The Killer 2023 (David Fincher)

Tools    





Just saw this. Didn't really like it much. It's quite a cold, and emotionally uninvolving film, with little to no plot. Fassbender was a good choice for the role and his performance fit the tone of the film. It was well done from a technical perspective. But, I didn't find the film to be engaging at all and found it to have a thin and not very engaging story.



I thought it was pretty good. Standard revenge flick with an above average production, similar to John Wick without the action/ body count. Had a feeling early on that George Jefferson, being a cleaner and all, would somehow be involved. Didn't mind the coldness of everything as it's kind of expected when you're following around a stone cold killer for hire who frequently claims empathy is a weakness.



After watching it for second time I noticed it has a dark sense of humor. For example: "It's a common knowledge something something. Well, maybe not a common knowledge" or "How is not giving a f... working out for you?". And it goes like that consistently through entire narration.



I thought it was pretty good... Didn't mind the coldness of everything as it's kind of expected when you're following around a stone cold killer for hire who frequently claims empathy is a weakness.
I agree that the coldness was part of the vision of the film. I'm just reflecting that I didn't like that. Also, trying to be as spoiler free as I can here, not knowing why he was hired to kill who he was and the overall motivation was something that I was craving to know which was never revealed. This was another intentional choice by the writer/director that I didn't resonate with and was part of why I didn't like the movie. It was very focused on the Killer character, but the plot, to me, was lacking or remained unexplained for much of the film.



Also, trying to be as spoiler free as I can here, not knowing why he was hired to kill who he was and the overall motivation was something that I was craving to know which was never revealed. This was another intentional choice by the writer/director that I didn't resonate with and was part of why I didn't like the movie. It was very focused on the Killer character, but the plot, to me, was lacking or remained unexplained for much of the film.
In narration the killer says: "I'm not here to take sides. It's not my place to formulate any opinion. No one who can afford me, needs to waste time winning me to some cause. I serve no god, or country."

Not knowing motivation didn't bother me.



Registered Oddboy
I just finished this movie last night, and enjoyed it for what it was . . . more of a slow-burn blockbuster than anything with substance, I think. Pretty good, but a far cry from Fincher's best work. Fantastic acting all around, though, and some of the shots were genuinely really great. A high 7 / 10.



I agree with AKA and Minio. Left me cold, and no, not in the "it's supposed to be cold!" sense. In the sense of not being particularly gripping.

It's a good movie. It's well-made, I was curious about what would happen, but it has a drift to it that Fincher, in particular, does not usually have. Maybe that was intentional, but if it was, I think it was a mistake. I can tell already this'll be one of the rare Fincher films I don't go back and rewatch much, if at all.



The way some of you don't see what is so special about The Killer, is similar as to how I can't see what's so special about Zodiac (2007).



Was interested in your thoughts on this Yoda, so thanks for sharing and sorry you didn't like the movie much either. Was it clear to you early on in the film why he was killing all the other people, and why they went after the person that he knew? Trying to be spoiler free here. I didn't understand the circumstances of why those events were happening until towards the end of the film, when Tilda Swinton and the older gentleman had their scenes. Was this the experience for anyone else, or was it clear to you all when these events were occurring, before these explanations were provided? This was another reason, not being able to follow everything as the events were unfolding, and not being able to piece it together until the end, that I didn't like the film.



Was interested in your thoughts on this Yoda, so thanks for sharing and sorry you didn't like the movie much either. Was it clear to you early on in the film why he was killing all the other people, and why they went after the person that he knew? Trying to be spoiler free here. I didn't understand the circumstances of why those events were happening until towards the end of the film, when Tilda Swinton and the older gentleman had their scenes. Was this the experience for anyone else, or was it clear to you all when these events were occurring, before these explanations were provided? This was another reason, not being able to follow everything as the events were unfolding, and not being able to piece it together until the end, that I didn't like the film.
I found it pretty straightforward narrative-wise, in terms of what was happening and why (and I consider myself a pretty plot-driven/plot-loving viewer). I suppose at this point I’m really used to non-chronological exposition, it really would have been more surprising to have things develop chronologically, especially with Fincher. This is no Memento, it’s not
WARNING: spoilers below
backwards
, just explained in stages, like, I don’t know, Kill Bill (which I felt was a big influence here).



