Sean Penn plays a reformed mercenary trying to redeem himself in the latest from ‘Taken’ director Pierre Morel
Director: Pierre Morel
Starring: Sean Penn, Idris Elba, Javier Bardem, Mark Rylance, Ray Winstone
Running time: 115 mins
Rating: 15
Release Date: 20th March 2015
TAKEN director Pierre Morel directs Sean Penn’s ex contracted special-forces triggerman pursued by a faceless presence from the past he left behind. Penn fights off various hit squads as he races around Western Europe seeking the ever elusive “truth” behind the price on his head. It sounds like quite good fun, and after checking out the supporting cast I was quite excited. Unfortunately, that was the peak of my euphoria surrounding this film.
We’ll begin with the protagonist, Jim Terrier (Penn). When we meet him he is situated in DR Congo as civil war is being brought to an end. We are shown that this would be bad for Terrier’s employers who have interests in the Congo mines, and so our “hero” is ordered to assassinate the Congo’s mining minister to keep the country in a state of brutal conflict that is claiming countless lives. Upon completing his mission, Terrier’s first and only concern is how he will now have to flee the country and leave behind his girlfriend. When we next see him, 8 years later, he is being reprimanded by his new employers for surfing on the beach. The film demands of us not only to enjoy this man’s company, but to also admire and applaud him as he spews his corny, action-flick recycled rhetoric that seems to have been written by Alan Partridge. Penn’s performance does nothing to help this: he is utterly wooden and entirely overshadowed by a brilliant supporting cast in Javier Bardem, Mark Rylance, and Idris Elba. Ray Winstone also appears, though he is playing…Ray Winstone. Penn meets his blokey mate in a smoke filtered east-end pub during a good ole game of footy, and Winstone sits clad in brown leather jacket and shirt exposed to brag chest hair and silver chain.
Through to the finish the audience would be forgiven for knowing absolutely nothing about Terrier, other than him being adept in psychopathic obfuscations of emotion. The film almost hits a good note with its background dealing in Western exploitation of developing countries, but entirely forgets this within 10 minutes before trying (and failing) to sort of bring it all back by the end. Penn is an artist who likes to lend his voice to humanitarian aid; he demands to be taken seriously. Unfortunately, all I could think when watching this was “is this the best you can do, Sean?”
When you compare this to TAKEN, which was a sincerely brilliant action flick that executed its set-up leading into some of the most exciting action sequences in recent cinema incredibly well, you really begin to understand how confused THE GUNMAN is. It can never seem to decide whether it wants to be BLOOD DIAMOND or the BOURNE franchise, and in the end plays out like a fan-fiction spin off written over a weekend.
The plot is entirely predictable and hollow. The inevitable double-cross reveal halfway through was painfully obvious when we met Terrier’s crew in the first 5 minutes of the film. If you’ve seen any amount of 90s action movies, you’re going to figure out what happens next with cringe-inducing ease.
In regard of the gender politics of this film, the one woman THE GUNMAN delivers is so painfully outdated in cinema it’s hard to believe I was watching this film in 2015. Penn’s girlfriend is almost literally a commodity tossed back and forth between the men (all of whom appear to be at least twice her age), and when she realises she’s stepped out of her depth she spends the rest of the running time panicking and sobbing under Penn’s rippling biceps. At one point she actually describes one of her romantic relationship with a man as ‘repaying’ him for rescuing her from despair.
As mentioned earlier, the supporting cast were the guilty party in leading me to have high expectations, but I must admit this is where I found merit in the film. Though I spent my time with Penn waiting for my next dose of Bardem, Rylance, or Elba, when they did appear I found myself enjoying their performances. Their characters are of course clichéd and predictable, but each performer did well enough to save the film from a one star rating. It was with particular gladness that I watched Rylance’s generous screentime, as I’ve been a huge fan of him in the theatre for years. If I had to tell what part of THE GUNMAN I am most thankful for, it would be giving Rylance exposure. It’s a pleasure to see this man’s extraordinary talent translate onto the screen, and I look forward to the next few years of his career with great anticipation and excitement.
Verdict
Two stars for fair action and decent performances from the supporting cast.
