innocentfreak

I really wanted to see this but it is getting trashed. Even the book is getting trashed. The original book and sequel were really good, but the movie is based off a third book which I never read. Maybe I will go see this tomorrow afternoon.

I would suggest everyone especially if you like the movie check out Jumper and then Reflex by Stephen Gould which is the original novel and the sequel.

Patman

I sort of wished Hayden Christensen and Jamie Bell had switched roles in "Jumper" because Hayden is just too frikkin' boring as a leading man, plus his character is written kinda stupid, for instance, for a guy who is jumping into a dangerous situation, why doesn't he just do a little surveying of the situation instead of just blindly jumping into a bad spot. I think Jamie Bell would have been a much more interesting actor to watch in the lead role. Rachel Bilson is fine as the love interest, she's too cute for words at times, but it's still just a secondary role. The film is literally a little too jumpy in spots, and the introduction of the Paladins as a group of people hunting down jumpers never quite gelled with me. Sure, they are headstrong in their mission, but the film doesn't quite delve into the deeper reasons why such a power should not exist amongst the population at large, and what they are prepared to do to protect the rest of the non-jumpers.

I give it 2 stars, or a grade of C.

Brack

if Stephen King loves it, it has to be good....

http://www.stephenking.com/

dadaluholla

I agree with "The O's" review...I liked it a lot. Very fun movie, and I would definitely like to see more of these characters in a sequel, especially to further explore the conflict between the Jumpers and the Paladins. Also, I thought it was a little too short, because the ending felt kind of sudden.

I'll be buying the dvd for sure.

fumanstan

Caught this with my girlfriend this afternoon. I dug it, but it could have been sooooo much better. I enjoyed the story, what they did with the powers, and the effects and creativity of all the fights. The movie didn't feel short either, despite someone mentioning it was only 85 minutes. I also didn't mind Hayden's character at all, not to mention the other jumper.

I do wish they developed the Paladins more; they didn't give much reason as to why they were hunting the Jumpers other then because "they shouldn't have that power." Fairly lame for a centuries year old fight. They could have set that all up by maybe showing a "bad" jumper like Roland talked about in a flashback or something. It also would have been nice to know more about why Jumpers are the way they were.

I hope this makes enough for sequels.

Finisher

This film just scratched the surface. I think sequels are a bad idea 99% of the time but in this instance a sequel could adequately flesh things out.

Solid, entertaining flick despite wooden Hayden.

FantasticVSDoom

Im glad we didn't get a whole lot of back story on either jumpers or paladins... Its such a cliche in movies like this so it was refreshing that we didn't see that or the 10-15 minute master/student learning montage. Was it a great movie? No, but I think it was a good first episode of a franchise that could be promising in the future. A lot like the first X-men that lead to a great part 2.

Linn1

I saw the movie and agree, Bell should have been the lead. If you sorta like the film, or just like the idea, I think you'd really like the original book.

animatedude

i rest my case.

Brack

I was joking, silly (notice the "....."). I didn't see it, but I heard Waist Deep was good, and I loved SoaP, fun movie.

celmendo

Agree with most of what has been said. Hayden was a bad idea for the lead. I was thinking they added Jaime Bell's character because they realized how "charisma free" (perfect description from another review) Hayden is. Rachel Bilson is just as forgettable as Hayden which is probably the reason she was chosen.

The book was good and great for a simple film but I guess it wasn't "epic" enough.

I did like they put stuff out there i.e. The Paladins, his mother, etc. and didn't feel the need to fully explain every detail. I think it wasn't really necessary and leaves a lot to do in sequels.

Maybe Hayden can die quickly in the sequel and leave Jaime Bell to take the lead as she should have done anyway. It's a better film every time he's on screen.

The Bus

I saw this yesterday when another movie I wanted to see was sold out. It wasn't terrible, but I thought it was entertaining and I didn't feel like my time was wasted. So, warmest of praises for Jumper. There were a few scenes that had me grinning.

And animatedude owes me $500. The only other movie I've seen for 2008 is One Missed Call.

jarofclay73

Heh, I like that Stephen King thinks he has low standards for movies.

