Killers (2010) User Reviews

Lower Your Expectations -- It's Not That Bad!

[3xHCCH · 6/10 · 23 June 2010]

The story of "Killers" is familiar, with a twist. Jen (Katherine Heigl) is vacationing in the very scenic town of Nice with her straight-laced dad (Tom Selleck) and alcoholic mom (Catherine O'Hara). There she meets the suave Spencer (Ashton Kutcher). They fall in love and eventually get married. Little did Jen know though, that three years later, the ghosts of Spencer's old job will come and wreak havoc on their seemingly perfect suburban life.

This is the first movie of Katherine Heigl that I have seen. I know she is in TV's "Gray's Anatomy", but I do not watch that as well. I liked her very much as the geeky beauty Jen in "Killers". She is sexy, funny and bubbly. Ashton Kutcher could never really escape the dumb persona he has built in "That 80s Show" or in "Punk'd." He does try his best here to play an action hero, and I think he passes muster. I think the two of them do have some sort of goof-ball chemistry because of their likable personalities.

The execution of the script is OK. I sort of liked the outlandish plot points and the over-the top comedic violence. I am surprised to see a lot of harsh reviews here. Hey, I am sure you do not watch a film like "Killers" expecting a serious screenplay and award-winning acting. This film is lightweight, silly and adrenaline-driven for the most part, and I think it delivered well on its shallow objectives.

Decent, but silly

[chaaa · 6/10 · 12 July 2010]

In this day and age, the standard of fluffy rom-coms has sunk so low that any film of that type that doesn't leave me fuming and offended as I leave the cinema gets a tremendous amount of goodwill from me. It sounds like the easiest thing to do; make a silly piece of brain candy that is so fun and silly that you forget that it has no cultural or artistic value whatsoever. Well, unfortunately, if recent memory serves me (and believe me, it does, vividly) there have been some absolutely horrific examples of the genre in the past year. Killers, fortunately falls into the former category of inoffensive nonsense that provides giggles, thrills and a good spirit. Killers opens with lovelorn Jen (Heigl) on holidays in Nice with her parents, disturbingly comic alcoholic Catherine O'Hara and protective and stern Tom Selleck. As they check into their hotel she meets half-naked Spencer (Ashton Kutcher) and, as any woman would, falls head over heels in love with him. What she doesn't know is that he is a CIA hit-man who is in town on a mission to blow up a helicopter. However, soon after he meets Jen he decides he wants a clean slate and quits the CIA forever. Soon they are married and loving every minute of each other and their life. However, it isn't long before Spencer's old life catches up with him. This film is not very inventive, nor does it tickle the funny bone as much as it could but it really is an enjoyable romp with a genuine sense of good intentions. The chemistry between the leads is great and, as a couple, the characters match well enough for the audience to engage with them. Heigl is a bit bland as always but she is likable enough as the vulnerable and fastidious Jen. However, it is surprisingly Ashton Kutcher who provides the warm heart of the film. We all knew he could achieve levels of comic genius at time with his portrayal of lovable moron Kelso in That 70's Show, but who knew he could give an underwritten character like Spencer some depth. There is a pleasant mix of heroic integrity and underlying sadness to Spencer, and this lends the film some subtle but much-needed poignancy. I suppose one of the most admirable things about this film is that it allows the audience to feel for Spencer but without falling into the third act sap trap. This is a silly film, with nothing much to say. It is 100% fluff and doesn't pretend to be anything else. But Ashton Kutcher proves a likable leading man and a pretty cool action hero, which raises this to the status of decent popcorn movie. Do not expect anything inventive with this film, but take it for what it is and you might just have a great time!

I didn't expect to like this as much as I did.

[reddiemurf81 · 6/10 · 30 March 2020]

I would give this a 6.5 if I could.

Surprisingly fun movie. Kutcher and Heigl worked pretty well together (it's a shame that she's caused so much trouble,, she really is good at what she can do, and by that, I mean she's one dimensional).

Girl meets boy,, boy sweeps her off her feet,,, 3 yrs of wedded bliss,,,, are those bullets flying over our heads?!? YIPE!!!

