Review: Taken
by John NolteWhen the lights dim on one of these action thrillers my question is always the same: Is this “300” or “The Kingdom?” Is this what it promises to be, a rousing, exciting, intelligent crowd pleaser true to its themes to the end like “300,” or is this “The Kingdom,” a hundred minutes of dishonest set up all designed to manipulate an emotional investment from you so that the closing, left wing, Big Hollywood sucker punch puts you on your knees?
I bring you glad tidings. Like a gritty, avenge grinder Charles Bronson might’ve made around, oh, 1973, “Taken” is about as satisfying an action thriller as you’re likely to see all year.
What a sad thing to have to say in January.
Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) spent his adult life in the service of his country doing what he describes as “preventing bad things from happening.” This cost him his wife Lenore (Famke Janssen) and estranged him from his seventeen year-old daughter Kim (Maggie Grace). To make up for lost time, Bryan’s retired and moved into a small, depressing L.A. apartment hoping to form some kind of relationship with Kim before she heads off to college.
The competition for his daughter’s affection is substantial, however. Mom remarried into L.A. money which comes with the mansion and a whole lot of “beautiful people.” When Bryan shows up for Kim’s birthday party with a karaoke machine likely purchased at the local Costco, Stepdad trots out a real, live horse. There’s a value gap, as well. Bryan understands how the real world works. Lenore and Kim, having benefitted from the security hard men like Bryan make possible, do not.
Bryan’s quickly discovering that the world he sacrificed so much for to keep safe holds no place for him. He’s a reminder of something people don’t want to be reminded of. Until the kidnapping, that is. Then Bryan’s worldview doesn’t seem so inconvenient and his unique skills so brutish.
If you’re thinking this sounds an awful lot like John Ford’s “The Searchers“ (1956), you’re not alone. To its credit, “Taken” has no ambition beyond holding your attention for 90 exceptionally well paced minutes, but like John Wayne’s Ethan Edwards, only death will stop Bryan Mills. He’s a thing that will never stop coming “just as sure as the turning of the Earth.”
“Taken” is a simple story extremely well told with about six scenes so beautifully crafted you’ll want to turn right around and see it again. The kidnap scene alone is worth the price of admission but a torture sequence that would make Jack Bauer join the ACLU is a finger dead in the eye of moral illiterates who refuse to acknowledge the vast difference between those who target the innocent and those who kill those who target the innocent. No hand wringing here, no pause to contemplate man’s inhumanity to man – not when there’s evil to exterminate.
My only complaint, and it’s not a small one, is this new, grotesque style of presenting actions scenes filmed with an epileptic shaky-cam and edited in a blender set on “incomprehensible.” Luckily the story has enough drive to make up for these messy action sequences, but this trend can’t die soon enough.
Neeson’s terrific as the single-minded killing machine. One of the story’s best moment comes right after the kidnapping. Obviously Mills is heartsick over what happened, but the situation also allows him to reclaim his place in the world. Suddenly he has value and can take charge. Neeson’s rugged and believable in a role that demands nothing more, and he’s well-equipped to carry a boilerplate action film whose only surprises come from a lack of political correctness.
“Taken” isn’t out to reinvent the wheel. Years ago, Hollywood used to drop one of these in drive-ins and downtown theatres about once a month. But unlike last year’s “The Bank Job,” which strived for throwback only to get bogged down in a convoluted script, or Tarantino’s “Grindhouse” which made the mistake of thinking we were dying to relive the experience of seeing bad movies, “Taken” is what it is. Twenty-five years ago no one would’ve thought a thing of it, but today its lack of pretension and moral preening makes it downright original.
“Taken” just wants to give us a good time. What a concept.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
49 Comments
Mr. Nolte your description of the “grotesque style of presenting actions scenes” is spot on. The last Batman almost turned me off action movies forever because of the dark, shaky camera work.
I shall see Taken even though the action is poorly filmed.
I had already planned on seeing Taken, willing to take a chance after seeing the commercials for it. Now, after seeing the opening of your review, I am resolved to see this film in theaters before time runs out.
By the way, I didn’t finish your review (wanted to avoid any and all spoilers).
I agree with your assessment of the film save for the characterization of the action sequences.
Most films which try to show hand to hand combat scenes using real actors often come off quite badly.
