Quick Peeks: Hitman (2007)

Just some quick thoughts on some flicks I saw on DVD this weekend.  By the nature of such viewings (especially since I got them from the library, and they were thus free), I was rather less picky than I am when seeing films in a theater, so be aware.

First I watched Hitman, which starred Tim Olyphant of Deadwood.  I dearly love that show, and Olyphant can communicate deep and barely repressed rage to a rare degree.  However, he’s not a great actor sans great writing (unlike his co-star Ian McShane), so here he’s more serviceable.  On the other hand, there’s not much an actor could do with this movie, which was amusingly stupid, even for a film based on a video game.

The titular hitman is 47 (“Where I come from, we don’t get names” he portentiously declares, one of the film’s inadvertently hilarious lines), a “ghost” of an assassin who’s been hunted over the last three years by an in intrepid Interpol agent played by Dougray “I was almost Wolverine” Scott.  Scott’s best line occurs when his hunt for 47 brings him into contact with a shady Russian spook.  This is right after an assassination attempt on the Russian president, and Scott asks the guy something like “Why’re the Russian secret police interested in this?”   It also turns out that that teams of machine-gun carrying CIA agents run around publically intercepting Interpol agents in Moscow, too, with nobody finding it worthy of much mention.

The funniest part of the film is that “ghost” assassin 47 is a bald guy in a black suit and tie with a barcode prominently tattoed on the back of his head, a fact that no one ever mentions.  In fact, 47–as his number suggests–is only of a big group of such assassins, all of whom are bald and wear black suits and ties and have barcodes prominently engraved on the back of their heads.   None of them even bother to wear hats, and yet nobody ever notices all these guys in the vicinity of all these high-profile assassinations.  Scott has been on 47’s tail for three years, and yet he never mentions 47th’s distinctive look, and apparently is unaware of it until he finally sees the guy.  (By the way, when 47 eventually decides to break off from the group, his new independence is marked by his switching from a black tie to a red one.)

Despite their not very ninja-y trademark look, the group remains so covert that it’s only known as “The Organization” and, we are told, “Nobody even knows it exists.”  Actually, I’m pretty sure the guys IN the group know it exists, but anyway.

Every movie (certainly modern ones) about the shadowy world of assassins revolves around three plots:  An assassin is given an assignment but finds himself betrayed by his client.  An assassin loses his objectivity and decides not to kill whatever incredibly admirable world figure he’s been assigned to assassinate.  An assassin decides not to kill his target because he falls in love with her.  Sometimes the plot incorporates all three of those clichés.  Here it’s mostly number one and number three. 

Said woman is played by actress Olga Kurylenko, who graduated to the lead female role in the recent Bond flick Quantum of Solace.  In this film she has a couple of nude scenes (at least on the unrated DVD), and I have to say, “Wow.”
I can’t suggest watching the film just on that basis, but it doesn’t hurt any. I will say that her burgeoning relationship with 47 is studiously unbelievable even for this sort of thing.  Their big issue is that 47 is highly sexually repressed (he was raised since a pup to be a super-assassin for the Vatican, if I was following things), a fact the film clearly finds a lot more strange than the fact that he kills hundreds of people at the drop of a hat.

Probably the biggest problem is that the action is kind of clunky and more ridiculous than ‘cool,’ especially a ludicrous ‘honor’ sword fight between 47 and three of his ex-brethren.  The film’s greatest strength, which makes it sort of watchable in that “hey, it’s a rental” fashion, is that it’s a pleasingly short 90 minutes.  Another twenty minutes and this might have been an eye-gouger, but luckily it’s pithy enough that the more laughable dumbness and the occasionally undraped Ms. Kurylenko get us through.  By the way, she also starred in the recent Max Payne, which is ten minutes longer than this and thus probably half as watchable, at best.

Hmm, that ran longer than I thought it would.  (I know, it’s shocking.)  More on the rest of the stuff later.

  • Danny

    I don’t understand why Hollywood churns out these video game movies. Most games either have all the plot of a porn film (Hitman, Max Payne, and more successfully Mortal Kombat), or big sprawling epics long enough to make an entire series out of. (Xenosaga or Suikoden, both of which actually were made into series in native Japan, though neither was all that successful). Either way, you’re either adding a plot to a series sans one, or tossing the game plot to make a whole new one (Final Fantasy: Spirits Within).

    And it’s not like they’re cashing in on the popularity. The last big-name game to get made into a movie was Final Fantasy (Which, as mentioned, changed plots and even genres from the games) in…I think 2001? Hitman was a niche game at best. Bloodrayne out and out flopped. I guess Dead or Alive has some measure of popularity, but the guys who made it were pretty much too ashamed to release it. (Can you blame them? And then that series kind of died. As did Tomb Raider and Mortal Kombat, actually.

    I get that sixty-something year old rich execs aren’t the best judges of what’s hip with the kids (See: The 70s), but you’d think they’d at least notice that the game they’re throwing millions of dollars into making a movie of was a failure.

  • Danny

    Actually, a quick bit of research reveals an interesting pattern (Be warned, I think I’m about to out-Ken Ken):

    Game-based Movies in America (Japan has a better track record, but I’m interested in Hollywood ones)

    In chronological order

    Super Mario Brothers – Hit game. The game’s cartoony setting was inexplicably turned into a post-apocalyptic one for the movie, which flopped due to being terrible.

