Professional Writer & Amateur Scholar
Taken 2: What Do You Want This Time?!
I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.
'That guy'
Taken 2: The Extreme
Link to my Contributer page because 'Tropes don't like under_scores [1]
Just awesome like that
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I love it XD
The trailer should have had this voiceover: "Once, I had a wife. My great love. She was taken from me. [...] I was forced to learn there are those without decency, who must be fought without hesitation, without pity. [...] anger gives you great power. But if you let it, it will destroy you."
Alternate Titles:
Taken: Your Mom
Taken: Even Evil Has Loved Ones
Taken 2: The Lost Lenore
Taken 2: The Taking
Taken Again
Taken 2: Mistaken
Taken 2: Taken Aback
Taken: Advantage
edited 16th Aug '12 3:30:11 PM by TompaDompa
Ceterum censeo Morbillivirum esse eradicandum.
Did anyone see this yet? It has really terrible reviews online, making me a bit iffy about seeing it. I tend to disagree with reviewers anyway, but... there are a lot of bad reviews out there.
"In distress", my ass.
I didn't even know it was out. Monday's the soonest I can see it, though.
All your safe space are belong to Trump
Well, it's not the type of film where you end up spending half the time looking at your watch but it misses that extra special something of the first film.
The first film revealed how much of a badass Mills was, with hints from the beginning and then breaking it out after the speech. He fought in a clever way, he used clever deceptions and ruses to find his daughter and to track the people down and this was interspersed with shockingly hard hitting acts of violence and destruction.
In this one, they just break out the action. They aim for a bit of Crazy-Prepared (although it ends up being a bit of Properly Paranoid) and a trick where he figures out his location but really, the clever spy Mills isn't there. Now the action itself is merely ok. The car chases are good, they remind me of the first non-Shaky Cam Bourne movies. However the fight scenes are a Shaky Cam extravaganza (presumably because Liam Neeson is not really a highly trained killing machine but I think they may be trying to double bluff us). The final scene with the Big Bad is an anticlimax and The Dragon was killed in the exact same way as a whole bunch of other people.
And then they end it on the an "Everybody Laughs" Ending so cheesy I was expecting a saxophone stinger.
Liam Neeson is trying really hard to drum up press for the movie. I wonder if the studio told him to after the initial reviews.
Never trust anyone who uses "degenerate" as an insult.
I finally saw it, and I liked it. And I guess that we have a hook for Tak3n since I guess Marco brothers.
And what about that rich sheikh from the first film? Maybe he has people wanting to avenge him. Hell, maybe the third movie could have both those groups of people trying to kill/take him?
The main villian in this movie has got to be the least sympathetic character I've seen in a long time. Normally, his type of justification is the sort of thing you'd see in saturday morning cartoons or movies with paper-thin plots. But the fact that the Taken series treats the world around it realistically and shows that many of the bad guys are just punch-clock villians with truly despicable jobs makes him look absolutely petty and evil. His son was a sex-slave trafficker, drug dealer, possibly even murderer too, and his only justification for attempting to torture and kill the main character and his family was that "was my son, I want you to suffer?" The movie was trying to make it look like he him and Liam Neeson's character are somewhat alike in how far they would go for vengeance, but the truth is they're worlds apart in morality and sense of justice.
Long Live the King
He want's Neeson's character to suffer like his son suffered. His son was the guy Neeson's character left to die by electrocution.
The movie is treating the world realistically in it's sense that everyone has a version of Protagonist-Centered Morality. What happens to you and your friends/family is worse than whatever you do to other people, by virtue of those other people not being friends/family...
Both characters were out for justice for what happened to their respective children... The difference in morality between them is only valid if you think Neeson's character never did anything with his "special set of skills" that was untoward/unjustified. And since he was working for the CIA, I'm doubtful that such a thing can be said...
Taken 2: Taken Harder