Home > Action >

The Silencer

The Silencer (1992)

October. 01,1992
|
4
|
R
| Action Thriller Crime

Lynette Walden and Chris Mulkey star in this action-packed ride through the sexy and dangerous world of flesh for sale and murder for hire.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Mjeteconer
1992/10/01

Just perfect...

More
Platicsco
1992/10/02

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

More
Stevecorp
1992/10/03

Don't listen to the negative reviews

More
Bob
1992/10/04

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

More
lemon_magic
1992/10/05

"The Silencer"'s central visual metaphor (introduced in the credits) is a simulation of the worst, most boring, static, and lifeless 16 Bit Sega video game you ever played as a kid. Viewers should set their expectations accordingly.Given the juicy subject matter and sordid goings on in the screen play, you'd think that "The Silencer" would be at least be a nice, cheesy little exploitation/grindhouse film.But no one involved in this hollow rehash of clichés has the vision or the moxie to make an involving or interesting movie. I sat through the whole thing waiting for something interesting to happen - and by interesting, I don't mean events like "heroine protagonist shoots another woman while they are side by side in a shooting range gallery"...I mean "does this in a way that makes me give a damn".The actress who plays the hitwoman is attractive enough, but her screen persona lacks any real charisma or grit, so the net effect is kind of like watching Malibu Hitwoman Barbie shoot a succession of sleazy Ken dolls. And the whole movie is like that - it goes through the motions, but lacks any forward momentum.I saw this movie in a $4.99 DVD collection called "Explosive Action" with a bunch of public domain releases from Crown International Pictures. I have learned (to my sorrow) that CIP rarely produces a good picture even by accident. Say what you will about Corman and American International (or Golan/Globus-Cannon), some interesting diamonds in the rough came out of those sausage grinder assembly lines over the years. But something about CIP seems to guarantee that any possible energy or interest in a film will be traded for a superficial slickness that saps all life out of everything they release.I feel bad for the director/screenwriter on this one - I think she had something she wanted to say and a point of view she wanted to present - but all that was tossed away long before the first cuts went to the editing room and post production.

More
dbborroughs
1992/10/06

One of the biggest wastes of celluloid I've run across. Not so much bad as utterly pointless. Woman who was a hit woman killing bad guys drifts from man to man until she finds a guy she really likes. At the same time she is called back for one last job. Meanwhile she's stalked by an ex-boyfriend and hit-man who wants things to be like they were. She wanders about looking cute while we listen to the ex boyfriends inane ramblings abut his "angel". I was half way into the film when I realized nothing had really happened. I also realized that I was still watching because I was waiting for something to happen. "Okay something will happen and I'll know whether its worth continuing…" I kept thinking…but nothing really does until the end, but by then its way too late. Yes it looks good. Yes the lead is pretty both in and out of clothes, but nothing happens for most of the movie that is worth giving up the very precise time of your life…. I want my 85 minutes back.2 out of 10 for the eye candy

More
Gluck-3
1992/10/07

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!

More
Mattias Petersson
1992/10/08

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.

More