Then this action packed movie is quite watchable; at least I didn't give up in the middle of it and cursed loudly as I used to do when watched a lousy B-movie soiled my day. This movie is actually quite good, the only thing that's not right is the numbers of the terrorists who appeared in a mid-sized truck, and how they got on the island in the middle of nowhere without transportation. The Seal team and the CIA lady needed chopper to get to the island, how these terrorists got on the island without even alerted the terrorist detainees black site? If you could put your logic, IQ and, well, the basic elementary math aside, then it's a quite exciting combat movie. Scott Adkins did a great job as usual, and I like him a lot, his acting has become better and better.
144 Reviews
Entertaining action thriller...
paul_haakonsen19 January 2022
I had no expectations to this 2021 action thriller from writer Jamie Russell and director James Nunn. I hadn't even heard about the movie prior to watching it. However, I saw that the movie had Scott Adkins in the lead role, and with it being a movie I hadn't already seen, of course I opted to sit down and watch "One Shot".
And while the storyline and plot in "One Shot" was essentially very simple and didn't have all that much going on in it, then "One Shot" was actually still a rather enjoyable movie. Why? Well, the sheer amount of action in the movie, and the way that the action scenes were filmed. It totally worked in favor of the movie, and made me feel like I was right there in the action.
"One Shot" had two actors that I was familiar with, and that was Scott Adkins and Ryan Philippe. But I will say that they had gotten together a good cast ensemble for the movie, and the actors and actresses were putting on good performances to bring the movie to life on the screen.
"One Shot" certainly was entertaining and enjoyable, I will say that. However, this is hardly a movie that warrants more than a single viewing, as there simply isn't enough material and contents to the storyline to support multiple viewings.
My rating of "One Shot" lands on a six out of ten stars.
And while the storyline and plot in "One Shot" was essentially very simple and didn't have all that much going on in it, then "One Shot" was actually still a rather enjoyable movie. Why? Well, the sheer amount of action in the movie, and the way that the action scenes were filmed. It totally worked in favor of the movie, and made me feel like I was right there in the action.
"One Shot" had two actors that I was familiar with, and that was Scott Adkins and Ryan Philippe. But I will say that they had gotten together a good cast ensemble for the movie, and the actors and actresses were putting on good performances to bring the movie to life on the screen.
"One Shot" certainly was entertaining and enjoyable, I will say that. However, this is hardly a movie that warrants more than a single viewing, as there simply isn't enough material and contents to the storyline to support multiple viewings.
My rating of "One Shot" lands on a six out of ten stars.
Scott Adkins doing what he does, as well as he usually does it
lotekguy-15 November 2021
Scott Adkins is the reliable, taciturn star of low-budget action flicks that Steven Seagal still thinks he is. The man is a legit martial artist. He looks tough, yet smart enough to be the hero of any sort of action flick he's offered, whether grounded in kick-boxing, organized crime or, as here, soldiering. Adkins leads a S. E. A. L. team deployed to a black-site island prison to transport a suspected terrorist to Washington ASAP. He supposedly knows what's needed to prevent an imminent nuclear attack in a major American city. His crew brings a civilian agent (Ashley Greene) to try to coax the intel from the detainee, since a period of "extreme interrogation" failed. The guy running the place (Ryan Phillipe) resents the hell out of this insulting intrusion on his domain and resists the extraction order, despite the claimed urgency and scale of the threat.
Horrible timing. Before they can leave, a horde of heavily-armed, disciplined terrorists crashes the party (literally and figuratively), killing the guards, destroying the means of exit, and cutting off communications before reinforcements could be summoned. They want the same inmate for whatever their end-game may be, regardless of the body count on either side.
What follows is a long, large-scale shootout between a horde of bad guys, amplified by the other prisoners they set free, and a greatly outnumbered and outgunned cluster of Adkins-led defenders. The clash plays out somewhat like a video game through the large, maze-like complex, both indoors and out, racking up a massive body count of anonymous characters, plus casualties among those we know by name and care about.
