Is all said and done in movies?

Rating: 1/10 (2 July 2008)

There are some hard-hitting scenes in this film to be sure, and the camera-work isn't so intolerably excessive like in most Hollywood films of today. In fact it's almost as efficient as in those very good "Jason Bourne"-movies. But therein lies the biggest problem, too: nothing in Shooter is original. Nothing. Of course, if it's the first shoot 'em up action -flick (with political undertones and an assassination plot with a fall guy) you've ever seen you might like this. Especially if you like Mark Wahlberg who to me is not much of an actor. Far from even Matt Damon's capabilities for sure. And veterans Danny Glover and Ned Beatty got impossible, laughable roles, but at least they seem to have a blast with them. So, you might also like this movie if you're able to not to take it too seriously, even if the flick itself fails even in that department.
What I'm really trying to say is: those who cry for this movie's "liberal, even left-wing and anti-US message" do take this FAR too seriously. Because in a stupid movie like this there can't be any real message to anybody. Unless it's the fact that judging by the Hollywood films of the 2000's people's IQ has dropped at least 20 points since the 1970's. Or, and I believe this theory hits closer to the mark, the film companies try nowadays to please EVERYBODY with their productions, just for money's sake of course. Especially the adolescent/teen viewers, no matter how adult themes movie supposedly has. Hence, this all superficiality.