Greetings again from the darkness. It seems to this casual observer that once a person makes the career decision to become a hitman (or hitwoman or hitperson), their life expectancy drops significantly, as does their willingness to trust any person they meet, or at least it should. After all, the industry of killing is all about death ... it's simply a matter of whether (this time) you are the one doing the killing, or the one being killed. This neo-noir comes courtesy of writer-director Nick Stagliano (his first feature film in 10 years) and co-writer James C Wolf.

Anson Mount (so good in the "Hell on Wheels" TV series) is the titular Virtuoso. In typical noir fashion, he's also our narrator, and serves up a detailed explanation of his approach to the profession. He's methodical and meticulous in his precision and planning, and goes about his business in a professional manner, while maintaining a low profile and adhering to his own code. He even practices his facial expressions in the mirror preparing for the rare social interaction (it's funnier than it sounds). He does jobs for The Mentor (newly crowned Oscar winner Anthony Hopkins), a former military friend of his dad. Their minimal communication usually involves a name on a scrap of paper. The first job we witness is a "rush" job and collateral damage leaves Virtuoso burdened with guilt - something that is not an asset in this line of work.

It's the second job that takes up most of the run time. The Mentor provides only "White Rivers" as a hint to the identity of the target, and instructs him to be at the only diner in a place that barely exists as a town. Walking in, he sizes up those in the diner: The Waitress (Abbie Cornish, excellent as Fanny Brawne in BRIGHT STAR, 2009), The Loner (Eddie Marsan, "Ray Donovan"), Handsome Johnnie (Richard Brake), and Johnnie's Girl (Diora Baird). A bit later, the local Deputy (David Morse) is added to the list of possible targets.

The set-up is fun, and meant to keep us striving to stay one step ahead. Chris Perfetti adds a touch of humor in his two quick scenes as the motel desk clerk, and much of the tete a tete comes courtesy of the Virtuoso and The Waitress. Of course as with most noirs, we viewers figure out what's going on long before the hero, as the distractions are many. The budding romance offers up some seedy motel lovemaking, and the Virtuoso has an unusual living arrangement in his cabin in the woods. In other words, there are some excellent elements in play here, and it's difficult to pinpoint why the film doesn't play a bit better than it does. Mostly it just lacks the suspense delivered by the best in the genre.

It was not the worst movie I have ever seen, but the plot was incredibly dumb. The utterly ridiculous premise about super-assassins being sent to kill each other, or just one, while they operate without any clue regarding evidence, DNA or other real world issues. Also, the entire premise of hiring an assassin then making them guess who the target is seems pretty stupid. What assassin would take such a job, and what idiot pays money to maybe have the wrong person(s) killed?

The plot holes are enormous.

The premise of the movie is that the Virtuoso is a professional assassin who is remorseful for an accidental killing. His Mentor, for whatever reason, decides he needs to be dead, but instead of just killing him when he had ample opportunity, the Mentor devises a complex scheme whereby 4 killers are sent on a mission to kill *someone* for *some reason*. Each other? Just him?

In the near-final scene where the Virtuoso meets his killer, they discuss inane issue. The *Deputy* could not be made to look like he was killed by bad guys because he had the real Deputy's body in the trunk of the Sheriff's vehicle. The police would not overlook that when investigating the fake Deputy's death.

The guy who had a heart attack induced had several fake ID's in his wallet, leaving only one at random would not fool police into thinking he was just some poor schmuck, it would, they would discover it was fake, he had a gun, etc. Hilarity ensues.

The final living killer is just as nonsensical as he is. Apparently, to the writer, getting away with murder is a common and easy experience requiring very little in way of not leaving evidence. She has sex with the Virtuoso, which makes no sense if she knows she will kill him, takes a shower allowing the Virtuoso to find her passport and figure out who she is. She then kills him after their ridiculous *one-professional-killer-to-another* conversation, goes to his house, feeds his dog and and nearly shoots it but changes her mind.

The plot makes me wonder which one of the actors read it and thought "that is possible and could happen in real life, I would like to be a part of this."

Donnie Darko is not real, but it isn't supposed to be, and is an entertainment masterpiece. The Virtuoso is supposed to be something that could happen in real life, is a trainwreck of unrealistic logic and events, and generally is not very good.

Plus the ending sucked. They could have ended it like the Mechanic, where he died but everyone else also gets killed by his revengeful nature.

The Virtuoso is all a bit of a mystery and for that reason works to a degree, but not amounting to much in the end.

I'm not sure why any of this was happening or why he would accept this sort of position. Hopkins isn't in a significant role and none of the inner-dialogue seems to add any value either.