Jumper Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x816 | 8137.34 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x544 | 4468.81 MiB | 720p | |
|
684x286 | 699.83 MiB | divx | |
|
320x176 | 346.74 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
Anywhere is possible.
A genetic anomaly allows a young man to teleport himself anywhere. He discovers this gift has existed for centuries and finds himself in a war that has been raging for thousands of years between "Jumpers" and those who have sworn to kill them.
| Hayden Christensen | Davey |
| Samuel L. Jackson | Cox |
| Diane Lane | Mary Rice |
| Jamie Bell | Griffin |
| Rachel Bilson | Millie |
| Tom Hulce | Mr. Bowker |
| Michael Rooker | William Rice |
| Sean Baek | Lawrence Simmons |
| Katie Boland | Sue Kimmell |
| Nathalie Cox | Maggie |
| Teddy Dunn | Mark |
| Barbara Garrick | Ellen |
| Meredith Henderson | Fiona |
| AnnaSophia Robb | Young Millie |
| Max Thieriot | Young Davey |
| Doug Liman |
5.90 out of 10 (17603 votes)
Visitor Reviews
A Waste Of Potentially Good Material
posted on 24 Aug 2009Ever since BOURNE IDENTITY I have always been a Doug Liman fan and so I decided to head over and watch his latest film JUMPER, starring Hayden Christiensen; I figured that a talented director like Liman could make even a horrible actor like Christiensen good by the sheer "force" of skill… boy was I wrong.The plot is about a young man named David Rice who happens to discover that he has a teleportation superpower which allows him to travel instantaneously anywhere around the world. The first twenty minutes of the film focuses on David as an even younger nobody (played by Max Theriot) in high school as he puts up with a bully and trying to hitch up with his crush as he accidentally discovers his superpower. Now if this sounds like Raimi's SPIDERMAN it pretty much is- except that you can obviously tell its been done before and Raimi had a better script and more talented actors to work with. The plot then shifts to an older David doing whatever he pleases until he realizes that not only are there other jumpers like him, there also happens to be a group of fanatics (led by Samuel L Jackson in white bleached hair, no less) that are out to kill him and his kind.So where did this film go wrong? Well, there could have been a number of intriguing possibilities with regards to storytelling about a group of people who can teleport but unfortunately the movie focuses on Hayden Christiensen- his character is pretty much a spoiled brat who only uses his power to indulge in very basic stuff (chicks, money and TVs) and then when confronted by his enemies he makes a lot of mistakes that makes it easy for them to consistently find him. The other characters, including Jaime Bell as a vengeful and witty teleporter, are barely given anything as far as background for their characters which doesn't endear them much to the audience with regards to sympathy. Samuel L Jackson is likewise wasted as a leader of the Paladins, a cult of normal people who feel that it is their religious duty to kill jumpers- there are no revelations as to what motivates him or even how the whole conflict between jumpers and paladins got started in the first place. By the end of the movie there are at least three separate unresolved plot lines.Rumor has it that Eminem was offered the lead role but turned it down. In light of this turd I applaud him for making a smart move.
Ignore the bad reviews - Switch off brain and Enjoy!
posted on 22 Aug 2009With so many bad review on IMDb, I had very low expectations of this film and I expected it to be terrible. But I really enjoyed it! And so did my two teenage kids (and boy and a girl who would both be the first to complain if it was boring or confusing).OK it's not a *great* film (in the sense of truly great destined to be a classic) but there are plenty of worse ways to pass 90 minutes. Sure, it won't be winning any awards. Yes, it could have been done so much better.But if you've enjoyed X-Men, Spiderman, Deja Vu, Back to the Future and Heroes (TV), then I think you'll enjoy this too. Certainly better than the Fantastic Four! So ignore the detractors, leave your brain and the critical reviews at home and go and enjoy. You can thank me later!!In retort to a few of the specific criticisms on here (no spoilers) I think Hayden Christensen got the part right (in my opinion his character is supposed to be lacking in emotion - he's been emotionally damaged). The brief narration at the start enables us to cut to the action as far as the rest of the movie is concerned. I also thought Samuel L did a fair job as the bad guy. The ending did point to a sequel but did not rob us of a self-contained story.
