Red

Schwentke would have to be more than just a learned craftsman to make RED more than just a solid film. It's pretty dynamic, but the style is taken from somewhere else, so it's definitely not consistent. The story is comic-book exaggerated, and in the film narrative it is terribly banal. But the old boys are great and are good at their jobs. In the end I had a great time, and I left with the belief that if an inventive helmsman got his hands on it, this cruise could give a lot. The way it is, it "just" entertains. (01/11/2010)

Red is a “costume show” with a senile plot, which is more about individual attractions than creating a coherent whole. You’ll have fun, enjoy Willis playing Willis, Malkovich reminiscing about the good old days of Burn After Reading and the regal Helen Mirren in a white dress, shooting a heavy machine gun. With a better script, this could have been one of the best movies of the year, but that sadly didn’t happen. Karl Urban might get some major roles in grade-A blockbusters. Robert Schwentke, circling around him at an intersection, elevated Michael Bay-like turning around the guy with a gun to the level of sophisticated ballet. Exactly between three and four stars; I’m giving four because I gave three to Resident Evil: Afterlife :-) (29/10/2010)

I’d happily replace gaps with drawn-out verbal filler in favor of action, which Schwentke handles quite easily. Thumbs up for those moments when the retired agents are having fun over the fact that in their youth the SS (Secret Service ;-)) wasn't a bunch of old farts because the actors are having a blast with it. However, the lack of a stronger villain and a thicker plot won't let me give that fourth star. 3 ½. (17/10/2010)

Even a master carpenter makes mistakes sometimes. I have long ranked Bruce Willis as an ultimate action icon, whose films tend to be just the right staple in my cinematic menu, but Red is one of the unwanted exceptions. While Bruce performs up to his standard, and for the most part the FBI and CIA together don't even come to think of him, the main storyline is too weak, the actual quality and fun action is downright sparse, and I didn't like how the story tried to be too cool all the time. Freeman has a desperately small role to pull it up somewhere, and as for the villain syndicate, bland is the word. Apart from Willis, the only one worth mentioning is the infernal "old man" John Malkovich, whose perfectly (un)measured performance in similar action titles is something I always enjoy. Anyway, I'm curious about the second one, with more imaginative direction and acting refreshment, they still may have a few rounds left. (19/04/2011)

Bruce Willis delivers his usual performance, but when it comes to emotions, he's actually quite good. And clumsy. It's even more evident in the sequel. John Malkovich stands out the most, playing a great madman, paranoid Marvin, who sees agents everywhere. Well, after all, just because someone is paranoid doesn't mean they're not being followed. And when he picks up a pig, it's really a treat. The communication between the team is incredibly filled with humor, creative and interesting. Humor is the main thing that drives the movie forward, even though it also relies on the classic formula of action spy films - locations change very often, the government is somehow involved in everything, and someone we know nothing about pulls the strings. The script is sufficiently convoluted, allowing the film to truly be labeled as a spy movie. More: http://www.comics-blog.cz/2013/08/250-red-2010-70.html (27/08/2013)