Taken (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message

Empire Admin -> Taken (22/9/2008 3:57:54 PM)

Post your comments on this article



coljohnmatrix -> RE: (22/9/2008 7:10:19 PM)

Ironic that I noticed an advert in the corner of the Empire website that read "Win Taken merchandise" before clicking on the review.

I saw the trailer, and I was confused as to why Liam Neeson was appearing in such a film. Perhaps there was a mix-up by the postie, and they delivered one of Steven Seagal's scripts to Neeson's house by mistake?

I agree that even if the film is bad that there should at least be some mention of how good(bad) the action in an action film is...



captainrentboy -> RE: Taken review (22/9/2008 8:36:41 PM)

I'm quite surprised to read such a scathing review for this film, going from the trailers and the reviews from other sources I thought it was going to a groovy lil action/revenge flick.
Still, I'm going to ignore this review anyway (Empire have been quite off the mark with a few releases this year) and catch it this weekend.
If only to see if Neeson can play an effective baddass :)



darth silas -> RE: Taken review (22/9/2008 10:09:26 PM)

Havnt seen this yet but im going to.The review sounds like it was done by someone who just doesnt like action films and cant suspend disbelief.




badassmofo -> RE: Very Surprised (24/9/2008 9:52:52 AM)

Its VERY dodgy thematically and that leaves a bad taste in the mouth but for me the worst problem is that for a 90 minute film, it takes a rather long time to start being an action film. When it does it gets some good moments but the action is rather few and far between, though it is very good and seemingly CG free. Liam Neeson gives it all even with ridiculous material (the scene where he pretends to be from the French government and complains about "you foreigners" with a straight up Irish accent is fucking hilarious), and the workings of sex trafficing seem well researched but the anti-foreign slant is very disconcerting.



MuckyMuckMan -> RE: Advertising...? (24/9/2008 11:27:53 PM)

I really liked Taken tbh. Yes there is a lot of racism in the first 20 minutes but surely we've seen this sort of thing before. USA is all things good, the rest of the world is bad. BEWARE!!! If you decide to leave the US of A's shores.
But once you get past the first 20 minutes of decidedly bad choice of screenplay the film kicks into gear and you get some pretty slick action there on in. Neeson is as solid as ever imo and I thought the direction was far better than Greengrass' Bourne films. At least you could tell what was going on when the action kicked in. All in all a solid film which I thoroughly enjoyed. 3/5

Oh just one other thing, Maggie Grace's running really irritated me! You'll know what I mean when you see it!



maffew -> RE: (25/9/2008 1:01:36 AM)

Taken was pretty good. What a completely awful review! Hostel only tackled similar ground and it was a whole lot better than that.. one star? Its not as bad as Disaster Movie...



Clarence Worley -> RE: hello superdan (25/9/2008 7:38:04 PM)

i deleted this cos there is no point advertising that fools ill gotten games!! havent seen the film either .....



sanchia -> RE: hello superdan (25/9/2008 7:46:22 PM)

I think some little troll is heading for a banning and within the first 7 posts (and one of those a double). The imperfect mix of racism and homophobia what a winner [8|]



brendygib -> empire wrong again (25/9/2008 10:42:13 PM)

very enjoyable film, sort it out empire, its a great action flick, go and see it. one star for taken and 3 for that piece of sh*t movie death race......come on!



richCie -> RE: empire wrong again (26/9/2008 11:22:22 AM)

remember people that the reviewers for say Death Race or whatever you compare this review to, were different people (probably, havent checked) so while one reviewer may like some fairly dumb action films, another might find that a film that treads no new ground, and what ground it does trend is done in a fairly questionable manner (the first 20 minutes by the sounds of it) is not worthy of even an average review.
Deal with it.



Agent Bauer UK -> Taken Review (26/9/2008 11:28:06 AM)

I loved this film, It reminded me of 24 the race against time all of the killings etc, It certainly doesn't deserve a 1 star rating.





Invader_Ace -> RE: Taken Review (26/9/2008 12:35:51 PM)

Also got a 1 star review in the Metro.  For very much the same reasons Empire gave.



UTB -> RE: Taken Review (26/9/2008 1:25:42 PM)

The Daily Star gave it "TEN out of TEN"


I think Empire are lying.



princessa -> RE: Taken Review (26/9/2008 1:56:12 PM)

Thought this was awful.  Very little action; didn't enjoy it at all and yes it does have a very anti-foreign slant.  BTW - the review is funny and very spot on.  I 100% agreed with it.



bloxham49 -> Terrible enjoyable film (26/9/2008 8:52:38 PM)

I thought this was an awful film, bad dialogue, poor acting, laughable continuity and 80's movie logic (yes! bullit proof car doors are back!) and the less said about the mindless violence the better... it's the kind of film my family think I love simply because many good films contain violence, therefore I love violent films (apparently) This is the kind of film the gives cinema violence it's bad reputation, the kind the Mail loves to write (moan) about. The kind I hate because it ruins cinema.... But then somehow ignore all that, because somehow, somewhat undeservedly I really enjoyed it. This is basically what happens when the Asylum or channel 5 try to do a Bourne rip off and is all the better for it. I'm sticking with 2 stars though!



benmharper -> RE: Advertising...? (26/9/2008 9:43:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MuckyMuckMan

I really liked Taken tbh. Yes there is a lot of racism in the first 20 minutes but surely we've seen this sort of thing before. USA is all things good, the rest of the world is bad. BEWARE!!! If you decide to leave the US of A's shores.
But once you get past the first 20 minutes of decidedly bad choice of screenplay the film kicks into gear and you get some pretty slick action there on in. Neeson is as solid as ever imo and I thought the direction was far better than Greengrass' Bourne films. At least you could tell what was going on when the action kicked in. All in all a solid film which I thoroughly enjoyed. 3/5

Oh just one other thing, Maggie Grace's running really irritated me! You'll know what I mean when you see it!



I noticed that as well.

Enjoyed it overall, 3/5 for me. Neeson was a convincing arse-kicker. You need to leave your brain in neutral but the action was well done imo. It reminded of the first Bourne film in looks and style without being as good but it kept me entertained for the afternoon



Indio -> Taken (26/9/2008 11:02:31 PM)

While I didn't find it as bad as the Empire review made it out to be, its not really that great either, it has its moments but it takes an awfully long time to get going, its seriously over sentimental in places and some of the coincidences beggar belief (i.e. the first prostitute Neeson talks to just happens to have an Albanian pimp who leads him to an extremely dubious knocking shop on a building site [&:]). That whole Holly Valance as a singer 'who's sold 25 million albums' sub-plot doesn't help things either.

However despite his overly dyed hair and the copious amount of make up on his face to make him look younger (I'm guessing so its harder to spot the stunt doubles), Neeson convinces as a bad ass, and I liked the way theres not a lot of fucking about when it comes to him killing a person.

Like Morels previous film District 13, and most of the other films Besson has produced in the last 10 years or so, this is pretty brainless derivative stuff, aimed at a mass audience who aren't really going to want to think about any social subtext, and so as such Taken should just be taken as an explitative mish-mash of the Bourne Films and Hostel with a little bit of The Bodyguard thrown in for good measure. 

I found it a kind of guilty pleasure to watch, but I doubt I'd want to see it again.



DavidPMcGinty -> Taken - definitely not a one-star film. (28/9/2008 2:53:07 AM)

I saw this tonight and I thought it had some clunky dialogue and a few frustrating moments of coincidence. But I also thought it was one of the most engaging thrillers of the summer. A one-star review for this movie from a publication like Empire is an absolute joke.

This review is full of inaccuracies and ridiculous hyperbole. Examples: Holly Valance's character is never named "Diva", she's simply referred to as a diva. Also, the idea that the film implies that a caucasian female tourist from the US is prey to any number of foreign evils is ridiculous. It requires this to happen because of the plot, and Neeson's character anticipates danger not because he's a racist or an "American", but because he's a pessimist, gripped by paranoia due to the life he's led in service of his country.

In the hands of any other reviewer at this magazine, this has three star movie written all over it. I thought it was four. Also, the utterly innocent bystander referred to in the review is one of the greatest twist moments of the film. It's also what, exactly? A betrayal of Liam Neeson's character? He's not Jesus Christ, he's a professional spy, or some shit. It's an absolutely logical direction for the movie to take, and although she was an innocent bystander, it had the effect of moving the story in the direction required in a totally believable way.

I love Empire generally, and I've never found myself taking serious issue with a review before. This review, however, was pathetic, and it's the last time I trust Empire, because I can tell you for a fact that this was no consensus. This is never in its life a one-star film. Never.