They either end up with fake ’special effects’ like Steven Seagal does these days, doing ‘wire fu’ and liberal use of body doubles, or they end up with actors looking uncomfortable as they try fighting moves they got to practice for maybe an hour before the cameras rolled, ending up looking stilted, unsure and uncoordinated.
Not in this film.
I said in a post here the other day, that while you are correct that the METHOD in which the hand to hand combat scenes are filmed can turn some people off, the actual H2H in this film is light years above what you see in most action movies.
Whoever choreographed the fights and trained Neeson and the other actors to participate in them surely earned every penny of their wages.
I’ve studied various H2H systems used by different special forces from the Israelies to the British SAS and the Navy Seals; that kind of fighting is what you are seeing in the film.
It’s not two guys circling around trading punches and kicks to the head for 5 minutes, which is what you get in hyper stupid action flicks.
In the way special forces soldiers are trained, any fight which lasts past 3 seconds, or 3 blows, you’ve screwed it up, back to the drawing board.
Many cinema buffs, used to the long, 5 minute slam bang, 50 punch and 20 kick type fights seen in most films, would find the contrast here very jarring.
Pick almost any Jean Claude Van Damme fight. Any one in any of his films. He will take and deliver full power kicks to the head, punches to the face, knees to the groin, etc. etc., but since the movie is supposed to be 90 minutes long they need a 5 minute fight so……….on and on it goes.
If THAT’S the kind of fighting you are used to seeing in your action movies, then Taken certainly will show you something different.
And I think that’s a good thing.
Wow you sold me, I wasn’t going to see it but I’m always in the mood for non-pc good guys killing bad guys,
Nolte, you are sooooo wrong about The Kingdom. You obviously saw a different cut than I did. The Kingdom has no suckerpunching moral equivalency…
…unlike Fox’s nauseating 24.
Fabulous. My weekend movie-dance card is now filled.
So far in 2009 I’ve seen Gran Torino and Last Chance Harvey. I hope to see Taken this weekend. This year is looking to be a much better year for films than the abysmal 2008.
(By the way, I also liked The Kingdom.)
JIC & John;
I’m partly biased because THE KINGDOM shot here in Phoenix, but JN really set my hair on fire with his intro. Peter Berg & crew deserve a lot more credit than ….
‘…a hundred minutes of dishonest set up all designed to manipulate an emotional investment from you so that the closing, left wing, Big Hollywood sucker punch puts you on your knees?’
Where John saw moral equivalency – the bomb-maker infecting his grand-daughter with his screed – I saw a clearly delinated expression of who I hope we continue to be when junxtaposing the same message Jamie Foxx’s character used to calm Jennifer Garner when morning her beloved colleague. For me this was brilliant filmmaking; very little dialouge necessary – one line – with side by side visuals that resonnated the entire story and pathos.
It was a perfect ending. Maybe if Ralph Peters was running around with his HAIR ON FIRE then or now I wouldn’t be so intent on challenging Nolte here. I love your insightful critiques John, esspecially a roving art historian’s eye toward the treasures of film archives, and I’m happily playing catch up on Dirty Harry now that you’ve dedicated yourself to Big Hollywood.
One question: How can conservatives ever hope to recapture enough of Tinsletown to reconnect with fly-over country if you ‘eat’ a young stud like Peter Berg? A stand up guy whose labor of love was a signifigant risk AND takes the heat for standing out? You gonna tell me I’m blinded in Hero Worship because I got to see a little filming from the sidelines?
THE KINGDOM represents ‘hope for change we can believe’ JN. An excellent film that took massive cojones to pull off in modern insulated Hollyweird. Anyone right down to the gaffer intern had to know what they were taking on.
Besides the passionate tangent; OF COURSE I’m going to catch TAKEN – and look forward to it all the more because of Nolte’s heads up.
Saw The Kingdom from start to finish and again, there was nothing that smacked of moral equivalency. The statement “We’re going to kill them all” when spoken by the FBI has a totally different meaning than when spoken by the jihadists. You’d have to twist yourself into creative pretzels to think they’re one and the same.
Hey, go easy on Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, he’s good people. Otherwise, I agree 100% with Phoenix48. Well said!
I’ll give this a shot…
Spoken by the FBI, the statement “We’re going to kill them all” means we will not sleep until we hunt down every last one of those jihadists who murdered our colleagues.
Spoken by jihadist Abu Hamza, the statement “We’re going to kill them all” means we will kill every last infidel man woman and child, Allah be praised!
