Transporter 2 Early Review
- Thread starter Wombat
- Start date
Sexy_Pansy
CAG Veteran
[quote name='rallen']I finally caught it, and thought...the movie blew.
First all, bad CGI was all over the place. People in the audience were laughing at the airplane sequence at the end of the film. It looked like Plan 9 From Outer Space bad.
This action sequence was so bad, so rediculous, that it didn't even make sense. Speaking of sence, what were they trying to imply with the iPod sequence? The script was so disjointed I couldn't even tell.
This movie has a plot written by a man with a crippled sense of reality. Things such as unused antedotes, instant hallway bombs, flying cars that are also resistant to hitting parking structure support stansions, firehoses that are heavy enough to knock someone out yet not heavy enough to hurt the person kicking it, the Transporter carries a handy set of shrinkwrapped clothes should his get sullied, Tarentino style naughty nurse ninjas only have bad aim when shooting at the Transporter, the Transporter can dodge bullets like Neo, it's easy to flip the girl in front of you on a jetski over your head so you can drive, crashing hard drives are accompanied by fleeting moments of unexplained spark showers, 18 wheelers stop on a dime, parking structure outer walls are soft enough not to damage the front end of a Mercedes, there is always a way into the fuselage of a 12 passenger jet from the landing gear, Lamborghinis explode on impact with city signs, G forces are all in your mind if you happen to be engaged in mid-air combat with a Columbian mercinary, widespread airbourne pathogens are expeditiously cured when it suits the plot do so, over a dozen guys with melee weapons to be feared can miss at the same time, scared teeneage girls wont pull triggers, its easier to comply with the demands of insane mercinaries with snipers trained on you than it is to back out of a driveway, Miami PD helecopters are made from paper Mache and it takes only a few 35mm rounds to make them explode, and French chef operatives can easily hack into, use, and get a way with using police computer resources without missing their flight home.
Save your money on this one. The first was about 10 times better.[/QUOTE]
yep that basically sums up the movie but I actually found it enjoyable.
First all, bad CGI was all over the place. People in the audience were laughing at the airplane sequence at the end of the film. It looked like Plan 9 From Outer Space bad.
This action sequence was so bad, so rediculous, that it didn't even make sense. Speaking of sence, what were they trying to imply with the iPod sequence? The script was so disjointed I couldn't even tell.
This movie has a plot written by a man with a crippled sense of reality. Things such as unused antedotes, instant hallway bombs, flying cars that are also resistant to hitting parking structure support stansions, firehoses that are heavy enough to knock someone out yet not heavy enough to hurt the person kicking it, the Transporter carries a handy set of shrinkwrapped clothes should his get sullied, Tarentino style naughty nurse ninjas only have bad aim when shooting at the Transporter, the Transporter can dodge bullets like Neo, it's easy to flip the girl in front of you on a jetski over your head so you can drive, crashing hard drives are accompanied by fleeting moments of unexplained spark showers, 18 wheelers stop on a dime, parking structure outer walls are soft enough not to damage the front end of a Mercedes, there is always a way into the fuselage of a 12 passenger jet from the landing gear, Lamborghinis explode on impact with city signs, G forces are all in your mind if you happen to be engaged in mid-air combat with a Columbian mercinary, widespread airbourne pathogens are expeditiously cured when it suits the plot do so, over a dozen guys with melee weapons to be feared can miss at the same time, scared teeneage girls wont pull triggers, its easier to comply with the demands of insane mercinaries with snipers trained on you than it is to back out of a driveway, Miami PD helecopters are made from paper Mache and it takes only a few 35mm rounds to make them explode, and French chef operatives can easily hack into, use, and get a way with using police computer resources without missing their flight home.
Save your money on this one. The first was about 10 times better.[/QUOTE]
yep that basically sums up the movie but I actually found it enjoyable.
Duo_Maxwell
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 36 (100%)
[quote name='rallen']I finally caught it, and thought...the movie blew.
First all, bad CGI was all over the place. People in the audience were laughing at the airplane sequence at the end of the film. It looked like Plan 9 From Outer Space bad.
This action sequence was so bad, so rediculous, that it didn't even make sense. Speaking of sence, what were they trying to imply with the iPod sequence? The script was so disjointed I couldn't even tell.
