Taken 3

Independently a fine movie rather being associated with TAKEN.

Actually, it was not a bad movie, I really enjoyed it. But associated with 'Taken' and being the third film in the series was the setback. Because unlike the first two films, this one was somewhat detached from the original theme. Except the cast from the previous two, the story takes place in a completely different platform. From all the three films, the phone call between father and daughter was retained, but was not effective as the first one which became just a trademark of the series, that's all.

The first half creates the puzzle and next half solves it. As expected, it was a typical structure in this trilogy, but the last quarter was turned into something like 'Mission Impossible'. In 'Taken' films, Bryan Mills (our lead guy) works alone, but he formed a team with a tech guy and others. That does not sound good, at least tried to be different from the original movie.

It is a little disappointment for 'Taken' fans, but you will have a best shot if you see it as an independent one off movie. Yes could have made a better action flick if it was not linked to it. Hope it all ends here like they have said. As a trilogy, it failed, or maybe we can call it a 50-50. But the first one was a masterpiece, a trendsetting piece.

6.5/10

The rugged and feisty Liam Neeson (as on-screen alter ego ex-CIA operative Bryan Mills) is back in fighting form for a third and supposedly final go-around in ‘Taken 3′. This tired and tepid action-packed crime thriller is directed by French filmmaker Olivier Megaton (‘Taken 2’, ‘Transporter 3’) with screenwriting credits attributed to ‘Taken’ producer Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen. Clearly Neeson and company want to squeeze the remaining strained juices out of the ‘Taken’ film franchise as this movie series trilogy ends on an exhausting whimper. Uninspired, toothless and motoring on empty impishness, ‘Taken 3′ has run its kinetic course for the aging Neeson to aim, shoot and take down some serious repetitive butt-kicking numbers.

After the last two energizing installments where flashy foreign locales were a major part of the appealing ‘Taken’ universe, ‘Taken 3′ is reduced to unraveling in the uneventful backyard of familiar Los Angeles that definitely lacks the exotic excitement and visual vitality that were previously showcased in posh landscapes such as Paris and Istanbul. In fact, star Neeson reportedly nixed the idea to partake in the ‘Taken 3′ production if there was another concept of kidnapping involved. Huh? Why avoid the element of kidnapping when in fact it was the soundly running gimmick that made the ‘Taken’ experience palpable and pulsating? Still, this is the least of ‘Taken 3’s bothersome problems as the movie delves in the manufactured mockery involving cliched car chases, sketchy gunplay and the inclusion of countless Russian mobsters parading about in obligatory fashion. Importantly, even Neeson seems quite disengaged as his robotic Bryan Mills goes through the motions trying to find some upside in the forced upbeat shenanigans that seem to trudge along scene after scene.

The very first outing in ‘Taken’ took audiences by surprised as it featured a matured Neeson as an avenging former CIA human weapon Mills committed to his fatherly duti...

I was looking forward to this movie and I have to say that I was a wee bit disappointed. It is a decent enough action movie but the script leaves somewhat to be desired. A good chunk of the movie is quite good, actually it is very good, but there are some crucial scenes that, in my opinion, really drags it down to a rather mediocre level.

The plot is a fairly classical, not a very intelligent nor a very original, one. When trying to push the third sequel in a series Hollywood have a tendency to fall back on certain “trusted” elements. Like, make the hero haunted by the law and / or the government (no I do not consider the government to be the same as the law) or kill off some of the main (or at least likable) characters.

In this movie they are doing both. I do not know why this always seems to be the standard solution because I certainly do not like it. Are the general movie going audience really falling for these, in my mind, cheap scripts? I guess they must be since this formula is repeated over and over again. Well, it is not for me to judge other peoples tastes and if I would have been a bean counter for the movie industry then it would really have been my duty to squeeze out as much money as possible regardless of whether I thought it would make a good movie or not, However, I am not. I am a consumer of movies and my personal opinion is that these plot elements are pretty cheap and not really to my liking. But then, that is just me.

Anyway, the movie is not really bad. It is a decent enough action movie and, in general, I quite like the performance of Liam Neeson. He is the half-sad, silent and, most of all, ass-kicking hero that I like. He is pretty much what holds this movie together. Well, that was perhaps not entirely fair. Forrest Whitaker is doing a quite good job as well. Most of the other characters are mostly fillers. The main bad guy started off fairly good but he really never got the chance to shine and the ending scenes with the big confron...

I can handle the 47 cuts and shakey cam poorly trying to hide the fact that Liam Neeson can't run. I can handle the inevitability of "More money means more explosions!" in franchises like these. I can even contort myself to handle the right-out-the-gate fridging of one of my favourite actresses that Taken 3 copped so much flak for. But what I cannot handle is how absolutely fucking dumb this movie gets in the second half. Every five minutes my roommate or I had to scream "WHAT!?" at the things that were happening on screen, and disparage the various idiotic and/or nonsense decisions that were being made.

Final rating:★½: - Boring/disappointing. Avoid where possible.

Taken 3 tries to bring a fresh angle to the franchise, shifting from the usual "rescue mission" to a fugitive-style thriller, but it doesn’t quite hit the mark. The plot feels weaker compared to the first two, relying on predictable twists and a lack of real tension. The script struggles to connect the story in a meaningful way, making it feel more like an unnecessary sequel rather than a proper conclusion. The directing leans heavily on fast cuts and shaky action sequences, which at times make the movie feel more chaotic than intense. Some moments work, but others feel like they’re just going through the motions.

Liam Neeson still delivers a solid performance, carrying the movie with his usual presence, but the supporting cast doesn’t add much to elevate the film. The cinematography is serviceable but doesn’t stand out, with action scenes suffering from over-editing that makes it hard to follow. The score is decent but doesn’t bring anything memorable to the experience. While there are some enjoyable moments, the movie lacks the tight execution of the first Taken and ends up feeling like a forgettable entry in the trilogy. Watchable, but nothing special.