The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

and to think i was gonna add a line like, "Contagion is slow, methodical, almost sedative in its pacing... it's to be blunt, a film Al would loathe"

glad you enjoy it. seems a lot of people don't

But wait, that's not all!

Next greatest random selection: Donnie Darko

#61 on Al's Top 100 list.

"I hope that when the world comes to an end, I can breathe a sigh of relief, because there will be so much to look forward to." - Jake Gyllenhaal

When I first saw this movie’s cover, I didn’t know what to make of it, much less what to expect out of the film itself. That strange image of a kid with a wiry, skeletal body surrounded by seemingly-digital writing and this gaping hole in his chest; is it some kind of science fiction? Is it something horrific? Is it something otherworldly?

Truth is, Donnie Darko is all of those things in its own distinctive way. It’s a high-school drama, wrapped up in an eerie, surreal, mysterious type of sci-fi overtone. This might actually go down as the one and only school drama where time travel and tangent universes factor into the kid’s life. The science is kept to a minimum, focusing more on story and character development. In spite of that, the film is pretty evenly paced – not too fast and not too slow – with a particular emphasis on crafting an atmosphere that’s simultaneously creepy, otherworldly, and perhaps somewhat spiritual in nature. It makes for an experience unlike any other.

The story for this is pretty odd, and without a whole lot of straight or concrete answers, the film will come off as weird and confusing. It definitely requires some thought and interpretation to fully comprehend. But even if you don’t spare that type of attention, the drama scenes can stand really well on its own (if it wasn’t for the time traveling stuff, this would simply be a story about a confused and angry teenage boy). Characters are pretty strong and endearing. Through their interactions and dialogue, greater themes of spirituality emerge, which not only adds depth to the story but also ties together the looser elements of the story into one tight package. Overall, despite being enigmatic, the story is as deep and tightly-constructed as it is interesting.

Despite its low budget, the film has some very interesting photography and editing, and I find it quite invoking in some areas. Acting is swell: Jake Gyllenhaal is effectively perfect as the title role, while Holmes Osborne, Mary McDonnell, Jena Malone, and Beth Grant all contribute quality performances. Additional smaller roles by Patrick Swayze, Drew Barrymore, James Duval, and Maggie Gyllenhaal are also noteworthy. Despite a few odd lines, the writing is really good. This production makes the best use of its limited sets, props, and costumes. Special effects aren’t terribly great, but they definitely accentuate the film’s unique style. Music is really slick.

This is not a film that offers a straightforward storyline or answers; it is fundamentally sublime, offering an experience that is mesmerizing and surreal. It is certainly recommended to those open-minded viewers who have the patience and tenacity to view and interpret this mysterious storyline.

Two cuts exist for this film. I've seen people favor the theatrical cut, because it explains less and therefore stimulates the brain more. I personally prefer the director's cut, because it does explain things some more. I'm also more fond of its added special effects. Music is different between the two versions; it may irk some viewers, but not me personally.

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Perfect | Film: Very Good)

On Blu-Ray, this video looks pretty darn and soft throughout, likely as a source limitation. It's still plenty sharp in certain spots, especially in daytime scenes, but with the softness and hazy contrast, it's only barely better than the DVD. Sound quality is really nice though.

PQ: 2.5/5, AQ: 4/5

[Foggy]

Taken 2

Probably the naffest film I've watched this year. The more it went on it sucked and the more it lingers it gets worse, so I might as well review it now while I'm at the peak of positivity towards it.

I've got three things to talk about before I get to the actual film. First being the first film. No, I don't think it's the modern classic of the action genre, it's a classer take on the euro trash action films. It's a brutal and risky film, yet cleverly makes all the numerous henchman have a clever survival drive making the opponents worthy foes against the ruthless Neeson. The only real complaint I have for the original is the jarring teeny bopper subplot with the daughter aiming to become a popstar, which is just barely mentioned in this one.

Secondly, I wasn't having a good theatre experience with this one, I had people on their phones left, right and in front of me, along with heckling. Why would anyone pay full price to watch a film on opening night if you're spending half the time on your phone?