This movie has a plot written by a man with a crippled sense of reality. Things such as unused antedotes, instant hallway bombs, flying cars that are also resistant to hitting parking structure support stansions, firehoses that are heavy enough to knock someone out yet not heavy enough to hurt the person kicking it, the Transporter carries a handy set of shrinkwrapped clothes should his get sullied, Tarentino style naughty nurse ninjas only have bad aim when shooting at the Transporter, the Transporter can dodge bullets like Neo, it's easy to flip the girl in front of you on a jetski over your head so you can drive, crashing hard drives are accompanied by fleeting moments of unexplained spark showers, 18 wheelers stop on a dime, parking structure outer walls are soft enough not to damage the front end of a Mercedes, there is always a way into the fuselage of a 12 passenger jet from the landing gear, Lamborghinis explode on impact with city signs, G forces are all in your mind if you happen to be engaged in mid-air combat with a Columbian mercinary, widespread airbourne pathogens are expeditiously cured when it suits the plot do so, over a dozen guys with melee weapons to be feared can miss at the same time, scared teeneage girls wont pull triggers, its easier to comply with the demands of insane mercinaries with snipers trained on you than it is to back out of a driveway, Miami PD helecopters are made from paper Mache and it takes only a few 35mm rounds to make them explode, and French chef operatives can easily hack into, use, and get a way with using police computer resources without missing their flight home.
Save your money on this one. The first was about 10 times better.[/QUOTE]
For the love of all that's holy promise me you won't ever attempt to make a film particularly an action film. I can't refence any action film over the course of history that was really that realistic. If movies simply mirrored everything that occured in real life no one would bother to watch them. I agree with some of what you said and the film was def. a little over the top at points (the plane scene for example), but about half your critcism is unfounded.
First all, bad CGI was all over the place. People in the audience were laughing at the airplane sequence at the end of the film. It looked like Plan 9 From Outer Space bad.
This action sequence was so bad, so rediculous, that it didn't even make sense. Speaking of sence, what were they trying to imply with the iPod sequence? The script was so disjointed I couldn't even tell.
This movie has a plot written by a man with a crippled sense of reality. Things such as unused antedotes, instant hallway bombs, flying cars that are also resistant to hitting parking structure support stansions, firehoses that are heavy enough to knock someone out yet not heavy enough to hurt the person kicking it, the Transporter carries a handy set of shrinkwrapped clothes should his get sullied, Tarentino style naughty nurse ninjas only have bad aim when shooting at the Transporter, the Transporter can dodge bullets like Neo, it's easy to flip the girl in front of you on a jetski over your head so you can drive, crashing hard drives are accompanied by fleeting moments of unexplained spark showers, 18 wheelers stop on a dime, parking structure outer walls are soft enough not to damage the front end of a Mercedes, there is always a way into the fuselage of a 12 passenger jet from the landing gear, Lamborghinis explode on impact with city signs, G forces are all in your mind if you happen to be engaged in mid-air combat with a Columbian mercinary, widespread airbourne pathogens are expeditiously cured when it suits the plot do so, over a dozen guys with melee weapons to be feared can miss at the same time, scared teeneage girls wont pull triggers, its easier to comply with the demands of insane mercinaries with snipers trained on you than it is to back out of a driveway, Miami PD helecopters are made from paper Mache and it takes only a few 35mm rounds to make them explode, and French chef operatives can easily hack into, use, and get a way with using police computer resources without missing their flight home.
Save your money on this one. The first was about 10 times better.[/QUOTE]
For the love of all that's holy promise me you won't ever attempt to make a film particularly an action film. I can't refence any action film over the course of history that was really that realistic. If movies simply mirrored everything that occured in real life no one would bother to watch them. I agree with some of what you said and the film was def. a little over the top at points (the plane scene for example), but about half your critcism is unfounded.
[quote name='rallen']I finally caught it, and thought...the movie blew.
First all, bad CGI was all over the place. People in the audience were laughing at the airplane sequence at the end of the film. It looked like Plan 9 From Outer Space bad.
This action sequence was so bad, so rediculous, that it didn't even make sense. Speaking of sence, what were they trying to imply with the iPod sequence? The script was so disjointed I couldn't even tell.
This movie has a plot written by a man with a crippled sense of reality. Things such as unused antedotes, instant hallway bombs, flying cars that are also resistant to hitting parking structure support stansions, firehoses that are heavy enough to knock someone out yet not heavy enough to hurt the person kicking it, the Transporter carries a handy set of shrinkwrapped clothes should his get sullied, Tarentino style naughty nurse ninjas only have bad aim when shooting at the Transporter, the Transporter can dodge bullets like Neo, it's easy to flip the girl in front of you on a jetski over your head so you can drive, crashing hard drives are accompanied by fleeting moments of unexplained spark showers, 18 wheelers stop on a dime, parking structure outer walls are soft enough not to damage the front end of a Mercedes, there is always a way into the fuselage of a 12 passenger jet from the landing gear, Lamborghinis explode on impact with city signs, G forces are all in your mind if you happen to be engaged in mid-air combat with a Columbian mercinary, widespread airbourne pathogens are expeditiously cured when it suits the plot do so, over a dozen guys with melee weapons to be feared can miss at the same time, scared teeneage girls wont pull triggers, its easier to comply with the demands of insane mercinaries with snipers trained on you than it is to back out of a driveway, Miami PD helecopters are made from paper Mache and it takes only a few 35mm rounds to make them explode, and French chef operatives can easily hack into, use, and get a way with using police computer resources without missing their flight home.