It's fun 👍

Post Modernist Tedium

[gdr2 · 2/10 · 2 June 2010]

There are two kinds of bad movies: The so-bad-it's-good, and so bad-it-hurts. But then, there is Killers; an amorphous blob that exists in a vacuum where no films has ever been made before. It's not a comedy in the sense it's assembled out of jokes and humorous conflicts -- Killers constructs its own parallel universe reality and giddily makes fun of it. And it's not an action in the sense that good guys and bad guys chase one another -- Killers' has a snake-eating-its-tail moral stance. Killers is Meta in the truest sense of the word, and it's not even aware of it.

Critically analyzing Killers is like reasoning with an alligator before it eats you alive; it's a waste of precious time better used for self reconcile. The only shinning piece of the film is Heigl's teeth. The script seems to have begun its existence as a Mr. & Mrs. Smith book report, rewritten by a conspiracy theorist, and finally polished by an ESL student. It tells the story of sweet Jen (Heigl) who while vacationing with her parents (Selleck and O'Hara) in France, meets the ripped Spencer (Kutcher), and instantly falls in love. Spencer is a professional assassin, but after a few minutes with Jen he decides to leave all that behind him.

The film is not in a hurry to tell is story, mostly due to the fact there is none. The couple gets married, move together and three years later (and half way through the film) his old boss calls him again, 'you're ain't going out that easy' he promises, and he's right on the money. All hell breaks lose, and almost everyone who gets introduced during the first half turns out to be a gunman hired to kill Spencer.

Kutcher is detail-oriented twitterer, and as an actor, his goofiness is unmatched. Up until the end, Kutcher monotone performance came across as lack of talent. But after the surreal note the film ended on, it made perfect sense. Him and Heigl have the best anti-chemistry, and casting them together was an unintentional stroke of genius; He's the Laurel to her Hardy.

Enjoying the Killers depends entirely on your expectations and gullibility. Despite the film's colossal shortcomings, it still manages to make you laugh with its idiosyncrasies. You'll laughing mostly out of confusion, but it's laughter never the less; Kutcher's latest installment in the Dude Where is My Car tradition.

Not as bad as it's made out to be

[XM1973 · 7/10 · 12 June 2011]

This one's not half as bad as most of the reviews here make it out to be. The film makers aren't pretending to make a classic or even competing for the Oscars. It's a fun film that you will either like or not like. It doesn't take itself seriously. How can a movie that has Ashton Kutcher playing a trained killer working for "some" government agency. Ashton plays it a little campy, almost like a comic book character and that works, Katherine Heigl is her usual self. It's always good to see a beautiful Hollywood actress not looking like skin and bones. Tom Selleck plays Heigl's dad, a slightly predictable character. While the movie might be very predictable, it has its funny moments and while the pace isn't break neck, it does keep you entertained. Well, it entertained me.

Made with the best intentions...

[tommyboy00783 · 4/10 · 2 June 2010]

Let's start of with saying that Robert Luketic knows how to direct, the pace in the movie is good, he never takes this film to serious and he know how to film a couple of good scenes.

Katherine Heigl has shown to us that she can be funny in comedies, check the ugly truth if you need proof. Ashton Kutcher however.. is not good. Which hurts the film because he's the leading man in this film. They've made better actors then him do straight to DVD films.

I don't want to spoil much about the movie, however the trailer practically tells the whole story and shows some of the best bits of the film. But the pace is good, sometimes it's funny and the action was good. But it has all been done before and in better films.

So it's not rubbish, but it's not good either. I recommend you wait until it's released on DVD and hope that Knight and day will be better.

Not for those who like things to make sense

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 17 June 2010]

Killers, I am certain, is a film which is going to irritate all those who are not easily pleased, because it is stuffed to the gills with major unlikelinesses. Fortunately, I am easily pleased, and I quite enjoyed it. But it's a bit of a weird one.