Well it made sense just before the film started. As one young girl shouted out in sudden revelation "OMG, it's a 12a, no wonder we weren't ID'ed". I guess most the teens were disappointed that they haven't snuck in to see a film older than they are.

Which leads me to my third and final point. The films watering down, after 4 of the last 5 films I've seen being Dredd, Killing Them Softly, Lawless and Looper being strong violent films. It's very jarring seeing a watered down version of an already watered down PG-13 film. This means the editing was a bit more choppy and the sound mixing was way more pants, I don't know what it's like in the states, but the sound effects sound more like people are getting patted on the back instead of hitting one another with steel pipes. Gun shots sound like ray guns and explosions sounded like whispy farts.

So, with all this in place, you'd think that I had it in for Taken 2 right from the get go. Well you'd be wrong, the film actually starts out pretty promising. They manage to balance out the storyline set at the suburbs pretty well, unlike the original, and the characters felt a lot more likeable, although it felt like the events from number 1 were shrugged of too easily.

And then, right around the 30 min mark it started to go sour real fast.

The problem being that Liam Neeson must of killed off all the smart clever henchmen in the first one, so was left with shit for brains inbred cousins to finish off in this one. So much so, he doesn't even do a lot until the final third of the film, he lets his daughter do most the hard work for an hour of the running time.

Seriously, these henchmen go around shooting people willy nilly in a hotel, their hideout gets compromised and the guy who killed all their people escapes, yet they go back and hide in the exact same place. Shit, if half these people had decent eyesight then Neeson should of been killed quite a few time, and if any of the had a cloud of common sense the whole family would be dead.

Neeson and his daughter aren't much better, going around being mild inconveniences towards taxi drivers. Running over any stall they can find and causing a bit of random damage to the US Embassy before asking them for help.

It's an eye rolling film needless to say. But that's not to say I can't enjoy silly dumb action films. The point, however, isn't to be stupid and dumb, because the first one got by with being clever and ruthless. Here, if they went a bit meta with Neeson being a one liner spewing badass then I'd be for it. But Oliver Megaton (who's now cemented himself as one of the dullest hacks working in Hollywood) has no sense of humour, nor an idea of how to make a good film. He clearly likes good movies, as he randomly steals pieces of the soundtrack to Drive and splices them into this film, making for the classic case of "Don't reference a great movie in your shitty one". And it's not like this film couldn't be a bit silly and still be good, Luc Besson produced and wrote a great silly action film earlier this year, but sadly couldn't reproduce that here, nor the same formula from the original.

There really isn't anything positive I can say about Taken 2 except maybe if Iwas hammered drunk it'd be better. It shows what catering to a teen audience can do to a film, not that an unrated cut would solve it's more sever problems, but judging by the amount of times the Blackberry screen kept cropping up in the seat in front of me, I can only gather that the film wasn't particularly engrossing to the person in front of me.

2/10

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

i'm a huuuuuuge Blair Witch fan. in fact, it's the greatest horror film of all time imo. but Apollo 18 was pretty much crap. i was a big fan of some creepiness like the guy who would just stare blankly like no one was home, that stuff gets me and a few other scenes were well put together, but all in all it was rubbish. i was very disappointed.

I saw The Blair Witch Project way back in 2000, like I said not a huge horror fan but it was a much better movie than Apollo 18.

[P@t_Mtl]

The Pirate Movie (1982)

Directed by : Ken Annakin
Starring : Christopher Atkins, Kristy McNichol, Ted Hamilton
Format : DVD

Story : After a young girl (McNichol) nearly dies at sea she as a very wild dream about herself, a large bunch of sisters and a group of pirate. She fall's in love with the youngest of the pirates (Atkins) who as his loyalties put to the test. A final battle between the pirates, the family and the strangest bunch of policemen ever we have a happy ending

Comments : This movie is a parody of a comedy (if that is even possible). Base on the comic opera The Pirates of Penzance, the director and everyone else involve in it take's huge liberties with the stories and songs. Of course this movie is silly to the point where cheesy cannot even apply anymore. All I can say is that I have always enjoy this one since I first saw it back in 1982.

