It is very easy to see where the mixed to negative critical reception for 'American Assassin' is coming from. At the same time, if there are people who got enjoyment out of 'American Assassin' that's more than fair enough. Have also been pleasantly surprised that so far those that liked the film have been reasonably civil towards those that didn't, which is very rarely the case for defenders of most critically panned films.

Because to me, 'American Assassin' was far from a terrible film. It has a little better than expected, a little better than reputed and had its fair share of good points. It could have been far better though and never hits the bulls-eye, instead competently a few targets without living up fully to its potential. As an adaptation of the source material, it is an assassination with the only resemblances being the title and the characters' names. 'American Assassin' however is going to be judged by me on its own terms, as a standalone it's serviceable enough but is heavily problematic from personal opinion.

'American Assassin' has good elements. It is a visually slick film, with atmospheric settings, brooding lighting and suitably gritty cinematography. The music doesn't make the mistake of being too intrusive or heavy in repetition. Some of the action excites and shocks and the direction is far from an amateur job, having touches of the bravura and some punch that should have come more consistently.

The best things about 'American Assassin' are the first half an hour and the acting. The film opens with a startling and uncompromisingly violent opening sequence that leaves a positive and very promising first impression, while the first hour an hour is gritty and compelling as well as providing chills and devastation. The actors did a very good job with what they were given. Best of all was Michael Keaton on fantastically grizzled form, injecting much needed energy and punch.

Dylan O'Brien is a very convincing lead, the character is too much of a hot-head at times who makes immature and rash decisions without thinking but O'Brien is charismatic and very committed to his role. Taylor Kitsch, who doesn't always do much for me, is surprisingly good in a type of role that one worries initially whether he has the charisma and menace to pull off but there is a noble and better-than-expected effort to rise above the material.

On the other hand, other elements don't work. Mostly the film is good visually, but there is some jumpy, chaotic editing and while the special effects are wisely kept at minimum when they do appear one wishes that there weren't any at all because they are really not good, one doesn't expect them to look as cheap as they are for a feature film made on a sizeable budget.

While the action mostly excites and shocks, others feel too rehearsed and polite when the film works so much better when unflinching and uncompromising which hurts the suspense and spontaneity. The direction as said is competent but the bravura and punch elements should have come more consistently and there is a lack of polish.

It is the script and story that bring 'American Assassin' down most. The script (suffering from too many cooks spoil the broth, referring to the film's troubled script-writing history, more than one script-writer was involved here and it shows loud and clear) is cliché-ridden and is both pedestrian and hammy. As critics have said the film does lack wit and style due to the bland scripting and inconsistent tone and with such stiff and vast competition for spy/political/revenge thrillers (which 'American Assassin' doesn't do enough with) mostly little stands out. It also does nothing to make one properly care for the characters and never fully develops them, a lot of the side characters are very underwritten.

'American Assassin's' story starts off so well and then goes off the boil and goes into tedious and over-the-top territories, never fully exploring the conflict and being indecisive on what its stance on whether revenge is a good or bad thing (it tries to do both and it ends up being confused). A good example of the over-the-top territory is when Keaton's character comments on and critiques his own torture, Keaton gives it everything and relishes the scene but the writing works against him, instead of being chilling like it could have been it comes over as very hammy and almost uncomfortably demented. While things do pick up in the climactic moments, some of it is overblown.

Overall, not a must avoid by any stretch of the imagination but could have lived up to its potential so much more. 5/10 Bethany Cox

AMERICAN ASSASSIN is a BOURNE-style spy thriller made with a notably harder edge than most modern action thillers and their PG-13 certificates. It's a film based on a novel series centred around the character of Mitch App, a secret operative who travels around the world taking down terrorists and assorted bad guys. This plays out as almost a prequel, introducing us to an ordinary guy involved in an extraordinary event (the breathtaking opening sequence) who ends up undergoing gruelling training before going on the usual mission to retrieve stolen nukes. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed this film. It's fast, hard-knuckle and action packed, and the fight scenes are really splendid. There's a lengthy training sequence lifted by the presence of the extraordinary Scott Adkins, while Dylan O'Brien is unrecognisable from his MAZE RUNNER young adult series. The film's real strength lies in the presence of Michael Keaton as the grizzled operative who bags all of the best lines. Keaton is really continuing his career resurgence here. Sure, there are problems, from the cliched plot devices to the bland villain and the digital look, but AMERICAN ASSASSIN remembers to focus on the twists, the turns, the suspense and the violence, and as such it's a real joy to watch.

Mitch Rapp (Dylan O'Brien) proposes to his girlfriend on their beach vacation and then terrorists attack. Fueled by his anger at her death, he infiltrates the jihadist group seeking vengence. He is interrupted by U.S. Special Forces and CIA Deputy Director Irene Kennedy recruits him to be a CIA operative. He is sent to be trained and led by Stan Hurley (Michael Keaton). They are assigned to find loose nukes and they are confronted by opponent Ghost (Taylor Kitsch).

This may have aspirations of being Tom Clancy or maybe more accurately going for a Jason Bourne vibe. It's not really achieving any of that. It has not enough realism and it's not necessarily fun. I do like dark Dylan O'Brien and some of the action. I don't know anything about the source material but it seems to me that Rapp's greatest asset is his expendability. There is deniability if the CIA keeps its distance. That's why at the beginning, I assumed that he would be a hired assassin in a dark ops with limited connection to the CIA. Instead, they try to incorporate him into a CIA team which is the worst of both worlds. He's restrained on one hand and on the other, he's a loose cannon for the CIA. He should be a lone wolf and the act of trying to tame him is flawed in both reality and storytelling. There are questionable motives by many of the characters if it stays long enough to explore them. In a world of action spy thrillers, this is a second tier entry and it fails to do anything special.