Joseph P. Ulibas Hitmans Code (2003) is a terrible "movie". Like I have said in the past, I have nothing against low budget movies. Most of the movies that I like are of the low to no budget variety. But if you're going to make a movie at least have some decent writing and some actors who have the slightest bit of stage presence and charisma. There's nothing worse than a movie that tries to hard. Especially ones that try to hard but have nothing to even flaunt.The movie is about a balding hit-man who tries to look cool. His new assignment is to follow some woman with beefy forearms but thin upper arms. As he follows her around town, he's learns a lot about his funny looking woman. She's not at all what she seems to be. What has this guy (and the audience) gotten in to?Just a terrible movie. Nothing thrilling or exciting to mention. It sucked. I don't even want to know why they even made this movie. There's nothing worse than a bad neo-noir film. Especially one filled with lousy acting, boring set pieces and plain looking women. This movie is masquerading under a nonsensical title Hitmans Code. I never found out or understood what the "code" was about.Avoid like the plague.

morkmeister I viewed this film under its pseudonym Hit-man's Code. It was horrible, the acting was wooden the lines delivered as if the read straight from the script. I rented this movie knowing that I would be getting a B grade film. I had accepted the fact that the movie would be below par and rented it away due to the presence of a Audi on the back cover(I am an avid Audi lover). The film did not have an Audi in it nor did the man on the front cover, back cover, or the girl reflected in his glasses not even the girl getting out of the Audi on the back appeared in this film. Way to go David Craig you suckered someone to rent the film you directed/produced/wrote by misrepresenting it with a fictitious cover. Your attempt to create a film failed, you created only crap.

SableFalcon I saw this movie at a film festival last year in California. I was happy to see it recently made it to my local video store. I remember being impressed with it because it was made on such a low budget. So, I rented it and watched it again. I've gotta say that for a low budget, independent, action movie it is really good. Lots of great locations. Good story. Nice action/gun-play sequences. Very cool love scene. Solid acting. I thought the guy who played the "Ragland" character (Brandon Smith) did a really great job. And the "Twins" provide some nice moments of comic relief. This movie is fun & entertaining. I give it a "thumbs up!"

filmandlife The film was this filmmakers first film, and it was solid for the budget and it being a first attempt. However, the acting most noteably the lead was weak. The story was bland and perdictable, and strangely resemblant of "Batman." If you are a Batman fan this will jump out at you. I think it was weak but good for what it was...