Can't wait for the TV series.
posted on 18 Aug 2009I saw this movie over the weekend and I liked it. While I am not a big fan of Hayden Christensen, he did an acceptable job in this one. I am a fan of Samuel L. Jackson. He was good as the bad guy. Without giving away too much, I am going to make a prediction that sometime in the next few years, this movie will be made into a TV series. It just has that "feel" to it. I hope that, if they do, they get actors that can carry it off. The premise is an interesting one and it would probably be enjoyable to watch each week to see how things unfold, etc. The story line is primed for that to happen. It reminded me of the Highlander series with the Immortals and the Watchers and the "rogue" watchers after them. If you see the movie, you will see what I mean. Go and see it, it is an enjoyable movie.
A disappointment
posted on 14 Aug 2009Of course the plot was unrealistic. It's a sci-fi action thriller.It was fast paced and entertaining, The acting was OK, with few standouts.Jamie Bell was amusing and gave the film energy.The part that makes it almost unwatchable is the camera work. I know it's the cool thing but for just once could we back the camera up a hair, hold it steady and PLEASE focus on SOMETHING? Anything? I certainly hope this fad is short lived, because I miss good action movies.I understand the idea is to make you feel like part of the action but I think it goes way too far and makes the film unwatchable.Someone needs to show Doug Liman how to shoot smooth at least some of the time.
Great original idea, ruined by scriptwriters trying to "punch up" the story
posted on 14 Aug 2009I read the original Steven Gould Jumper books. The idea and stories were excellent. And though they were a bit slow at times, they were also a realistic view of what someone who had the power to 'jump' would go through dealing with this extraordinary gift. The movie, though, was a confusing mix of secret societies, unexplained histories and characters with no motivation.The jumping was still there, and the fx was excellent. The problem was the Palladins, a centuries old secret society out to kill all the jumpers. No real reason, they just seemed jealous. It's never explained where they get their funding, why they feel the jumpers are evil or even how jumpers were ever hunted before electricity and 'wormhole generators.' In other words, they ruined the story.Even the ending left no real closure or even clues. Evil was not stopped, David was still hunted and his mother was prepared to kill him (by the way, was she a Palladin who happened to have a Jumper son or did she become a Palladin because of him? She could have been edited out and nothing would have been missed).They could have done so much better by trying to adopt one of the books, not just take the title and the original idea and write a script that for some reason tried to include "The DiVinci Code...."
Jumping allover the story
posted on 14 Aug 2009This is one of those movies that grabs the imagination just by viewing the trailer. But leaves you bored and unsatisfied as if you just had a wedding buffet at macdonalds: confused why they went for such cheap content and unsatisfied because there was no real food.This is one of the examples why a director like David camera is so good: he never lets anything happen that breaks the suspense of disbelief. The problem with jumper is that to many stupid things happen, to many inactions. It is just one cliché after another and you never really care about the characters.Why would a 23 year old act like some 12 year old nerdie kid? Jamie Bell is good, Samual L Jackson is not, my guess is he has to act down not to blow christensen of the screen and his haircut.... its just a bad xmen joke. Is he related to storm or something?? The most typical proof of this movie being boring was the fact half of the row of kids in front of me started playing hide and seek halfway through the movie.
