I wrote a review of jumper and posted it on IMDB and other websites. I couldn't keep it in, I saw it tonight and just had to share my view. God knows why I'm posting it here as well. But tell me what YOU think of the film, or what you think of my review.

Summary: A good Idea executed poorly.

*This may spoil your experience if you really want to see the film.*

Jumper was a boring film with little story.
Basically it tells the viewer what would happen if you gave a selfish, American, pre-developed teen a super power. You would get super tw*t (and most probably super tw*t the sequel).

The film opens with a dialogue on what the super hero has done this morning. Not only was it unfitting but it was indeed incredibly annoying. The actor who played David (Hayden Christensen. Yes, he was from Star Wars) could have been rivalled in acting talents by a baked potato. No offence to the guy, but I truly and honestly didn't care if his character were to die.

These days you would expect super hero films to enter the realms of a gothic and dark city, or even a utopia with not so obvious faults which the protagonist sees. This film opens no new doors (except that of hatred within me). I found my self more interested in the young girl (Rachel Bilson) that David was trying so hard to protect rather than what little of a story there actually was.

That's what disappointed me the most. There was no story, no structure. I wasn't even particularly looking forward to the film. So there was no hype, I was disappointed by a film that had the chance to baffle me with awe. But nope, not at all. The only thing I was looking forward to, and what dragged me to the cinema was the fact that Samuel L Jackson was in it. Yes, he looked super cool, yes he did some kick ass stuff, yes he had the BEST hair (and this is what you would expect from the master himself). BUT they gave him no back story, no reason to hate or like him. They were all dislikeable characters *EDIT* because of what they were doing in the film. There was no back story to make you think otherwise. *EDIT*.

The fact that this was a fast pace film complimented it in no way. There was no story to hold it back, so it didn't last long and there is no reason to call it short and sweet, but rather "I'm glad that was only a short waste of time." Okay, that was a little harsh. But in all honesty that is what I thought afterwards.

Actually I didn't hate the film as much as I come across to. The CGI was visually stunning; the landscapes were also pretty to look at and added to the little atmosphere it created. (Which is a horrible thing to say when it was directed by Doug Liman). They did do a pretty well choreographed fight scene between two Jumpers (but God, that sound ridicules).

Still, it was all too 2 dimensional... I'm not sure how much more I'm going to elaborate this point. You need likeable characters or at least have a back-story to make it all the more believable. Or you end up not caring weather the character is shot, stabbed, hit or electrocuted. It just makes you giggle a little in the cinema (oops).

Take Man on Fire for example, Creasy (Denzel Washington) a brilliant wonderful display of character, torn by the horrors of war. Absolutely amazing acting by Denzel; which made you care for the character. Jumper lacks this in every way.

As I don't want to give away too much of the story, (which you could pretty much guess from the advert) I'm going to take you to the end. It was sudden, you didn't expect it, When it ended you realised how short the film was and how much you've been ripped. Just before the point it ended I was thinking, "This is where it's going to get good." NO, don't try to leave me with a happy tingling in my belly; I don't like the characters. I want them all horribly mutilated in a car accident so that David could become a hardened badass son of a bitch. Cause it left it open for another movie. I want to slap whatever bastard said "hay you guys, lets leave it on a poorly written cliff hanger so that the protagonist is happy. It will make our views feel all gooey" because your wrong, it made me feel all pissed off.

All in all (in conclusion, I found that) The film is something to grin and bear if you want to entertain your little brother. Cause he doesn't care about plot, or characters, he wants to fantasize about teleporting and kicking Samuel L Jackson's ass (Which will never ever happen... ever) So see it if you like mindless fantasy that will only entertain a child, but if you are like me and want to think "Jesus that confused the hell out of me, lets think it through" Then don't bother, for you sanity, leave it alone.

I really didn't enjoy the film for anyone who hasn't realised. But thank you for reading to this point. Now what did you think of the film?

Based on what trailers i have seen i would say it seems like The Matrix. Infact a Matrix without anything cool at all. Left standing is a guy who can teleport.

Lets just watch The Matrix against instead shall we?

sammyfreak:
Based on what trailers i have seen i would say it seems like The Matrix. Infact a Matrix without anything cool at all. Left standing is a guy who can teleport.

Lets just watch The Matrix against instead shall we?

LMFAO. Yes, lets watch a real film.

To me, Jumper looks like an over bugeted version of an American tv drama like The Sarah Conner Chronicals or Heroes or soemthing exceot it has Sam Jackson. The ads make it look pathetic. This can be for two reasons, 1)The ads sucked or more likely 2) The ads showed the best parts of the movie (which is their jobs, to intice the people to watch it) but the movie sucked altogether. So it is like watching the best parts of suck.

