Amph JMPR: Jumper film, series & Impulse series [YouTube Red]

I have to say, that review alone has convinced me not to ever see this movie. Suffering through his wooden deliveries in AOTC and ROTS was enough.

 

Nevermind the critics' confused dismissal: I just saw the film and I thought it was a solid, three-star-out-of-five affair. Jumper is a fun, exciting sci-fi/action film featuring a true-to-life character who starts out selfish and greedy, and ends up becoming a hero. The early scenes do not engage emotionally, but intellectually; it's such a terrific concept it's hard not to stay with it just to see where it's going. It's true that in the first act you don't really care for this jerk kid who turns a blind eye to human suffering. But then something happens -- a series of character-building and plot-thickening events -- and the movie's off and running! The third-act action sequences are FREAKING AWESOME and must be seen to be believed. I fail to understand what is supposed to be so boring or vague about this film, and Christensen's performance is fine. All the negativity being heaped on this movie is totally undeserved, IMO. We've never seen action scenes like this, and judging by the public's reaction to it, we never will again.

 

Hayden is a good actor -- great in Shattered Glass.

 

brillaint film although i felt it seemed a little short and dived into the story way to quick, effects were good too, 8.10

 

I really liked Jumper, but the ending was a bit abrupt, and some things weren't resolved totally.

 

Solid film, this Jumper. I was entertained. It could be picked apart ... as the plot in it just leaves way too much to say ... but the action, effects and entertainment value remained pretty good I felt.

The ending also reminded me so much of how The Bourne Identity ended.

Agreed.

 

It does seem a bit short, but it serves the story since this is a set-up for the next movie (which I gather will not be made now that everyone supposedly hates it). I would have liked a little more exposition in the final scene with his mother, in which certain plot elements might have been explained, such as the worm-hole machine and what, if any, is the biological or technological connection between a high-level Paladin (his mother) and a super-powerful jumper (himself). Presumably these matters would have been dealt with in sequels, which are not now likely to be filmed.

 

Yeah I heard this was supposed to be a trilogy.

 

The reviews I saw in the UK press this weekend were mostly either so-so or bad. The ones with 'star' rankings gave it 2 out of 5.

 

It was a decent movie. It certainly doesn't deserve a 14 percent or whatever on RT.com. I enjoyed myself and I wasn't expecting an Oscar worthy performance from anyone. The 3/4 full theatre on a Saturday afternoon seemed to all enjoy it too.

 

^ ^ I hope so! The movie seems designed for sequels, and IMO deserves better than the response critics are giving it.

 

I'm hoping to see it this week. If it continues to make some money, I think a sequel is a real possibility. But first it needs to make back its budget of $85 million.

 

Saw it yesterday with two of my brothers. We all thought it was better than critics are giving it credit for. I'd definitely see a sequel. Hopefully this movie does well enough to get one made.

 

I really hope they do make a sequel, that have a lot of loose ends that need to be tied.

 

I really liked it. Solid performances from everyone.

 

Ever think that maybe the 'designed for sequels' aspect is one of the things people are hating about it?

It's bad enough that it's become a given that no big franchise will ever tell a complete story in a single installment these days, but when even original, non-franchise movies are half-trailers for their sequels, it starts to get really disgusting.

 

I agree with 2ndQuest. What's wrong with serialized story-telling? Sci-fi/fantasy fiction has its roots in serial publications of the 30s and 40s, and sci-fi cinema has its antecedents in the Republic serials of the same era. One might complain that the only reason, say, ER Burroughs kept publishing Tarzan stories was because they sold, but that's ignoring that the public was hungry for them, and as a result we've got some damn fine adventure/fantasy fiction that will llikely last the ages. Commerce and art proceed together hand in hand. Bring on the sequels!

 

It seems to me like an exiting movie.. I would go and see it.

 

I enjoyed this film. I want to read the novels now..

 

I liked it. I hope the sequels happen. Lots of loose ends left to be tied up.

 

My problem comes when someone is making a movie that has no guarantee nor immediate plans to continue the story by producing the next installment. Those classic movie serials you talk about had one new chapter a week coming out until the whole story was told. If it isn't made as some kind of generally continuous production schedule, then it isn't really a serial. It's the reason seasons of TV shows in the UK are referred to as 'series'; each one is a series of episodes produced together as a single and coherent unit. The pairs of Back to the Future, Matrix, and Pirates sequels are serial. The X-Men, Spider-Man, etc. series are not.

Raiders of the Lost Ark is a great setup film. The Bourne Identity is a great setup film. Star Wars is a great setup film. They make you want more without making you feel like the movie you just saw was incomplete or that you've been told a lesser, 'pre' story. They don't FEEL like setup films. Most franchise films these days DO. Studios keep churning out movies that are as much extended franchise trailers as they are actual complete films, and as I said I think critics (as well a good number of regular people) are getting tired of it.