Nothing to write home about
posted on 14 Aug 2009Like most people, I decided to see this movie based on the trailer. Though the trailer portrays a decent plot with excellent special effects, the movie was really nothing to write home about. Jackson played read his lines exactly the way he does in every other movie he's in. Hayden Christensen started out decent enough, but was ultimately revealed to be lacking in acting ability when Jamie Bell entered the screen. There is absolutely no chemistry between Christensen and Rachel Bilson, and their make-up lines and implied "happily ever after" were wholly unrealistic. The battle scenes were pretty good, but since each side really only relied on one tactic, the fighting got old real quick. Overall, if you're looking for a decent action movie that doesn't require a whole lot of comprehension, this movie really delivers. I'd wait for the DVD, though.
i'm disappointed with the end....
posted on 12 Aug 2009i think that there is no end in this movie... or it's very bad end.... it's too short.... There is a plenty of action but in the end there is a leak of final fight... The bad guy, Samuel L. Jackson is very good with this character... generally it's very good idea in this movie... It seems that in the end something is missing and I think that is the some kind of sad end... or at least that somebody dies... I liked some of the locations where they fight and hide, I mean jumpers... I think that there is gonna be a jumper II in the future definitely... and the actors team is very good,especially Rachel Bilson.... she is beautiful....
All flash but no thunder
posted on 12 Aug 2009**MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS** The premise of the story is that a teenage boy called David Rice (Christiansen) discovers he has the ability to teleport himself anywhere in the world at any time. He runs away to escape his abusive father (Rooker) and a hum drum average life in middle America and uses his power to 'borrow' large sums of money from bank vaults undetected, thus being able to afford a worry free and privileged life.Fast forward several years later and David begins to realise there is more going on than meets the eye when he finds himself confronted by Roland (Jackson), a Paladin who have been responsible for hunting and killing Jumpers in a war that has raged for hundreds of years.Caught up in the middle of this war are David's old high school crush Millie (Bilson), another Jumper called Griffin (Bell) and David's estranged mother Mary (Lane) Indeed, it looks good....slick and stylish with great visual effects, but that's sadly one of the few things that impressed me about this movie as it turns out to be all style and little substance.The pace of the film is slow to build as the threadbare plot is so transparent it doesn't allow for any kind of suspense and the story itself is laboured with no real character or timeline development. This means that by the time any real adrenalin kicks in and things start to happen, you're still none the wiser as to why everything is happening and to be honest I nearly got past caring.Although looking good and brooding all the way through the film (which i'm sure will be popular with teenage girls all around the world) Hayden Christiansen fails to really get under the skin of his character, staying sadly wooden and one dimensional in a part which is supposed to chart the course of a young man who starts off as a self absorbed, arrogant loner who realises there are things and people in the world worth risking his own life to protect. Likewise Samuel L Jackson has little to work with script wise and does his best to look menacing throughout, but that's about it.The same is true of Rachel Bilson who again struggles to find anything worthwhile and meaningful to say or do and ends up as little more than eye candy. The star of the show for me was Jamie Bell who as Griffin the other Jumper gets the lion's share of the best lines and dialogue, so much so that the screen is an empty place when he's not on it.The film ends raising more questions than it answers and many people will argue that the film has massive plot holes and is incomplete, however I suspect that that is entirely what it was designed for and speculate that Jumper 2 will be in cinemas before long to finish off the story, hopefully ending a lot more satisfactorily than the first.OK, so this movie was never going to be a serious contender for a truck load of Oscars or some visionary piece of epop making cinema that will influence generations to come......it simply is what it is peaking at just above average. Like so many recent Sci-Fi/Action adventures, Jumper has all the hall marks of a middle of the road movie that would surely entertained and killed a couple of hours, but never really packs to much of a punch to leave a lasting impression.
Good... but could do better
posted on 12 Aug 2009***SOME SPOILERS HERE***BE AWARE*** To some others dismay I actually enjoyed watching this film. I enjoyed the quick pace of the movie and I thought that the characters where pretty good. I would like to see the movie again so that I can pick up anything I missed last time.However I think that there is something missing to this movie. The fact that Griffin (Jamie Bell) was left I found rather strange since the quick pace made them form a slight friendship very quick but leaving him suddenly I think extremely slowed the pace down and probably left some people unsure. I think the ending was rather strange also as the speed picked up again but was stopped by David (Hayden Christenson) by him suddenly planting Roland (Samuel L. Jackson) in the cliff side. I also wasn't to sure on the cliffhanger typed ending. I though that it was very bizarre in some areas of the movie.Nevertheless, I though that it was pretty good. I enjoyed the part where David jumped the flat to show how powerful he was and the majority of the comedy I thought was funny. I may enjoyed it more since there was some good looking men in this movie. I am just left wondering with the end whether there will be a second movie to conclude the first, and answer some of the questions people may be asking.
