Jaq's Review: Jumper - Don't Leap for Joy

February 14, 2008

The biggest problem with Doug Liman's new action film Jumper is that, well, it's boring. There's not enough action in it to keep the plot moving and not enough drama to really engage the viewer. Ultimately, it feels like an engine misfiring on three out of four cylinders – you can feel the power there, but it's just not getting through.

The story is easily digestible and doesn't tax the brain too much. David Rice (Hayden Christensen), the class wimp, discovers he has the power to teleport himself to anyplace he's seen and so, at fifteen, he quits school and uses this new found ability to rob banks and generally live the life of an international bon vivant. When a shadow law enforcement agency, in the form of Roland (a white haired Samuel L. Jackson) suddenly shows up, knowing about David's strange power, things start to unravel. He thinks the best course of action is to go home to Detroit, find his high school crush Millie (Rachel Bilson) and jet off to Rome. No, this doesn't make much sense to me either.

The war wages on between the Jumpers and the Paladins, two secrets sects that confront each other head first in Jumper.Jumper Review

In Rome, about a third of the way through the film, we are introduced to Griffin (Jamie Bell), another Jumper, and the action picks up slightly. Through him we get a bit of a back story – Jumpers have been around for centuries and they've always been chased by Paladins (Roland's group) who are trying to kill them. Nothing more is ever said about what causes this mutation, how it's passed from generation to generation or how the Jumpers are found. The only quasi-explanation we get for a centuries-old battle (which is rife with story potential) is that Roland thinks there are no good Jumpers, that eventually they go bad and hurt people. Unfortunately, the script by David S. Goyer, Jim Uhls, and Simon Kinberg doesn't support this thought process. At best, we see David ignore a situation in which he could have helped someone, but he's never malicious in his actions. In fact, he leaves I.O.U. notes at the banks he robs. He's not a bad guy, just naive. But then, if you had the power he has, you might take advantage of it as well.

And this is where the film falls apart. Instead of giving us a shaded, nuanced portrayal of a man with too much power, Liman and his writers try and give us an action film. But then, the action is sidelined by futile attempts at character development. They needed to pick one direction and go full throttle. Either one would work, but the two in combination are like oil and water, never blending successfully. Add in to this mix wooden performances by all the leads with the exception of Jamie Bell, and you're left with a mess worthy of Joel Schumacher. We're given plot contrivances in place of story development, characters who act in ways no sane individual would act (when David shows up after an 8 year absence, Millie never asks a single question about his time away, but immediately gets on a plane with him to another country) and effects which get tiring after the ninth time they're used.

And, because it needs to be said, Jumper opens with a narration, which, I suppose, is used to set the scene. It doesn't work. Then, since this seems to be the trend, the narration device gets dropped completely. This kind of thing never works in the best of situations and this is hardly the best. When all is said and done, Jumper has some talented people doing mediocre work. And it really jumps out.

Find more posts: Movie Reviews



thanks for the warning. i will see In Bruges instead

Keith on Feb 14, 2008


This garb has Hayden "I will F*** Up This Movie" Christensen-do people not realize what a horrible crap actor he is yet?Putting him in a harmless funny-buddy supporting role would've been bad enough,going so far as to hand this joke of an actor the LEAD ROLE pretty much guaranteed Jumper a failure from the get-go.

twispious on Feb 14, 2008


oh!ª i dont care hayden is hot!

Paulina on Feb 14, 2008


You gave Fools Gold a Seven out of Ten, I'll take my chances. With Jumper

Jack Jack on Feb 14, 2008


That IOU thing is from the book and doesn't fit in with the character they're trying to create in the movie. The whole mythology aspect is only good if the story is loosely grounded in reality but the opening scene setting coupled with the random half-hearted attempts to humanise david and his cohorts just leads to a wholly unsatisfying movie. In contrast, "Be Kind, Rewind" gave me exactly what it promised and left me walking out a happy man.

newmi on Feb 14, 2008


Hayden wasn't really a problem in the movie. (He was utter crap in star wars). It was a little slow, some of the action was awesome but. I hope it does well enough for more movies. It's worth seeing for shore.

louis on Feb 14, 2008


Newmi (#5) Thanks for the heads up on that IOU thing. You're right, it doesn't make much sense in the context of the film the way it is. When i was discussing it with the girl I saw it with, we couldn't quite figure out where they were trying to go with those things so it makes much more sense that is was part of a more nuanced character study in the book.

Jaq on Feb 14, 2008


Fool's Gold 7 out of 10?! What?! Hayden Christensen is box-office poison as an actor, particularly after his whiny wooden Anakin Skywalker portrayal. Mee-sa, not happy to see yous again, "Ani".

avoidz on Feb 15, 2008


ack, sorry to have mislead you Jaq. I just rechecked the chapter in the book and he only thinks of leaving a note: "For one brief second I considered leaving a thank-you note, perhaps even some spray-painted graffiti, but decided against it. I imagined there would be enough excitement the next morning without that. I jumped." So it makes even less sense and makes him seem like more of an idiotic showoff then the maturing character in the book who robs one bank out of neccesity. The book also creates a much more intelligent character for Millie and even makes the "jumper" power believable. Now, I wasn't looking for a rehash of the book, the trailer painted an interesting alternative story for the power but the movie was just a huge let down on all fronts. As Jaq wrote, "Liman and his writers try and give us an action film. But then, the action is sidelined by futile attempts at character development. " The movie really tries to cover the action and characterisation and does neither properly and it ends up as a boring movie with some fancy effects. You're better off reading the book if the power piques your interest as it gives a much more believable and enjoyable portrayal of the characters, the world they live in and the ability itself.

newmi on Feb 15, 2008


Saw it last night against my better judgement. Disappointing. Good idea for a story that leads us nowhere.

Heckle on Feb 15, 2008


Hmm.. sounds like there's good material to work with but it wasn't used wisely. Maybe someone should rehash this movie sometime in the near future.

Alfredo on Feb 15, 2008


Paulina, you are an idiot. Thanks.

Kat on May 26, 2008

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:

Follow Alex's main account on Twitter:

For only the latest posts - follow this:

Add our posts to your Feedlyclick here

Get all the news sent on Telegram Telegram