Hope that clears up your confusion.
Acacia, you’re not wrong. That *is* what those two things mean, more or less.
But claiming that’s what they meant IN THE MOVIE is claiming something without evidence.
I had high hopes for this one. I really enjoy Nesson’s work, and the plot sounded interesting. It’s nice every once in a while to have a movie that isn’t a conflicted mess, but just decides who is right and wrong, then acts on that. Not everything has to be some moral equivalence lesson.
Synova, I think the evidence is clearly IN THE FILM, in the context in which the FBI and jihadists operate…
- The FBI agents, always professional, are focused on solving the crime and bringing the dead-enders to justice.
- The jihadists, always feverishly devout, are ready to sacrifice body and soul (and often fingers!) to the cause of indiscriminant mass murder, in service of their “god.”
In this context how can anyone place both statements on the same moral plane?
I loved this film as well, basically a perfectly paced old fashioned actioneer. Guy shows up in europe and kicks the crap out of people until he gets what he came for. The end.
“a torture sequence that would make Jack Bauer join the ACLU is a finger dead in the eye of moral illiterates who refuse to acknowledge the vast difference between those who target the innocent and those who kill those who target the innocent.”
So are you saying you think torture if it’s used on people convicted of actual crimes?
And for the record it’s less that I don’t see a difference between their torture and our torture. It’s that in the America I grew we didn’t have “our torture”, cruel and and unusual punishment was agreed to be unconstitutional and the action of an uncivilized culture. Then one day “sadam hussien did worse” became a reasonable excuse for to forget about human rights.
And congradulations on at least having the moral fortitude to use the term “torture” as opposed to some orwellian euphemism.
@ “This definatley ISN’T a moral-ambiguity film, but it’s an important distinction that Neeson’s character DOES target the innocent – in fact, he doesn’t just target but in fact violent STRIKES the completely innocent (and helpless) loved-one of an unarmed enemy for the sole and sufficient purpose of proving how serious he is. It’s a spectacular scene, one of the best in the film , and it’s important because it tells us that the hero really IS the dangerous guy he’s supposed to be. Usually we’re told someone is the ultimate badass only to see them turn out to be Sir Gallahad with all kinds of moral restraint. Not so this guy.”
Good point bob. I love Liam Nissan’s character but he’s not a moral hero we should be emulating. He’s a desperate man driven to extreme means.
Haven’t seen it but I will; read my local paper’s (The CoCo times) review of the movie (They gave it a B+) and it embodied the schizoid nature of the reviewer: on the one hand he questioned why would the Government ‘retire’ such a tough, effective & resourceful field agent & on the other hand the reviewer had ‘reservations’ about Neeson’s character using ‘torture’ on the bad guys…
ah well…
A. Acacia – January 30th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Hey, go easy on Lt. Col. Ralph Peters
No disrespect intended. A great American. His various C-Span stops were riviting and illuminating for me. After his most recent INDEPTH I was floored by how well travelled and diverse this guys incredible career has been. How cum Obama hasn’t called him?
KIT:
Don’t mess with the middle-aged man.
Aw, gee … there goes my life’s work … ;o)
Taken is a big hit among the soldiers in Iraq. Just about everybody in my office loves it, and I’ve talked with a couple other soldiers who stopped by, and it turns out they’ve all seen it and loved it. I hate shaky cam work, but I thought Neeson’s brutality was efficiently filmed. Great stuff. After Gran Torino, this really itched the scratch.
Great movie!!!! Two thumbs way up!!!! Best movie of 2009 so far…..
On “the kingdom”. I agree with JN and definitely got the “sucker punch” at the end of the movie. I was apprehensive that this was a liberal movie and in the beginning the film got me believing it was going to be great. Then the ending hits and I am sittin there thinking, what in the world happened? Again, I should have known how this flick would have turned out givin the cast of actors. Sure they respected the agencies involved but like every Hollywood movie dealing with the middle east they gotta play the “their not so bad card”.
No worries with Taken. Worth every bit the price of admission because the movie does not bog itself down with crap liberal thinking. It’s just a dad trying to get his daughter back and not letting anything get in his way.
Also, on the fight scenes. JN has a point about the camera work but the hand to hand is 100 percent awesome and Neeson’s training is top notch. Most fights involving knives and such don’t end nicely and if you are dealing with a person that knows how to handle one than just walk away because you are going to get cut, hurt or dead.
Great amount of action, heart and presence from Mr. Neeson. Go spend your ten bucks, you won’t be disappointed.
…new, grotesque style of presenting actions scenes filmed with an epileptic shaky-cam and edited in a blender set on “incomprehensible.”
What a great line and I’m right there with you on the way action movies have been edited lately. But based on your review, I’m going to have to see Taken anyway.
Luke
I’ll admit it. I have a man-crush on Liam Neeson and I am proud of it. I have said for years this guy would electrify in an action role. Thank God Besson gave it to him.
I have also been going through a major Bronson binge and got one of his box-set’s for Christmas. If this film comes anywhere near early 70’s Bronson films like The Mechanic or Death Wish it will be in constant rotation on my DVD machine.
Looking forward to seeing this on a double bill with Gran Torino (finally!) on Tuesday.
Rusty: Obviously, what Neeson does is torture. What else could it be? But for you to conflate that with waterboarding or my conceding that America tortures goes beyond being intellectually dishonest and into straight-ahead delusional.
As far as Movie Bob (nice to see you, btw)parsing my words, as well — obviously I meant targetting the innocent for murder, not flesh wounds. And no, I don’t think for a second he would’ve followed thru on his threat.
Man, what a great scene, though. At least, we can agree on that.
Glad to see I’m not the only one getting burned-out on the obsession with handheld-shot action sequences. I didn’t mind it in Cloverfield, it was an element of the story. But in my opinion, it takes me out of the action rather than puts me in it.
There, that’s my rant. I feel better.
SPOILER ALERT: One of the best moments of this riviting film was the final moment when he rescues his daughter. Neeson has no interest in negotiating with the bad guy. What he does is priceless. Maybe I’m reaching here, but not a bad way to deal with terrorists instead of putting ‘em in a prison near you.
I’ve felt that way about action scenes since at least “The Bourne Supremacy” in 2004. That was the first film I personally noticed that decided the best way to film an action scene is to make it as incomprehensible as possible.
I think I read somewhere director Paul Greengrass said it lent to the inherent chaos and brutality of a fight like that, but I can’t remember for sure and could be making it up or mis-attributing it to Greengrass.
This was an excellent movie – I just got back from seeing the matinee and the theater was quite full. It was so quiet during the really intense moments and I wasn’t the only one to cheer when ass-kicking ensued. We need more of these. The jerky action was hard to follow, but I was on the edge of my seat nonetheless.
I think I know what I’m going to do with my free movie tickets (in two weeks, of course, when I can use them for Taken!). Should make a good date night!
My husband and I LOVED the movie and we will definitely see it again! You could tell our audience enjoyed the hell out of it, too.
Sweet. I can’t wait to see this movie.
Beyond entertainment, films likes Taken and Gran Torino just may be reestablishing a moral universe, one in where it’s not so uncool to be a conservative.
““300″ butchered the actual facts of Thermopylae…”
And that’s the problem isn’t it, Sauropod? The fact that you KNEW?
The same thing happens with doctor movies and cop movies and science fiction. Too much knowledge of how things really work is a pain.
Thank you for the review, Mr. Nolte.
I don’t go to movie houses for any reason any more. Your review has me looking forward to receiving it in Blu-ray in March.
BTW: I enjoyed “The Kingdom” since it pulled back, ever so slightly, the curtain of obstructionist attitudes against anything Western prevalent in Saudia Arabia. Maybe even in the entire Middle East.
Another BTW: I enjoyed “300″ also but had to suspend knowledge of the facts, as did others above, to fully appreciate the cinematography, action and the story line.
I think there is another “jared” floating around here on the boards…
But I thought it was pretty good. Not much shaky cam during the action sequences which made following what was going on easy to see, no doddering dad trope/stereotype, and unflinching showing of a real life evil. I also liked that it didn’t do camera cuts during certain scenes like when the guy jumped off the bridge.
Manofaiki – As the line producer on “Taken” (the American crew), I can tell you that the stunt coordinator/choreography for the fight scenes worked closely with Liam. I saw quicktime movies of their work which was, I was told, Kali, Esrima with some Wing-Chun, thrown in. Very effective, very close in. Quite enjoyable and real.
just saw this today and I thought it was excellent. it was really refreshing to watch a character who makes no apologies for what he needs to do to get the job done, i.e. get his daughter back. famke janssen was a little over the top in her role, but she was only in a few scenes.
