Paramount Pictures | Release Date: March 23, 2007
7.9
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 291 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
229
Mixed:
47
Negative:
15
Watch Now
Buy On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
6
ShawnC.Apr 9, 2007
Is it great? No. Is it enjoyable? Sure. Wahlberg is always better in weirder roles, but he certainly fits in the role of an angered veteran intent on getting even. It's pretty much exactly what you would expect.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
PatrickC.May 8, 2007
Shooter was an entertaining film. It had an interesting story, Marky Mark had another good performance following the Departed and the action was rock solid. Although Danny Glover must retire. He was awful in Saw and has an equally awful Shooter was an entertaining film. It had an interesting story, Marky Mark had another good performance following the Departed and the action was rock solid. Although Danny Glover must retire. He was awful in Saw and has an equally awful performance in Shooter. If you can get passed his performance you might be able to fully enjoy the action packed thrill ride that is Shooter. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
HotelCentralMar 9, 2019
This is a pretty good action flick which benefits from the excellent work of Levon Helm as a backwoods firearms expert, and Ned Beatty as a very corrupt US senator. Unfortunately, this is also a film that will confirm all the worstThis is a pretty good action flick which benefits from the excellent work of Levon Helm as a backwoods firearms expert, and Ned Beatty as a very corrupt US senator. Unfortunately, this is also a film that will confirm all the worst suspicions of right-wing paranoids who are already convinced that the US government is their worst enemy and Muslims are not far behind.

There is of course one major flaw. The bad guys are looking for someone to use as a fall guy in an assassination. So who do they hire? They want the best sniper on the planet. So how about Bob Lee Swagger? Good pick. Except for the "fact" that the last guys who hired Swagger, and betrayed him, were all hunted down and killed by Swagger. Is this really the guy you want to betray? Well, if you're an arrogant maniac, why the hell not?

On the plus side, the finale gets dragged out because of course our hero has to stop short of taking justice into his own hands until he's given the government a chance to do the right thing, but of course that doesn't work out so the inevitable shoot down is merely delayed.