It's a slow-burn, but enjoyable nevertheless. Fassbender's strong acting performance carried the movie. Enjoyed the second half more than the first half, due to the pace. It's probably not everyone's cup of tea, though.*



Just saw this. Didn't really like it much. It's quite a cold, and emotionally uninvolving film, with little to no plot. Fassbender was a good choice for the role and his performance fit the tone of the film. It was well done from a technical perspective. But, I didn't find the film to be engaging at all and found it to have a thin and not very engaging story.
My thoughts exactly. It has the "Nobody else would let me make this film because it's not very good, so I'll go and see if Netflix will" vibe. Complete with CGI clouds. Awful.



Was it clear to you early on in the film why he was killing all the other people, and why they went after the person that he knew?
Mostly. I did have one moment of "oh, that's the client" and then it turns out it isn't. That's about it, though.

This isn't related to what you asked, but to expound on why I didn't like it: the voiceover was incredibly banal. Kind of amazingly so. I know we're all familiar with McKee's reproach on voiceover, but I think it can work sometimes. And more to the point, it does allow you to put a lot of really good lines out there without having to "set them up" in any kind of narrative sense. So I expect the "trade," such as it is, with voiceover, is that whether it's always good storytelling or not you tend to get some really good (in a vacuum) writing out of it. And that just wasn't the case here. There was very little interesting or remarkable about his philosophy and the lines he kept repeating didn't even always seem to have applicability to whatever was happening at the time.

Just odd, really. Michael Fassbender delivering voiceover about why and how he's a hitman seems like a slam dunk.



Agree. The voiceover was very repetitive and not particularly illuminating. Voiceover can work, if it's done right. "Million Dollar Baby" has a wonderful voice over from Morgan Freeman, and there is an added surprise at the very end of the film related to why he is narrating the story and for whom, and it's very moving.



I kept waiting for one of his mantras to take on some new meaning, some special significance to something that was happening on screen, and I don't think it ever did. Truly bizarre. Such a simple, obvious setup, and no payoff.

Would've benefited from some kind of reason for why The Plan doesn't go off, in the moments that it doesn't. There was no thematic reason for it, no exposure of some oversight or flaw, it was just sort of random. Which can be fine if that's the point, that you can't actually plan around everything, but the film didn't really seem to be saying that, either.

That's the broader problem, I guess: I had no sense of a voice underneath the events. Watching it was, at times, like reading an outline of the script.



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
Its coldness is arguably inspired by Le samurai. But it plays more like one of the Hitman games.

WARNING: "The Killer" spoilers below
I think this film is about how, no matter how you view yourself, you're actually a nobody to the world. The voice-over is supposed to be a satire of toxic masculinity/narcissism/huge ego. Fassbender keeps talking so that the viewer thinks he's really cold, cool, and badass, and yet, the killer ruins the shot, which might symbolize something sexual, perhaps erectile dysfunction-- proof that the way he sees himself (and how he's largely portrayed in the film) is but a mirage, a wet dream of a wussy who wants to be macho.

The killer thinks he is badass, but he isn't. He's a puny man with a huge ego. He's an a-hole with a perfect philosophy of individualism. He supports it with quotes but he doesn't remember from whom. He pretends to be well-read and ready for anything, but when his plan fails, he freaks out. But suuure, he's a professional, he doesn't care, he just does his job. Just keep cool, no emotions, he keeps reminding himself.

The killer turns out to be yet another guy trying to fulfill the stereotypical male "virtues": coldness, lack of emotions, and being the patriarchal head of a family. But in the end, he never achieves anything. His incompetence leads to a failed assassination. From then on, he only tries to save the projection of himself with his slogans, but he's failing. The whole thing is slipping. He ends up being a disappointment to the family, his failure literally almost killing his wife. And so he embarks on his revenge, and he keeps killing people to cover his tracks. But then again, he's but an insignificant screw in a system he doesn't really understand. He thinks his vendetta is incredibly meaningful. But for the people above him, his dismissal was just another day in the office. The billionaire client (his higher-up) at the end of the film doesn't even know who the hell he is or what he's talking about. He has to be reminded. The killer spares his life, thinking he's badass again. But none of that matters anyway. The killer returns to his wife and they chill. Nothing has changed, really. The dude is still a failure. And he will still take other jobs because he has to give the proverbial food to his family. And the higher-ups won't even know who he is anyway. If this is any sort of commentary on Fight Club, then The Killer is a satire on the corporate world in capitalist societies.
__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.