Gorgeous, intelligent, funny Jen (Ketherine Heigl) has just been dumped by her nerd boyfriend and joins her affluent parents (uptight control freak Tom Selleck and alcoholic Catherine O'Hara) on holiday in Nice. While checking in at the hotel she bumps into Spencer (Ashton Kutcher), a CIA assassin who has decided to quit, although his controller tells him that he can't leave just like that. They fall in love and we roll forward 3 years to a point where they are enjoying conventional married life in small-town USA. Then Spencer's controller resurfaces. Spencer rejects his summons and, all of a sudden, pretty nearly everyone Spencer knows turns out to be a would-be assassin looking to collect a vast bounty on Spencer's head. This understandably alarms Jen, and the last half of the movie is an extended action sequence as the two of them escape countless attempts on Spencer's life while wondering what to do next, until the final - and very silly - explanation and resolution.

I cannot overemphasise the vast improbability of nearly every element of this film, not to mention the many unanswered questions (not least of which is what happened to all the dead bodies littering the town where they live). The light rom-com in the early part of the film - which is well done, incidentally - doesn't sit easily with the genuine jeopardy in which the two find themselves, and the occasional laughs seeded into the otherwise straight action sequences feel weird.

Katherine Heigl does comedy well, and is always pleasing to look at, and there is a bit of - 'ow you say? - cleavage oriented eye candy for the chaps. This is balanced out by Ashton Kutcher's abs, on display for the girls. Kutcher makes a decent fist of Spencer, Tom Selleck plays Jen's father nicely against type, and Catherine O'Hara is funny as mother, although her disastrous drinking is a) played for laughs and b) never commented on.

But if you like your movies to be credible, stay away from this one.

Fast Paced Fun

[Skylightmovies · 16 July 2011]

Not every film is supposed to make you review your life and become a missionary. This is pure escapism but without heaps of gadgets and blatant CGI.

It looks good , the stars look great and the supporting cast do what they're supposed to and a little more. The script made me laugh a lot more than the slightly overrated 'Hangover'.

Katherine Heigl was a surprise for me, a grown up Marilyn, and since seeing Ashton Kutcher in 'Dude', I was happy to see a different side. Yes the story IS simple but most plots are and it's the delivery that counts.

Yet there were still some unpredictable moments. I was entertained and would definitely recommended this to unwind to after a stressful day at the office.

Great date movie too.

Kill me now

[benhall_uk · 2/10 · 1 July 2010]

ONCE in a blue moon there comes a movie which hits every criteria spot on, and Killers has honed all of its attributes in order to make a truly, unequivocally bland and forgettable hour and a half-worth of tosh. Newly single Jen, played with no charm or skill by Katherine Heigl, is on vacation with her parents when she meets her ideal man Spencer, just about acted by perennial action figure Ashton Kutcher. The pair fall in traditionally quick fake movie love and get married. Little does Jen know though, her new husband is actually a secret government spy who kills people for a living and is trying to settle down. The fact that Kutcher looks in or around 30 years old and is playing the 'I don't want to kill people any more, whimper and sniffle' card does nothing for the integrity of the storyline. It wasn't until I looked at my watch either that I realised nothing more than that had actually really happened for the first 45 minutes. The trailers portray the premise of the film as an unwitting and clumsy Jen being dragged into a kill or be killed quarrel between Spencer and assassins hired to kill him because he's a liability in suburban life. However, it's nigh on an hour into the woeful film before anything of significance even happens. They say start as you mean to continue, and director Robert Luketic has done just that; he began with a barrel-full clichés played without any conviction and then went on to provide the audience with nothing more than an homage to every action rom-com in a drawn-out montage. Admittedly, neither Kutcher or Heigl has strayed far from their comfort zones, which in many ways has served against them as the pair seem almost complacent in their efforts to make the characters believable. At times there is a childlike playfulness between the two, but even that serves to the detriment of the film as the standard appears not wholly dissimilar to that of an amateur school drama production. Even the dry wit of Tom Selleck fails to provide much consolation. He brings experience and a touch of class, but the poor dialogue he is handed just proves too much for him to salvage. In fact, probably the best thing about the film is probably Tom Selleck's infamous moustache, partly because it doesn't get any lines. Occasionally in the movie industry there will be two promising actors who carry a film, perhaps struggling to shoulder the burden of a lacklustre supporting cast which doesn't communicate well through inexperience. However, it is never a good sign when you literally find yourself wincing throughout a film at the sheer lack of chemistry between its two leads. Perhaps the best testament to the lack of quality in the film is that Katherine Heigl cannot even scream convincingly, which is strange seeing as she has so much practice throughout. The shining light of Heigl's career so far was Judd Apatow's Knocked Up, which seemed to set up a potentially promising career. That being said, she now seems intent on penning her name to any bit part rom-com coming her way. Yes, she may have got the kooky, loser-in-love part down to a redundant tee, but it is evident from this that she needs a charismatic cast and script to support her, otherwise she appears as nothing special at all. As for Kutcher, the six foot-plus husband of contrastingly skilled Demi Moore could quite easily have been replaced by a large slab of granite with more personality. By all means, if his niche is sub-standard romantic comedies where he can run around topless for as long as possible, he deserves a typecast Oscar. If he wants to be taken seriously as an actor though, it's time buck up his ideas or just take on twittering full-time. Couples eager to find a movie which suits them both should undoubtedly hang on for the hotly anticipated Cruise-Diaz summer smash Knight and Day. Such a promising movie would really have to go some to lower the bar set by Killers. From the trailers, Knight and Day looks to straddle the line of satisfaction for both sexes incredibly well, whereas Killers attempts to do the same but gets lost in an insipid void somewhere in between. Maybe I've been a tad harsh, it was never intended to be an Oscar winner or one that would go down in the record books I'm sure, but I just can't help thinking you'd have to be void of at least four out of your five senses to really enjoy this.

