$2.50 Reviews: Killers (2010)

Recommended Videos

Marter

Elite Member
Legacy
Oct 27, 2009
14,268
19
43
<color=darkred>Previous Review: <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.286787-2-50-Reviews-The-Tournament-2009>The TournamentNext Review: <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.287212-2-50-Reviews-13-Going-on-30-2004>13 Going on 30
$2.50 Reviews:
Killers
<img height=400>http://i29.servimg.com/u/f29/16/09/70/40/poster40.png

After watching Killers, I finally understand why there is a lot of people out there who dislike Ashton Kutcher. Having not seen that many of the films he's chosen to take part in before, I didn't have that frame of reference. Fortunately, (or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it), I now do understand. It's films like Killers that can make anyone look bad, but choosing to take part in it is the issue I have in this case.

[Img_Inline width="275" height="159" Caption="Not awkward in the least." Align="left"]http://i29.servimg.com/u/f29/16/09/70/40/killer10.jpg[/Img_Inline]

The actual plot doesn't even get going for the first hour our of the film, so let me spare you what happens then: Jen (Katherine Heigl) and Spencer (Ashton Kutcher) have gotten married. Their marriage may or may not be completely working out. Spencer used to be a spy, but may or may not have given that up. They have small problems that every couple has to deal with. That's all.

The other half of this movie deals with Spencer and Jen being on the run from trained assassins. The reason that people are after them is revealed at the end of the film, but it isn't a big surprise to anyone when it is revealed. Literally everyone they encounter in the last 40 minutes is someone trying to kill them, and Killers takes an action-comedy route for the two leads to avoid death. This is when the film actually begins to pick up steam, except that everything that happens is too predictable to excite the audience.

So, apart from the film not really being the film it was billed to be, what else is wrong with it? Well, neither of the leads prove that they can act, especially not when in the company of one another. Their chemistry is almost non-existent, which makes the first hour of the film feel overlong and kind of pointless. Apart from giving us a small bit of character development, (but not enough to matter), and some attempts to make us laugh, it serves little purpose.

[Img_Inline width="275" height="177" Caption="Not even guns can liven this film up." Align="right"]http://i29.servimg.com/u/f29/16/09/70/40/killer11.jpg[/Img_Inline]

Once the film actually gets going and lives up to what it promised to be, it still isn't very good. It's slightly better in this part, because the poor acting and chemistry doesn't show as much when there are a bunch of action scenes, but it still isn't very entertaining or funny. I mean, action scenes can still be entertaining even if they're poorly executed, and that's sometimes the case here. Not often -- and the most memorable scene for me is still one in which an explosion occurs behind a character that looks like they hired people who had no idea how to do special effects to make it -- but there are times where they are passable.

Actually, I'd like to change what I said earlier. There is one more moment in the film that was more memorable than the terrible pyrotechnics. Usher makes a cameo appearance as an employee at a K-Mart. Unfortunately, he shows himself to be a better actor with far less material than either of the leads, which just goes to show he poorly they do in this film.

With such little amount of working having seemingly gone into the film, I'm just about done talking about it. The leads were awful, the first hour of the film was pointless, and there was almost no fun to be had while watching it. When the most memorable parts about a movie were the terrible special effects and a small cameo, you know you're watching something terrible. Killers was a complete waste of my time and I urge anyone contemplating watching it to consider watching something better. Or just going to bed. Or going for a run. Or doing anything that could possible considered more productive than sitting there wasting you time watching this movie. Please and thank you.

<color=D6D9DA>_________________________________________________________________________________

If you are a fan of my reviews, and want to boost my ego receive notifications when new reviews are posted, or find an old review, please join/visit this <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/2-50-Reviews>user group.
 

irequirefood

New member
May 26, 2010
558
0
0
Good way of telling me to stay away from this. As always, enjoyable review, and I have yet to see Ashton Kutcher in a role I enjoyed outside of That 70's Show.
 

