User reviews

John Woo's "The Killer" 2024 had been highly anticipated by action movie enthusiasts and fans of the director's previous works. However, upon watching it, one can't help but feel a sense of disappointment. This film falls short on several fronts.

First and foremost, the plot was unimaginative and predictable after the first main action scene. It seems as if the filmmakers were trying to be overly complex in an attempt to create a deep and engaging narrative. Instead, it results in a jumbled mess that leaves the audience uninterested. There are too many subplots and twists that don't add much value to the overall story. For instance, a side story involving a character's personal vendetta takes up a significant amount of screen time but fails to contribute meaningfully to the main plot.

The character development is also lacking. The protagonist, who is supposed to be a complex and intriguing anti-hero, comes across as one-dimensional. We don't get a sense of her motivations or inner conflicts beyond the surface-level action. The supporting characters are equally underdeveloped, with little to no backstory or personality. This makes it difficult for the audience to connect with or care about any of the characters.

Another major issue is the action sequences. While John Woo is known for his stylish and intense action scenes, in "The Killer" 2024, they seem repetitive and lack the innovation and excitement of his earlier works. The gunfights and choreographed fights are predictable and don't offer any new or fresh elements. It feels like we've seen these same types of action scenes countless times before. Pigeons, doves, churches etc.

The pacing of the film is off as well. There are long stretches where not much happens, and then suddenly there's an explosion of action that feels rushed. This uneven pacing makes it hard for the audience to stay engaged throughout the movie. A woman of 5.7 135lb beating a 6 foot 220lbs man in unarmed combat is still unbelievable.

Furthermore, the cinematography, which is usually a highlight in Woo's films, is unimpressive in this one. The lighting and color palette don't create the mood and atmosphere that one would expect from a John Woo movie.

In conclusion, "The Killer" 2024 is a letdown. With its boring and predictable plot, underdeveloped characters, repetitive action sequences, off pacing, and lackluster cinematography, it fails to live up to the expectations set by John Woo's previous masterpieces. It's a movie that leaves the audience longing for the director's past glory days and wondering what went wrong.

The main actress had a kick ass image. The camera simply loves her. But is she a killer?

It just doesn't work. The film cliches start thick and fast and soon go into overdrive. By the end the film is dripping in old camera angles, dull fight scenes and amateur plot lines. It is desperate to be an action film. But it is just a parody of one.

The acting talent is high. And the Director used to be known for blockbusters. But I can't help but feel they have all dropped in the rankings creating this 'straight to VHS' nothing burger.

The story is ridiculous. It literally makes no sense. A whole killing empire brought down for no good reason. All the silent pro killing replaced with amateur battles that are disproportionate to the problem. The solutions just making it worse for no good reason.

This film is bad. Comically bad. By the end you will be questioning whether it is the same John Woo. Or just budget retired one.

Not recommended 💩

I had to stop after 50min where I couldn't take it anymore, I mean it might be for someone but not for me.

John Woo has a style and I respect that! However I'm not sure if I would still have stomach for that in 2024, nearly 30 years after Faceoff.

You might ask how about the story then? Enough to know that a Killer with misplaced conscious caused a lot of civilians to die to avoid one particular civilian to die because she was against killing civilians. I know it's stupid. But that's the main theme, at least up until I said enough is enough. The plot has so many wholes and it looks so fake that even popular faces couldn't save it for me.

Do not waste your precious life with this movie, Mr Woo, please grow up.

I don't know how many action clichés John Woo made and then piled up during his carrier, but I guess a lot. This picture is really like mocking himself. Probably, rather than maybe, he is. Well, it is a remake of his own film, once considered pioneer of modern action movies, but it does nothing original at all. Rather, it delivers basically the same but with much less intensity, commitment and flair. The soul of the original is absent. There is no fire in it, just ember - to say the least. The characters are good but apparently most of them are restricted, blocked even, to show raw emotions (with the exception of Cantona). It is a weak remake, as they usually are.

Set in Paris, Zee (Nathalie Emmanuel) is an assassin who takes on assignments in the Parisian criminal underworld from her handler Finn (Sam Worthington) operating on a strict code of honor and a bedrock rule that no civilians are to be harmed. During one of her assignments, an American singer named Jenn Clark (Diana Silvers) suffers a blow to the back of the head that renders her blind. Against orders from Finn and her client, Zee spares Jenn. Meanwhile, driven police inspector Sey (Omar Sy) investigates crime lord Gobert (Eric Cantona) and his ties with Saudi prince Bin Faheem (Said Taghmaoui) in a case involving a robbery of Bin Faheem's plane that puts him on a collision course with Zee and Jenn.