Takes awhile to get its act together

[napierslogs · 6/10 · 5 June 2010]

"Killers" is a romantic comedy action film, but starts out by failing on all accounts.

Katherine Heigl plays the romantic comedy lead, she got the sexy part and at least tried on the funny part, but she was a very disjointed character that at times was really hard to care for or relate to. Ashton Kutcher played the action lead, and he got the sexy part but was very awkward when he tried to play the romantic comedy lead.

The film then spent around an hour showing us their boring suburban life. Boring being the key word.

When we finally got to the action, the film started clicking. The romantic leads developed some chemistry, and the many known comedic actors appeared to be there for a reason. The film then flew by with a pretty good medley of comedy and action, and a healthy dose of reminders that this is for fun not serious.

Beware if you're looking for a romantic comedy or a quick action flick. Watch it only if you are willing to stand an hour of nothing to finally get to a fun, ridiculous, sexy, and funny light-weight action film.

No, just no

[mjk280 · 2/10 · 27 June 2010]

I'm sorry but there was no way I was ever getting into this one. Beforehand the title annoyed me (did anyone really think this would be edgy in the least bit?) and I was not buying Ashton Kutcher as a spy and it was pretty obvious from his past work he wasn't going to "suck me in" as the movie went along. I know everyone is sick of Tom Cruise these days and frankly he plays a spy way too often, but at least someone like him looks the part. Kutcher in this role is just Hollywood trying to usher in a new generation for these movies and it's just better off left to someone a little older with some better acting chops (Clive Owen or someone? I dunno).

The movie commits a pretty big sin in my book right from the get go: The couple meet in France, have a great time, and the movie fast forwards to Kutcher trying to get out of the spy game because he's just so in love with her. *Sigh* I hate when the filmmakers basically just say "you pretty much know what happens here so we'll just skip it." Jeez at least try to hide the fact that the movie is just a way to make a quick buck for the studio.

Anyways 3 years after getting married Heigel finds out Kutcher is a spy and all these people from his daily life start coming out of the woodwork to try and kill him. All of a sudden fat coworkers are skilled knife fighters and goofy neighbors are lugging around automatic weapons to try and get him. Ugh. This transition from normal suburban life to a mine field of would-be assassins takes place so fast and not in a good way. Plus again the whole time Kutcher is trying to harness that "eye of the tiger" his character used to have back when he was a cold blooded killer and nobody buys it for a second.

At the end we find out Selleck was involved with a government agency and had all these people planted into Kutcher's life to make sure he really was on the up and up. When Selleck realize Kutcher was contacted by his old boss, Selleck released the hounds on him. WTF? Whatever, I'm too bored and annoyed to care. The couple has a baby and the movie ends. Good god.