Zenron

The Laughing Shadow
May 11, 2010
298
0
0
I kind of assumed this film would be a really bad rip off of Mr and Mrs Smith, but with Ashton Kutcher. I remember it being released last year and decided against going to see it. I guess I made the right decision.

But seriously, from what I've seen about this movie, it doesn't even try and disguise the fact that it's a rip off of a way better movie(well, it wasn't great but at least it had good actors).

Question: Has anyone else seen No Strings Attached? Surprisingly, I didn't mind it, although that's probably more to do with the fact that Natalie Portman is in it.

Oh and, "Next review: 13 going on 30". I'm going to guess that it will be bad as well.
 

Marter

Elite Member
Legacy
Oct 27, 2009
14,268
19
43
Zenron said:
I kind of assumed this film would be a really bad rip off of Mr and Mrs Smith, but with Ashton Kutcher. I remember it being released last year and decided against going to see it. I guess I made the right decision.

But seriously, from what I've seen about this movie, it doesn't even try and disguise the fact that it's a rip off of a way better movie(well, it wasn't great but at least it had good actors).

Question: Has anyone else seen No Strings Attached? Surprisingly, I didn't mind it, although that's probably more to do with the fact that Natalie Portman is in it.

Oh and, "Next review: 13 going on 30". I'm going to guess that it will be bad as well.
It's not really a Mr. & Mrs. Smith rip-off at all. I've got my review for that movie written up already, and yeah, they're not all that similar. Particularly because Kutcher and Heigl don't spend a lot of time trying to kill one another.

I reviewed <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.263176-Marter-to-the-Movies-No-Strings-Attached>No Strings Attached, actually. ;)

And I don't really want to ruin the surprise that is my next review, but why would you assume I'll dislike it? If it's just because it has Jennifer Garner in it, then that shouldn't be why because I've liked, (or at least not hated), quite a few films with her in it. Like...The Invention of Lying, Juno, Elektra and The Kingdom. The latter two I definitely wouldn't recommend, but they weren't that bad.
 

Zenron

The Laughing Shadow
May 11, 2010
298
0
0
I Didn't realise you had already reviewed that film. I haven't been paying attention to the review forum for very long.

My view on this film is purely speculation, I haven't seen it, but the same could be said for 13 going on 30 as well. Haven't seen that it either. I don't have anything against Jeniffer Garner, I just don't like the premise behind the story. I don't know, it might be executed well for all I know, but I've seen the idea before and it seems completely uninteresting to me. I kind of assumed it would be like big, but not as awesome.

I looked up The Invention of Lying on IMDB, it looks kind of interesting, I might watch it.
 

Marter

Elite Member
Legacy
Oct 27, 2009
14,268
19
43
Zenron" post="326.287021.11329937 said:
My view on this film is purely speculation, I haven't seen it, but the same could be said for 13 going on 30 as well. Haven't seen that it either. I don't have anything against Jeniffer Garner, I just don't like the premise behind the story. I don't know, it might be executed well for all I know, but I've seen the idea before and it seems completely uninteresting to me. I kind of assumed it would be like big, but not as awesome. I was thinking that you were making a judgement call because of my supposed disdain for Garner. Because some people think I have some clear bias against her, I figured you were taking that route as well, and guessing that I'd dislike 13 Going on 30 because of that.

My mistake, it would seem. XD
 

emeraldrafael

New member
Jul 17, 2010
8,585
0
0
I didnt think I would like it when it came out, just cause we had Knight and Day and the Gerald Butler movie with Jennifer Aniston in that same time (though both seemed better then this).

... Plus there was MacGruber, and you cant say no to that.
 

thelonewolf266

New member
Nov 18, 2010
708
0
0
I don't know how you can force yourself to watch some of these Movies especially this one.
Good Job Marter I appreciate the torture you put yourself through so we don't have to.
 

AvsJoe

Elite Member
May 28, 2009
9,051
0
41
irequirefood said:
I have yet to see Ashton Kutcher in a role I enjoyed outside of That 70's Show.
He was amazing in Reindeer Games. It was a small role but he over-acted the hell out of it.