Adkins does what Adkins does as convincingly as ever. I started this review by calling him reliable for a reason. His brand of predictable is a significant asset, not a critique. The dude delivers exactly what his fans expect of him, which is largely a high score on the adrenaline scale that minimizes cerebral exertion. Here's a satisfying example for your guilty-pleasure enjoyment.
Horrible timing. Before they can leave, a horde of heavily-armed, disciplined terrorists crashes the party (literally and figuratively), killing the guards, destroying the means of exit, and cutting off communications before reinforcements could be summoned. They want the same inmate for whatever their end-game may be, regardless of the body count on either side.
What follows is a long, large-scale shootout between a horde of bad guys, amplified by the other prisoners they set free, and a greatly outnumbered and outgunned cluster of Adkins-led defenders. The clash plays out somewhat like a video game through the large, maze-like complex, both indoors and out, racking up a massive body count of anonymous characters, plus casualties among those we know by name and care about.
Adkins does what Adkins does as convincingly as ever. I started this review by calling him reliable for a reason. His brand of predictable is a significant asset, not a critique. The dude delivers exactly what his fans expect of him, which is largely a high score on the adrenaline scale that minimizes cerebral exertion. Here's a satisfying example for your guilty-pleasure enjoyment.
Scott Adkins and one shot action sequences elevate this generic action film.
Jack_Traven_3066 November 2021
6.5/10; About this film, Scott Adkins shines as usual. This man is a legit on screen action presence and acts well. He sells the character of the Navy SEAL team leader. And the fights are amazing too, starting with extended shootouts to close quarter pistol fights and hand to hand fights. The action is directed well. It is really tense and well choreographed.
The supporting cast is ok. Ashley Greene is good. Ryan Phillip looked bored. Others were just fine. The story is your generic good guys rescuing prisoner from bad guys. And the script is mediocre. Many scenes in the film would have made an impact had the characters been fleshed out and the script a better one. The one take becomes a bit strenuous at times too.
Overall it's a fine movie. Without Adkins and the cool fights, it would have been a boring mess. Do give it a watch.
The supporting cast is ok. Ashley Greene is good. Ryan Phillip looked bored. Others were just fine. The story is your generic good guys rescuing prisoner from bad guys. And the script is mediocre. Many scenes in the film would have made an impact had the characters been fleshed out and the script a better one. The one take becomes a bit strenuous at times too.
Overall it's a fine movie. Without Adkins and the cool fights, it would have been a boring mess. Do give it a watch.
Good one
ArtPicNRGH12 November 2021
For the B movie - this is the good one. Nice realistic gun and fist fights, amazing cameraman and choreography work, good CGI. No wokism or PC BS. Predictable and enjoyable action. Minus for 200 people in one truck and some cheese. Rare find in modern agendas-ruled cinema.
A shot of adrenaline
Gordon-1115 January 2022
200 Soldiers, 1 Truck...
scott-harding17 February 2022
Just because a movie is shot in 1 take definitely doesn't make it special anymore and this isn't special. With 15 minutes to go in the movie I really was rooting for everyone to get at least one bullet. A rating of 7.5 at the time of viewing I thought I'd give it a go and now wish I hadn't.
Well armed soldiers piled out of a TARDIS like truck for what seemed like 20 minutes, like scarfs up a clowns sleeve they just kept coming out.
Gun magazines with seemingly endless bullets to impregnable buildings with fire escapes dragged this sea-sickness giving camera work on for far too long.
There seems a lot of love for the main actor but there wasn't much acting for him to do in this film. I'll try another movie of his but won't be revisiting this tripe during my lifetime.
Well armed soldiers piled out of a TARDIS like truck for what seemed like 20 minutes, like scarfs up a clowns sleeve they just kept coming out.
Gun magazines with seemingly endless bullets to impregnable buildings with fire escapes dragged this sea-sickness giving camera work on for far too long.
