Jump to content
IGNORED

Taken - Liam Neeson

Goose

By Goose
in Film, TV & Radio

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
Eats hoops and leaves

Eats hoops and leaves

Posted
Posted

I saw this last night, and I was really looking forward to it, as I love old action films like Commando etc.

Boring, boring, boring. It’s absolutely ridiculous, which would be fine if it didn’t take itself so seriously. So that’s its first mistake. Connected to this is the massive series of plotholes and logical errors. Of course, I can forgive this if a film is presenting itself as a sort of pantomime (see Commando etc.), but this film isn’t. It’s trying to be realistic and hard-edged, but because the rules of the film’s world are just slightly different to our own, it makes for an uncomfortable half-way real universe that is just frustrating and childish. In fact, it bears a huge resemblance to superhero films in this respect.

Another thing is that as I get older, I become less enthused by ‘badass’ characters. I’m sure that I would have found that

torture scene

thrilling a decade ago, but now I just think that the guy’s a dick who should be locked up. I’m not against having amoral protagonists – in fact, this is what often attracts me to films – but we are supposed to be on this guy’s side. Granted, his enemies have done something ghastly, but the means that he goes to cause him to be on the same level as they are. As a result, I don’t want him to ‘win’ the story, I want the daughter to use her own intelligence to win, and him to fail.

All of this wouldn’t matter if the film was just entertaining, though. But it isn’t. There are no original set-ups, twists, set pieces, characters or fights. The main bad guys aren’t presented until the very end, so we get no hint at what’s to come, no decent chase with a real end in sight (a lot of action films are getting this wrong these days – they are mistaking not revealing the bad guy until the end as a clever twist. No. Let’s see who we’re up against and go in with a little more knowledge than our hero. It’s not a detective story or thriller, it’s an action film), just Qui-Gon Jin running about Paris chasing seemingly thin-ends of trials to nothing. The only good bit was that scene… and I’ve just read that 24 did it first anyway.

It’s just dull. ‘Bad ass’ characters/ruthless killers with no morals aren’t interesting anymore. They’re a product of the nineties, IMO, and should be left behind as curiosity pieces. We live in more transparent times, where we’re aware that the tools of our governments aren’t people to be cheered on.

I also had issues with the fact that his twisted, paranoid view of the world was justified in the end.

And Famke Jameson’s character came across as a bitch at first, but as soon as the story got going, I was completely on her side.

Bah.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr_woo

mr_woo

Posted
Posted
It’s just dull. ‘Bad ass’ characters/ruthless killers with no morals aren’t interesting anymore. They’re a product of the nineties, IMO, and should be left behind as curiosity pieces. We live in more transparent times, where we’re aware that the tools of our governments aren’t people to be cheered on.

Completely disagree with that. I'm fed up in this day and age were every hero/character has to be 'conflicted' or have some sort of morality to him. I was extremely happy to see an action hero were there was none of that shite and it was about ass kickings all the way, no thought about anything else. Maybe they are a product of the 80's/90's but considering that's where all the best action films came from IMO we could do with more instead of the shit that gets produced these days. I also really enjoyed the way the action was straight to the point, no dilemmas or anything about what was 'right', simply a 'fuck you where's my daughter ?' followed by a beating. Not realistic in the slightest, but damn good fun to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eats hoops and leaves

Eats hoops and leaves

Posted
Posted
Completely disagree with that. I'm fed up in this day and age were every hero/character has to be 'conflicted' or have some sort of morality to him. I was extremely happy to see an action hero were there was none of that shite and it was about ass kickings all the way, no thought about anything else. Maybe they are a product of the 80's/90's but considering that's where all the best action films came from IMO we could do with more instead of the shit that gets produced these days.

I sometimes miss the heros of the last couple of decades, but the storylines and bad guys matched these characters. I'll bring it up again, because it's a favourite: in Commando, I accept the ridiculous body count and gore because it all feels a bit inconsequential. It's vapid crap, and it's presented in that way. It's camp and stupid and it's not set in a world that's recognisible as our own. What's interesting about this is that I'm never sure if this was the filmmaker's intention or not - whether it's because of budget constraints or a lack of directing skill or whatever, but the point is that these characters can behave in this fashion because they're in fairly-tale land.

In Taken, it's stepping into our recognisible, modern world, dealing with questions and situations (up to the actual taken point) that a lot of men deal with, and the petty, jealous side is being championed.

I'm not asking for him to be conflicted or being overly-moralistic - I enjoy watching characters flirt with their own moral lines and beliefs to achieve what they must - but I do want sophistication in my heros, and I want them to be people that make me feel empowered when I watch them. I don't want to be ashamed of them getting their way, which I was when he walked out of that room

after flicking the switch.

Look at Leon. Very simple, straightforward action film with a ruthless hero whose actions I find disgusting. But I want him to win because there are traits in him I recognise in myself, and he has a tenderness that he doesn't know how to express properly. He's got flaws, and they're not the usual ones. I can forgive him his sins and cheer him on. In Taken, Neeson doesn't love his daughter - he wants to posses her and prevent her from growing up and becoming a woman.

What do you think happened next, after the credits finished? He let her go on holiday again?

The bad guy won in this case.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr_woo

mr_woo

Posted
Posted
In Taken, Neeson doesn't love his daughter - he wants to posses her and prevent her from growing up and becoming a woman.

What do you think happened next, after the credits finished? He let her go on holiday again?

The bad guy won in this case.

In terms of the film I assume she just had a great voice and became a world-renowned singer :(<_<

In the film he came across more as overprotective rather than possessive to me. He's been in the CIA for years and has seen some really bad shit in his time so I don't blame him for being careful. When his ex wife tells him about being too overprotective he realises she's right. After all the events that follow I would assume the daughter learned her own, though very severe, lesson. Sure it would take time to get over it but I'm sure eventually she would like any person would.