Ratings : 3.5/5

[P@t_Mtl]

I saw the pub on TV for Taken 2. Never saw the first one but I sort of wonder just how many time can someone's daughter be kidnapped while traveling in Europe

[usrsld]

I really liked Man on a Wire too. I'm a sucker for a good documentary.

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Taken 2

[Show spoiler]Probably the naffest film I've watched this year. The more it went on it sucked and the more it lingers it gets worse, so I might as well review it now while I'm at the peak of positivity towards it.

I've got three things to talk about before I get to the actual film. First being the first film. No, I don't think it's the modern classic of the action genre, it's a classer take on the euro trash action films. It's a brutal and risky film, yet cleverly makes all the numerous henchman have a clever survival drive making the opponents worthy foes against the ruthless Neeson. The only real complaint I have for the original is the jarring teeny bopper subplot with the daughter aiming to become a popstar, which is just barely mentioned in this one.

Secondly, I wasn't having a good theatre experience with this one, I had people on their phones left, right and in front of me, along with heckling. Why would anyone pay full price to watch a film on opening night if you're spending half the time on your phone?

Well it made sense just before the film started. As one young girl shouted out in sudden revelation "OMG, it's a 12a, no wonder we weren't ID'ed". I guess most the teens were disappointed that they haven't snuck in to see a film older than they are.

Which leads me to my third and final point. The films watering down, after 4 of the last 5 films I've seen being Dredd, Killing Them Softly, Lawless and Looper being strong violent films. It's very jarring seeing a watered down version of an already watered down PG-13 film. This means the editing was a bit more choppy and the sound mixing was way more pants, I don't know what it's like in the states, but the sound effects sound more like people are getting patted on the back instead of hitting one another with steel pipes. Gun shots sound like ray guns and explosions sounded like whispy farts.

So, with all this in place, you'd think that I had it in for Taken 2 right from the get go. Well you'd be wrong, the film actually starts out pretty promising. They manage to balance out the storyline set at the suburbs pretty well, unlike the original, and the characters felt a lot more likeable, although it felt like the events from number 1 were shrugged of too easily.

And then, right around the 30 min mark it started to go sour real fast.

The problem being that Liam Neeson must of killed off all the smart clever henchmen in the first one, so was left with shit for brains inbred cousins to finish off in this one. So much so, he doesn't even do a lot until the final third of the film, he lets his daughter do most the hard work for an hour of the running time.

Seriously, these henchmen go around shooting people willy nilly in a hotel, their hideout gets compromised and the guy who killed all their people escapes, yet they go back and hide in the exact same place. Shit, if half these people had decent eyesight then Neeson should of been killed quite a few time, and if any of the had a cloud of common sense the whole family would be dead.

Neeson and his daughter aren't much better, going around being mild inconveniences towards taxi drivers. Running over any stall they can find and causing a bit of random damage to the US Embassy before asking them for help.

It's an eye rolling film needless to say. But that's not to say I can't enjoy silly dumb action films. The point, however, isn't to be stupid and dumb, because the first one got by with being clever and ruthless. Here, if they went a bit meta with Neeson being a one liner spewing badass then I'd be for it. But Oliver Megaton (who's now cemented himself as one of the dullest hacks working in Hollywood) has no sense of humour, nor an idea of how to make a good film. He clearly likes good movies, as he randomly steals pieces of the soundtrack to Drive and splices them into this film, making for the classic case of "Don't reference a great movie in your shitty one". And it's not like this film couldn't be a bit silly and still be good, Luc Besson produced and wrote a great silly action film earlier this year, but sadly couldn't reproduce that here, nor the same formula from the original.

There really isn't anything positive I can say about Taken 2 except maybe if Iwas hammered drunk it'd be better. It shows what catering to a teen audience can do to a film, not that an unrated cut would solve it's more sever problems, but judging by the amount of times the Blackberry screen kept cropping up in the seat in front of me, I can only gather that the film wasn't particularly engrossing to the person in front of me.

2/10

What's wrong with a whispy fart sound effect?

In all seriousness, my expectations for this continue to drop, and I LOVED the first one. I won't be seeing it in the theater.