There seems a lot of love for the main actor but there wasn't much acting for him to do in this film. I'll try another movie of his but won't be revisiting this tripe during my lifetime.
You´ll get more than one shot...
frank-liesenborgs10 November 2021
Here you have it, your "One Shot". You will enjoy non-stop action for 1,5 hours. The fighting scenes, hand-to-hand combat and the explosions are very well executed. Everybody will say off course that the plot and screenplay was a bit simple. But who cares? This movie is fast paced and will never get bored. Regarding the acting, Ashley Greene stands out as the tough and steady Zoey, the mysterious CIA analyst. And Scott Adkins as Jake, leader of the SEAL time, also delivers an outstanding performance. The scenes inside the building to the chasing from block to block, against the raining of gunshots and the transition from one set-up to another is done in one flow. Astonishing. If you have seen "Unbreakable", you know the storyline. The execution however is totally different. Conclusion: if you like action movies, this is a must.
Youtube shooting range clip ... extended to 90 min
m-hilberg10 November 2021
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is VERY disappointing. The plot takes place in small shooting range kind of setup and terrorist stereotype "tangos" fall by the dozens. But to be honest it's really not much of a plot that takes place at all. It's just a very boring series of killings... roughly 6 per minute... so about 540 in this 90 min clip. And they all fit in a bus. Yeah.
Too much...
byron-1167 November 2021
Don't waste your time
grahamhamilton6 February 2022
Decent plot line, dreadful acting
Box ticking exercise with the terrorist detention camp, guns that don't run out of bullets and actors with unexpected bills to pay, surprised Bruce Willis doesn't make an appearance.
I don't think many can appreciate the difficulty in making this film.
Top_Dawg_Critic8 November 2021
It's called One Shot because they only have one shot to stop a terrorist plot, but also, because the entire movie was filmed in one take! That takes a lot of work and skill to create and I'm sure is exhausting, yet this is novice filmmaker James Nunn's first writing credit, and his 5th full length feature film directorial credit. And he did not disappoint.
At first it will feel like you're behind a player in Call of Duty, and then it's like you're right there, behind the action, turning your head to whoever is talking or shooting. It's kinda epic and magical when you really think about it. It's non stop energy, excitement and suspense. Obviously the pacing is fast, so the 96 min runtime flies by quickly.
Then add the excellent tactical action choreography, cinematography and special effects, plus the outstanding, convincing and commanding performances ny all - especially Scott Adkins, and you'll be on the edge of your seat the entire time. I'm pretty sure I forgot to breath a bunch of times.
My only complaint was that I wanted more story and not as much shooting, which seemed to be the majority of the film. But nevertheless, if you're into this genre, you will not be disappointed. Hats off to Nunn for giving us this amazing action film. It's a well deserved 8/10 from me.
At first it will feel like you're behind a player in Call of Duty, and then it's like you're right there, behind the action, turning your head to whoever is talking or shooting. It's kinda epic and magical when you really think about it. It's non stop energy, excitement and suspense. Obviously the pacing is fast, so the 96 min runtime flies by quickly.
Then add the excellent tactical action choreography, cinematography and special effects, plus the outstanding, convincing and commanding performances ny all - especially Scott Adkins, and you'll be on the edge of your seat the entire time. I'm pretty sure I forgot to breath a bunch of times.
My only complaint was that I wanted more story and not as much shooting, which seemed to be the majority of the film. But nevertheless, if you're into this genre, you will not be disappointed. Hats off to Nunn for giving us this amazing action film. It's a well deserved 8/10 from me.
Pretty solid action flick
Jim_Screechy5 November 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this one not knowing what to expect but for the most part enjoyed it.
As with so many films where there is an agenda that needs to be fulfilled, some of the events and situations that arise occur solely to either advance the plot or execute the predetermined narrative. This one unfortunately falls fairly squarely into this category. The screenplay is thus a little 'out there' and though this is clearly evident it isn't so obtuse that it interferes uncomfortably with your enjoyment of the movie.
