CougarCorner

snoscythe wrote:I'm cautiously looking forward to this movie. Part of what made Taken so good was the fact that you weren't expecting the voice of the Jesus-lion to be so bad-@$$ and violent like he was.

I'm hoping against hope that Taken 2 makes it without that surprise factor and that it isn't forced like many sequels (see: all Transporter sequels).

This is exactly what I've worried about with this film (also, The Transporter was probably my favorite action movie ever, but #2 was pure garbage, and #3 was barely okay).

Schmoe wrote:

snoscythe wrote:I'm cautiously looking forward to this movie. Part of what made Taken so good was the fact that you weren't expecting the voice of the Jesus-lion to be so bad-@$$ and violent like he was.

I'm hoping against hope that Taken 2 makes it without that surprise factor and that it isn't forced like many sequels (see: all Transporter sequels).

This is exactly what I've worried about with this film (also, The Transporter was probably my favorite action movie ever, but #2 was pure garbage, and #3 was barely okay).

I saw Trans 2 first and enjoyed it, then I saw Trans 1 and liked it a lot more.

When I saw that they were making a Taken 2, my first thought was, "oh no, you can't top the first one so they are going to ruin it by fleecing the public with a rip-off sequel."

After seeing the trailer, that it still invokes the same gut-wrenching and adrenaline-rush that the first one had, even though I am pretty sure I know how it turns out, I will watch it and most likely enjoy every minute of it.

The whole concept of Taken taps into something deeply American that I am afraid we are losing sight of.

The other thing that keeps me involved with a movie like Taken that even a good James Bond flick can't do is the fact that I have to give even a somewhat psycho version of Bond some entertainment license for the insane, death-wish antics because they are not very believable. But Taken rips all that away because I can believe that a father would take those kind of chances for his daughter.

So rip-off sequel or not, I am hooked.

I'll be there, just because I'd hate to be a Schmoe!

Mars wrote:
Taken: A guy's daughter is kidnapped, and he fights to save her. Cool.

Taken 2: The same guy's daughter is taken again, PLUS his wife is taken too! Stupid. Really, really stupid. It's like Rudy transferring to Penn State and then successfully walking on to their program as well, because the first time at Notre Dame wasn't good enough, and somehow doing it twice is still believable.

Rudy wasn't an action film.

snoscythe wrote:I'm cautiously looking forward to this movie. Part of what made Taken so good was the fact that you weren't expecting the voice of the Jesus-lion to be so bad-@$$ and violent like he was.

Liam Neeson is in that exclusive club of 60+ year old men who still have the physical presence and charisma to pull off being a badass. Right along with Ron Perlman. The ring leader being Clint Eastwood, who convincingly pulled off being a badass in his late 70s in Gran Torino.

Schmoe wrote:

Mars wrote:
Taken: A guy's daughter is kidnapped, and he fights to save her. Cool.

Taken 2: The same guy's daughter is taken again, PLUS his wife is taken too! Stupid. Really, really stupid. It's like Rudy transferring to Penn State and then successfully walking on to their program as well, because the first time at Notre Dame wasn't good enough, and somehow doing it twice is still believable.

Rudy wasn't an action film.

Which is why Transporter 2 was good and Invicible wasn't.

Schmoe wrote: Rudy wasn't an action film.

Don't you remember the scene where Rudy is going all out in practice, and the starter's are getting pissed? FOOTBALL Baby! How much more action could you ask for!?

Also, no, the Transporter sequels are not good. I remember a scene where he's, like, flipping a car 360 off of a ramp and shoots a metal chain that drops a sign on someone. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Almost as bad as the movie where he hooks a car battery up to his heart to keep himself alive. No, not Iron Man.

Mars wrote:

Schmoe wrote: Rudy wasn't an action film.

Don't you remember the scene where Rudy is going all out in practice, and the starter's are getting pissed? FOOTBALL Baby! How much more action could you ask for!?

Also, no, the Transporter sequels are not good. I remember a scene where he's, like, flipping a car 360 off of a ramp and shoots a metal chain that drops a sign on someone. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Almost as bad as the movie where he hooks a car battery up to his heart to keep himself alive. No, not Iron Man.

Agree that Transporter sequels were not great (#2 was garbage, #3 was ok).

My argument is that you can't discount an action movie because it will be "not believable," as most action movies are not believable to begin with.