Killers
User Score
3.7 out of 10

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 81 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 24 out of 81
  2. Mixed: 13 out of 81
  3. Negative: 44 out of 81

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. grandpajoe6191
    Oct 11, 2011
    3
    Absurd it is...the new summer action-romance movie "Killers" is just plain terrible. The script is crap as well as the action sequences (Its like parodying those Bourne or Bond films). Aston Kutcher also performed terribly (His worst one yet). Most of all, the movie just doesn't know where to point its gun at; action or comedy? Don't watch it, noobs.
  2. ChadS
    Jun 7, 2010
    3
    Ashton Kutcher plays a killer, but not the "Psycho Killer" that's promised in the trailer. Unwilling to put his screen image at risk, Kutcher doesn't kill with a gun, or knife, or even with his bare hands. The ex-"That 70s Show" star leaves the nail guns and chainsaws for Christian Bale to handle. Spencer is a nice psycho. The nicest psycho in Nice. The contract killer merely pushes a button, causing the helicopter he rigged with explosives to blow up. No arterial spray, not even a drop of the red stuff is spilled. Blood would remind the moviegoer that the American girl on vacation(played by Katherine Heigl) just had lunch with a sociopath. Modeled loosely after 007, the former star of "Grey's Anatomy"(and future Shelley Long), ends up looking like a Bond girl of a lesser god. Presuming that she's not a superlative lip reader, daddy's girl(daddy is played by Tom Selleck) should have heard the midair detonation of the chopper. Perhaps it's bad editing, the moviegoer thinks, since there's no reaction shot(on her, or anybody's part) to the earsplitting blast. "Killers" just proceeds on to the next scene. The editor, not the screenwriter, helps keep the secret of Spencer's nefarious trade from the unsuspecting tourist. For sure, bad editing confuses the moviegoer, back on American soil at the now-married couple's suburban home, where a near-death experience in their garage becomes a mystery, because it's unclear as to who's doing the shooting: the man in the kitchen(a knife-wielding man), or the woman at the front door(a woman, as it turns out, was the only neighbor not trying to kill the Aimes unit). So where does the itchy trigger finger come from? Personally speaking, the bullet-riddled attempt on Spencer's life is practically extra-diegetic, a transmogrifying assailment from the moviegoer who wants a simple shot/reverse shot for the sake of clarity. If my aim was true, the chemistry-free pair(Kutcher and Heigl are no Chris Franz and Tina Weymouth) would be stopped, dead in their tracks, from riffing on Quentin Tarantino's "Kill Bill: Vol. 2", in which a delicate domestic matter starts to encroach on the protagonist's wild, wild life. "Killers" has an edge all right, a dull one. "Killers" is no "Grosse Point Blank". John Cusack played a character that had the conviction of a cold-blooded killer. It's a trait that Spencer needs to make his transformation into a pillar of the community mean something.… Expand
  3. ReelWorld
    Jun 5, 2010
    0
    Can we finally be done with Ashton Kutcher and his utter lack of talent for acting? I hear the Razzies calling Ashton - best run back to your Mommy - I mean wife!
  4. Chrisl.
    Jun 8, 2010
    4
    There was good acting on the whole by lead actors. But the screenplay lacked depth and suprises. Its with an avoidable feeling one comes after watching it.
  5. JohnD
    Jun 11, 2010
    1
    Terrible movie and lousy acting. Kutcher is just a joke. Totally not believable. Two very annoying people in the leads. Don't waste a cent on this stinker.
  6. IvanO
    Jun 13, 2010
    2
    Ashton kutcher fails as an action star, the movie itself is really corny and moronic, the movie had its few funny moments and thats because of Rob riggle, nothing else is funny here.
  7. AndrewR
    Jun 6, 2010
    1
    Bad Movie, Bad, bad Movie. I didn't believe one second of this movie. That being said Cathrine O'Hara does her best to save her scenes and is very funny here. Kutcher, on the other hand should probably consider another profession.
  8. PeterJ.
    Jun 7, 2010
    2
    I went out on a date with this girl last night and I asked her what she wanted to see. I was hoping she would have chosen anything but this one. Hell, I would have rather sat through Sex and the City 2. But she chose this one. It was one of the most horrible films I have seen in years. And I've seen some pretty bad movies. I gave it a two simply because the girl from Grey's Anatomy is hot.… Expand
  9. KevinG
    Jun 25, 2010
    0
    Ashton Kutcher sucks and he was the best thing about this film. Heigl should have never given up her day job; she can't act her way out of a paper bag.
  10. eliteco3
    Jan 16, 2011
    2
    Kutcher and Heigl have the on screen chemistry comparable to a Hannah Montana episode. Heigl plays a familar role for her in the unassuming curious unintelligent brunette. The "suave" Kutcher totally fails at attempting ot play a vicious killer. After the meandering plot scatters around looking for some substance or direction you are left wondering if this is a movie at all. Weak bland character development hits home like a game winning touchdown.… Expand
  11. jimmytancredi
    May 29, 2011
    3
    I was disappointed. I love the Katherine Heigl movies, but in the end I was like: "Okay, so it was just that?". I did not like the concept of this movie. Ashton Kutcher and Katherine Heigl had a good chemistry, but the plot is weak even the movie is cool.
  12. aaronpaul121
    May 24, 2012
    0
    The worst acting performance (in a movie) I've seen in my entire life. Kutcher is incredibly terrible in this one. His performance was the worst by an actor. The title does not fit to the whole (terribly bad) plot of the movie. One of the worst movies I've ever watched.................
  13. Hasriona
    Jul 21, 2011
    0
    Because I accidentally gave it a 10...a 0 should average it out. And just to affirm, a rubbish film with terrible acting and no excessively fun moments.
  14. dev92
    Aug 24, 2012
    1
    What an awful film. How could anyone have read this script and thought it would be good? I really dislike Heigl's acting (she tried her best to ruin Knocked Up) and with a poor script she stood no chance. Ashton Kutcher was below his normal standards too meaning this film was doomed. Also, the whole spy story film has been worn out and only the best can really succeed in this genre.
  15. cameronmorewood
    Nov 7, 2012
    1
    You're kidding right? Who the hell even thought up this mess?
  16. worleyjamers
    Dec 8, 2012
    2
    Not very good, one of the worst films of 2010. What could have been a fun and charming action/comedy flick, Killers is nothing more than an awkward, careless, silly, and unbelievable film that fails miserably. Kutcher and Heigl are totally awkward, lacking chemistry, Tom Selleck and Catherine O'Hara are terribly annoying as the parents, and the entire supporting cast is strange. Skip!

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
21 out of 100

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 22 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 22
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 22
  3. Negative: 19 out of 22
  1. Entertainment Weekly
    Reviewed by: Lisa Schwarzbaum
    25
    The steady drip-drip-drip of nothings like this are killing us all.
    Read full review
  2. Tampa Bay Times
    Reviewed by: Steve Persall
    16
    Everybody's cyber-pal Ashton Kutcher is perfect casting for Killers, since the screenplay is shallow as a Tweet and the movie appears to have been shot with a Nikon point-and-click camera he plugs on TV.
    Read full review
  3. Variety
    Reviewed by: Rob Nelson
    10
    Bullets fly and jokes land with a thud in Killers, a deadly dull hubby's-a-hit man farce that alternately resembles a knockoff of 2005's "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" and a rehash of "Knight & Day" avant la lettre .
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »