Well the first post I am writing about is probably not the best movie to begin with. Hopefully I will write up another review very soon if not tonight.
But here is Taken 2.
I love Liam Neeson. Yes, he's not the world's greatest actor. He's been in some really bad movies: Star Wars: Episode 1, Clash of the Titans, After.Life. But I think for every bad movie he's done, he's done more entertaining, if not really good movie. And even the movies listed above, I don't mind Neeson in those movies, he's probably the better part of those movies.
And then there's Taken. I don't know if I've ever seen a movie like Taken that has made me not care about how thin the plot is or how underdeveloped the characters are. The movie is just entertaining. I think I read somewhere that Taken is very much like a video game in that Neeson is given an objective and he does whatever he needs to do to get it done... and that's it... His daughter is kidnapped, he needs to go rescue her... and that's what he does. There is no twist, there is no alternative motives, he just goes and saves her. It's brilliant!
And then there's Taken 2. I of course was confused when I saw the trailer for it
Here's a spoiler, from that trailer, you know exactly what the plot is and what is going to happen. I really could not believe it. It took me a little under a year to finally get around to see it and I was... underwhelmed?
I mean I went into not expecting much. Even if you didn't watch the trailer, you should know what is going to happen well before it does so there wasn't much build up. With the experience of the first movie I expected this to be another video game like action movie. And it was...
No surprises, no twists, just Liam Neeson, an agent of what I assume is the CIA, doing whatever he needs to do to save his daughter and his wife (Oh big change up adding the wife by the way). It was the same exact movie, just different bad guys and different location. It wasn't really bad, of course it wasn't phenomenal, it was entertaining... just like the first one.
Now this is a trend I am starting to see in movies, not too many, just enough to make me angry. Something that I am starting to see is a trend where a movie is successful for the things that go on in the movie. Whether it is action in this movie, or jokes in another movie.
I saw The Hangover part 2. I was really close to asking for my money back because it is the exact same movie. Same characters, same plot, just different location and a few new situations. Movies aren't suppose to be made from shells. Just because something is successful doesn't mean you should make an exact copy of it and write it off as a sequel.
Both first movies of Taken and the Hangover were entertaining movies. Movies I enjoyed because the idea of the plot was original and new. But the sequels were the exact same movies. I am glad I saw Taken 2 on DVD and not in the theaters because I probably would have asked for my money back. And now I hear they're making a Hangover part 3?!?!?! Why? It's like telling the same joke to a friend over and over again. Sooner or later, that joke is not going to make you money anymore. So why ruin the joke? I am actually surprised that they got all the actors of the first two Hangovers to come back for a third one. Maybe they just really like each other.
Taken 2, it wasn't an awful movie, why? Because Taken 1 wasn't an awful movie, and they're the same movie. Both movies were made by directors who did the Transporter movies, Hitman, movies that are just summer blockbusters and entertaining flicks. And that's good for them, I love those kinds of movies. They're good when you don't want to think too hard and just enjoy some guy taking on a bunch of bad guys just because they're bad. Its reminiscent of Die Hard and I freaking love Die Hard (the first 3). But that's another example of putting the same character in the same situation, the same action sequences, just in a different location and calling it a new movie. Its not.
There's a line at the end of Taken 2 where Liam Neeson is talking to main bad guy of the movie. Neeson has him at gunpoint and says, (I am paraphrasing of course) "You have two options. First option, I can kill you. The second option is, I can let you live, you can return to your family, you can live out your life with your sons and you can give me your word that you will leave my family alone." The bad guy asks him why he is giving him this option and why he is letting him live. Neeson simply answers that he is tired and he doesn't want to do this again. When I first saw this I almost thought the next line was going to be. "Why are you doing this?" "Because I'm tired.... I'm really tired and I really don't want to make a Taken 3." I hope there was glimmers of that in Neeson's delivery of that line because I really don't want there to be a Taken 3.
So what is there to take out of this? I would reach out to Mr. Neeson and say, "Mr. Neeson, you've done 2 very successful movies about the same thing. Be smart and get out while you're ahead. There was little reason for you to do Taken 2, there is absolutely no reason you should do a Taken 3."
But of course, since both movies did well, there is talk of a 3rd sequel and although my man Mr. Neeson has casted some doubts on the project, I do not doubt they will drag this idea to the grave and it will join several other series in that arena of repackaged ideas.
No comments:
Post a Comment