The direction is pretty good, and the film is technically proficient. The tension, energy and action are all portrayed fairly effectively so the film has a nice authentic feel to it. The performances for the most part are good to fair, though in certain places it is difficult to tell if scenes are failed by the cast, or much more likely the script. I seem to be saying this far too often, but again, a little more time and effort spent on the story would have gone a long way to making this far better film. This is not to say its not decent, just that it could have been so much more.
Scott Adkins gives a solid performance as does Ashley Greene, and the supporting cast has a couple of standouts, though largely they are all fairly competent.
Some aspects of the film are a little ridiculous, but as I said earlier, they're necessary for the plot to work, and sadly they are too significant to go unnoticed. For example, when the truck breaks through the gate into the military compound a dozen or so men jump out the back and start the attack. The truck can hold maybe twenty or thirty men max, but in spite of how many are killed, both by our crack shot Seal team, and the base's military defence personnel, the numbers never decrease. If anything they seem to multiply, spawning baddies like a campaign session of 'Call of Duty'.
Ok in fairness its still quite an enjoyable movie, and this is largely due to the cast doing a good job with the material. I enjoyed it and think 6/10 is a fair score, maybe 7 at a push.
Definitely worth a watch.
As with so many films where there is an agenda that needs to be fulfilled, some of the events and situations that arise occur solely to either advance the plot or execute the predetermined narrative. This one unfortunately falls fairly squarely into this category. The screenplay is thus a little 'out there' and though this is clearly evident it isn't so obtuse that it interferes uncomfortably with your enjoyment of the movie.
The direction is pretty good, and the film is technically proficient. The tension, energy and action are all portrayed fairly effectively so the film has a nice authentic feel to it. The performances for the most part are good to fair, though in certain places it is difficult to tell if scenes are failed by the cast, or much more likely the script. I seem to be saying this far too often, but again, a little more time and effort spent on the story would have gone a long way to making this far better film. This is not to say its not decent, just that it could have been so much more.
Scott Adkins gives a solid performance as does Ashley Greene, and the supporting cast has a couple of standouts, though largely they are all fairly competent.
Some aspects of the film are a little ridiculous, but as I said earlier, they're necessary for the plot to work, and sadly they are too significant to go unnoticed. For example, when the truck breaks through the gate into the military compound a dozen or so men jump out the back and start the attack. The truck can hold maybe twenty or thirty men max, but in spite of how many are killed, both by our crack shot Seal team, and the base's military defence personnel, the numbers never decrease. If anything they seem to multiply, spawning baddies like a campaign session of 'Call of Duty'.
Ok in fairness its still quite an enjoyable movie, and this is largely due to the cast doing a good job with the material. I enjoyed it and think 6/10 is a fair score, maybe 7 at a push.
Definitely worth a watch.
This one is not up to Adkins' usual high standards. Sorry Scott!
derek-a-charette10012 December 2021
Though I am a huge Scott Adkins fan, I won't sit here and make excuses for this movie being subpar. I am very well researched in US military tactics, as well as covert intelligence and CIA/CSS, CO-INTEL, counterterrorism, and special forces operations. I am also very much familiar and experienced with guns.
Whenever people like myself, and people with military training and law enforcement and gun owners watch this kind of movie, we expect to have an as accurate as possible depiction of reality.
When I watch high powered rifles being fired with exactly ZERO recoil, a lack of barrel movement, and ZERO smoke coming from the ejection port or the casings as they are ejected, I get upset.
When I see these guys firing Kalashnikov's on full auto, and not even shake the smallest amount, I get upset. If anyone wants to argue this point, I suggest you look up a video of an AK47 being fired on full auto. After 3 shots the recoil is so strong that the barrel lifts so far that it ends up pointing at the Heavens. The AK47 kicks like an elephant. Unacceptable!
