Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Console best movie i've ever seen.

ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

FlashCallahan Master Gunnery Sergeant Thomas Beckett is a sniper stationed in Panama. Although skilled, he has lost several men under his command.Beckett is teamed up with a S.W.A.T. member named Miller, who has not earned any confirmed kills, to eliminate a top Panamanian rebel leader.Tensions emerge between the two on how to conduct the mission, coupled with running into numerous challenges during the mission.....If you were like me, a teenager seeing the trailer and that scene where the bullet goes through the scope and kills the opposing Sniper, you had to see this film.Over twenty years on, it's just Billy Zane going all Dead Calm toward the end, and almost giving away their cover every two minutes.Sniper is a film that the title alone would sell to a market. We all love those parts in action films where we see someone getting taken out from a long distance, and when we play Call Of Duty, the sniper parts are the best.But this is where the film fails, it's like watching someone playing a really bland video game, and they are insisting that they watch the in game scenes because they really add something to the film.Brenger is okay, as is Zane, but we've seen this done before a thousand times.And even if that bit with the scope still impresses today, it does not justify a film.Let alone four sequels.

TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews Beckett(Berenger, reserved and experienced) is top-of-the-line for snipers. He works in the Panamanian jungle. People like him work in pairs, or alone. Trust between the two can mean the difference between life or death. And he's paired up with rich pretty-boy Miller(Zane, more of an office man), who's never killed anyone, for the next mission. Will they ever get out alive?This favors tension(with a constant low current of it through the 92 minutes, or 95 with end credits) over action, and those looking for a popcorn flick should look elsewhere(no offense intended). Aiming for a narrower audience, pun intended, this seeks to be a gritty, realistic and highly detailed depiction of the reality for war-time marksmen. For those of us who want such, it's satisfying, although this approach is occasionally broken by brief bouts with Hollywoodism. Acting and casting is great.It's a thriller with a focus on the psychological, and, indeed, one of the biggest conflicts is between the two leads, who are among the only characters in this. You'd almost be forgiven for calling this a minimalist piece - two people, in the one seemingly endless setting, and a straightforward plot. Both are human beings, with flaws, and as this progresses, they get to know each other, not everything goes as it should, and things will get pushed right to the edge.There is some strong language and bloody violence in this. I recommend this to anyone who likes the concept. 7/10

disdressed12 Sniper is a much better movie than i thought it would be.i did think it would be entertaining,but more from a time wasting perspective than anything else.but it turns out it's a pretty tense,at times suspenseful film.it's well paced.there are no spots that drag.i wasn't bored for a minute.and the two lead actors,Tom Berenger and Billy Zane work well off each other.both are very well suited for this particular role and were very convincing.as for the degree of realism in the film,i can't speak to that,but i do know i enjoyed myself for 90 odd minutes,and sometimes it's enough to just enjoy a movie for the entertainment value.for me,Sniper is an 8/10

bernie-122 I will warn you here: I chose to believe those reviewers who said that this wasn't an action film in the usual sense, rather a psychological drama so you should appreciate it on that basis and you will be alright.I am here to tell you that they were wrong. Completely wrong.Well, no, not completely; it is very disappointing if you are looking for an action flick, they were right about that. But it is also very unsatisfying on all other levels as well.Tom Beringer wasn't too bad, I suppose, no worse than usual; but what possessed them to cast Billy Zane in this? Was it some sort of death wish on the part of the producers? A way to made their film a guaranteed flop? In that case, it worked.If they were actually aiming for success, then why not cast somebody who can act? Oh, and might as well go for a screenwriter who knows how to write. Ah, yes, and a director who knows how to direct.As someone who sat through this mess, actually believing it would shortly redeem itself, I can assure you it never did. Pity, it could've been a good film.