I'd give the film a 7 if not for the political aspect catering to the extremists in the audience--which seems a deliberate choice.
Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
5
ChadS.Mar 26, 2007
Mark Wahlberg's character simply doesn't make any sense. Bob Lee Swagger is like a composite of left- and right-wing sensibilities in an effort on the filmmaker's part to be fair and balanced. This millitary sniper is no naif; Mark Wahlberg's character simply doesn't make any sense. Bob Lee Swagger is like a composite of left- and right-wing sensibilities in an effort on the filmmaker's part to be fair and balanced. This millitary sniper is no naif; he knows our government regularly lies to it people, but still he participates in a reconnaisance mission that should smell trouble to any conspiracy paranoiac who surfs the web and owns a copy of the "9/11 Commission Report". Swagger should be G.I. Joe, not Oliver Stone. After "Shooter" is through evoking our memories of the J.F.K. assasination, this film goes formulaic on us, on fugitive-on-the-run autopilot. The torture scenes are ugly, as are the exploding body parts and liberal bombast. "Shooter" would've made more sense(for the sake of a character arc) had Swagger turned into Rambo after the frame job; but he's cynical from the first frame rather than having an unequivocally patriotic relationship with his country, which would've made for better drama when the shadow government attempts to patsy him. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MarkB.Mar 27, 2007
Stephen Hunter, on whose novel Point of Impact this is based, is not only a crack writer of thrillers, but in his other life is one of the sharpest, wittiest and most perceptive movie critics currently working. (His Washington Post reviews Stephen Hunter, on whose novel Point of Impact this is based, is not only a crack writer of thrillers, but in his other life is one of the sharpest, wittiest and most perceptive movie critics currently working. (His Washington Post reviews are frequently displayed on this site--see for yourself!) Hunter is a military buff, a gun enthusiast and a political conservative, but unlike certain other Republican movie reviewers we could name (are you listening, Michael Medved? Didn't think so.) Hunter doesn't feel the need to have his personal politics seep into and dominate every word he writes; he's perfectly capable of appreciating and enjoying the skill with which Barbara Koppel made the Dixie Chicks documentary Shut Up & Sing while still thinking that singer Natalie Maines is a loudmouth blowhard, even though he undoubtedly knows that Koppel and Maines are on the same ideological page. And his novels, most of which center on either ex-Marine sniper Bob Lee Swagger or his Mississippi police sergeant father Earl, are catnip even for someone like me who's bored silly by Robert Ludlum and Tom Clancy; if you buy or borrow any of them, prepare to take the next day off from work because they're truly unputdownable. That's why Shooter, in which Bob Lee (Mark Wahlberg) is duped by the US government into masterminding an assassination that's intended to go awry but instead goes in an entirely different direction that leaves him a scapegoat and a fugitive, is surprising on two different levels. First off, no big-studio movie since The Constant Gardener (which was actually released through Universal's boutique label, Focus) has been this blatant in shouting its take on America's less-than-completely-altruistic overseas activities, which no doubt will make this a discomfiting night at the movies for those who believe that the last conspiracy our government was involved in had to do with hiding Bill's Whitewater documents and Monica's dress. That's no cinematic sin, however, no matter what your political stripe, but being utterly mediocre, generic and boring is another story...and unfortunately, except for an expository scene involving an old geezer and gun expert (rocker Levon Helm, who's just wonderful here and whose delivery is very reminiscent of the late, lamented Richard Farnsworth) and a bloody climactic shootout in which Swagger manages to disarm his enemies, Shooter is sadly guilty. And Wahlberg, who fully deserved all the praise and the Oscar nomination he got as the theatrically foulmouthed cop in The Departed, is completely wrong as Bob Lee. In Hunter's books, he's a bigger than life, mythic, strong-but-silent figure, an amalgam of John Fenimore Cooper's Deerslayer, John Ford's The Ringo Kid, Sergio Leone's and Clint Eastwood's The Man With No Name and Sly Stallone's John Rambo, but as Wahlberg plays him, he's a muscled pretty boy who gets a little smudged. And Wahlberg doesn't even TRY to get the Southern accent--but don't worry, overactress Kate Mara, as a buddy's widow who offers him refuge, does enough of one for both of them. Trendily grimy cinematography (even in the outdoor scenes) and director Antoine Fuqua's sloppy storytelling (he shows Wahlberg and Mara preparing their defense with rows of cans of whipped cream but neglects to tell us what they're for, and I doubt that they're using the stuff for a kinky breather from the action) make me anxious for Hunter the film critic to avenge the crime done to Hunter the novelist by opening up an even bigger can of you-know-what on the moviemakers who trashed his work than Bob Lee Swagger does on those who betrayed HIM. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
TyranianApr 12, 2020
Wahlberg is as dependable as ever but the plot quickly loses logic and coherency after a good setup.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
RolentoAug 31, 2014
Was this movie made by some sort of location-freak? Was it all an excuse to show me different parts of america or something? Because other than that, all I've seen is a mediocre plot and an ending that didn't make the hero look either like aWas this movie made by some sort of location-freak? Was it all an excuse to show me different parts of america or something? Because other than that, all I've seen is a mediocre plot and an ending that didn't make the hero look either like a good guy or an anti-hero or a bad guy, it was just stupid and wrong and, I don't know, edgy?

Action movie my ass, if they were aiming for something not particularly deep but full of action they would have definitely cut on that stupid plot going on interrupting the movie every two seconds. Not that I'd have preferred it that way, I'm just saying that this fails both as an action movie or a plot-driven movie. Literally what the hell did I just watch.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
SpangleJul 28, 2013
The plot is definitely not plausible at all, but yet it was entertaining. The acting was good and there was definitely plenty of action. This is not a great film, but it is still very good entertainment.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
WriteFilmLive21Dec 1, 2012
To first address the pros, "Shooter" is an engrossing and well-made thriller following a military sniper's chaotic leave of retirement after he's deceived into a new assignment and finds himself on the run from corrupt government officials.To first address the pros, "Shooter" is an engrossing and well-made thriller following a military sniper's chaotic leave of retirement after he's deceived into a new assignment and finds himself on the run from corrupt government officials. Mark Wahlberg is decent in his role as the ex-soldier turned fugitive, and Danny Glover's performance is fairly engaging, while Michael Pena is largely forgettable and unconvincing as an FBI agent who is somewhat messily pulled into the fray. The action can also be fun at times.

However, ultimately, "Shooter" lost me with its dark, cynical and corrupt atmosphere. Whatever its true purpose, the film paints government as an evil and ruthless mugshot on our wall. Our villains, who lack any discernible thread of humanity or therefore plausibility, are perhaps two of the more callous and heartless government officials you'll find in a film, and they are virtually the only piece of government focused on in the film. There is a brief snapshot of attempted justice near the end, but that is conveniently written through a loose legal loophole to make way for a quick and bloody finale of retribution, so in the end I suppose the message is to be a vigilante and ignore all the rules since Big Brother is apparently no more than a sexually abusive, mass-murdering thug.

I can't say if it was the movie's intention to be so pointed in its presentation, but "Shooter" is nonetheless a pointedly pessimistic film, and for me its scowling nature wasn't quite up my alley.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews