Wesley obviously did this for the money, I know he previously had trouble on the production of "Blade Trinity," so I think he needed something small to be a character builder.This film was it, it has a pretty standard straightforward story one that is familiar, although Wesley is the only reason to watch. It's been a while since I've seen this back in 2011, Wesley is a good actor so don't blame him, I would blame the writer for this under-cooked script.The action scenes are OK at best, but if I remember correctly, the movie was underwhelming as a whole. Still It was at least watchable to some ex-stint, Wesley is by far the best actor in the film. The villains are forgettable, same for the story and the movie it's self.Overall an underwhelming film that should have been better, but then again I don't think Wesley was looking for anything great, just somewhat decent after wrapping on "Blade Trinity". I give it a 3/10. I could watch it again I think? But I think if you want to see this, keep your expectations very low. It's a forgettable film you can watch on a rainy day, maybe with friends.

This is the kind of movie that gives the "Direct To Video" genre a bad name. Everything about this movie screams "CHEAP!".Modern movie-goers are sophisticated enough to notice things like the same clip being used over and over again to represent something different. They notice it when a Russian MiG and a US Tomcat have the same ejection seat, and the same fire control panel. Plainly put, the production values in this movie reek. Horribly. I'm prepared to lay reality aside somewhat when watching a flick, but this one stretches credulity beyond all reason.Wesley Snipes must have either owed Producer Andrew Stevens a freebie, or he did it to fulfill a contract he just wanted to get out from under. I can think of no other reason for his appearing in this. He could have phoned his performance in.Speaking of Andrew Stevens, his production company has 13 films in release and 2 listed as "In Production" (as of 1/27/09). Of those in release, SEVEN of them went direct to video. Make of that what you will.I gave this a 2 out of 10, and it's only that high because I have a soft spot for Emma Sams.

...that I would bet does NOT show up on Wesley Snipes' resume. I think he must have owed someone a favor or something. "The Marksman" plays like an inept child's G.I.Joe fantasy, right down to the lack of accurate detail. Bad costuming, unrealistic military action, lots of fiery but totally unbelievable bang-bang, enemy soldiers who can't hit the broad side of a barn, terrible dialogue, wooden performances from one and all, pedestrian cinematography from a career TV DP, shot on-the-cheap in Romania; one can only wonder who greenlighted this thing. Like I said, Wesley must have owed somebody. Maybe Andrew Stevens, who embarrasses himself in a brief cameo role, and was dumb enough to co-produce this turkey. Even Wesley didn't do that! Strictly for the desperate. Glad I got it at the library, that's for sure.

does any one else think that this was really crappy made for TV movie or was it just me i was watching it a 7:00pm and almost fell asleep 3 times. i consider Golan and globus movie bad at least their some humor in them, but i'd rather watch commando or raw deal again and thats not because Arnold is in them but it does help. i think this movie is lucky it got 3 stars i don't think it deserves that many the acting is awful its so dry and bland it was hard to take "PLOT SPOILER" the best actor was the little girl that almost got ran over by a tank one other thing the movie is just full of loose ends i just watched murder at 1600 and that is a much better movie than this even thought of being i've seen pretty much all of Wesley snipes action movies if you want to see a great Wesley snipes movie watch the art of war or U.S. Marshals and like i said murder at 1600 they are far superior