[Pondosinatra]

Director: Karen Moncrieff

Main Stars: Britanny Murphy, Toni Collette, Giovanni Ribisi, James Franco, Rose Byrne, Piper Laurie

Rating: 4 out of 5

Out mindlessly wandering to momentarily escape her abusive, invalid mother a woman comes across the dead and battered body of a young hooker (Murphy) named Krista. Numerous lives soon intersect and are explored as we witness the final days of the dead girl. I tend to enjoy movies that contain multiple stories that overlap and come together in unexpected ways. Sometimes they are great (Short Cuts) and sometimes they are clichéd and boring (New Years Eve). With believable performances and a dark subject matter, this one falls in the great camp despite it being very depressing. The film focuses on five different women trapped in unhappy lives. They don't know each other, but the discovery of the body sets in motion events which compels them to confront their unhappiness and enable change for the better. The final story focuses on the last day of Krista's life. Like the other women we see her struggle to break out of her miserable existence, but unlike the others she sadly cannot escape her fate. Knowing what awaits her makes it all the more upsetting to watch. The film ends with a long still shot of Britanny Murphy and it gave me chills. Like the woman on screen that she portrayed, she couldn't escape her own tragic fate and would die within a few years of this being released.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Taken 2

[Show spoiler]Probably the naffest film I've watched this year. The more it went on it sucked and the more it lingers it gets worse, so I might as well review it now while I'm at the peak of positivity towards it.

I've got three things to talk about before I get to the actual film. First being the first film. No, I don't think it's the modern classic of the action genre, it's a classer take on the euro trash action films. It's a brutal and risky film, yet cleverly makes all the numerous henchman have a clever survival drive making the opponents worthy foes against the ruthless Neeson. The only real complaint I have for the original is the jarring teeny bopper subplot with the daughter aiming to become a popstar, which is just barely mentioned in this one.

Secondly, I wasn't having a good theatre experience with this one, I had people on their phones left, right and in front of me, along with heckling. Why would anyone pay full price to watch a film on opening night if you're spending half the time on your phone?

Well it made sense just before the film started. As one young girl shouted out in sudden revelation "OMG, it's a 12a, no wonder we weren't ID'ed". I guess most the teens were disappointed that they haven't snuck in to see a film older than they are.

Which leads me to my third and final point. The films watering down, after 4 of the last 5 films I've seen being Dredd, Killing Them Softly, Lawless and Looper being strong violent films. It's very jarring seeing a watered down version of an already watered down PG-13 film. This means the editing was a bit more choppy and the sound mixing was way more pants, I don't know what it's like in the states, but the sound effects sound more like people are getting patted on the back instead of hitting one another with steel pipes. Gun shots sound like ray guns and explosions sounded like whispy farts.

So, with all this in place, you'd think that I had it in for Taken 2 right from the get go. Well you'd be wrong, the film actually starts out pretty promising. They manage to balance out the storyline set at the suburbs pretty well, unlike the original, and the characters felt a lot more likeable, although it felt like the events from number 1 were shrugged of too easily.

And then, right around the 30 min mark it started to go sour real fast.

The problem being that Liam Neeson must of killed off all the smart clever henchmen in the first one, so was left with shit for brains inbred cousins to finish off in this one. So much so, he doesn't even do a lot until the final third of the film, he lets his daughter do most the hard work for an hour of the running time.

Seriously, these henchmen go around shooting people willy nilly in a hotel, their hideout gets compromised and the guy who killed all their people escapes, yet they go back and hide in the exact same place. Shit, if half these people had decent eyesight then Neeson should of been killed quite a few time, and if any of the had a cloud of common sense the whole family would be dead.

Neeson and his daughter aren't much better, going around being mild inconveniences towards taxi drivers. Running over any stall they can find and causing a bit of random damage to the US Embassy before asking them for help.