The Killer is the long in development remake of John Woo's 1989 Hong Kong film of the same name. Attempts at adapting the film date as far back as the early 90s where Woo's producer and former friend Tsui Hark sold the rights to Tri-Star Pictures and cut him out of the proceeds per a grudge he held towards Woo over A Better Tomorrow II's production. Walter Hill had briefly been attached to a version that would've featured Richard Gere and Denzel Washington as the leads but concerns apparently arose from Tri-Star executives that American audiences would interpret the relationship between the assassin and cop characters as "homoerotic" which lead to the decision to gender flip one of the roles. After extensive re-writes this project fizzled out and another attempt would be made in the mid-2000s by John H. Lee for a version which would be filmed in 3D. In 2015, John Woo himself became attached to direct the remake having taken a hiatus from Hollywood and the action genre to dabble in period epics like Red Cliff and The Crossing. On his decision to direct The Killer remake, Woo stated that his intention with this point in his career was to make movies in other countries as it gave him an opportunity to experience and work with new cultures and settings. The Killer doesn't escape the long shadow cast by its 1989 original, but it's perfectly serviceable even if it doesn't reach the pinnacle of Woo's work.

In terms of the kind of movie Woo's remake of The Killer is, Nathalie Emmanuel and Omar Sy do well in the roles of Zee and Sey respectively as The Killer sees Woo playing the material in a slightly lighter fashion in comparison to the heroic bloodshed melodrama that had characterized Woo's work in A Better Tomorrow and The Killer. When watching The Killer 2024, it feels very much like a man out of time as many elements like Woo's usage of split screens, to the dialogue, to even some character types like Sam Worthington's Finn feel like they've stepped out of that early 90s school of action filmmaking as in comparsion to the recent wave of action films The Killer feels much more over-the-top and tongue in cheek in comparison to other films of its ilk such as the John Wick films which have cited Woo and the original The Killer as a creative influence. In terms of its plot the film is less of a character study and seems to sidestep any attempts at heavier themes as there's a considerable amount of time dedicated to tracing a missing shipment of heroin and many have pointed out (not without reason) that the film feels less like Woo capturing his glory days and more like he's making his own version of those mid-2000 Europacorp action thrillers that Luc Besson made.

The Killer doesn't come anywhere close to Woo's original classic, but it's not an embarrassment either as Woo still shows some passion in his filmmaking all these years later. Maybe I'm being kinder to this film than I should, but after seeing The Crow remake this weekend I just can't be that hard on this movie because it's still got Woo's style in it albeit with less intensity and guerilla grit than his early work.

I have done my share of reviews here and, over the years, I have developed a very special fondness for actors and directors trying to recreate their salad days. What we have here, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is nothing more and nothing less than a brilliant impresario, almost 80 years old, gently reminding the rest of the world ... "Hey .. you know those film tropes and set pieces you take for granted now? Well, thing is, I #^$^ invented them." This is the way of it. You can't go home again, and you can't get younger. Ridley Scott has never come close to the brilliance of Alien 1 or Blade Runner 1. Stallone has never duplicated the original Rocky vibe. Eastwood has never been as good as he was when he trusted Leone to direct him. And The Pastor Currently Known as Bob Joyce no longer boasts the legendary 3-octave voice he once had -- but that has not stopped him from singing! Was ever thus. Enjoy this film for what it is, let's not critisize it for what it is not. ((Designated "IMDb Top Reviewer." Please check out my list "167+ Nearly-Perfect Movies (with the occasional Anime or TV miniseries) you can/should see again and again (1932 to the present))

I realise that John Woo is an iconic director, mainly because of his run of funky HK triad gunslinger movies, but whoever put this remake together skimped on the screenwriting, and the script. The direction is ok, but with the nagging feeling that the hourly rate there was also well shy of inspirational.

Every cliched character and trite line of dialogue feels disconnected, existing in isolation, awaiting their brief memetime on Tik Tok and Youtube.

Even the action felt kinda perfunctory, like a cheap sequel filmed in a hurry by an inferior production crew, with no sense of pride in their accomplishments. "Two more flash-cut car chases, an MMA ruck in a public space, a slow-mo bullet time shootout, and we're done, chaps".

What it resembles, more than anything, is a low-budget 80s Eurocrime actioner, with a mismatched Euro-cast, and a script straight out of Babelfish, tarted up in post to look vaguely modern. Unfortunately, it ends up looking like a badly animated storyboard.

It is time that we viewers take a stand against this type of movie. It is made directly for a streaming service. For anyone who has not yet noticed, the great majority of movies made for streaming services are low-quality, recycled ideas. Like this one.

The director is John Woo. I can't fault him entirely, he is responsible for such fine movies as the 2003 "Paycheck", the 2000 "Mission Impossible", and a few others. He is a good director and needs work.

But this movie, "The Killer", features Nathalie Emmanuel as assassin Zee. She hesitates on a kill and therefore becomes the hunted. There is absolutely nothing novel in this story or the way the movie is made. It uses all the tired tropes of this genre of movie and substitutes guns and more guns for good story.

What is this obsession with guns, guns, and more guns in movies? Is this what the producers think audiences want? I say, let's all take a stand and demand better. Let's reject this type of movie, they are not entertaining and not worth our time.

Less than a year after he returned to American action with Silent Night, John Woo is back with a "reimagining" of sorts of his 1989 action classic, The Killer. I guess if anyone is going to remake your film, why not make it yourself?

While it falls a tad short of the original, this new iteration is a TON of fun. Thanks to some explosive action sequences and two charming performances from Nathalie Emmanuel and Omar Sy, The Killer (2024) has the 77-year-old John Woo operating in his wheelhouse and delivering some of the coolest action you'll see this year. It's just a shame this went straight to Peacock, because that rollicking finale would've been even more of a blast to see on the big screen.

The original starring Chow-Yun Fat was amazing. This is not as good. Still fun. Has Nathalie Emmanuel, Omar Sy, Said Taghmaoui, Gregory Mandel, Sam Wirthington all great actors. Too bad this script doesn't live up to the original. They tried. Setting it in Paris was a nice idea. But, the rest could have been done better.

There is humour in this version. They probably could have done this somewhere else. London? Or Amsterdam? I imagine that Hong Kong was much too expensive.

Again, overall, this version is okay. It definitely could have been better. It has been updated, obviously. But, not as well as it could have. Worth the watch. Just don't expect it to be the original.

Let's start with...if you're a fan of the original The Killer 1989, then you will absolutely hate this movie. It's just downright silly. This is 2 hours I will never get back. The action is made for tv movie bad. The acting is lazy. I feel like if you are remaking a classic, maybe Peacock is the wrong way to go. Nathalie Emmanuel who plays the tittle role really doesn't belong here. She never convinces the audience that she is The Killer. There is no chemistry between her and Omar Sy who plays the cop. I guess Sam Worthington got the day off from filming Avatar and somewhat phoned in his part of the villain. Please skip this and watch anything else. Actually, you can catch the original The Killer (1989) on some streaming services. Highly recommend that movie.

The bad

This movie continues the legacy of pretending women are equal or stronger than men, that a 100 lbs woman can toss around and beat 200+ lbs men. The leads are also of the "diverse" kind and the main villain is White. So far goes 'the message' of this movie. There are also several inconsistencys that makes you go 'lol' but its not a kill shot.

The good

The story is simple but with enough twists to make it interesting to watch. The acting is also quite good as is the music and the picture, but the directing is really what makes this movie worth watching, its the camera angles, the closeups and the way it follows the story, its great. The fight scenes are also really good and slowed down so you get to see what happends.

With that said, this movie is quite forgetable, there is no real depth or unique displays that sets this movie apart, no exciting sex scenes, show of skin or mind, your eyes will stay dry and your heart wont jump or race, but it can keep you happy in a dull moment.

7/10⭐

You have the killer, Zee, and the police detective, Sey. Zee is sent to a place where no one in the room is to be allowed to live. And she can be depended to do her job very well. But she also will not kill an innocent civilian. But in the shoot out in the room, the singer hits her head, and is blinded. So apparently that fed into her sympathy for the woman, and the decision not to kill her. And Zee feels she doesn't know anything, so is innocent. Naturally, those who sent her to do the job don't like a loose ends. She is ordered to kill her, and when she manages to sneak into the woman's hospital room, along comes Sey, to ask questions. Sey is quite smart, and actually an honest cop, and their paths cross a lot. It is somewhat predictable, and there are a lot of action scenes and shoot outs. What I felt redeemed the film is really the last act. Those scenes are choreographed well, and there is a lot of action and suspense. And plenty of blood is spilled. So it comes down did I have enough fun watching it to feel I was not robbed of my time. Yes.

I enjoy a good straigh forward action movie but this was just complete nonsense. When you have a movie with such a dumb plot you need lots of good action to keep the audience from thinking about the stupid plot too much. This movie barely has any action and the action it has is mediocre at best. The acting is also mediocre at best. I liked the main actress, she had a good style to her and the black cop as well. The few scenes they had together where some of the best. This definitely had potential, there is some great camera work and stuns here and there but is just too little to keep your entretain.