Well, if HE walked out on "The Transformers," then I'd suppose "Jumper" is worth a try. "Transformers" was a silly movie and I wouldn't have seen it if it weren't for the toy franchise.

Fincher Fan

Jesus, this movie was rubbish. All the memorable moments are in the trailer. Avoid.

grifter

I enjoyed the effects enough, but saw no reason for the Jumpers to not have massacred the Paladins. Hayden's labored speech pattern annoyed me.

After Bourne, was Doug Liman replaced with a robot? A silly blockbuster producing robot?

DaveCole

Saw it satuday night and enjoyed it. I wouldn't mind seeing the sequels delve into the past and show the formation of the Paladins. The only distracting thing is I kept thinking of Nightcrawler when ever they jumped. Especially during the fight scenes.

Mercury&Solace

As most have already mentioned, this movie wasn't terrible, but wasn't very good either. The performances and dialog from Hayden and Rachel was horrible. I enjoyed Max Thieriot and AnnaSophia Robb WAY more than Hayden and Rachel. I expected a little more from Liman too. I mean how many times does Hayden need to get his ass kicked and trapped before he gets a weapon and some balls and do some of his own damage? WTF? This movie is a mess, thats just the tip of the iceberg. This could have been a lot better.

redskull

Meh. What a mess of a movie. As others have said, everything's right there in the trailer. If you've seen the trailer, then there's no reason to see the movie.

SPOILERS AHEAD, although there's nothing much to spoil:







I thought the kid who played young Manakin in the flashback scenes was a much better actor. Too bad they didn't sign him up for the whole movie. By the way, shouldn't Hayden Christiansen have looked like Jake Lloyd in those flashbacks?

I'm surprised that no one's brought up the point that Manakin was a thief, plain and simple. No matter how much the movie wanted him not to be, he was nothing but a crook. He routinely teleported into bank vaults and stole money from them, as well as teleporting into venues without paying. And EVERYTHING he had was stolen. Even things he may have actually paid cash for were bought with money he stole.

And yet we're supposed to embrace him as the "hero." I get that it's a wish fulfillment thing; that he's got the power to do things we'd all like to be able to do. But to so casually gloss over the fact that he was a thief seems wrong to me.

He even whines to Samuel L. Jackson that he's "not like those other Jumpers who went bad." No, of course not, he's just a Jumper who steals money from vaults.

The movie tries to rationalize his thefts by having him leave I.O.U.s in all the banks he robbed. I'm not buying it. Seriously, how was he planning on paying back the millions he stole? He didn't have a job. I doubt he was investing. I suppose maybe he could jumped to Vegas and won some money there to pay back the banks, but that's a pretty big supposition. Maybe he was stealing from one bank to pay back what he owed the first? But then there's always going to be one bank that's out some money. It's like they were just paying lip service to the I.O.U. idea, tossing it out there in a lame attempt to validate the character without thinking about how it would really work.

jeffkjoe

This movie is the kind of movie that does well cause there's nothing else to watch.

Brack

^^^ Yep, studios are finally starting to understand that February is good for releasing stuff that isn't too great, i.e. Daredevil and Ghost Rider.

hdtv00

Yep Ms. Bilson I love you....however this movie was a joke. It felt like a half written movie that just ended in the middle of it. The idea/story didn't suck , I just think they forgot to finish it but released it anyway.

Brack

I quite enjoyed this. I don't think Hayden's character is supposed to be a hero at all, I don't know where that's coming from. He's just a dude having fun with his power. I think I'd probably do the same thing. I don't think Hayden's wooden at all, that's just the way the guy talks. It wasn't great, but it never set itself out to be great, just a silly action movie, which I dug.

Star Wars Guy

Saw this last night. I thought it was a good popcorn flick with a novel idea. Brack, I agree, I don't know why anyone would think that David is a hero.

About him not being like the others and 'going bad' was directed that he wasn't a murder or really a bad person.



As for Hayden's performance, yes it wasn't great, but it was 10 times better than what he did in the 2 Star Wars movies.

Brack

Yeah, I really liked that part.

JayDerek

A good popcorn movie.

My only complaint is the very 'non reaction' Hayden received after returning to his hometown. That was either poorly written or executed by the actors.