It's an eye rolling film needless to say. But that's not to say I can't enjoy silly dumb action films. The point, however, isn't to be stupid and dumb, because the first one got by with being clever and ruthless. Here, if they went a bit meta with Neeson being a one liner spewing badass then I'd be for it. But Oliver Megaton (who's now cemented himself as one of the dullest hacks working in Hollywood) has no sense of humour, nor an idea of how to make a good film. He clearly likes good movies, as he randomly steals pieces of the soundtrack to Drive and splices them into this film, making for the classic case of "Don't reference a great movie in your shitty one". And it's not like this film couldn't be a bit silly and still be good, Luc Besson produced and wrote a great silly action film earlier this year, but sadly couldn't reproduce that here, nor the same formula from the original.

There really isn't anything positive I can say about Taken 2 except maybe if Iwas hammered drunk it'd be better. It shows what catering to a teen audience can do to a film, not that an unrated cut would solve it's more sever problems, but judging by the amount of times the Blackberry screen kept cropping up in the seat in front of me, I can only gather that the film wasn't particularly engrossing to the person in front of me.

2/10

Over your years here we've watched you mature into a full fledged film snob

[Show spoiler]

I thought it was okay, definitely far off from the original (in my Top 15 favorite films)...I'd go 3 or 3.5/5.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Over your years here we've watched you mature into a full fledged film snob

[Show spoiler]

I thought it was okay, definitely far off from the original (in my Top 15 favorite films)...I'd go 3 or 3.5/5.

A few years ago I would of said it was alright. But now it just sucks, like seriously, Maggie Grace hadn't even passed her test yet, and she's pulling all these crazy manoeuvres, all my friends and both my sisters (who are 34 and 30) are terrified to drive on the fast lane of the motorway, never mind whizzing down alleyways.

In retrospect, my dad liked it, although he said it was more of the same.

[jvince]

V/H/S (2012)
dir. David Bruckner, Glenn McQuaid, Radio Silence, Joe Swanberg, Ti West, Adam Wingard

The Good: Unique, creative concepts (except the second segment). Right amount of gore. Lots of tits. Hannah Fierman (the freaky girl in the first segment). Second segment has one of the most shockingly realistic murder scenes in recent memory. The final segment which is, by far, the best and most fun. "Cast him down! Cast him down!"

The Bad: Sorely lacking in fun and scares. Lots of tits. Botched executions of the middle segments.

The Bottom Line: While it is thankfully in no way sterile unlike its other found-footage counterparts, V/H/S is also without its flaws. Worth checking out if you're in the mood for some Halloween horror.

[jvince]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Taken 2

[Show spoiler]Probably the naffest film I've watched this year. The more it went on it sucked and the more it lingers it gets worse, so I might as well review it now while I'm at the peak of positivity towards it.

I've got three things to talk about before I get to the actual film. First being the first film. No, I don't think it's the modern classic of the action genre, it's a classer take on the euro trash action films. It's a brutal and risky film, yet cleverly makes all the numerous henchman have a clever survival drive making the opponents worthy foes against the ruthless Neeson. The only real complaint I have for the original is the jarring teeny bopper subplot with the daughter aiming to become a popstar, which is just barely mentioned in this one.

Secondly, I wasn't having a good theatre experience with this one, I had people on their phones left, right and in front of me, along with heckling. Why would anyone pay full price to watch a film on opening night if you're spending half the time on your phone?

Well it made sense just before the film started. As one young girl shouted out in sudden revelation "OMG, it's a 12a, no wonder we weren't ID'ed". I guess most the teens were disappointed that they haven't snuck in to see a film older than they are.

Which leads me to my third and final point. The films watering down, after 4 of the last 5 films I've seen being Dredd, Killing Them Softly, Lawless and Looper being strong violent films. It's very jarring seeing a watered down version of an already watered down PG-13 film. This means the editing was a bit more choppy and the sound mixing was way more pants, I don't know what it's like in the states, but the sound effects sound more like people are getting patted on the back instead of hitting one another with steel pipes. Gun shots sound like ray guns and explosions sounded like whispy farts.

So, with all this in place, you'd think that I had it in for Taken 2 right from the get go. Well you'd be wrong, the film actually starts out pretty promising. They manage to balance out the storyline set at the suburbs pretty well, unlike the original, and the characters felt a lot more likeable, although it felt like the events from number 1 were shrugged of too easily.

And then, right around the 30 min mark it started to go sour real fast.

