With his permanent dope-faced-career-alcoholic appearance, *compris* that greasy forelock that he loves so much, Penn is a fairly good fit for the lead in this spare-time filler, struggling valiantly along with the audience to keep our eyes open. A contrived and unbelievable plot has some attention-grabbing action but nothing of narrative interest happens, we don't care about his survival - and there is nothing to write home about. Watchable, but so unremarkable that I had to refer to Wikipedia to remind me what it was about. I suspect that I was distracted by something mundane soon after watching it.

To start with, I really liked the movie. Not because of the slightly far-fetched plot, but mostly for the fact that Penn once again proved he is really a powerhouse actor. I appreciate the fact that this film focused to a great extent on his acting and not on special effects and computer animation as most action movies tend to do these days. I read some critical reviews focusing mostly on his age and the not so familiar to the large audience Jasmine Trinca. I think she did great as well. I guess most people today will not appreciate an action film unless it is "action" all the way through. I have seen movies with really meaningless plots getting rated a lot higher. Anyway, in my humble opinion, Sean Penn is still one of the best and charismatic actors that have appeared on screen and he proved it once again as his acting is still great in The Gunman.

Sean Penn did not age well. But I suppose you could say that an old assassin would look weathered. Also, the character is dealing with stuff that took place many years ago when he was younger.Having said that, it was awkward to watch a guy that old and gray portray an indestructible super hero. After all, that's what these type characters are. The Bourne guy, the Taken guy, etc. They know how to do everything and they can't be beaten. Unrealistic yes, but generally fun.There was plenty of action here. It wasn't boring from that standpoint. But like other reviewers said, there simply was not enough of a back story. Who was this guy? We didn't know, and even his girlfriend didn't know. At least show us a scene of them taking a romantic walk somewhere and talking about life. Otherwise we don't see any substance to their relationship. Who was the girl? Where was she from and what motivated her to be a volunteer doctor? Searching the globe for answers to why you are being targeted for assassination, and then beating everyone up along the way, is a tired plot by now. You can keep doing it for lack of better ideas, but at least infuse it with real emotion and history.How many times can Ray Winstone play essentially the same character? Let's get some new faces in these spy flicks. He was the same guy in the remake of Point Break.I turned it off about three quarters of the way through, so I guess for whatever reasons, it couldn't hold my attention. Probably because I felt that the rest was going to be more of the same and I had enough. I really had no feeling for the characters and couldn't care less what happened to them.I will give some credit to Penn for portraying the character as genuinely remorseful for the events that his work triggered.Good pacing, photography, and choreography.

From the Director of the original Taken comes what is essentially Taken 2.0, re-skinned, rehashed and re-marketed for a different audience to puke back up. But this is Penn's show, a self-obsessed project. Highlighting what a great human being he is. Look at all the humanitarian work he does! Protect the environment! Guns are bad! The last statement though, isn't entirely true. Penn uses guns many a time, so its message is somewhat conflicted. Like the overall point of the film. What are the filmmakers really trying to say about the current economic climate? The answer though is simple and its, well nothing.Penn's character, a bland individual that doesn't deserve the honour of being named, is an ex-sniper or gunman if you like. He's out of the business. For good. That is until his demons of the past force him to confront his fears and health problems. Because what would an action film be without an aged actor, mediocre director and the threat of heart problems in the long run?The Gunman is solid proof that Hollywood has run out of new ideas. Instead the film plays out like a poor man's Bourne Identity, not stylish enough to offer thrills, nor thoughtful enough to make a meaningful statement about the economy. Instead it ponders along boring everyone in its wake. Maybe I would like The Gunman more if it didn't insult my intelligence at every turn, didn't bore me from tears and didn't make me long for the days of Liam Neeson as an action hero. That's how bad this film is. Take note because with a poor script, inflated runtime, zero characterisation and a dull po faced story, The Gunman is not worth your time or money.D