I just finished the movie, viewed it on a nice quality screen. Still, I think it's not quite the same as the cinema experience.
Maybe then, I would've enjoyed it a sufficient amount (liked it enough to warrant the ticket/rental price). I'm almost inclined to resort to conspiracy theories, there's got to be a Doug Liman twin out there, an evil one, who sullies the name of a director who brought us 'The Bourne Identity' and 'Mr and Mrs Smith' (but I probably shouldn't yell the last movie title out too loud, what a mediocre action movie).
The biggest problem - besides the casting of airhead Rachel Bilson - imo is the choice to butcher a much longer film to a scarce ninety minutes. It doesn't take a genius to notice the giant gaps between scenes, maybe one day we'll get to see an extended cut. Like Spider-Man 3, you can clearly feel a director's cut would be an infinitely great improvement.
The story (actually based on a novel, believe it or not) entails an in all ways selfish protagonist, with NO redeeming qualities, furthermore there's a bag of undealt issues from the past, which of course (as in any cliché-ridden screenplay) affect his present state of mind. That's as far as the audience gets to a rounding of characters, 'Jumper' bored the hell out of me except for a couple of scenes in the second half of the movie.
How did they go wrong?? Not exactly inventive, but at least an exciting concept, a $85,000,000 budget, and a popular novel combined with an acclaimed director, it all ends up in this mess.
Maybe then, I would've enjoyed it a sufficient amount (liked it enough to warrant the ticket/rental price). I'm almost inclined to resort to conspiracy theories, there's got to be a Doug Liman twin out there, an evil one, who sullies the name of a director who brought us 'The Bourne Identity' and 'Mr and Mrs Smith' (but I probably shouldn't yell the last movie title out too loud, what a mediocre action movie).
The biggest problem - besides the casting of airhead Rachel Bilson - imo is the choice to butcher a much longer film to a scarce ninety minutes. It doesn't take a genius to notice the giant gaps between scenes, maybe one day we'll get to see an extended cut. Like Spider-Man 3, you can clearly feel a director's cut would be an infinitely great improvement.
The story (actually based on a novel, believe it or not) entails an in all ways selfish protagonist, with NO redeeming qualities, furthermore there's a bag of undealt issues from the past, which of course (as in any cliché-ridden screenplay) affect his present state of mind. That's as far as the audience gets to a rounding of characters, 'Jumper' bored the hell out of me except for a couple of scenes in the second half of the movie.
How did they go wrong?? Not exactly inventive, but at least an exciting concept, a $85,000,000 budget, and a popular novel combined with an acclaimed director, it all ends up in this mess.