The problem being that Liam Neeson must of killed off all the smart clever henchmen in the first one, so was left with shit for brains inbred cousins to finish off in this one. So much so, he doesn't even do a lot until the final third of the film, he lets his daughter do most the hard work for an hour of the running time.

Seriously, these henchmen go around shooting people willy nilly in a hotel, their hideout gets compromised and the guy who killed all their people escapes, yet they go back and hide in the exact same place. Shit, if half these people had decent eyesight then Neeson should of been killed quite a few time, and if any of the had a cloud of common sense the whole family would be dead.

Neeson and his daughter aren't much better, going around being mild inconveniences towards taxi drivers. Running over any stall they can find and causing a bit of random damage to the US Embassy before asking them for help.

It's an eye rolling film needless to say. But that's not to say I can't enjoy silly dumb action films. The point, however, isn't to be stupid and dumb, because the first one got by with being clever and ruthless. Here, if they went a bit meta with Neeson being a one liner spewing badass then I'd be for it. But Oliver Megaton (who's now cemented himself as one of the dullest hacks working in Hollywood) has no sense of humour, nor an idea of how to make a good film. He clearly likes good movies, as he randomly steals pieces of the soundtrack to Drive and splices them into this film, making for the classic case of "Don't reference a great movie in your shitty one". And it's not like this film couldn't be a bit silly and still be good, Luc Besson produced and wrote a great silly action film earlier this year, but sadly couldn't reproduce that here, nor the same formula from the original.

There really isn't anything positive I can say about Taken 2 except maybe if Iwas hammered drunk it'd be better. It shows what catering to a teen audience can do to a film, not that an unrated cut would solve it's more sever problems, but judging by the amount of times the Blackberry screen kept cropping up in the seat in front of me, I can only gather that the film wasn't particularly engrossing to the person in front of me.

2/10

No surprise. I never understood the love for the first one. I really wanted to like it and I've seen it several times now, but I just find it to be bland, cliched, and eye-rollingly embarrassing. Sure, Liam Neeson running around killing people is a fantastic idea, but that doesn't make the entire movie great. Give me The Professional any day.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by jvince

No surprise. I never understood the love for the first one. I really wanted to like it and I've seen it several times now, but I just find it to be bland, cliched, and eye-rollingly embarrassing. Sure, Liam Neeson running around killing people is a fantastic idea, but that doesn't make the entire movie great. Give me The Professional any day.

If it helps, the second one is funnier

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by jvince

V/H/S (2012)
dir. David Bruckner, Glenn McQuaid, Radio Silence, Joe Swanberg, Ti West, Adam Wingard

The Good: Unique, creative concepts (except the second segment). Right amount of gore. Lots of tits. Hannah Fierman (the freaky girl in the first segment). Second segment has one of the most shockingly realistic murder scenes in recent memory. The final segment which is, by far, the best and most fun. "Cast him down! Cast him down!"

The Bad: Sorely lacking in fun and scares. Lots of tits. Botched executions of the middle segments.

The Bottom Line: While it is thankfully in no way sterile unlike its other found-footage counterparts, V/H/S is also without its flaws. Worth checking out if you're in the mood for some Halloween horror.

in the good you put, "lots of tits".

in the bad you put, "lots of tits."

it's pretty simple, tits are awesome, so which one is it for you???

[Show spoiler]

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

You don't like my template

I like it very much. Thats why I said idea.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Taken 2

[Show spoiler]Probably the naffest film I've watched this year. The more it went on it sucked and the more it lingers it gets worse, so I might as well review it now while I'm at the peak of positivity towards it.

I've got three things to talk about before I get to the actual film. First being the first film. No, I don't think it's the modern classic of the action genre, it's a classer take on the euro trash action films. It's a brutal and risky film, yet cleverly makes all the numerous henchman have a clever survival drive making the opponents worthy foes against the ruthless Neeson. The only real complaint I have for the original is the jarring teeny bopper subplot with the daughter aiming to become a popstar, which is just barely mentioned in this one.

Secondly, I wasn't having a good theatre experience with this one, I had people on their phones left, right and in front of me, along with heckling. Why would anyone pay full price to watch a film on opening night if you're spending half the time on your phone?

