Sam Blake (Martin Kemp who is OK) a professional sniper, is forced to run around London killing people because his daughter is being held hostage by a man with a heavily disguised voice. Which sounds promising but the execution (no pun intended) of the film is not exciting and the big reveal of the villain's identity is flat as it was easy to spot who it was going to be in the first fifteen minutes. In the end it was difficult to know what it was about and understand the motives of the villain.There are fine actors like Patrick Bergin, Dexter Fletcher, Phil Davis and the legendary Bruce Payne in it but they are not given much to do. The rest of the cast don't shine, particularly the actress who plays the Detective Inspector in whining child mode. All credibility evaporates when she is on screen. The time of the action pops up on screen now and then but it doesn't really add to the suspense. It just made me keep looking at my watch and wandering when it would end. And getting around London is much harder than the film tries to makes out!

Well, I have now seen the film so its time to share my thoughts with you about the film.I've seen many 'reviews' and quotes that are comparing the film to a movie version of the Kiefer Sutherland series '24' and whilst I can kinda see that being applicable. Age Of Kill is Age Of Kill. yes it does have a military man Sam Blake (played by Martin Kemp) whose daughter (played by Dani Dyer) is snatched to be used as a blackmail tool against Sam Blake. Its not set in real time. Isn't 18 and a half hours long (that's how long 24 was without adverts) and isn't an insane over the top super agent action series. (By the way I'm a huge fan of '24')Age Of Kill is an hour and a half journey into Sam Blake's life, as well as that of his past and his present. Himself and his family. The action set pieces work well with no issue. Gun battles, explosions and such like do exactly what they need to do and what they promise to do. Martin Kemp is on form as more action star than some roles he has previously done and I can see him with a future in the action genre. Martin Kemp has always been a watchable, charismatic guy from his early days, and even when watching him on television being interviewed, He is always someone you find interesting to listen to. So its with no shock that his scenes in Age Of Kill are of course - watchable and engaging.For me the highlights of the film though are easily the scenes he shares with some of the other cast. When Martin Kemp and Phil Davis share the screen, they are wonderful and you do want to see more of that. More so with the scenes involving Martin Kemp and Dani Dyer which just has wonderful chemistry to it, and once again, l wanted to see the scenes play out longer and see Dani in more scenes. She has a fantastic future ahead in film and shes definitely an actress to keep an eye on.But those aren't complaints against the film or the story. I cant fault a film for not including more scenes, that's just a preference. All praise goes to the cast, and of course to writer Simon Cluett for creating this world of Sam Blake, and Director Neil Jones for putting these characters together for us, the viewer. Does Age Of Kill give us anything totally unique that we haven't seen before in film. No, but it doesn't try to. It gives us an hour and a half of entertainment with a great cast. That's what I need from a film and a story. One that engages me with characters that I enjoy watching. Job well done. There is a plot line involving somewhat radical politicians which did feel like the sort of storyline that I have seen in several other films of late and which did sort of feel a little out of place in Age Of Kill, but putting that small detail aside. I really enjoyed Age Of Kill and look forward to not only the next film that Neil Jones directs, but also other scripts created by Mr Simon Cluett.(Bonded by Blood 2)

Already during the first few minutes, I was having doubts.A man gets followed by a team of what_you_might_call_them; apparently they have all the resources but need someone with a microphone to be close to the target to be able to listen in on his telephone conversation. The man runs and gets shot by our sniper, which makes no sense at all.From that moment on the movie gets worse and worse. Skipping through some bad acting, over-acting and several continuity errors - the fighting scene on the staircase is laughable at best - we get annoyed by a lead investigator who needs some acting classes.And then... about thirty minutes into the movie, for me it all ends.Our hit-man is driving a black car for which The Bad Guy provided him the key, but police check the license and find the car is in The Hero's name...Just forget about this movie - it never happened.

There's a merit on presenting heavy theme with simplicity, Age of Kill opens up with intriguing premise of a sniper forced to do a terrorist's bidding. It is a good start for a film which unfortunately becomes needlessly complicated later on. Using too many subplots revolving around abundance of tired characters, most of whom are far from likable, the film becomes too tedious and chaotic for audience to invest on.The initial set-up works pretty well, introduction for its protagonist is focused with minimal interruption. However, the film strangely shifts into myriads of other perspectives which are not only hampering the main plot, but seem out of place, especially when it also puts restriction of following an inflexible timeline.There is viewpoint of the police inspector following the killing spree, but the female chief role is overbearing. It may be to establish an empowering authority figure, yet the actress delivers the personality with shallow unfriendly delivery. As the sniper makes his way through the victim list, he meets an escort who deals with the same problem. This woman is almost shoehorned with barely any buildup, although she becomes a strange supporting character later. There's plenty of info skimped to accommodate the large cast.As though it's not complex enough, the movie also throws in religion and political elements at second half. The actual plot becomes heavily muddled with extremely preachy undertone, so much so the development relies on luck and blatant convenient to finish the story. Much of the twists are abrupt, negating the action storyline for the sake of vague propaganda. Furthermore, none of the character or script is enough to hold any interest.It has a bit of action aspects, but most likely won't keep audience invested through the overly complicated story. There's no satisfying conclusion to be had, considering the movie stacks subplots on top of another until it becomes a messy pile of narrative.