Save your money on this one. The first was about 10 times better.[/QUOTE]
It's.... a movie. No one went into this movie thinking it was going to be realistic. The first one was just as unrealistic as this one. As unbelievable and impossible as the shit in this movie was, it was still entertaining.
First all, bad CGI was all over the place. People in the audience were laughing at the airplane sequence at the end of the film. It looked like Plan 9 From Outer Space bad.
This action sequence was so bad, so rediculous, that it didn't even make sense. Speaking of sence, what were they trying to imply with the iPod sequence? The script was so disjointed I couldn't even tell.
This movie has a plot written by a man with a crippled sense of reality. Things such as unused antedotes, instant hallway bombs, flying cars that are also resistant to hitting parking structure support stansions, firehoses that are heavy enough to knock someone out yet not heavy enough to hurt the person kicking it, the Transporter carries a handy set of shrinkwrapped clothes should his get sullied, Tarentino style naughty nurse ninjas only have bad aim when shooting at the Transporter, the Transporter can dodge bullets like Neo, it's easy to flip the girl in front of you on a jetski over your head so you can drive, crashing hard drives are accompanied by fleeting moments of unexplained spark showers, 18 wheelers stop on a dime, parking structure outer walls are soft enough not to damage the front end of a Mercedes, there is always a way into the fuselage of a 12 passenger jet from the landing gear, Lamborghinis explode on impact with city signs, G forces are all in your mind if you happen to be engaged in mid-air combat with a Columbian mercinary, widespread airbourne pathogens are expeditiously cured when it suits the plot do so, over a dozen guys with melee weapons to be feared can miss at the same time, scared teeneage girls wont pull triggers, its easier to comply with the demands of insane mercinaries with snipers trained on you than it is to back out of a driveway, Miami PD helecopters are made from paper Mache and it takes only a few 35mm rounds to make them explode, and French chef operatives can easily hack into, use, and get a way with using police computer resources without missing their flight home.
Save your money on this one. The first was about 10 times better.[/QUOTE]
It's.... a movie. No one went into this movie thinking it was going to be realistic. The first one was just as unrealistic as this one. As unbelievable and impossible as the shit in this movie was, it was still entertaining.
The Successful Dropout
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 101 (100%)
the first one is one of my favorite movies...but when they threw in the girl for the second one, it kinda turned me off...it's like ok, they're going that way...kinda like when they throw a kid in a sequel to a movie that didn't need any changes, just the same formula...maybe none of that makes sense to anyone but me, i dunno...anyways, i haven't seen it yet and will probably wait til it comes out on dvd
DesertEagleXIX
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 3 (100%)
[quote name='Trakan']It's.... a movie. No one went into this movie thinking it was going to be realistic. The first one was just as unrealistic as this one. As unbelievable and impossible as the shit in this movie was, it was still entertaining.[/QUOTE]
An action film can tweak with reality; Desperado is one of my favorite action films, and that's completely unrealistic. But, when a film has huge holes in logic (in one scene the car in exploding in the "miami" sign, the next, the transporter is on board the plane) the gap takes me out of the film. Show a clip of Miller climbing in the landing gear, like any competant director.
All of a sudden the transporter dodges bullets? Why didn't he do that before? This takes me out of the film.
An action film can tweak with reality; Desperado is one of my favorite action films, and that's completely unrealistic. But, when a film has huge holes in logic (in one scene the car in exploding in the "miami" sign, the next, the transporter is on board the plane) the gap takes me out of the film. Show a clip of Miller climbing in the landing gear, like any competant director.
All of a sudden the transporter dodges bullets? Why didn't he do that before? This takes me out of the film.
[quote name='Drtyazn']I'll be seeing it sometime this week... the matinee showing naturally...[/QUOTE]
Don't!!! If you have to watch it at least rent it so you can take it back and get $1 credit. It was total crap. Even the fight scenes were the same. Corey Yuen does not direct the sequel. I came very close to walking out.
Friends don't let friends see Transporter 2.
Don't!!! If you have to watch it at least rent it so you can take it back and get $1 credit. It was total crap. Even the fight scenes were the same. Corey Yuen does not direct the sequel. I came very close to walking out.
Friends don't let friends see Transporter 2.