    Double Dragon – Moderate hit game. Flop movie.

    Street Fighter – HUGE hit as a game. Bad movie, but turned a decent profit

    Mortal Kombat – Game less of a hit than Street Fighter, but got a better movie. Movie profitable.

    Mortal Kombat Annihilation – Yeah. The game lost popularity after this, but stayed popular enough to keep getting sequels (Game sequels, unlike movie sequels, tend to to be better)

    Pokemon the Movie – HUGE hit as a game (and later a cartoon). Movie succeeded primarily due to the popularity of the franchise. Pokemon as a fad is mostly dead, but the franchise still makes a lot of money for Nintendo, from the games and the still-running cartoon.

    Tomb Raider – Game a bit past its expiration date. Movie successful.

    Final Fantasy – No apparent connection to the hit game. Massive flop, and Square Pictures wouldn’t make another movie for years

    Resident Evil – The game franchise was getting to be as rotting as the zombies (it since recovered), but the movie was successful

    Tomb Raider: Cradle of Life – Released concurrently with a new game. Both the game and the movie blamed each other for their massive failures.

    House of the Dead – Game LONG past the peak of its popularity. Movie flops.

    Resident Evil Apocalypse – Game series still not back on its feet, but movie profitable

    Final Fantasy: Advent Children – Square makes another Final Fantasy movie, this one actually based off the games. It’s released straight-to-DVD over here, but sells pretty well.

    ***Things get interesting here***

    Alone in the Dark – Based on a series of adventure games ten years old. The target audience is too young to have played the games, and the movie itself isn’t a selling point, so it flops.

    Doom – Popular game from time past about to make a comeback. Big name star (well, by today’s standards). Bad movie. Flop.

    Bloodrayne – Poor selling game. Movie a MASSIVE failure. Rumors than Uwe Boll was intentionally trying to lose money as a tax shelter begin to spread.

    Silent Hill – Cult classic game. Not so much as a movie. Cost $50 mill and made $97 in theaters, with the studio getting half that, so DVD sales probably pushed it into the black.

    Dead or Alive – Moderately popular game. Flop as a movie, earning $1 million back on a $21 million budget. Oddly, it did a lot better overseas, but not better enough.

    Resident Evil: Extinction – The games were hits again, but the movies were out of steam.

    Hitman – See above. The games weren’t all that popular, but apparently the movie did pretty well.

    In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale – The game was kept profitable by a low budget. The movie…wasn’t.

    Postal – The game was poorly rated, and doesn’t seem to have sold very well (it’s a bit hard to get numbers for game sales. It didn’t seem to carve even a niche, though). The movie cost 18 million, and made $100,000. Part of the reason for this was that, of the 1500 theaters given the movie, 1496 of them refused to show it. Nevertheless, Uwe Boll has stated he’s making a sequel, making him the richest, craziest man on earth, and possibly the antichrist.

    As time goes on, the drawing power of the franchise is going down, and the movies are lowering in quality. Not only are the movies crappy, they’re based on increasingly obscure games. They’re making movies based on Postal, and not based on Zelda. It’s pretty strange.

    Wow. I used all this text to say video game movies are bad. *Sigh*. Check and Mate, Ken. You’ve been out-rambled.

  • Pilgrim

    “Final Fantasy: Advent Children – Square makes another Final Fantasy movie, this one actually based off the games. It’s released straight-to-DVD over here, but sells pretty well.”

    Not too surprising, since Advent Children was (from what I’ve seen) basically made to cash in on the widespread popularity of FF VII. I think the apparent success of that movie has less to do with it being good or appealing to a wide audience and more to do with it pandering to a niche market of rabid fans.

    I think the most interesting thing about the analysis you posted is the fact that most of the movies on it were either failures (Mario Bros, Double Dragon) or were only modestly successful (Street Fighter, Silent Hill). Really only a few were successful, most in genres that would have been successful anyway (Tomb Raider is an Indiana Jones knock-off, Resident Evil is about zombies). The game franchise really seems very superfluous as it’s obvious at this point that even gamers don’t go to see movies just because it’s based on their favorite game.

    (Also you forgot Wing Commander – A popular series of flight sims that crashed and burned at the box office.)

  • Plissken79

    The unfortunate thing is that there a few games with truly amazing storylines that have yet to be made into films, such as Metal Gear Solid or BioShock (although I know there are plans for a BioShock film). Even Gears of War could make a great Aliens-type film if done right. Hopefully at least one great video-game film will be made before this phenomenon comes to an end. Far too many lousy games have been made into equally bad films

  • Fatmouse

    I foolishly rented this movie after enjoying the game, and was left flabbergasted by the intense loathing I had for it.

    Olga has to be one of the least sympathetic one-note characters I’ve seen. Okay, she’s a ho because of her eeeevil owner, but she still manages to consistently stank up every scene she’s in. The pathetic sowwy “I want a vineyard” scenes can cause diabetes at fifty paces.

    As a form of rehabilitation I watched “The Transporter” and was amazed at how better every bald inch was compared to the Hitman mess.

  • Resident evil is the best horror game