I just got done watching The Killer (2024), the remake to the John Woo 1989 movie of the same name, and it was okay enough.

Positives for The Killer (2024): Nathalie Emmanuel gives a great performance as the main character of Zee and honestly I've always loved this actress especially during her time in Game of Thrones (2011-2019). I also really liked both Omar Sy and Sam Worthington in this movie. I enjoyed the chemistry between Nathalie Emmanuel and Omar Sy. And finally, the action sequences in this movie are spectacular which isn't surprising given that John Woo is the director of this movie and he knows how to shoot action in his movie.

Negatives for The Killer (2024): This movie sadly doesn't have the heart and soul of the original 1989 classic. A big part of the reason is that this is a streaming movie and that doesn't help this movie at all.

Overall, The Killer 92024) is an okay enough action movie and I would highly recommend that you go watch the original from 1989.

Hard to believe this is John Woo movie. Perhaps he doesn't care much more about the script and it's all about style and filming and little else. Every cliche is pulled out of movie history, as our hardened killer has mercy on the innocent girl. It was put together to also present the battle of the non non binary lesbians. It's not meant to be a slight on lgbtq people, there was just no reason to have them in there and it is never explained. Some nonsense about the beating of Sam worthington's heart, in his attempt to do an Irish accent.

All the good reviews here are fake. This is a shell of what good films used to be. You seen it all before and just much better done.

Let's pretend for a moment that this is not a John Woo movie and lets pretend I had never seen the 1989 masterpiece at least ten times. Under this light, anyone not giving a 6 minimum and above is just being unnecessary cruel to a fun film.

Is it a masterpiece? No.

Is it fun to watch? Yes!

Do I like the cast, I do! There are camera shots that are simply wonderful. I have some nuances but i'm being picky.

Could the script have been better? Absolutely!

Was it really that bad? No, it's an action movie, it could have been much worse and still be fun to watch.

Did I leave the cinema happy and smiling? I did, so therefore a good movie!

Was I looking for a pigeon scene? Yes I was, and although it wasn't the one I expected, it was good enough for me.

Now to be picky, the sidestory was probably sacrificed on the cutting floor. It screams at some point too much screentime and then suddenly not enough, or at least this is how I feel about it.

The main actress is very good in all things but in my eyes fails to deliver the pro killer feel. I have a distinct feel she was not coached properly, because she delivered everything else.

The copper was so very good (although cliched) that I was always happy to see him enter the screen.

Cinematography had few original things but it still was a John Woo movie, I could have picked it out easily as one of his, make no mistake.

I see no point for all this hate I see in some reviews, my simple denominator, remains Was I bored? No.

Was it fun? Yes.

Therefore, far from a masterpiece but still a good movie to watch.

If it wasn't plastered all over the place that this was his remake I would have screamed that it was sacrilege. But indeed it was Mr. Woo's feeble attempt to rejuvenate his 1989 hit. I don't recall much of that film so this was a fresh viewing for me without any expectations. The movie delivered on the low expectations. It was criminally boring for an action movie. The fight scenes and cinematography that is synonymous with Mr. Woo were watered down and lacked any punch.

I felt the setting was wrong, the actors were wrong and the story was extremely weak. This left the action scenes to carry the burden of the movie. This too fell flat and I was just wishing the credits would start rolling already. If this was a categorized as a B movie I'd give it 4.

Zee (Nathalie Emmanuel) is an assassin in Paris. Finn (Sam Worthington) is her mentor, savior, and handler. Zee walks into a room full of gangsters with a samurai sword and massacres the lot. He takes pity on lounge singer Jenn (Diana Silvers) who hit her head and has gone blind. Finn insists that she kills the girl anyways. She goes to the hospital to finish the job. Police detective Sey (Omar Sy) is on the case and has come to interview the victim.

Filmmaker John Woo is remaking one of his great movies. It's been 35 years. To bird or not to bird. It's fine if he wants to use pigeons as motif for this movie. I would simply ask him to not use slow motion in those scenes. It may have been cool 35 years ago. Since then, guys like Zack Snyder has abused slow motion to such an extent that it's not even cliché. Its use in non-action scenes has been reduced to camp. It's not John Woo's fault, but it is his problem. He cannot remake his classic into camp.

I have minor issues with some of the writing. No one believes finding heroine bricks in the police station. As for No One, it sounds silly. It is silly that Sey is writing it out on paper. I thought an interesting alias could be Fat. Why not make it Zee Fat? They could make a joke about the name. Sure, Chow is his last name, but that could be another joke. Just get away from No One.