Crap_haT:
BUT they gave him no back story, no reason to hate or like him. They were all dislikeable characters.

This confused me. If they offer no reason to like him or dislike him, why then, do all the characters get labeled "dislikeable"? Honestly, that, along with your very obvious predisposition towards not wanting to like the film makes this a very tough review to take seriously.

More than that, when you go to see "Jumper", you should know what to expect. You aren't going to see something particularly thought-provoking; you are going to see this movie because you want to see some action sequences, and some nice effects, and (at least 1/4 of the people who see it will use this justification) because you can't pass up a Samuel L. Jackson film.

The review was overly-negative from the start, and while I don't endorse the film in any capacity, I find it very hard to take the above seriously.

EtherAMP:

Crap_haT:
BUT they gave him no back story, no reason to hate or like him. They were all dislikeable characters.

This confused me. If they offer no reason to like him or dislike him, why then, do all the characters get labeled "dislikeable"? Honestly, that, along with your very obvious predisposition towards not wanting to like the film makes this a very tough review to take seriously.

More than that, when you go to see "Jumper", you should know what to expect. You aren't going to see something particularly thought-provoking; you are going to see this movie because you want to see some action sequences, and some nice effects, and (at least 1/4 of the people who see it will use this justification) because you can't pass up a Samuel L. Jackson film.

The review was overly-negative from the start, and while I don't endorse the film in any capacity, I find it very hard to take the above seriously.

What I tried to say was the only thing you could go by for the characters was what they were doing at that moment in the film. And they were all pretty sucky. There was no back-story to make me think otherwise.

I gathered that, but what I was pointing out was that this was just another segment where you showed (however subconsciously) that you had no want to enjoy this film.

I watched it...
It was like watching I Am Legend all over again.
A perfect idea, yet portrayed so wrong.

If that was directed decently the film would of actually been enjoyable.

EtherAMP:
I gathered that, but what I was pointing out was that this was just another segment where you showed (however subconsciously) that you had no want to enjoy this film.

Actually I wanted to enjoy this film. How else would I enjoy an evening? It just turns out it was crap. I tried to show that in the review. If it was mind blowingly amazing I would have written that in the review, if it was mediocre I would have left it to with all the other movies I don't care about. But it was just terrible.

Crap_haT:
Actually I wanted to enjoy this film.

Crap_haT:
I wasn't even particularly looking forward to the film.

You were saying?

EtherAMP:

Crap_haT:
Actually I wanted to enjoy this film.

Crap_haT:
I wasn't even particularly looking forward to the film.

You were saying?

I wasn't looking foward to it, but enjoying it would be nice. (I haven't contradicted myself, so don't feel like to much of a smart arse) *Enters the cinema* "I havent really been looking foward to this film but if it's not good I've wasted an evening and money." Guess what happend?

(Why do I have to justify myself to you people?)

sammyfreak:
Based on what trailers i have seen i would say it seems like The Matrix. Infact a Matrix without anything cool at all. Left standing is a guy who can teleport.

Lets just watch The Matrix against instead shall we?

Why must everything be compared to The Matrix? Just because Random Movie hints at Character A having some sort of non-human power Forum Poster 1 assumes they ripped off The Matrix. This pattern is old, tired, and needs to stop.

When I was watching The Matrix, I couldn't help but compare scenes to Dark City - and even Dark City wasn't the first to have similar plot points.

My point? Please stop comparing everything to The Matrix. It wasn't the be-all and end-all of reality bending characters.

For the record, I did see Jumper and never once thought "oh the Matrix blah blah". While you'd be hard pressed to get me to watch Jumper again, I have seen worse movies.

Let me finish my mini-vent by saying that this wasn't a dig at sammyfreak. This same pattern happens on many other forums.

It dosen't compare to the matrix.

Maybe if there were a X-men Chronicals.

All of the major problems with this movie stem from the fact that it is an amazingly blatant set-up for a sequel. Unfortunately, the movies creators forgot that the first movie of a trilogy has to stand up on it's own.

**POSSIBLE SPOILERS** It's just annoying that there's never a good explanation/back story to the Paladins, "they're religious nutters who hate us for not a particularly good reason." That's all the explanation you get. Samuel L. Jackson's character is barely defeated. You think his mum is going to be helping him from the inside, but no.

All in all, I'd already heard that it's a blatant sequel set up before I saw it, so with that mindset, so I still found it enjoyable. Some very cool shots and CG effects, yet the film manages not to look over-the-top-CGed to death.

I liked Jumper. It was slow paced for an action flick, and there were plotholes big enough for my fat ass to jump through, but I liked it.