When I see Scott fire almost 100 rounds from a 30-round 5.56 mag without any reloads, I get mad.
When I see that Scott is using the standard M4-A1, I get upset. Navy SEALS are incredibly precise with their weapons platforms, I get mad. The variant of this weapon that SEALS and SWCC carry, is the M4-A1 carbine SOPMOD Block-1 modified.
When I see a SEALS team and not one of them has an underslung M203 40mm grenade launcher, I get mad. In reality, as soon as a large attacking armed force assaults your position with rapid violence of action, all clumped up together in a 20 foot radius, you automatically have several operators pop a few 40mm grenade at the target, the instant you see them, and that would have wiped out almost all the bad guys before they even have a chance to carry out the assault, I get mad.
When I see what are supposed to be highly trained and battle hardened SOF security detail that protect our embassies and CIA covert overseas prison sites, that run around like a bunch of idiots with no tactical awareness, I get mad.
Whenever people like myself, and people with military training and law enforcement and gun owners watch this kind of movie, we expect to have an as accurate as possible depiction of reality.
When I watch high powered rifles being fired with exactly ZERO recoil, a lack of barrel movement, and ZERO smoke coming from the ejection port or the casings as they are ejected, I get upset.
When I see these guys firing Kalashnikov's on full auto, and not even shake the smallest amount, I get upset. If anyone wants to argue this point, I suggest you look up a video of an AK47 being fired on full auto. After 3 shots the recoil is so strong that the barrel lifts so far that it ends up pointing at the Heavens. The AK47 kicks like an elephant. Unacceptable!
When I see Scott fire almost 100 rounds from a 30-round 5.56 mag without any reloads, I get mad.
When I see that Scott is using the standard M4-A1, I get upset. Navy SEALS are incredibly precise with their weapons platforms, I get mad. The variant of this weapon that SEALS and SWCC carry, is the M4-A1 carbine SOPMOD Block-1 modified.
When I see a SEALS team and not one of them has an underslung M203 40mm grenade launcher, I get mad. In reality, as soon as a large attacking armed force assaults your position with rapid violence of action, all clumped up together in a 20 foot radius, you automatically have several operators pop a few 40mm grenade at the target, the instant you see them, and that would have wiped out almost all the bad guys before they even have a chance to carry out the assault, I get mad.
When I see what are supposed to be highly trained and battle hardened SOF security detail that protect our embassies and CIA covert overseas prison sites, that run around like a bunch of idiots with no tactical awareness, I get mad.
Delivers As Advertised
CinemaClown21 December 2021
An adrenaline-fuelled & macho-flavoured B-movie action fare that delivers exactly what the package advertised, One Shot is a competently crafted genre romp that packs a simple plot and executes it with skill & flair. And despite the gung-ho attitude & 'Murica crap, it manages to be a tense & thrilling affair, thanks to its no-nonsense action & fluid camerawork.
Directed by James Nunn, the story unfolds in real time with the camera capturing the events and following our characters around in a way that gives it the appearance of being shot in a single unbroken take. It sure is a gimmick but it does add to the immediacy of the chaos and keeps us invested in the proceedings while also heightening the tension & suspense at times.
The camera manoeuvres through the spaces in slick & smooth fashion and the neat editing deftly masks the various scene breaks. The drama & performances are serviceable at best but Scott Adkins plays his part with conviction. However, the film loses momentum and begins to go downhill after that big explosion, not to mention that the ending feels a tad drawn out as well.
Overall, One Shot does what it set out to do and does it in style. It is a surprisingly well made example of its genre that's quite aware of its strengths & limitations, and gets ample mileage out of its straightforward premise. Scoring high on action, violence & body counts, this is one solid actioner that plays out like a video game and offers an entertainment that's at least satisfying if not wholly rewarding.
Directed by James Nunn, the story unfolds in real time with the camera capturing the events and following our characters around in a way that gives it the appearance of being shot in a single unbroken take. It sure is a gimmick but it does add to the immediacy of the chaos and keeps us invested in the proceedings while also heightening the tension & suspense at times.