The worst part is the movie tries to create humor by banking on the chemistry Heigel and Kutcher have. It doesn't work because they have none, but it's not totally their fault. The whole "couple arguing while under duress" thing is so overdone by Hollywood. They figure some people still haven't seen it done a million times so they do it anyways. The jokes are lame and we've been there before. I gave it a 2 out of 10 because I did indeed chuckle a few times.

A very entertaining comedic spy film

[davispittman · 8/10 · 13 July 2015]

This comedic spy flick starring Katherine Heigl and Ashton Kutcher and Tom select and Catherine O'Hara was surprisingly very entertaining despite very negative reviews. The action sequences were very violent and intense just how I like them, and Ashton Kutcher and Katherine Heigl's chemistry between each other as a married couple was perfect, I found myself laughing throughout the film! Also Tom Selleck and Catherine O'Hara did a great job too, along with Alex Borstein, she was very fitting and very hilarious and her role. There was a couple of scenes that had missed placed jokes that fell flat, but that was rare. I really don't know why this movie got negative reviews. Eight out of 10 for killers

Pretty good romantic comedy for young couples

[chris-g-anderson · 7/10 · 14 June 2010]

I am surprised this has such a low rating. It's not the best movie I've seen but it was funny. My wife and I left thinking it was very cheesy but very funny too, which is what we were hoping to get out of it.

The parts most people refer to as "boring" in the film are what my wife and I really enjoyed. It was like looking at ourselves on the big screen. They got the "we've been married 3 years" struggles and fun times down pat. I especially liked the awkwardness of the son and father-in-law scenes (so true).

Of course the action and plot had some serious holes and needed to explained a little more, but we went for a romantic comedy, and that's what we got. You get to see 2 good looking people (that obviously never actually go through these situations) going through the same conversations/arguments/experiences that all us young couples have.

I liked it.

Rubbish

[cartidge · 3/10 · 5 July 2010]

In my book, a comedy has to be, first and foremost, funny. Killers was not funny. I didn't laugh once. The film was predictable, tedious and shockingly performed. The plot is also utterly incoherent.

It goes basically something like this, Katherine Heigl plays a rebounding officer worker type called Jen, who having ended her relationship with her previous partner goes on holiday with her parents played by Tom Selleck and Catherine O'Hara. While on holiday she meets Spencer (Ashton Kutcher) with whom she forms a romantic relationship. However, what she doesn't know if that Spencer is actually a CIA assassin and on a working 'holiday'.

Upon meeting Jen, Spencer has a clichéd change of heart regarding his work, and concludes that it is time to retire. Upon learning of Spencer's decision his CIA boss declares (again in banal clichéd style that we have all heard in this type of film) that nobody ever quits their vocation. Regardless, Spencer returns to the States with Jen, marries her and begins a life of middle-class suburban domestic bliss, with his new neighbours. In the meantime Spencer begins to form a cool relationship with his father-in-law.

However, all is not well in middle-class suburban domestic bliss, as Spencer's erstwhile boss sends him a coded message, which is noticed by a suspicious Tom Selleck. At this stage Spencer and Jen's various colleagues and neighbours suddenly turn out to be highly trained assassins out to kill Spencer, and bloody hilarity in suburbia is supposed to ensue, complete with pregnancy tests and machine guns. Unfortunately, it simply isn't funny. It lacks any charm, wit or spark, save for the presence of Tom Selleck, without whom this film would not have achieved the generous three star rating I have given it.

The plot is grafted together from films we have all already seen, and uses every cheap ploy available to increase the films attractiveness to its target audience. For the female audience it shows a topless and ripped Ashton Kutcher, and for the teenage male audience it has Katherine Heigl in her bra for no real reason other than eye candy.

I have never stormed out of a cinema in righteous anger, but this was a close call.

Fun film

[johnnyv-83486 · 20 April 2019]

I thoroughly enjoyed this film. Action and humor. Surprising cameos

In a Nutshell: Killers

[mike-adly5 · 5/10 · 3 June 2010]

Killers...So unreasonably stupid, I actually enjoyed it!