John Woo is a pioneer in the HK over-stylized action genre. He could stay relevant in the field today. I would like him to stop repeating all his trademark moves. At least, do them with a fresh eye. Another small issue, Emmanuel needs to hold her gun more steadily. She is drifting too much when she needs to be rock solid. Otherwise, she's cool enough to play the role.

I'm truly stunned. I cannot for the life of me fathom why a director who created a masterpiece 35 years ago (at the time of writing) would remake his own highly lauded piece of art into this utterly vacant, vapid and forgettable rubbish. Why?? I realise Mr John Woo is advancing in years and may not have the passion he once did. And certainly it shows in this film, that he must have been thoroughly bored to re-tread something he had done before and infinitely better in order to produce what we see here.

Absolutely nothing about this reboot/remake is characteristic of Mr Woo's work. None of the multi-angle slow motion operatic ballet of violence from the original film can be seen here. None of the emotional and melodramatic depth of the original film, whose story was simpler but more profound and compelling in its execution, is experienced here. The economical and meaningful dialogue from the original is now replaced with unnecessarily verbose, inane and cringeworthy lines. Deeper themes such as honour and loyalty that would bring antagonists characters in his earlier works together in mutual admiration are totally absent here. The violence is unimpactful and painted with CG squibs. Even the practical blood looks like bright red paint, the kind they used in westerns in the 60s and 70s. The cinematography is bland and dull. It genuinely looks like a TV movie from the 1990s directed by a novice.

The setting in France seems to have inspired a slight goofiness and unnecessary forced humour to the picture, including the score, typical of French action comedies. To say nothing of the obvious continuity errors and poor editing. The entire picture screams laziness and indifference.

Most of the individual cast members don't have the gravitas or charisma to provide or carry the emotional weight that might make the story more interesting to watch. The lead actress is frankly miscast and probably for reasons of DEI agendas. The actress playing the singer has little to do and is mostly annoying, and without the deep emotional connection between her character and the killer that was so central to the thrust of the original film there is no reason for the audience to care about their journey.

I will admit that John Woo's original Killer is a film I have seen many times and am happy to call one of my favourites, and I knew that I would be disappointed to see this new version. Most films made for streaming are mediocre by design, and this one is no exception, arriving without any notice or fanfare. And it is easy to see why. Whether it was a contractual obligation or a financial incentive Mr Woo seemed to sleepwalking his way through directing it. A great shame.

Please do yourself a favour and skip this awful and embarrassing travesty and watch the original Killer from 1989. You will thank me.

Where the original was a bombastic melodrama of violence and honor, this update is a distinctly European ballet of bloodshed and redemption. It owes as much to Woo's own films as it does those of Luc Besson. This version is elegant with a feminine touch. It's a battle of the sexes, with a parade of brutish men (good and bad) rampaging through Paris and a sleek female assassin killing by a moral code.

This Killer is given more motivation and backstory than her predecessor in the original film and we understand what kind of person she is and what motivates her. Woo's signature style and meticulously choreographed set pieces remain impressive but what both hurts and helps the film is the lack of grit. Woo's characters are near indestructible in his Hong Kong films, riddled with bullet holes before succumbing. Instead of thematic masculine power, there is agility and grace from our heroine. Yet it's all too clean and talky which defuses a the desperation that made the original pulse pounding.

That is not to say it isn't entertaining. There's a banter between the cop and the killer that is a game of chess rather than the borderline testosterone bond of rye original. There's a distinct French style which is fitting considering Woo's original The Killer was heavily influenced by the French classic Le Samourai. The acting is universally strong, there is more story and interesting twists than the original and the action (although there should be more of it) is very good. Finally the conclusion is far more satisfying. The finale is good but no where at the level of Woo's fantastic original film's finale but the final moments of epilogue is less oppressive. Or maybe the two different styles just required different resolutions.

It's a very cool movie but with less urgency than its predecessor. It has new twists and turns and is a very French thriller rather than a Hong Kong one. Don't dismiss it. Woo proves he still has much to offer and even this far into his career is open to attempting new tricks.

Does John Woo's artsy style get in the way of a movie's flow. Yes. It makes movies longer than they really have to be. I'm actually surprised he's still working. He has to be like 70-80 years old. That said, I think there's something worthwhile about this movie. The plot is interesting and it has entertainment value. I had no problems staying engaged and interested through the entire movie. There are two things that you need to do before you watch this movie. You need to first go into it knowing this isn't a 100% serious movie. There's some casualness to the movie that you have to get used to. You also have to suspend disbelief a little as the main character is kicking a ton of ass at what looks to be in a110lb body.