Nome in codice: Banshee

The story is basic but so many holes send in a team to do a job all get killed then ask next team how many they have and they say enough but they again got killed. The film was a special kind of stupid planned operation just burn the house down it was good enough for Winston Churchill.

Usual revenge story but not very well done. Macho woman verses big hard Scottish man, predictable result in a poor thriller. Usual cliche's for this genre. Give it a miss, get's a three because there is a lot of action in it, albeit predictable and poorly staged.

Tiresome dialogue, weak action performed by underprepared actors. If you can't hold an automatic at arms length without shaking, you may not want to portray a seasoned assassin. Just saying. Antonio Banderas should have passed on this one. His part in Stallone's "Expendables" was 10 times better than his character in this one. Just sad.

I gave it 2 stars only because it did have Banderas in it and the short preview I saw looked promising. Fool me once and all that... I'll never get the time or my $9 back on this one. Wish I'd checked these reviews first.

And why do they require a minimum of 600 characters in these reviews? In this case I'm forced to ramble on much longer than needed.

I'm not a rich man, but I'm betting I could have paid Antonio Banderas more to come make omelettes in my own kitchen than they paid him to make this God-awful direct-to-dvd garbage. 2nd worst movie I've seen all year. Seriously made me consider making movies with my cellphone if there's actually profit to be had in creating this stuff.

Who selected these actors, and why does Banderas do this garbage? He can clearly do that better.

The main actress should consider whether she wants to continue playing at the level, or should rather take on easier roles. She holds the weapon like a beginner and embodies the assassin very badly. The close combat scenes were hidden in the dark. Were you so bad that this was necessary?