The camera manoeuvres through the spaces in slick & smooth fashion and the neat editing deftly masks the various scene breaks. The drama & performances are serviceable at best but Scott Adkins plays his part with conviction. However, the film loses momentum and begins to go downhill after that big explosion, not to mention that the ending feels a tad drawn out as well.
Overall, One Shot does what it set out to do and does it in style. It is a surprisingly well made example of its genre that's quite aware of its strengths & limitations, and gets ample mileage out of its straightforward premise. Scoring high on action, violence & body counts, this is one solid actioner that plays out like a video game and offers an entertainment that's at least satisfying if not wholly rewarding.
Engaging and Worth Seeing
tkdlifemagazine3 January 2022
Very original execution of a modern western type story. Scott Adkins leads a mission to a Guantanamo type military prison to transfer a prisoner to Washington DC to stop an imminent terrorist attack. The transfer is disrupted by a gang of terrorists invade the island to capture the prisoner. Ryan Phillipe is adequate. Adkins is very good. Ashley Greene is also uncharacteristically good as the agent sent to retrieve the prisoner. The film is shot in one continuous shot from start to finish. This could have been a disaster if not executed well; however this one is very well done. It is fast paced and gripping throughout. The visuals are unsettling at points but they fit the film. It may be lower budget but it doesn't feel like it, nor does it look like it. It is very watchable.
Lacking in polish, but a solid shwocase forScott Adkins and James Nunn
IonicBreezeMachine28 March 2022
At a CIA black site, analyst Zoe Anderson (Ashley Green) is escorted by a SEAL team lead by Jake Harris (Scott Adkins) to escort suspected terrorist Amin Mansur (Waleed Elgadi) back to the United States for a time sensitive purpose. While Anderson deals with bureaucratic squabbles between the CIA and the black site's head Jack Yorke (Ryan Phillipe) the sitce soon comes under attack by insurgents leaving Anderson, Mansur, and the SEAL team fighting scrambling to find an escape and protect Mansur from both the insurgents and black site personnel who harbor anger and hatred.
One Shot comes to us from James Nunn, a UK film director who first came to prominence as co-director of the sniper thriller Tower Block which lead him to direct a number of direct-to-video action films. One Shot marks Nunn's third collaboration with Scott Adkins following their work on Green Street 3: Never Back Down and Elminators. One Shot selling point is the illusion of being shot entirely in one continuous shot similar to films ranging from genre pieces like Bushwick and Silent House to larger scale films like Birdman or 1917. One Shot's stylistic approach to a very basic "meat and potatoes" action framework does elevate it above typical films of this ilk, even if the production is understandably limited by their resources and can't fully exploit the gimmick.
Scott Adkins is well cast as SEAL Team leader Jake Harris and remains an engaging and underrated presence in indie action films. Adkins effortlessly commands the screen in One Shot and sells the danger and tension of the situation. Ashley Greene does well as the CIA analyst whose methods are contrasted against the more extreme methods of Ryan Phillipe's Jack Yorke as the movie includes an anti-torture subtext as well as commentary on the self-feeding cycle of the war on terror where in strikes met with counterstrikes lead to further collateral damage which helps fuel the radicalization that keeps this "war" going. While there's not the level of depth you see in something like Eye in the Sky or one of the John le Carre adaptations the movie does get a bit more ambitious in this department than it needed to.
While most of One Shot's usage of the "one take" format are reasonably well utilized, there are parts where the format works against it and I think it mostly has to do with the Camera's switch in focus. When a one-take setup is utilized in a film, it works best if you're only following one or a specific group of people because it embeds you with them and makes you feel like you're in the movie with them. Nunn does do that with Jake for much of the movie, but there are large chunks of the film where Jake will be off camera and the focus will switch to the insurgent leaders or Mansur which breaks the verisimilitude of the format and doesn't use it to its full effect. If the insurgents had been held at a distance in the movie and only viewed from either surveillance monitors or from Jake Harris' point of view it would've made for a far more effective and tense experience because it would keep our characters and the audience in the dark with regards to them and make them seem more threatening.