[quote name='neocisco']Don't!!! If you have to watch it at least rent it so you can take it back and get $1 credit. It was total crap. Even the fight scenes were the same. Corey Yuen does not direct the sequel. I came very close to walking out.
Friends don't let friends see Transporter 2.[/QUOTE]
I used to watch Kung Fu Theatre on Sunday's on the WB in the 90's.... there's no way T2 can be worse than that... plus... I've seen Bridges of Madison County
I had a weak moment... chicks have a way of making you retarded...
Friends don't let friends see Transporter 2.
[/QUOTE]I used to watch Kung Fu Theatre on Sunday's on the WB in the 90's.... there's no way T2 can be worse than that... plus... I've seen Bridges of Madison County
I had a weak moment... chicks have a way of making you retarded...
[quote name='neocisco']Don't!!! If you have to watch it at least rent it so you can take it back and get $1 credit. It was total crap. Even the fight scenes were the same. Corey Yuen does not direct the sequel. I came very close to walking out.[/QUOTE]
This movie had the exact same directors as the first one, dude: Corey Yuen did the fight scenes for both, and Louis Leterrier (who also did "Unleashed", which was surprisingly better than T2, IMO) did the rest of both.
This movie had the exact same directors as the first one, dude: Corey Yuen did the fight scenes for both, and Louis Leterrier (who also did "Unleashed", which was surprisingly better than T2, IMO) did the rest of both.
[quote name='trq']This movie had the exact same directors as the first one, dude: Corey Yuen did the fight scenes for both, and Louis Leterrier (who also did "Unleashed", which was surprisingly better than T2, IMO) did the rest of both.[/QUOTE]
That depends on your source. If you're using IMDB then that's mostly correct. However, on the new edition of The Transporter DVD Corey Yuen is credited as director and Louis Leterrier is credited as artistic director. My guess is this came about due to some arbitration done in conjunction w/the Director's Guild. I watched both movies w/in 2 days and they were shot very differently. Considering all this I have to believe that Fox updated the credits on the new DVD to reflect the changes. So I'm sticking w/my original statement.
What was the point of all this? Only that it proves that I'm willing to waste pefectly good time researching useless crap.
That depends on your source. If you're using IMDB then that's mostly correct. However, on the new edition of The Transporter DVD Corey Yuen is credited as director and Louis Leterrier is credited as artistic director. My guess is this came about due to some arbitration done in conjunction w/the Director's Guild. I watched both movies w/in 2 days and they were shot very differently. Considering all this I have to believe that Fox updated the credits on the new DVD to reflect the changes. So I'm sticking w/my original statement.
What was the point of all this? Only that it proves that I'm willing to waste pefectly good time researching useless crap.
[quote name='neocisco']That depends on your source. If you're using IMDB then that's mostly correct. However, on the new edition of The Transporter DVD Corey Yuen is credited as director and Louis Leterrier is credited as artistic director. My guess is this came about due to some arbitration done in conjunction w/the Director's Guild. I watched both movies w/in 2 days and they were shot very differently. Considering all this I have to believe that Fox updated the credits on the new DVD to reflect the changes. So I'm sticking w/my original statement.
What was the point of all this? Only that it proves that I'm willing to waste pefectly good time researching useless crap.[/QUOTE]
You really do have too much free time man.... when are you moving to Seatown? Atown Down!!! WOOOOOO!!!
What was the point of all this? Only that it proves that I'm willing to waste pefectly good time researching useless crap.[/QUOTE]
You really do have too much free time man.... when are you moving to Seatown? Atown Down!!! WOOOOOO!!!
chickenhawk
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 162 (100%)
I surely don't need realism in my movies, especially my action movies but I thought the first one was weak. Sure the fight sequences were kickass and I am sure that this one will be no different, but there was nothing to the movie. It just seemed like a lot of filler just to get to the next fight scene. If this one is more of the same (which it sounds like it is), I'll pass on this. Thanks for the review though.
[quote name='neocisco']That depends on your source. If you're using IMDB then that's mostly correct. However, on the new edition of The Transporter DVD Corey Yuen is credited as director and Louis Leterrier is credited as artistic director. My guess is this came about due to some arbitration done in conjunction w/the Director's Guild. I watched both movies w/in 2 days and they were shot very differently. Considering all this I have to believe that Fox updated the credits on the new DVD to reflect the changes. So I'm sticking w/my original statement.
What was the point of all this? Only that it proves that I'm willing to waste pefectly good time researching useless crap.[/QUOTE]
Huh. Fair enough. Live and learn.
What was the point of all this? Only that it proves that I'm willing to waste pefectly good time researching useless crap.[/QUOTE]
Huh. Fair enough. Live and learn.
bread's done