There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

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

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Always endangered to break under its over-complicated story-line, progressing from scene to scene without forgetting to grip on twisted suspense, "The Gunman" (2015) directed by "96 hours" (2008) director Pierre Morel surprisingly holds up under pressure with leading actor Sean Penn, carrying a heavy load in shape of a backpack from Central Africa to several locations in Europe in order to encounter one by one the demons of his past and eliminating any hostiles under hammering sound design and well-staffed properties of action combined with believable close to humanized relationships with supporting parts stretching from Javier Bardem and Mark Rylance as corrupted nemesis in a globalized world business of natural resources and actress Jasmine Trinca as the protagonist's love interest, who got the chemistry balanced enough to elevate this action thriller over the usual lone wolf clear-my-name revenge story.© 2017 Felix Alexander Dausend (Cinemajesty Entertainments LLC)

I really expected much, at least an 8 out of these 2 amazing actors, Sean and Javier Bardem. I did not expect such a disappointing, boring, stupidly written "thriller" I rented the movie and felt sorry for every cent i paid, is Penn turning into Cage? What happens to these actors as they get older? and Javier? this actor played so bad, if there was an Oscar for bad acting he would get it. The holes in the plot are huge, the acting terrible, the story idiotic and boring, the directing slow and tiring. Don't watch it. i gave it a 3 because of my good manners, it should get a 1. If there is a movie that should have not been made, it is this one (and some of nick's, and Vin......)

Sean Penn did not age well. But I suppose you could say that an old assassin would look weathered. Also, the character is dealing with stuff that took place many years ago when he was younger.Having said that, it was awkward to watch a guy that old and gray portray an indestructible super hero. After all, that's what these type characters are. The Bourne guy, the Taken guy, etc. They know how to do everything and they can't be beaten. Unrealistic yes, but generally fun.There was plenty of action here. It wasn't boring from that standpoint. But like other reviewers said, there simply was not enough of a back story. Who was this guy? We didn't know, and even his girlfriend didn't know. At least show us a scene of them taking a romantic walk somewhere and talking about life. Otherwise we don't see any substance to their relationship. Who was the girl? Where was she from and what motivated her to be a volunteer doctor? Searching the globe for answers to why you are being targeted for assassination, and then beating everyone up along the way, is a tired plot by now. You can keep doing it for lack of better ideas, but at least infuse it with real emotion and history.How many times can Ray Winstone play essentially the same character? Let's get some new faces in these spy flicks. He was the same guy in the remake of Point Break.I turned it off about three quarters of the way through, so I guess for whatever reasons, it couldn't hold my attention. Probably because I felt that the rest was going to be more of the same and I had enough. I really had no feeling for the characters and couldn't care less what happened to them.I will give some credit to Penn for portraying the character as genuinely remorseful for the events that his work triggered.Good pacing, photography, and choreography.

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