One Shot is an entertaining film that takes a well worn premise and plays it reasonably well. While it does feel a little restricted by its budget and the one take format is lacking in polish in comparison to other users, One Shot remains a simple but effective show case for James Nunn's prowess in action filmmaking.
One Shot comes to us from James Nunn, a UK film director who first came to prominence as co-director of the sniper thriller Tower Block which lead him to direct a number of direct-to-video action films. One Shot marks Nunn's third collaboration with Scott Adkins following their work on Green Street 3: Never Back Down and Elminators. One Shot selling point is the illusion of being shot entirely in one continuous shot similar to films ranging from genre pieces like Bushwick and Silent House to larger scale films like Birdman or 1917. One Shot's stylistic approach to a very basic "meat and potatoes" action framework does elevate it above typical films of this ilk, even if the production is understandably limited by their resources and can't fully exploit the gimmick.
Scott Adkins is well cast as SEAL Team leader Jake Harris and remains an engaging and underrated presence in indie action films. Adkins effortlessly commands the screen in One Shot and sells the danger and tension of the situation. Ashley Greene does well as the CIA analyst whose methods are contrasted against the more extreme methods of Ryan Phillipe's Jack Yorke as the movie includes an anti-torture subtext as well as commentary on the self-feeding cycle of the war on terror where in strikes met with counterstrikes lead to further collateral damage which helps fuel the radicalization that keeps this "war" going. While there's not the level of depth you see in something like Eye in the Sky or one of the John le Carre adaptations the movie does get a bit more ambitious in this department than it needed to.
While most of One Shot's usage of the "one take" format are reasonably well utilized, there are parts where the format works against it and I think it mostly has to do with the Camera's switch in focus. When a one-take setup is utilized in a film, it works best if you're only following one or a specific group of people because it embeds you with them and makes you feel like you're in the movie with them. Nunn does do that with Jake for much of the movie, but there are large chunks of the film where Jake will be off camera and the focus will switch to the insurgent leaders or Mansur which breaks the verisimilitude of the format and doesn't use it to its full effect. If the insurgents had been held at a distance in the movie and only viewed from either surveillance monitors or from Jake Harris' point of view it would've made for a far more effective and tense experience because it would keep our characters and the audience in the dark with regards to them and make them seem more threatening.
One Shot is an entertaining film that takes a well worn premise and plays it reasonably well. While it does feel a little restricted by its budget and the one take format is lacking in polish in comparison to other users, One Shot remains a simple but effective show case for James Nunn's prowess in action filmmaking.
Not great.
bombersflyup8 December 2021
Warning: Spoilers
One Shot is watchable, but fails to bring anything new or entertain a whole lot.
For starters, there are a lot of these insurgents to have come out of this lone truck and they're people not bots. They keep doing the exact same thing repetitively, even though the guy in front of them died instantly. Too much of it is just dull stationary shooting without plot and the actors underutilized. It ends abruptly too, so it's all for naught. How a film's made, or what an actor does outside the film to play a role, doesn't change the product, unless of course it improves it.
For starters, there are a lot of these insurgents to have come out of this lone truck and they're people not bots. They keep doing the exact same thing repetitively, even though the guy in front of them died instantly. Too much of it is just dull stationary shooting without plot and the actors underutilized. It ends abruptly too, so it's all for naught. How a film's made, or what an actor does outside the film to play a role, doesn't change the product, unless of course it improves it.
A Masterpiece in Action
HadiAriyan0717 November 2021
This is a wonderful showcase in how action should be done, this a smoking gun proof that you don't need a hundred of millions Hollywood budget to make great action movie.