I'm glad I did myself the service of ignoring this review and seeing the movie anyway. Do it, you won't regret it.



Pat Roach -> (28/9/2008 5:03:59 AM)

Well up for this. Sounds hilarious and a bit of a guilty pleasure. Neeson fighting people? Getting ready to dust of a solid 5 star rating so have a pre-emptive one instead.



jayjayjayjay06 -> wtf? Great Film!!!!!!!!! (28/9/2008 8:18:00 AM)

i think empire were judging this film to much its a great enjoyable film !!!!!!!!!!!!!



crimebusterofthesea -> Tsk tsk empire.. (28/9/2008 2:03:55 PM)

This is quite simple, a film which is based around Liam Neeson beating the shit out of people could never be a one star film.

It's Liam Neeson.

Beating the shit out of people.

The film does a good job of being utterly ridiculous and enjoyable and, maybe accidentally, it draws attention to human traffiking.
Liam Neeson also kicks the shit out of alot of people so it is therefore brilliant.



mike_390 -> Hmmm (28/9/2008 2:22:16 PM)

I watched this film and thought that it was quite enjoyable as a non serious action filled movie. Liam Neeson is always good, the bad guys were not particularly memorable but didn't need to be. Directing was above average and the editing wasn't bad either.

Oh and thanks to the forum editor for deleting my last comments, I never liked free speech anyway.



moviemaniac2 -> TAKEN (28/9/2008 2:44:06 PM)

Taken never gives the human trafficking theme its due seriuosness.
Although this Bourne (if Bourne stayed put that is) meets Dirty Harry hybrid has energy, pace and you can't wait for the hero to give the villains a right hiding, the numerous cringey scenes and macho dialogue ruin any chance of loving it. It ends up like a poor Transporter that unintentionally funny.




sam7777777 -> empire review is nonsence! editor please amend!!! (28/9/2008 9:17:58 PM)

just come back from seeing taken which i have been looking forward to as liam neeson is always great and i like this kinda plot in a guilty pleasure sorta way! i thought it was great, dialogue a little clunky and a few unbeliveable scenes, tho when is there not one really!the empire review is complete nonsense and it would be good to see one of the more experienced or just plain better reviewers to make suitalbe amendments to the 1 star review please! this film is highly enjoyable largely down to liam neeson being extremely cool!



MuckyMuckMan -> RE: Terrible enjoyable film (28/9/2008 11:12:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bloxham49

I thought this was an awful film, bad dialogue, poor acting, laughable continuity and 80's movie logic (yes! bullit proof car doors are back!) and the less said about the mindless violence the better... it's the kind of film my family think I love simply because many good films contain violence, therefore I love violent films (apparently) This is the kind of film the gives cinema violence it's bad reputation, the kind the Mail loves to write (moan) about. The kind I hate because it ruins cinema.... But then somehow ignore all that, because somehow, somewhat undeservedly I really enjoyed it. This is basically what happens when the Asylum or channel 5 try to do a Bourne rip off and is all the better for it. I'm sticking with 2 stars though!


I'm sorry! but had they ever gone away?



chanting_ray -> EMPIRE is WRONG!! (29/9/2008 12:23:24 AM)

This film was fantastic! It's got a 7.8 on IMDB and the two guys I was with, along with a busy cinema, all LOVED it! Gripping, tense, fast paced. An excellent Thriller!



chelseaboogle -> Dan Jolin is an idiot (29/9/2008 2:17:26 AM)

please ignor the review of this film it is far from a 1 star movie. It is a great 88 mins of fun and action and i think the only hate i can see is in the review. I watched and enjoyed this film one of the best films this year.



chelseaboogle -> Dan Jolin is an idiot (29/9/2008 2:17:41 AM)

please ignor the review of this film it is far from a 1 star movie. It is a great 88 mins of fun and action and i think the only hate i can see is in the review. I watched and enjoyed this film one of the best films this year.



DavidPMcGinty -> Way Off (29/9/2008 8:08:28 AM)

I wonder if Empire will stick to one-star when the DVD is reviewed out of principle just because of this enormously satisfying and unanimous reader backlash, or whether it will quietly amend it to the three stars it absolutely deserves.

T**** F*** were way off with their theatrical review of In Bruges, but they had the humility to admit their cock-up and bump it up to four stars for the DVD review, and even before then were referring to it as "four star movie despite what our theatrical review said".



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.203125