Silencer - Sie tötet lautlos

While this film does have some very poor sound effects editing (silencers that don't, for example), it is far from a bad film, even though it's obvious it did not intend to be anything other than a B-movie.

What is most impressive is the female lead. Lynette Walden does a surprisingly good job portraying Angel, and she is the first clue that this was supposed to be a sex and action flick. However, she went far beyond that and actually made Angel at least a character, as well as someone with whom you sympathize.

Some of the sound effect editing is bad, causing the two main characters' guns to sound like some warped combination of an overloud laser blast and a normal gun, it's not that dreadfully distracting. Also, there is some silliness in part of the plot.

Again, let me point out that for a movie trying to be a B-grade show, Angel is one of the strongest female characters I have ever seen in a movie. She doesn't go whining off to her boyfriend every time she gets in trouble or gets hurt. A refreshing change from most movies which are supposed to have a heroine who can stand up for herself but ultimately requires the help of the hero.

You may have gotten an overall idea from the other comments that this film was not exactly ground-breaking. What do you expect from Crown International Pictures? There's a formula to be adhered to involving pretty girls, guns, sex, violence and nudity. So allow me to pitch in my two pennies as to the specifics.

It's always a curiosity for a female director to be at the helm of an exploitation film. Since such films generally don't deliver, sometimes one wonders whether a feminine perspective can set things right. I could practically hear the cheering section shouting, "You go girl, you Amy Goldstein, you show 'em how it's done RIGHT." It could be said director Amy Goldstein was the auteur of "The Silencer," as she was also the co-writer. Yessir, Amy Goldstein's womb was filled with "The Silencer," the film was her baby, and she has delivered... probably by Caesarean.

Not that Ms. Goldstein has gone totally wrong... she has set about creating an unusually strong female lead. (Well. The character is a hitwoman, so she can't be too much of a wuss.) There is one scene at a poolroom where she takes such a liking to a feller ("Tony"), she practically rapes him, as if to say, Ha-ha. How do you like this role reversal, buddy?

The thing is, why oh why did Ms. Goldstein choose Lynette Walden as the hitwoman, "Angie"? It's like today's films that insist on casting Hollywood pretty boys for roles involving rough-and-tumble characters. For example, I hope you don't remember the TV series version of "The Dirty Dozen," but if you're unfortunate enough to still be haunted by this memory, just compare the mostly plastic actors in that cast versus the amazing cast in the original movie. (Even "The Silencer" plays along with casting ho-hum pretty boys in the mean roles... note the corrupt vice cop - if that's what he was - who tries to shake down hookers for money... why choose an actor who has the forgettable looks of Jeff "Taxi" Conaway?)

Okay, Ms. Walden tries to look and act tough, but she opens her mouth and she sounds like she's out for a night at the mall with the rest of the girls. She's so.... regular! If you're going to make a film about an aggressive and ruthless woman, you need an actress who has some GRIT! An extreme good example is Lucy Lawless' "Xena"; a beautiful woman, certainly, but the viewer can readily believe there is some power behind her. The odds were already stacked against The Silencer's being a memorable movie, but Amy Goldstein really did herself in with her unimaginative casting choice for the lead role.

Two good casting choices: the late Morton Downey, Jr. who was so beautifully sleazy, and perfectly chosen for his villainous role in "The Silencer"; then there's Chris Mulkey, who's always a pleasure to see in films, with his eyebrow tips by the nose constantly pointing upward. I didn't know this actor by name, but you always see him in movies and television... bit parts in films like "Rambo" is where I first took note of him. Checking his body of work at the IMDB, he has been around for a while... starring (STARRING!) in a "Death Wish" type of movie all the way back in 1976 (called "Deadbeat"). He's tall and distinctive-looking, and should have become at least as well known as Michael Madsen. Why couldn't obscure Chris Mulkey have been cutting off ears in "Reservoir Dogs"? Life just isn't fair.

Surprisingly, some work actually went into the title sequence, going for a James Bond type of flair; the song helped. When the gets-lost-in-a-crowd Lynette Walden kept holding her Luger-like golden pistola with the defective silencer extension, do you know what she caused me to do? I mean, besides lowering my eyelids to half-mast? She reminded me of Christopher Lee's "Man with the Golden Gun." Maybe she reminded me more of Herve Villechaize in that film, I don't know.

In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, could somebody please tell me how Mr. Mulken's character, as the one-time lover of the far-from-intoxicating Lynette Walden (I'm not talking about her mouth-watering chest... I'm talking about Lynette Walden, the person. Please do not objectify Lynette Walden), stalking her as he does throughout the movie (Chris: the affair is over; get over it. You want to be with a dangerous woman, go after Amanda Plummer... even if her chest is not of the treasure variety)... how in the world can he see her every move from the video game machine that she seems to be getting her instructions from. Is Chris Mulkey secretly Dr. Mabuse, and is this really a science fiction film? Do not ask me to suspend my disbelief to such an outrageous extent, PLEASE, Amy Goldstein!

how can anyone not love this film? this movie goes so beyond bad it puts ed wood to shame. to think dozens of people actually put time and effort into this film, and even got paid for their "efforts," is just mind-blowing. forget camp, forget rocky horror picture show, steven segal, look who's talking too, just forget every bad film you ever saw. if you want to cry and laugh until you die convulsing on the floor, watch this film. has more cheese than the moon, worse editing and effects than 'liquid sky', more gratuitous skimpy outfits than a britney spears video, 'the silencer' is just wall-to-wall cringers.

This movie is simply quite horrible. I watch a lot of movies (typically 4-5 a week at the very least) of which many are b-movies. But i have trouble finding movies that have as few qualities as this one. The plot is non-existent and all the characters have the depth of a playing card. The effects are pretty silly, with silencers that sound like cannons, video games that give flashbacks to the eighties, completely unnecessary slow-motion sequences, and of course a score sounding like that of a b-grade porn flick.

If i should try to find anything positive to say, it´s that Lynette Walden is very nice to look at. Something that the film-makers obviously knew since they like to keep the camera showing her chest a bit too much...

All in all, this is a pathetic movie. I give it 1/10.

Give me Lara Croft (TOMB RAIDER) any time of day! You can interact with her a lot more than movies like THE SILENCER. Proving that the worldwide video game industry can be smarter and more creative than Underground Hollywood, it's a disgraceful pity. Aside from our "heroine" Angel, who shows a little life using the wimpy gun, the film suffers from one extremely fatal flaw: the silly writing. Halfway through, the stalker playing "The Silencer" apparently makes the film follow his point of view. It remains to feel more "exploitation" than basic action, and is the case with virtually all of them. I don't know why the hell they're made this way. One thing is for sure: they cash in on "adult" content more than the movies themselves. Avoid this and other female-lead "actioners" (except for Pam Grier's and LA FEMME NIKITA) at all costs to prevent further upsetting.