22 Bullets (2010)

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

This movie uses French as language but it has subtitles.It has lots of action and it is about an ex-gang member trying to get revenge after he got gunned down.Although you could say it's somewhat predictable it was never boring and I felt it was worth watching despite it having long duration.

Charly Matteï was a notorious Marseilles gangster until one day he gave up his life of crime to enjoy a peaceful life with his wife and two children. All goes well for three years then his past catches up with him and he is gunned down in a car park. They leave him for dead with twenty two bullets in him… unfortunately for them they didn't make sure he was dead. He gradually recovers and pays a visit to his attackers and tells them that he will kill them all… not straight away though; they will have to live in fear for a while first. He also intends to go after the man who ordered the hit; his former friend Tony Zacchia. Of course Zacchia still wants Charly dead and also goes after his friends. If that weren't enough police officer Marie Goldman wants to find the man responsible for her husband's murder by an unknown gangster.This is a solid revenge thriller. The attack on Charly is brutal as are many of the later killings. From the moment Charly is shot the tension is high right to the end. There is plenty of action; including car chases, shootouts and a kidnapping. Charly may have a moral code but none of those who tried to kill him is safe; his enemies have no such code and will target anybody to get to Charly. Jean Reno carries the film as Charly but his isn't the only good performance; the rest of the cast are pretty solid too. The film makes good use of its South of France setting especially as Charly, on a motorbike, is chased by two carloads of gunmen. Overall I'd certainly recommend this to fans of Jean Reno or anybody who enjoys revenge thrillers.These comments are based on watching the film in French with English subtitles.

This film starts with great promise. It has a decent cast, it's well acted and well shot. We know we're looking at a revenge film, but at first it appears that it will at least be an original and interesting take on the genre with some insights into the French criminal underworld. After 45 minutes it becomes glaringly obvious that this is unfortunately not the case.Our protagonist is a retired mob figure and loving family man who is shot 22 times by 8 masked gunmen and survives. He then goes on a hunt to take down each of the 8 shooters as well as the man who ordered the hit. Cue, horrifically clichéd dialogue, and a plot as formulaic as an episode of Sex and The City. If there was a little comic relief or if it was all played a little more tongue in cheek, this would have offset the frankly patronising predictability of the plot and the awful dialogue, the likes of which Arnie would have laughed at for being too cheesy.Jean Reno is very watchable as always, and there are at least some reasonable chase sequences. The films biggest problem is its inconsistency. I'm always happy to sit down to a good old adrenaline pumping gruesome gangster flick, but this films spends half its time trying to do serious drama which only makes the other half even more laughable.

The premise of this looks well worn but with Berry directing and Reno starring it should be promise to be more engaging. It isn't: it is a cliché ridden, violent, monotonous,'been there seen it it hundreds of times, waste of time.It's basic errors lie in the amount of camera coverage and the editing. There must be thousands so of cuts in this film which are to add pace and disguise the fact that it is so badly conceived. The camera swirls and dives and whizz-pans and does everything to simulate movement but a note to directors who think this type of action bestows a simulation of actual motion: it doesn't because the eye and brain always see things in proportion and not blurred. To do so with a camera only demonstrates how bad a simulation of action it really is. Consult a physician who will provide the data.This instant editing destroys any connection with the story and the action because nothing is done for long enough, not that the characters are interesting, nor is the dialog very good: but it wastes a real talent in Reno. As to the others; well they all look man and cruel but who really cares?