I love this movie so much

Disappointment for a huge fan!

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

This movie can be compared to a bad Asian Karate movie. No plot, story just bad actions scenes where they continuously fight to the point of it being ridiculous. You can only what so much then gets boring to the point of laughable. This was obviously just a paycheck for Costner. I sure he slept though his takes. I wonder if he even watched it himself.

We can't understand why this movie has such a low rating – it's Luc Besson writing & humour at its most entertaining and Costner – like fine wine – gets better with age – is just great – no flab – it's kinda like Taken but with a few home truths (which came later with Taken….) If you want a bit of thriller entertainment of an evening, this does it for us.

Am I saving the world today? I don't think so.But I try ;) I notice I feel compelled to write a review on IMDb for only 2 kind of movies : those that are so awful I need to warn other fellow humans about and those that are so amazing that I want to expand my gratitude through here.You've guessed well : "3 Days to Kill" is not one of my favorite movies. I do think the director has done some choices that did hurt the movie. And the screenplay is a Luc Besson's actual screenplay. Very thin story, very simplified reality, actually the word 'reality' does not suit this movie. You can not believe the Luc Besson who writes this is the same that did the amazing "Nikita" or even better "Le Grand Bleu".OK, so, first, the name of the movie. If I was not in love with Costner, I would not have watched this movie, just from the title. I don't like violence, I don't like promoting violence to all the teenagers who don't really know what it is to kill (here comes my trying-to-save-the-world preaching). I see this kind of movie responsible for the banalization of violence, and responsible for the false connection it shows between strength and guns. I find the message of this movie utterly confusing : here's a good guy who lets squatters in his place and yet kills people for a living. You see, killing here becomes just another thing a good guy does in life.That's in general.In the details, there is so much to say. I must say the way the movie began I gasped because I heard : "CIA", and I thought : no! again? but I love Costner too much... Basically it's the lack of reality that just pushed me out of the movie more than once. The baby birth was ridiculous. Or was it the editing. I understand we can't go through the 15 hours of a labor. But to show a woman push her baby out and the next second to see the baby in the family's arms WITHOUT a cord, that's just hilarious!!! Not to mention the squatters ready to leave because they found a place out of Paris, all smiley and all. I ask : where is Mickey and the balloons? I mean, is Luc Besson aware of the actual real life in Paris for people who don't have much money? You think people say with a smile : "Oh we think we'll just move out of Paris..."?Also Paris is so fukking beautiful. I regret they did not take more advantage of the city. Showing us only the Eiffel Tower in like so many plans, even giving us a Kevin Costner alone moment next to the Eiffel Tower, I mean, that was sad, he really seemed alone and I thought : they must have guarded him very well alone so that he's not troubled by all the crazy fans. I even thought the scene where he bikes through Paris maybe has been chosen for it was one of the only ways to shoot him (pun intended) in the city without him being bothered or even in any kind of risk (there are insurances in movie business...)But the bike episode with the daughter. Hello. Too fake. Too long. It was supposed to touch us but it didn't because it looked too much like a commercial. Because we jumped too fast from the girl in her nightdress to the girl in her pants. Because it was different scenes put together. Because why would Costner mimic as if he was strong when people cheer about his girl having learned to bike? Why was it so fake? It was not the actors. The actors actually managed to act quite well, most of them (I found that Hugh was very fake too).No, it's really the direction. Where's the camera and what does she give importance to and for how long? The camera should never give a viewer the feeling : oh, here comes the love scene, right; oh, here comes the sweetness scene, right, et cetera.You don't feel like you're watching a real story. You feel like you're watching very expected scenes that don't glue together and not even to themselves.Pffffff. Makes me want to go back to Paris and see it fortunately without guns and without crashes, although there are probably many gunned police and army officers because these days there are young people who do just like Kevin Costner in this movie. I guess someone told them it's hot.Oh, one thing I did love very much and found was very creative was the presentation of the movie, with the windows and all, and you see many Kevin Costners at once (mmmm). It was so beautiful, from a taxi, with the sunlight. But it did not fit with the title of the movie that appeared right after, title that got filled with a red color just afterwards (so gross).Anyway, I'm a girl and I'm telling you guys, I so don't find guns hot!

Sometimes melodrama works. Then the reviewer in me faces a dilemma. I know that you need to buy into the story in order to feel anything in a melodrama, but who does not buy into it if they are parents, faced the teen crises of their kids, were too busy to dedicate to them the time they deserve (which is approximately all the time in the world)? Did I actually name all the parents population in the world with a few rare exceptions? Of course, only very few of us if any practice the profession of paid killer in the service of the CIA, as does Kevin Costner in 3 Days to Kill, a combination of a 'absent father - daughter' relation with a Luc Besson co-written thriller.I belong to the category of fans who are quite disappointed about the downturn of the career of Kevin Costner (both as actor and director). It's due in my opinion to some big projects that were less successful than planned at the end of the 90s, followed by a lack of great roles. '3 Days to Kill' is not the film that will put his acting career back on the stellar path, it's a lead role but written in a manner where accurate execution and a touch of humor and sensibility are all that is needed. Which Costner delivers.There is nothing special and nothing wrong in this film directed by McG. The professional level of execution of the story telling, good acting with a cast which aside Costner also includes another semi-comeback by Connie Nielsen, a touch of humor which makes the violence on screen palatable, the background of Paris which always looks well - all these are actually the setting for the family melodrama which simply works. The cast also includes good performances by Hailee Steinfeld (in the role of the teenage daughter, she actually has an impressive acting record although she was just around 18 when the film was made) and Marc Andréoni.We can ask for more, of course, but for this summer day it was the good entertainment I needed.