Transporting junk
23:46 Tuesday 6 Nov 07
It was cheap. It should have been at release. Junk, absolute trash.
More: Film
Comments (10) --
Read (1917)
It was cheap. It should have been at release. Junk, absolute trash.
FreshlyPressed - Feed - Privacy - 3.1.3 - 3,203 - 10,494 - 0.219
1
Well, depends on what you’re looking for ;). On the premise of an action flick, it’s pretty good. Storyline? Not so much.
00:47 Wednesday 7 Nov 07
2
I agree, it was quite a good film for just a straight action flick. If you wanted a decent storyline then its not really the best one to choose to watch heh.
11:19 Wednesday 7 Nov 07
3
Thing is, you sound surprised… ;-)
11:53 Wednesday 7 Nov 07
4
I thought there would be a little more substance. Even a morsel would have been good.
No storyline.
Stylised violence that just wasn’t any good. Van Damme does better and that’s not saying much.
At 88 mins though the duration wasn’t too bad though they’d have been hard put to stretch it further.
The sequel is 3 quid in the shop. It’s staying in the shop :)
Tonight: League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. I have a feeling this isn’t going to be great too.
12:46 Wednesday 7 Nov 07
5
It is really, really bad, but it does have that great scene where they are slipping around on oil.
03:54 Friday 9 Nov 07
6
If you think that’s bad, try watching ‘Crank’ :)
11:42 Friday 9 Nov 07
7
Crank – I nearly bought that.
Lloyd – I thought the oil was .. a new low.
11:53 Friday 9 Nov 07
8
Transporter 2 is FAR FAR sillier, but is better as a result.
In it’s defence, Crank does have Amy Smart.
23:16 Friday 9 Nov 07
9
I dunno, I personally liked it myself, but I went in only looking for action and not a plot, so I wasn’t let down.
02:17 Saturday 10 Nov 07
10
So you are not rushing out to get the sequel? hehehe! I don’t mind the actor in a couple things like the movie where he was the “adrenaline junkie or die from poison”, but really didn’t like that this one either!
02:22 Sunday 11 Nov 07