I went to see this one to make up for my needy romantic comedy desires unfulfilled by "The Bounty Hunter". I gotta say; it isn't as intriguing as I wanted but to a certain extent enjoyable. "Killers" is a story about Jen (Katherine Heigl), recently dumped, who goes on vacation with her parents to France where she meets Spencer (Ashton Kutcher) the man of her dreams. As they become 3 years married, violent secrets about lovely Spencer begin to unveil and then the adventures begin.

"Killers" is one foolish, unrealistic, anything-can-happen, whatever- the-director-wants kind of movie. You'll find it impossible to judge it with reason. If you drop your brains at the door of the theater, and decide to enjoy a sequence of some random eye candy scenes with good looking characters running around, you'll love it. "Killers", just like other movies this year, is a based on one fabulous idea, that could have been well executed to create a different kind of film.

Moreover; I think this movie is chronologically impaired (definitely not in a Tarantino way). The events are in a timely order, but in a wildly shifting manner. Things happen so fast and you're moving from one stage in the story to the other so quickly. It makes you think they're underestimating your intelligence. You'll find yourself, in many parts of the movie, saying "really??" sometimes out loud. But then again, leave them brains out of the game.

Kutcher appears as charming as usual, but ironically, he fits in the character he fakes a lot more than his real one in the movie. Heigl who's undoubtedly one of the most beautiful women in Hollywood these days, brings in her funny side and succeeds to give a few chuckles. Finally, Tom Selleck and Catherine O'Hara who portray Heigl's parents add their 2 pennies of comedy during their short appearances which are nothing less than amusing.

In a nutshell, "Killers" is a comical, no story, chain of events that take place in no brains land. Watch it with just your eyes and you may have fun. You may also give yourself one free pass to use your brains so that you can imagine the whole lot of events that happen off the screen as they're surprisingly more than what happens on it.

better lead needed

[johnjag-21-794553 · 6/10 · 27 October 2020]

This is a nice movie, but Ashton Kutcher does not quite ring true as the assassin. I know real spied are not to stand out and be noticed the way James Bond is. But still I think another actor might have been better in the action sequences. The rest of the cast is just perfect, especially Katherine Heigl.

Disappointing...

[paul_haakonsen · 3/10 · 14 August 2010]

One thing comes to mind, that this is an off-beat, slowed down and less entertaining version of "Mr. and Mrs. Smith". I might be wrong, but it sure does look that way.

I thought this movie was a comedy, but I didn't laugh once throughout the movie, nor did it manage to make me smile. Sure the movie moved forward at a decent pace, but where did the comedy go? There are some nice twists throughout the movie, but that is basically all that this movie have working for it.

If you have seen the movie with Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, "Mr. and Mrs. Smith", then this movie comes off as a cheap imitation, and your money would be better spent on "Mr. and Mrs. Smith", mark my words.

The performances by Kutcher, Heigl and Selleck were top notch, no doubt about it, but the movie just didn't work in their favor. There was something missing from this movie to make it stand out, to make it work as a whole experience. And the action scenes were also adequately nice to look at, good action, fast car chases and alright fight scenes. But that wasn't enough to keep this movie floating.

This was a sore disappointment to me, and it is not a movie that I will be returning to for a second viewing.

Actually good

[productofthes-42452 · 7/10 · 15 March 2021]

Never watched this movie until quarantine because it didn't seem like a movie I'd like, but it's actually not that bad. It's not making my top ten list or anything but it's worth a watch.

The film is neither funny or thrilling and is instead really boring!

[Hellmant · 4/10 · 12 October 2010]

'KILLERS': Two Stars (Out of Five)

Katherine Heigl and Ashton Kutcher star in this action comedy directed by Robert Luketic (director of 'WIN A DATE WITH TAD HAMILTION', '21', 'THE UGLY TRUTH' and 'LEGALLY BLONDE'). The film really wants to be a fun mix of 'James Bond' homage style goofy action with romantic comedy slapstick but it fails on both counts. I like some of Luketic's other work (like 'HAMILTION' and '21') but here he has a horrible script to work with and some severely miscast actors. Kutcher is about as wrong for the lead in this film as any casting job I've seen in quite some time (and the voice he chooses to attempt to do in the film is awful) and Heigl is just plain bad.