It is a February release movie... The studios only give us crap at best until late spring because of the Oscars. Any truly blockbuster hit they'll save till August thru December so it's still riding the hype into the awards, why release something like LotR in the first quarter when it will be old news by the time the Oscars pick nominations. For a down-season movie, It was better than we usually get.

THAT all being said, I'd be a better Jumper than those f'n retards... From what I gathered as canon in the movie, they have no actual way to ID a Jumper unless he is caught doing something nobody else could (Ie, going in the Vault w/o opening the door), or actually being seen Jumping. Their Jumpscar opener could only take you to and from where a Jumper ported...

So... Jump into the middle of the Sky (preferably over a volcano or something), use aerodynamics to guide your fall to a different location than straight down from the scar, then jump to somewhere safe. Your first starting scar and your second ending scar will be the only two they can go through, and both lead to certain death. There is no way for them to exit the first and go through the second, so you can just walk away when you land from the second jump.

Also, haven't these retards heard of GUNS? Not the Paladins, the Jumpers... You can teleport anywhere, get your arse to a military armory and gear up.

There was no character development! This might be okay if the character wasn't such a dick. But this guy... I mean, he steals, he's a creepy obsessive stalker, he's a bad son, he ignores desperate flood victims, he's violent, he's stupid, he's self-centered, he's not even slightly compassionate, he shows no respect for authority, and he defaces monuments. And at the end of the film? Nothing has changed, except he changes to stalking his mom instead of some poor girl.

I hated this film. I went to it thinking "Cool, a movie about a guy who can teleport" and left realizing that it might as well be a documentary because it is just a movie about a guy that can teleport, it has no message or artistic intent readily obvious. I hated all the characters except for one, and only because I liked his accent.

If you want to see a movie about a guy who can teleport, buy a ticket for In Bruges instead, because even if it has nothing to do with teleportation, you'll be more satisfied.

Good review, but I suggest spell checking in the future.

Ok, but when really was the last time you saw a true thinking movie? I really expected more from the Director of "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" and "The Bourne Identity", guess it was just the talent of the writers...

I took my little cousin out see it earlier tonight, and on the ride home he asked "What was your favorite part?". I couldn't answer. The movie wasn't bad it just faded from your mind afterwards. Now for the low-low-price of $26.00 (I wanted my coffee, and he HAD to have his large soda) I would have liked to feel something during the movie. Well, something other then "Hey, shes pretty cute".

It's not a bad time waster, but one that's deserving of uTorrent then the theater.

I enjoyed it.

It made me laugh , the concept of the movie seemed crap to me in the first place,
i mean a guy that can teleport... thats it , what the fuck.

this movie is absolute shite.

at first you think , ok well this guy can teleport , i can accept that.
so for the rest, the world is normal , well... then you get a scene of samuel l jackson ,
with clear white hair.. and then you start thinking..wtf...

too bad anakin skywalker didnt act so well , he does have a perfect arse though.
but hey , if i was gay at least i could have enjoyed that...

but iam not.

wilsonscrazybed:
Good review, but I suggest spell checking in the future.

Oh noes, I thought I did. T.T Damn.

EtherAMP, the film was a still born (imo), Crap_haT said so, whats the problem?

The actor that did his very best to drag Star Wars down with his own soon-2-be-dead career did the very same here!

As soon as Jamie Bell appears (literally) on screen I was almost overwhelmed as some actual acting hit me!

Wait, should this review be in the Review Forums?

JOE COOL:
Wait, should this review be in the Review Forums?

Probably

Larenxis:
There was no character development! This might be okay if the character wasn't such a dick. But this guy... I mean, he steals, he's a creepy obsessive stalker, he's a bad son, he ignores desperate flood victims, he's violent, he's stupid, he's self-centered, he's not even slightly compassionate, he shows no respect for authority, and he defaces monuments. And at the end of the film? Nothing has changed, except he changes to stalking his mom instead of some poor girl.

Sounds perfectly human to me... Just having superpowers doesn't mean a person has to be either a hero or a villain, and people ARE self-centered.

Khell_Sennet:
Also, haven't these retards heard of GUNS? Not the Paladins, the Jumpers... You can teleport anywhere, get your arse to a military armory and gear up.

Yeah, that annoyed the crap out of me. And then the Irish/Cockney bloke pulls out the flame thrower.

Its funny that neither side made use of guns... Sniper rifles in particular.

Jumper - Locate a Paladin, jump somewhere they won't notice you, pop em off then jump away.
Paladin - Locate a Jumper, fire a silenced shot. If they don't see it coming, they can't avoid it.