UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Noutions Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Lachlan Coulson This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

Bezenby I don't know where to start with this one. I think Hangmen has been consigned to some sort of hell due to it having Sandra Bullock in it. This has created some sort of paradox where Sandra Bullock fans are put off by a film that has Sandra Bullock in it for only about ten minutes, whereas bad movie fans are put off because the film has Sandra Bullock in it. With her face on the cover, who would expect such a hilarious, inept action movie? This one has dropped right under the radar, and Bullock 'isn't the best thing about this movie' at all. In fact, this early into her career, Bullock just adds to the insanity on display. For example: she goes on a crying jag over her missing boyfriend, manages to cover her mouth so the mike doesn't pick up anything she says, and the filmmakers don't bother re-looping her dialogue.Brilliant. I can't believe such a stupid film has gone unnoticed. It involves an ex-green beret who goes on the run after the CIA (whom he also worked for) tries to bring down another CIA agent (or something, it doesn't make much sense). His son must also go on the run after his mum is murdered by an agent disguised as a fireman (eh?). His son tracks down an ex-army buddy of his dad's, whom, about one minute after meeting the kid, picks up a machine gun and massacres a bunch of agents. After saying "What do we do?" about a hundred times, they try and track down the rest of his dad's squad. A difficult task, as the evil CIA agent is busy dispatching everyone. There's only one pal left, some guy from the start of the film's opening massacre who doesn't like the guy's dad.The sheer amount of madness on display in this film is a bit disorientating. From the assassination of a senator in the beginning, where everyone screams their lines at each other while people are riddled with bullets, to the scenes were the evil CIA agent orders people's deaths (his voiced strangely electronically treated for no good reason at all), to the driving scene where the two actors overdub themselves without any other sound whatsoever (this scene is so inept it has to be seen to understand it), plus the 'gun cam' which gives the film the look of a FPS computer game, Hangmen is just off the wall. I had to rewind a few times just to make sure I wasn't just making things up, but yes, this film is chock full of madness.The end gun battle is a right laugh. There's a very stiff 'dummy falling' scene (it lands on the camera!), and a mong-fu moment that's short, but really daft.This one is out on Hollywood DVD, and will probably cost you between a penny and a pound. I enjoyed it a lot.

csetzco Possibly the worst movie ever made that included a super star.Like others, I only bought this movie because I saw Sandra Bullock's name and picture on the cover, in the cheap bin at WalMart. as stated it is such a minor part, it isn't worth noting.In my mind, the reason for this film being such a stinker, is because there is one person that was the writer, director, producer, and editor. With only one person with all these parts, there is not the exchange of ideas or influences. No one to say that this is crap.The only redeeming quality of this movie is to be shown to all classes on movie making, to show how bad a film can be, and what NOT to do when making a film.A horrible, horrible film.

uhlek23 This movie was COMICALLY awful. It seemed to me more a film student's final project than a full movie production... and it is shamefully bad. The cover of the rental case that I picked up had Sandra bullock prominently displayed on it (while in the film she is on screen for less than 10 minutes) wearing a hat crudely photoshopped on her head that she never wore in the film. This movie is best enjoyed as an object of ridicule -- and is masquerading the incidental fact that Sandra Bullock is a tertiary character in it to get people to view it. That fact alone is almost as funny as the awfulness of the movie itself. It is as much a Sandra Bullock movie as "28 days later" is a sequel to Sandra Bullock's "28 days."

Qaoz I watched 5% of this movie tonight and you may tell me that I need to see the whole movie to understand it, but frankly I don't think so.What the hell is the story in this movie? I saw a lot of people running around in a factory, shooting at everything around them.Where to start? Okay..1) They were shooting around the place as if it was the Terminator or something they were trying to kill. The entire place is made of metal, but not a single bullet sparked on the metallic surfaces.2) No ricochet. Metal vs metal is bound to cause ricochets, but apparently no one got hit by a stray bullet.3) Magic bullets? In one scene a bad-guy is standing right in front of a good-guy when another good-guy pops out behind the bad-guy and pumps him full of metal. You see the bullets exit his chest as it explodes in a bloody mist, but the good-guy right in front of him doesn't get hurt at all! 4) After having just splattered a human being all over the wall, the two good-guys tell each other some jokes and they laugh and look like teenagers playing with soft-guns.5) Sound? At one point the good-guys cut a wire and an alarm goes off (who the hell cuts a wire just to set off an alarm?). The lady screams out "Alarm in sector blah blah" and the bad-guy boss says "Okay.. this.. is.. not.. a.. drill.. blah blah" in a very, very amateur kinda way. Ooh, we're getting ambushed by terrorists, this isn't a drill, but I'm gonna sound like I don't give crap.6) Focus!! First you see the bad-guys load up on weapons. For some reason the same guy gets the same Uzi twice. Deja vu or loop of scenes? You literally see every single bad-guy receive the same kind of weapon and they lock and load the same way. The weapons dealer pops in the clip and the bad-guy extra no. XX locks and loads. When they started opening fire you HAD to see the barrel flashes. Boooring!! 7) Actors or dummies? One of the presumed good-guys throw down a smoke grenade for some reason and of course the bad-guys are suddenly inside the smoke because they're smoke-blind or something so they don't see it coming. They cough and moan as if it was Anthrax in the grenade. Then a semi-boss bad-guy arrives and he doesn't even cough when he enters the smoke, he just pushes the other bad-guys away and they suddenly realize that the smoke isn't Anthrax anyway.8) B flick? I think yeah! A guy sliding down a metal pipe wielding a Uzi in his right hand shooting away at someone in his eye height apparently. I'd like to see a guy fire a Uzi with one hand and I'd like to see him go get his hand afterwards. Extra bloody gore mess in a B flick kinda way. Small *pops* and a red hole with a torn shirt indicates that this guy is dead. Though the first bullet hit his heart the good-guy who is a super trained green berets still feel the urge to empty his clip into the dead guy.9) One of these mentioned trained soldiers jump out from his hide with an empty clip! How stupid can you be!? Always check your clip before facing an unknown amount of enemies! 10) Boring scenes. Like the barrel flash scenes and the lock and load scenes, the movie is filled with time wasting scenes of people running around in an apparently empty building. Cut to the action if you're going for a B flick movie, please.My two cents on this movie.