In all honesty I never really thought that deep about it though, to me it was just a plot device to let the ass kickings start and not really much else. I never really found it hard to root for Neeson throughout the whole film but I am admittedly a big fan of his so I am biased though I do think he is a character people will empathise with simply because he's trying to find someone he loves.

I take your point about the serious tone rather than the jokey tone of Commando (brilliant film) but I liked the way it mixed the serious tone of action films these days with the complete nonsense of tolder action films, a really good mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eats hoops and leaves

Eats hoops and leaves

Posted
Posted

But what lesson did she learn? I mean, she was a ditz, but no more than a lot of girls at that age. She was just enjoying her holiday. I'm not sure what she could have done to prevent what happened from happening, so in my eyes there's no lesson to learn.

Well, I like Neeson too, and found no problems with his acting. I just didn't like the story and found something uncomfortable lurking behind the whole thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr_woo

mr_woo

Posted
Posted
But what lesson did she learn? I mean, she was a ditz, but no more than a lot of girls at that age. She was just enjoying her holiday. I'm not sure what she could have done to prevent what happened from happening, so in my eyes there's no lesson to learn.

Well, I like Neeson too, and found no problems with his acting. I just didn't like the story and found something uncomfortable lurking behind the whole thing.

How about the lesson of not getting a lift with someone she doesn't even know ? Seriously that's one stupid fucking thing to do, even at that age, can you honestly tell me you'd think people of that age would just get into a taxi with someone they've never met before ? Maybe I'm just being naive but even when I was that age (christ that was years ago :( ) I didn't know anyone that stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr_woo

mr_woo

Posted
Posted
It wasn't something that struck me as totally irresponsible, but then maybe I'm the naive one :(

Well I'm from Northern Ireland so maybe I'm just overly cautious. Getting into a car with someone that you didn't know during the troubles was inadvisable <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
lordcookie

lordcookie

Posted
Posted

After a truly dire first half hour I thought this really picked up. It is easy to argue about the questionable morals, the plot holes and lack of any interesting characters but the film had an energy that made the many negatives rather irrelevant. It was nice to see economic fight sequences. Even the Bourne franchise over-embelishes the action but here most of the set pieces are over quickly. Neeson is great once in Death Wish mode. He makes an silly character credible and really is the only reason why this film works as well as it does.

It is a shame that almost a third of the film is made up of a terrible scene-setter though. It is entirely redundant to the rest of the film and trying to thread a dull character arc into the film added nothing to the experience. Famke was rubbish, Maggie Grace was the least convincing 17 year old girl ever, Neeson's friends were pointless and the bad guys were all instantly forgettable yet despite this it was thoroughly entertaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goose

Goose

Posted
  • Author
Posted

First thing I tell anyone before they see the film is "Forget the first 20 minutes. Get through it, and you'll enjoy the last hour". The first 20 mins are like a movie of the week where a divorced man tries to reconnect with his daughter who is no longer 8 years old, while being thwarted by his evil ex-wife and her multi-millionaire new husband. It really is a pretty rotten opening but it goes to show how great the last hour is because you forget all that opening once it kicks off. And it really does kick off and with practically any other actor it wouldn't have worked but Neeson has enough of a cold edge, of rawness, that you just want him to start killing people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr_woo

mr_woo

Posted
Posted

I don't think the first 20 mins are THAT bad, it's not badly acted and they need to establish Neesons character and his relationship with his daughter which is does quickly and efficiently. After that of course it's ass kicking all the way but the start of the film whilst not great does it's job fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Simmy

Simmy

Posted
Posted
I don't think the first 20 mins are THAT bad, it's not badly acted and they need to establish Neesons character and his relationship with his daughter which is does quickly and efficiently. After that of course it's ass kicking all the way but the start of the film whilst not great does it's job fine.

Oh but it really is.

I might be missing out, but I switched off after those 20mins and can't be arsed watching the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hello Goaty ♥

Hello Goaty ♥

Posted
Posted

Well, I've seen Taken three times now. ( High seas action ) And would happily watch it again on the big screen. Its a classic!

And yet again, I see the serious film buffs on here over analysing.

Aside from that, why the hell are the film reviews calling it the " Next Bourne! "

It has more of a Leon feel to it, which is not suprising as its the same director, innit.

Infact i probably will go and watch it on the big screen. It's worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goose

Goose

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Oh but it really is.

I might be missing out, but I switched off after those 20mins and can't be arsed watching the rest.

Neeson is divorced. Quit his job at the CIA to try to spend time with his family but it was too late and he and his wife are now divorced. She's married to a rich guy and Neeson is trying to connect with his 16 year old daughter. His friends want him back at the CIA but he is going to continue to try and connect with his daughter to make up for lost time. She goes to France...

That's the 20 mins out the way. Skip to 20 mins, when Neeson is on the phone to his daughter. Watch from then forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordcookie

lordcookie

Posted
Posted
Oh but it really is.

I might be missing out, but I switched off after those 20mins and can't be arsed watching the rest.

I'd give it another go. If I was the sort of person to walk out of a film in the cinema I probably would have done in the first 20 minutes of this film but once his daughter is taken it really picks up.

Even the first 20mins has its purpose, as part of the story.

No it doesn't.

None of the family relationships, his banter with his friends or the singer have anything to do with the rest of the film. His estrangement from his daughter has no bearing on whether or not he'd try and get her back because even if he had the ideal family setup he would have done the same thing. None of the things established at the start drove him to do what he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept