Page 1 of The Transporter 2 (my review)

Just what the world needs another no-brainer PG-13 action film. Well actually this one was pretty good.

The usual silly plot Frank is a "driver" and his client, a young boy named Jack (of course) gets kidnapped & then theres some nonsense about a deadly virus (again of course). As long as you go into Transporter not expecting much, you will get a pretty decent action film out of it.

I wasnt the worlds biggest fan of the first movie, which is suprising considering all the action films i like. Its big downfall was the action, it just wasnt very good & clearly done with wires (i dont like that). This sequal however is much better, just as ludicrisly stupid, but the action has that extra punch (so to speak).

Jason Statham returns as Frank & is just as good at looking hard & grouchy as he is at doing everything else, for one his own stunts & you can tell, which is good. Including a jet ski chase, a car chase & a number of "hand-to-hand" fights. I have inverted hand-to-hand because the fights usually involves some kind of weapon, i say weapon, well basically every fight is ripped off from Jackie Chan films, but they are done well & it seems like there is minimal wire work (which is nice).

The bad guy is very much a by the numbers bad guy & may as well not exsist. There is however an extremely hot chick bad girl, who walks around with 2 full auto glocks (pistols) & in all she wears is her lingerie, mmmmmm.

The bad things, well, obviously the plot is nonsense, the cgi is terrible & the hole film is one big advert for audi, even at the end when he speeds off with a Lamborghini (who owns Lamborghini? AUDI), i am suprised more people didnt moan about this. But as long as you have your brain on stand-by & you like martial arts, cars & "kool" gun fights you should like this (another one for the guys then).

7/10

What you guys think??

You say pyscho like its a bad thing

Bag of crap

Starts out trying to be `Man on Fire`. Throw in an unconvincing ugly skinny chick in her knickers (who can`t act) along with some ludicrous CGI car stunts (guys, it`s like using wires in a kung fu flick, if it ain`t real, it don`t `look` real) then bung it all together and pad it out for 90 minutes.

S***e of the highest order.

============================
It`ll never heal if you don`t stop picking...


My Collection

S***e of the highest order.

yup

Quote:
S***e of the highest order

Yup, and I enjoyed every minute of it. I think the action is better in the first (more defined and quirky). But they`re both ridiculous pieces of entertaining crap. Guilty pleasure to the extreme.

The first was a guilty pleasure, and I can`t wait to see the second. I know its s***e, but its good s***e.

I know the first one was a guilty pleasure and trust me, you don`t want to see the second one - they got it all wrong, it felt like watching a kids cartoon... the crap cgi was inexcusable...

How does it compare to another film say like Commando or Death Wish 3?

floyd


SALE/TRADE HERE!!!

They`re masterpieces compared to this

555, you shall be hearing from my lawyers regarding the breach of copyright in your thread title. Only I can put up "my reviews". :D :P

--
Live for the Moment on DVD ORDER NOW
My DVD Collection

Completely stupid and not even as good as the first one - there are so many ludicrous stunts involving vehicles and preposperous fight scenes that I actually got bored halfway through. The dialogue is shocking (but I was prepared for that) but the real shock is the CGI which is absolutely rubbish. It`s crap, but it knows it and works fairly well within its limits. I enjoyed some of it but was annoyed by the amount of corporate sponsorship which grated without reaching the huge levels that were in The Island. Dumb but (mostly) fun.

Edit - did anyone else think Amber Valletta (Audrey) was the spitting image of Cameron Diaz?


My Top 20 Horror Movies ---- My DVD Collection
Be afraid, be very afraid.

This item was edited on Tuesday, 13th December 2005, 18:50