance. Idris Elba shows up midway through as a dashing and cryptic Interpol agent, but he essentially has nothing substantive to do in the film. I imagine that Penn's pecs and Elba's charm are bonus eye candy items for the ladies dragged into theaters by their male partners as trade off for the guys having to watch Insurgent, but all in all it's a waste.

That last sentence brings me to another sore point of the movie, regarding how it treats the leading lady. These are very much old-school macho men in an old-school action movie, and this includes old-school concepts of honor, chivalry and gender relations. When Jim leaves abruptly after the assassination, Felix swoops in to save Annie from her broken heart (and possible physical danger since the contracting security gig falls off). She ends up marrying Felix, stating that it is some type of debt she owes. But then as Jim re-enters the scene, she simply becomes a used trophy to be won back. There's even an insinuation/revelation later on that she is "damaged goods" due to rape/sexual violence, as if Jim shouldn't be fighting to get her back so hard because she's devalued. Altogether this left a bad taste in my mouth similar to the aforementioned conflicting thematics: the film has something to say about social justice and inequality, yet there's still the traditional repressive social stuff here just that doesn't jive.

Although I wanted to get this published during the weekend to coincide with those who wanted to see the film, the discussion actually becomes more interesting now after taking a look at the Sunday afternoon weekend box office results. Liam Neeson's LiamNeeson™ Movies have been steadily tanking at the box office. Last week's Run All Night only scored $11 million on its opening, being pummeled by Cinderella's $70 Million. And now, The Gunman has opened to a dismal $5.4 million compared to Divergent:Insurgent:Detergent's $54 million. A couple different conclusions can be derived from this. Most immediately, the surge of Old Man Ass Kicking/Dad-Action movies is over. Secondly, as Devin has advocated for many times before, leading women can and most certainly are drawing big at the box office. And lastly, I think it shows that everyone is more than ready for some new blood.

I thought Run All Night was just okay, but i legitimately enjoyed the underlying message about letting the past go and working toward the future. That Joel Kinneman guy has gotten short shrift thus far in this and his previous RoboCop stint, but I honestly think he is pretty good and he has plenty of time to build his repertoire. Also recently, Kingsman: The Secret Service emphasizes this theme, which has been doing gangbusters at the box office and is still in the top 5 even after five weeks in theaters. Even though it featured a dynamite performance from who-woulda-thought Old Man Ass Kicker Colin Firth, Taron Egerton's Eggsy was remarkable and the film was wise enough to let him shine at the end. I can't wait to see that kid in more movies in the future. I also can't wait for the rebooted Fantastic Four kids to show us what they can do. I can't wait for Rocky to pass the torch to Creed. I'm ready. The movie-going public is ready. The new generations, the future, they are ready. I come to praise and to bury the action heroes of old. They have given much joy over the years, yet in this recent spate of old man action films there is a heavy element of expressing regret, asking for redemption or one last chance. There is nothing to forgive. We are only human, and whatever mistakes you have impressed upon us, along with the successes, we accept. Now it's time for the youth to make their own mistakes and their own successes. It's time for the old men to die. And for those in their dusk....hey, I'm sure Penn and Neeson and Costner and the like got plenty in their retirement funds; they'll be all right. They don't need my 10 bucks a pop every weekend anymore. I'm ready to invest my money in the new blood.