Don't wait to be taken by a great story or characters or even great acting, this just pure action movie with the one and only Scott Adkins, he and the editor who seamlessly gave us the impression that the movie was shot in one take. Great job James Nunn, you and the crew gave the movie lovers a wonderful action movie.
Don't wait to be taken by a great story or characters or even great acting, this just pure action movie with the one and only Scott Adkins, he and the editor who seamlessly gave us the impression that the movie was shot in one take. Great job James Nunn, you and the crew gave the movie lovers a wonderful action movie.
Why
roxlerookie10 November 2021
Why does Hollywood keep making movies like this. Playing a video game is fun. Watching the lamest video game possible play out is not. In fact that's unfair to video games, the stories they have in those are much better than that one.
It was just awful. At the very least, when you duck behind something 5 meters from the shooter, duck low enough that your head doesn't stick out, especially if not wearing a helmet. And don't hide behind stuff that's obviously not bullet proof.
It was just overwhelmingly bad, I'll stop there.
It was just awful. At the very least, when you duck behind something 5 meters from the shooter, duck low enough that your head doesn't stick out, especially if not wearing a helmet. And don't hide behind stuff that's obviously not bullet proof.
It was just overwhelmingly bad, I'll stop there.
Game sequence move
agrancharov9 November 2021
The movie is a part of Hardcore Henry (more serious though, more realistic ) style. If we can speak about the "role" here Scott Adkins is great as in "Boyka" thus with a top level performance.
This is this type of movies that either makes you nervous because of the continuous action, or keeps you "in game" the whole time.
Really, the movie is similar to what would be if you combine - for example Half Life action along with the cutscenes.
High rate from me for "this type" of movies.
This is this type of movies that either makes you nervous because of the continuous action, or keeps you "in game" the whole time.
Really, the movie is similar to what would be if you combine - for example Half Life action along with the cutscenes.
High rate from me for "this type" of movies.
A novel premise
Leofwine_draca2 February 2022
ONE SHOT is another B-movie from modern action star Scott Adkins, but unlike many of his recent movies it's one of his very best. That's thanks to the novel premise of having the whole thing take place in one seemingly continuous take, which puts the viewer right into the heart of the action and leaves them gasping for breath. It takes twenty minutes to set the story and then never lets up from that point onward, with constant well-directed shoot-outs, explosions and hand-to-hand combat. Adkins shines and the whole film is pacy and exciting. Great job!
Better than a lot of Big Budget movies
ranger512626 September 2022
Didn't know what to expect but I was very impressed with what seemed to be a "One Shot" continuous take.
Action was great, dialog good, story was good, actors good. Not Oscar worty as most action movies are not but under the hoorific time of battle there were no one liners that most american movies put in for comedic effect.
Not a whole lot of cgi or fx, mainly focus on the characters. No romantic interest or Nudity.
Overall I give this a 7. Kudos to Scott Adkins and Waleed Elgadi. I can't explain this movie in less than 600 words that IMDB wants without giving up spoilers.
Camera work was solid, Stunts were great, it almost felt like you were in part of the action.
Action was great, dialog good, story was good, actors good. Not Oscar worty as most action movies are not but under the hoorific time of battle there were no one liners that most american movies put in for comedic effect.
Not a whole lot of cgi or fx, mainly focus on the characters. No romantic interest or Nudity.
Overall I give this a 7. Kudos to Scott Adkins and Waleed Elgadi. I can't explain this movie in less than 600 words that IMDB wants without giving up spoilers.
Camera work was solid, Stunts were great, it almost felt like you were in part of the action.
Bad as bad gets really
Kevbrown7722 March 2022
I turned it off after 23 minutes. It's essentially trying to piggy back on the 'one shot' success of 1917... but without the same calibre of actors, the dialogue, the execution of the lines, the tension, the story, the set scenes or the financial backing. The sort of film you'd find in a battered old VHS case in the bottom of the bargain bin in Blockbusters.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