In the film Kutcher plays a secret super agent by the name of Spencer Aimes on assignment in Nice, France who has grown tired of the violence and just wants a normal life. Then he meets carefree and simple Jen (Heigl) on vacation there and immediately falls in love. So he quits the assassin life and gets married. Three years later his ex-employer (Martin Mull) tries to draw him back into the life and when Spencer refuses to go back a mark is put out on his life. Spencer soon learns that a lot of the people he's gotten to know in the last three years are really spies planted in various areas of his life and now they want to kill him. Jen soon discovers what's really going on and the two go on the run not knowing who they can trust.

The film is full of ridiculous slapstick and half ass-ed completely over the top action. The film is neither funny or thrilling and is instead really boring. Heigl plays yet another dumb sexist stereotype and her acting has never been worse and Kutcher, like I said, is just the wrong guy for the job and as a result is horrible as well. The two have no chemistry and the supporting cast all seems to be just going through the motions. Then the movie really gets bad when it reaches it's horrendous idiotic conclusion, which makes no sense. Why the two stars then? Because there are a few entertaining moments here and there, including a few mildly impressive action scenes. Other than that the film is almost a complete waste.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbVn2VjPK44

Not Bad, Shallow but damn entertaining

[tilak · 6/10 · 24 May 2021]

If you want to get entertained from this mindless flick then go for it . Direction is good, plot is decent, and dialogue is amusing. What bothered me the most was unnecessary use of CGI in driving scene, could have used a little more budget. Action scenes are worth watching, which are creative and slick. One death scene is simply amazing, I won't say which one.

So ignore the haters ,watch it!!

Somewhat a disordered mess

[Floated2 · 3/10 · 20 August 2010]

Killers is not that great of a movie. Its more of a mess. Its titled as a comedy yet its not funny at all. Many romantic comedies have failed and this one is no exception. Though this one is more action. So its about a female Jen (Heigl) who goes on vacation and meets her future husband who turns out to be a spy (Kutcher). The start of the movie is so weird and unrealistic from the point where they meet. Then about 25 minutes into the film, it fast forwards to 3 years later where they are married and she still doesn't know that he's a spy. She eventually finds out when she comes back to her house unexpectedly and sees her husband be attacked by a hit-man sent to kill him and also her.

The movie was rather lame and boring. Though towards the end the action caught in and it became better. There were some alright parts but not enough to save this film. The end turns out that basically everyone the couple knew was set out to kill them. The action sequences were somewhat unexpected but okay. Overall the movie could have been much better. So i wouldn't really recommend but whatever.

A Fun Show

[miket641 · 8/10 · 11 December 2018]

My wife and I just watched this movie again and I still like it. I don't know why this kid didn't make more action movies.

Better than people make it out to be

[Jke_1245 · 7/10 · 4 February 2021]

So for context I've been on a Katherine Heigl binge lately and this is one of the movies that came up. I watched it and for the most part enjoyed it. What can I say it was pretty good, the plot knew what it was doing and I understood it, the characters were played well and the chemistry between them was fantastic. I will admit I have never seen Ashton Kutcher in a movie except Open Season (Remember that movie?) and I thought he good a great job as a ex 'agent'. Katherine Heigl's character is fun and bubbly an not to the point where its annoying but just enough. She also comes across as quite humorous in this movie. Their chemistry is good and feels genuine when they are on screen especially in panicked situations. Also Magnum P.I himself is in this film and although is character is basic and has been done many times before in movies as a dad who doesn't like/ trust their daughters husband yet this one puts a spin on it. Now this movie is a comedy however its not laugh out loud funny, its more mellow and makes you smile or laugh a little.

But my final thoughts on this movie is that it's well made and good fun... The performances are on point and the plot is easy to follow so If you've got spare time and are bored I'd suggest giving this a watch. Not as bad as people are making it out to be.

Bland is an understatement

[cardsrock · 4/10 · 13 January 2019]

There's almost negative chemistry between the two leads and they both seem like they're phoning it in. The story is almost nonexistent and, of course, highly implausible.