"No, Mr. Sanders. You are locked in here with me: and you just brought me mine."
Both this film and the previous Hitman adaptation with Timothy Olyphant aren't good adaptations. There's no doubt about that. This one is considered the worst of the two; the previous one was better made from a filmmaking perspective, whereas this one had a lot of visual effects, making it seem a little too artificial. Generally, the previous one was more well-put-together, although most people disliked that one, too; only this one, way more.
If you've read my review of that film, you'll know I found it serviceable. I wished it was a good adaptation because I feel like the source material, when faithfully adapted, would make for a pretty good film. I thought it could've been better on its own, but it was decent enough despite being a somewhat shoddy adaptation.
Regarding this film, I thought it wasn't as well-made, and everything about the story was a little too generic and not as atmospheric and immersive as the first film, specifically in a similar way as it was in that film. Despite that, I think I enjoyed it slightly more. It was the same outcome as before, when I watched both movies for the first time, except then, I liked this one more and rated it to the limit. Now, I care more and am more particular with that sort of thing.
Performance-wise, Rupert Friend seemed to fit the character better than Timothy Olyphant, even though the character's writing wasn't necessarily Agent 47-esque. Rupert was more properly villain-like, in the sense of having a commanding presence with a slight terrifying nature about him: as well as more monotone, which I'm pretty sure is how the character is in the games; I've never played them myself, only watched Let's Plays, and my memory of how he seems regarding that aspect is a little hazy. Timothy seemed too human. Does that make sense? But I seem to think, or remember, in a vague way, that 47 is humorous sometimes in the games, but still in a deadpan, monotone manner, and Rupert was doing so in a too (facially) expressive way, including not being monotone enough, generally; too many emotive instances. That's my only criticism.
And the other performances were decent. Hannah Ware, Zachary Quinto, Thomas Kretschmann, and Ciarán Hinds delivered decent performances. Hannah was a little one-note (more so due to the character), but she displayed noteworthy moments. Ciarán stood out the most to me, although I guess Zachary is a close second. Thomas (despite not having much screen time) had somewhat of a presence and appropriate line delivery, so he was decent, too.
While the story was generic and the filmmaking lazy, including the visual effects and whatever else: whether it has to do with the cameras used or something along those lines, that seems to be typical with multiple films (The Hitman's Bodyguard comes to mind), making them look similar, the score by Marco Beltrami, who has quite the résumé, was pretty good.
I suppose the cinematography by Óttar Guðnason was decent enough: although something about how the film felt sometimes or looked (that almost artificial look, which seemed prominent in The Hitman's Bodyguard and plenty of other films, I'm sure) isn't the way to go. And the action/fight sequences were as well.
A sequel would've been welcome. This film was enjoyable enough. Seeing Rupert Friend and Hannah Ware return to these roles for another film, especially given how the characters are close now, has an appeal to it. That hasn't happened yet, and it's been over seven years already, so it probably never will.
Review by LineageBlockedParent2018-09-02T18:59:07Z— updated 2022-07-13T19:03:01Z
"No, Mr. Sanders. You are locked in here with me: and you just brought me mine."
Both this film and the previous Hitman adaptation with Timothy Olyphant aren't good adaptations. There's no doubt about that. This one is considered the worst of the two; the previous one was better made from a filmmaking perspective, whereas this one had a lot of visual effects, making it seem a little too artificial. Generally, the previous one was more well-put-together, although most people disliked that one, too; only this one, way more.
If you've read my review of that film, you'll know I found it serviceable. I wished it was a good adaptation because I feel like the source material, when faithfully adapted, would make for a pretty good film. I thought it could've been better on its own, but it was decent enough despite being a somewhat shoddy adaptation.
Regarding this film, I thought it wasn't as well-made, and everything about the story was a little too generic and not as atmospheric and immersive as the first film, specifically in a similar way as it was in that film. Despite that, I think I enjoyed it slightly more. It was the same outcome as before, when I watched both movies for the first time, except then, I liked this one more and rated it to the limit. Now, I care more and am more particular with that sort of thing.
Performance-wise, Rupert Friend seemed to fit the character better than Timothy Olyphant, even though the character's writing wasn't necessarily Agent 47-esque. Rupert was more properly villain-like, in the sense of having a commanding presence with a slight terrifying nature about him: as well as more monotone, which I'm pretty sure is how the character is in the games; I've never played them myself, only watched Let's Plays, and my memory of how he seems regarding that aspect is a little hazy. Timothy seemed too human. Does that make sense? But I seem to think, or remember, in a vague way, that 47 is humorous sometimes in the games, but still in a deadpan, monotone manner, and Rupert was doing so in a too (facially) expressive way, including not being monotone enough, generally; too many emotive instances. That's my only criticism.
And the other performances were decent. Hannah Ware, Zachary Quinto, Thomas Kretschmann, and Ciarán Hinds delivered decent performances. Hannah was a little one-note (more so due to the character), but she displayed noteworthy moments. Ciarán stood out the most to me, although I guess Zachary is a close second. Thomas (despite not having much screen time) had somewhat of a presence and appropriate line delivery, so he was decent, too.
While the story was generic and the filmmaking lazy, including the visual effects and whatever else: whether it has to do with the cameras used or something along those lines, that seems to be typical with multiple films (The Hitman's Bodyguard comes to mind), making them look similar, the score by Marco Beltrami, who has quite the résumé, was pretty good.
I suppose the cinematography by Óttar Guðnason was decent enough: although something about how the film felt sometimes or looked (that almost artificial look, which seemed prominent in The Hitman's Bodyguard and plenty of other films, I'm sure) isn't the way to go. And the action/fight sequences were as well.
A sequel would've been welcome. This film was enjoyable enough. Seeing Rupert Friend and Hannah Ware return to these roles for another film, especially given how the characters are close now, has an appeal to it. That hasn't happened yet, and it's been over seven years already, so it probably never will.