Well it made sense just before the film started. As one young girl shouted out in sudden revelation "OMG, it's a 12a, no wonder we weren't ID'ed". I guess most the teens were disappointed that they haven't snuck in to see a film older than they are.

Which leads me to my third and final point. The films watering down, after 4 of the last 5 films I've seen being Dredd, Killing Them Softly, Lawless and Looper being strong violent films. It's very jarring seeing a watered down version of an already watered down PG-13 film. This means the editing was a bit more choppy and the sound mixing was way more pants, I don't know what it's like in the states, but the sound effects sound more like people are getting patted on the back instead of hitting one another with steel pipes. Gun shots sound like ray guns and explosions sounded like whispy farts.

So, with all this in place, you'd think that I had it in for Taken 2 right from the get go. Well you'd be wrong, the film actually starts out pretty promising. They manage to balance out the storyline set at the suburbs pretty well, unlike the original, and the characters felt a lot more likeable, although it felt like the events from number 1 were shrugged of too easily.

And then, right around the 30 min mark it started to go sour real fast.

The problem being that Liam Neeson must of killed off all the smart clever henchmen in the first one, so was left with shit for brains inbred cousins to finish off in this one. So much so, he doesn't even do a lot until the final third of the film, he lets his daughter do most the hard work for an hour of the running time.

Seriously, these henchmen go around shooting people willy nilly in a hotel, their hideout gets compromised and the guy who killed all their people escapes, yet they go back and hide in the exact same place. Shit, if half these people had decent eyesight then Neeson should of been killed quite a few time, and if any of the had a cloud of common sense the whole family would be dead.

Neeson and his daughter aren't much better, going around being mild inconveniences towards taxi drivers. Running over any stall they can find and causing a bit of random damage to the US Embassy before asking them for help.

It's an eye rolling film needless to say. But that's not to say I can't enjoy silly dumb action films. The point, however, isn't to be stupid and dumb, because the first one got by with being clever and ruthless. Here, if they went a bit meta with Neeson being a one liner spewing badass then I'd be for it. But Oliver Megaton (who's now cemented himself as one of the dullest hacks working in Hollywood) has no sense of humour, nor an idea of how to make a good film. He clearly likes good movies, as he randomly steals pieces of the soundtrack to Drive and splices them into this film, making for the classic case of "Don't reference a great movie in your shitty one". And it's not like this film couldn't be a bit silly and still be good, Luc Besson produced and wrote a great silly action film earlier this year, but sadly couldn't reproduce that here, nor the same formula from the original.

There really isn't anything positive I can say about Taken 2 except maybe if Iwas hammered drunk it'd be better. It shows what catering to a teen audience can do to a film, not that an unrated cut would solve it's more sever problems, but judging by the amount of times the Blackberry screen kept cropping up in the seat in front of me, I can only gather that the film wasn't particularly engrossing to the person in front of me.

2/10

Wow! Sounds like massive suckage.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by usrsld

I'm a sucker for a good documentary.

Marwencol

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by jvince

No surprise. I never understood the love for the first one. I really wanted to like it and I've seen it several times now, but I just find it to be bland, cliched, and eye-rollingly embarrassing.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I like it very much. Thats why I said idea.

I know was just teasing. I notice that all I was doing was mostly giving my comments but not really saying what the movie is about. Since I do watch a lot of movies that go a bit outside the "normal bounds" I figured it might be a good idea to give a little description of the movie if anyone here is looking in maybe seeing it. Not that I expect a lot of people to go for Ozu, Mizoguchi or Eisenstein but at least it give everyone a chance to know what the movie is about.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by jvince

No surprise. I never understood the love for the first one. I really wanted to like it and I've seen it several times now, but I just find it to be bland, cliched, and eye-rollingly embarrassing. Sure, Liam Neeson running around killing people is a fantastic idea, but that doesn't make the entire movie great. Give me The Professional any day.

I miss the first one and it never occured to me to even place it in my rental list. For some reason it never played on the movie channel here. I am thinking now to go ahead and add it to my list. I do like Liam Neeson even if the movie does sound a little cliche