Taken

[sanjuro_ronin]

dude dont you know, chuck norris, is liam neeson. its one of his many alter egos

That explains everything !!

[GeneChing]

Taken was totally off the radar for me. I like Neeson - he totally won me over in Rob Roy. I think he's was a little over-rated as Qui-Gon, Schindler and Aslan, but whatever. But after reading this thread and picking up on some other buzz, we decided to add it to our e-zine archive, especially since we don' thave much media wise for a spell in the wake of CC2C. It's a bit of a reach for us for sure, so I hope it's a decent film.

TAKEN It to the Limit by Dr. Craig Reid

[doug maverick]

it is gene, this film was off my radar as well. just thought it was a movie about a girl who gets kidnamed however if i'd known it was co wriutten by luc besson i would have been more inclined to check it out. trust me its worth the watch.

[GeneChing]

Mick LaSalle is S.F. Chronicle's fussiest critic.

'Taken' keeps on giving
Mick LaSalle, Chronicle Movie Critic
Friday, January 30, 2009

POLITE APPLAUSE Taken: Action thriller. Starring Liam Neeson, Maggie Grace and Olivier Rabourdin. Directed by Pierre Morel. (PG-13. 94 minutes. At Bay Area theaters. For complete movie listings and show times, and to buy tickets for select theaters, go to sfgate.com/movies.)

So many movies are well intended but poorly made that when something like "Taken" comes along, it's a relief, almost a joy. There's nothing lofty in the intentions of "Taken." The aspiration here was to make a simple, straight-ahead action thriller. Period. But if you think that's easy, think of all the lousy action thrillers that come out in the course of a year. The level of skill that went into "Taken" is masterly.

This is a picture that will appeal mainly to people who love movies, and I use the word "love" advisedly. Viewers who love movies for their true soul - for their obviousness, for their manipulations, for their corniness, for their blend of high and low emotion - will take great pleasure in "Taken." Others, who like movies conditionally, like a wayward lover they hope to reform, may end up hating "Taken" - or at least thinking of it as something stupid, ridiculous, far-fetched and worthless.

Which reminds me of a story: When I was 6, all the kids I knew used to watch the TV show "Batman." We took it very, very seriously. Then, at around 7, we realized it was ridiculous. Then, when we were around 9, we realized it was intended to be ridiculous, and we liked it again. At 7, we thought we were quite sophisticated, but, it turned out, there were higher levels of appreciation. "Taken" requires that higher level of appreciation.

In terms of pace and economy, it's beautiful to behold. Director Pierre Morel, working from a script by Robert Mark Kamen ("The Fifth Element") and Luc Besson, knows when to slow down and lavish time on characters to establish the emotions and motivations that are going to give the action its urgent undercurrent. Liam Neeson plays Brian, a nice, easygoing fellow whose main mission in life, as the film starts, is to rekindle a relationship with his teenage daughter. Apparently, he was a workaholic who neglected his family and wrecked his marriage, but he's determined to keep that one flickering connection alive and thriving.

Oh, yes, and it turns out that he's a former CIA agent. Of course he is. What did you think, that this movie was going to be some boring thing about a family? Wake up and smell the explosions! So what happens next? How do the screenwriters connect the dedicated-father angle with the former CIA-agent angle? Three guesses. ... What, you only needed one guess? That's right, the daughter is taken and borne away by an international cabal of criminals.

Anyone could devise this premise. The real measure of "Taken" is not in what happens but in how it happens. Observe, for example, the intelligent construction of the abduction scene. Notice how the design of the apartment (from which the girl is taken) and the use of the victim's perspective contribute to the tension. Take note of the sheer cleverness of the filmmakers' choosing to have it all happen while the girl is on the phone, and how that phone conversation builds the sense of dread and excitement.

It's as if the filmmakers, at every turn of the script, said, "OK, this is how it's usually done. Let's come up with a way that's better. Then let's throw that out and come up with something that's even better than that." There are different kinds of creativity. "Taken" evinces the creativity of expert craftsmanship.

Neeson is well cast as a softhearted, thoughtful, self-effacing man who is big enough to do serious damage once he gets angry. He's angry for most of the movie, which, incidentally, takes place mainly in Paris. The placement of an archetypal American character, the avenging action hero, wreaking havoc through the Paris streets has some dark appeal: No one at the tourist information booth is going to be rude to this guy.

Then it's over, and a glance at the watch shows that only 94 minutes have gone by and yet so much has happened. I won't tell you "Taken" is great, but it's great fun.

-- Advisory: Strong action violence and near nudity.

[brothernumber9]

The movie was released in Japan and Korea last year. A friend of mine has had it since he came back from Seoul in November, I slept on it as well. I still haven't seen it, but now my interest is piqued with all the buzz and positive reviews it has gotten.

[Jimbo]

I saw it and it's an excellent movie. Highly recommended.

[RedJunkRebel]

I just watched it today. Two thumbs up here. I saw a lot of Wing Chun-based close quarters movements. As a close combat self-defense specialist, I found the fight scenes to be highly realistic.

[mickey]

Greetings,

So you guys liked the movie, huh?

I think this flick will set the bar very high for upcoming modern action movies for a while, very much like the movie Fist of Legend has become the standard for period piece martial arts films.

mickey

[Shaolinlueb]

not a real leam nielson fan, but i will see.

i am going to quote myself because i was not a fan of his.

but he ****ing rocked in this movie. this movie was the sh*t! as is awesome. i think it did set a standard for fight scenes.

[mickey]

Greetings,

I would love to see a follow up movie (I think they call it a sequel) with Liam Neeson's character. The thing is, I do not know if they can improve upon perfection.


mickey

[doug maverick]

oh yeah you know this character is making a come back. movie was number one during superbowl weekend, it beat expectations.

[冠木侍]

I'm in a budget crunch and have to choose my movies carefully at the moment. However, this one looked good from the trailer and has been on my list of things to see.

I try to stay away from critic reviews but one bad thing that got through to me was that the editing for the fight scenes were a negative of the movie.

Regardless, I still have an open mind about things and this seems like an action thriller that won't disappoint.

[TenTigers]

the editing of the fight scenes accomplished something very special, that did not really occur in the Bourne, or Bond scenes. They made his technique appear quick, efficient, and brutal, the way you would expect a black ops spook to fight.
Although, being a MA'ist, I really enjoy "seeing" good technique-early Segal was great, this worked for me.

[doug maverick]

I'm in a budget crunch and have to choose my movies carefully at the moment. However, this one looked good from the trailer and has been on my list of things to see.

I try to stay away from critic reviews but one bad thing that got through to me was that the editing for the fight scenes were a negative of the movie.

Regardless, I still have an open mind about things and this seems like an action thriller that won't disappoint.

as a filmmaker and fight choreagrapher i can tell you that the fights were edited very well. and whoever says defferent has no freaking dea what they are talking about

[Shaolinlueb]

about the fight scene edits.

what ten tigers and doug said rpetty much sum it up.