Saw TAKEN last night and I thought it was great! (I gave it 9/10 at imdb.) I compare it to last years RAMBO in its intensity. The comparison is also valid because I think that both films have been soft pedalled by Hollywood- look at the time of year both films were released! Neither had much, if any, promotion. It’s as if films with this point of view are merely tolerated in the yearly movie schedule. Ya know… you can earn a little, but know your ‘place.’
Disagree about the Kingdom- I think Peter Berg was trying to get across the point that this is a battle of civilizations. To me the heroes in the movie were the Americans, not the jihadis. And that the jihadis were portrayed as they truly are. I actually was surprised how NON PC and liberal the Kingdom was!!
And remember, Peter Berg the director is now going to make “Lone Survivor” which is the true story of our SEALS in Afghanistan. He may be a democrat, but he also has made “Friday Night Lights” which portrays conservative and republican values like family, religion and tradition…
It “improved” on history by adding war elephants and war rhinos (neither of which fought at Thermopylae, and the latter of which never fought anywhere, because they never existed), not to mention portraying Xerxes and his court as a menagerie of gender-bending freaks. It also presented totalitarian, militaristic, eugenics-practicing, slave-holding Sparta as a model for democracy and freedom.
I've had a crush on Liam Neeson since he appeared in "Satisfaction" in the 80's, I believe. Horrible movie, but he was sexy as hell then and he still is!
That being said, this was exactly the rock 'em, sock 'em, shoot 'em up, blow 'em up movie I was hoping for. However, they left some parts hanging in my eyes: what did he do with the girl he resuced? Why didn't the police arrest him at the airport, and wow, his daughter sure got over her trauma quickly! I know, I know, it's a movie – but still…. it left me wondering and I hate that!
I will watch this movie again. And I agree, completely, that Neesan makes one spectacular action hero. The best line in the whole movie was the "I will find you, and I will kill you" line. Gave me shivers. Now that's acting!
I agree. I would like to see more continuous fight scenes, instead of cut-up, shaky camera work.
Taken is the best action movie I've ever seen…I was literally on the edge of my seat the whole time…never a boring minute…the dialogue, action, acting were all superb and enthralling…I'll either see it again or buy the DVD when it comes out.
TO RUSTY JAMES:
Non-US citizen on foreign soil do not have any constitutional rights, and non-uniformed enemies don't truly have any protection under the Geneva Convention… therefore use of torture of any such people is not an issue or any kind (legal or moral).
If you do any kind of real study on America's history in arm conflicts and the history of our intelligence community (OSS, CIA), you will find many examples of things that current Americans would consider "torture" or "immoral" behavior towards captured non-uniformed enemies & spies. The America that you grew up in did have "our torture" (unless you grew up in an America in a different dimension), its just not as widely known to some due to the fact that it was only done to non-uniformed enemies (guerrillas/insurgents/terrorists, and spies).
The fact that the United States government is currently affording Geneva Convention & constitutional protection to our enemies is an utterly sicking fact of the decay of our country at the hands of socialism & political correctness.
Liam Neeson's character was a "moral hero", and is a worthy a fictional charactrer to emulated… unless you are a fan of the grow trend I like to call the pussification of the western male
"I've studied various H2H systems used by different special forces from the Israelies to the British SAS and the Navy Seals; that kind of fighting is what you are seeing in the film."
There was no cut clear indications of Kapap, Lotar, Krav Maga, or San Soo KungFu being used in the film… therefore your claim of seeing Israeli military or Navy SPECWAR infulenced h2h fighting is BS!
"In the way special forces soldiers are trained, any fight which lasts past 3 seconds, or 3 blows, you've screwed it up, back to the drawing board. "
If you're trying to pretend that you know what your talking about, or trying to be a poser… you've screwed it up, back to the drawing board!
If it weren't for the bullcrap listed above your post would've been much better and more productive
Indeed…
Defiance, Taken, and Gran Torino are the three biggest movies among the troops & contractors right now (haji's are making a killing of selling the bootlegs to those movies)
[...] John Nolte: I finally left the house and saw a movie at a theater (’Taken’) and it was pretty good except I missed part of it because some fat chick was humping the arm rest three rows in front of me. That was kind of distracting… 18 Comments Spotlight [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.