Getting ahead of themselves - assuming audiences will be hungry for more
posted on 12 Aug 2009To sum it up quickly: Too much setup. This entire film should have been the first half-hour of a bigger story. They try to make this just a first chapter, like an "origin" story in a superhero film, but if you're gonna spend the whole film setting up a story, and leave an ending wide open for sequels, you better be damn sure the public will actually care enough to see more. I don't think that will be the case here. Perhaps if it had been filmed and marketed as a teen flick as the book was, the series could have a longer life; but as an adult franchise I'd be surprised if there are further installments.It wasn't a bad flick. It was a fun distraction for an hour or two, with some good action and visuals, but it was certainly nothing special. I think much of that is due to the cast. Diane Lane is always good, but she was barely in it, and Samuel L. Jackson was just distracting - partly because of the pointless white hair, and partly because pairing him with Hayden Christiansen constantly reminded you of Star Wars and took you out of the movie. The main stars, Christensen himself and Rachel Bilson, were just so...blah. I actually would have preferred if Jamie Bell had been the star instead of just a supporting role.
No Bourne, no Matrix, but still a good movie!
posted on 08 Aug 2009I went to see this movie having lowered my expectations after reading so many bad reviews around. I gotta say they don't really do justice to it. Sure, it's not a big movie, it's not huge, great; it could have been bigger, better, deeper and more meaningful, but it was a good movie nonetheless.Following the story wasn't difficult, it was a simple one without many complications, which is probably where most "critics" were disappointed, but you have to keep in mind that is is usually the case with superhero movies. It just comes with the genre. Also, it wasn't difficult to realize that this is just the first of e very possible trilogy. I mean, (spoilers here) the fact that Roland wasn't killed, and the relationship with mom basically just started is a dead give-away. In this light, I believe the story will make more sense and will be more complete after watching the sequel and probably the threquel.The script wasn't great but not bad either. I wasn't left with a bad taste at any time during the movie. The acting was good too, no matter what people keep saying. Just when did everyone become an expert on acting I wonder? It's so easy to blame the guy hated by the critics; it makes us feel like we know what we're talking about. I don't like Christensen either, but while watching very attentively his acting, I failed to see anything wrong with it or out of place. Sure he's not the most warm and expressive person, but that doesn't diminish his acting. Another actor would have probably brought a different feel to the role, but I feel he was good enough. So was Bilson. No need to comment on Jackson, but the real star of the movie, it is indeed Bell. He was simply awesome and I'm sure he is a star on the rise.To conclude, would I go to see this movie again or the sequel? That's a definite YES.
An great premise starts out promisingly in the beginning then it begins messy after that.
posted on 06 Aug 2009As a young teenager David Rice (Max Thieriot) always felt left out... since his father (Michael Rooker) is a alcoholic, his mother (Diane Lane) left him when he was five years ago and he's a loner. The only bright spot at his teens years, he has a long time crush on Millie (AnnaSophia Robb). When he tried to present a gift to his would-be girlfriend but he got interrupted by a school bully (Jesse James) by throwing the present at the thin ice. When David tries to get it back, he falls in the ice and finds himself trapped. Then suddenly David finds himself at the library, which he doesn't understand at first. Tired of coming home to his drunken father, he decides to run away to New York to start a new life. When he begins to control and experience his unique gift, he starts by robbing banks at first or departing himself to places he knows by memory.Then many years has passed, David (Hayden Christensen) has grown into a young man by experiencing life by going many cities, different countries he wants. Then David finds himself stalked by a mysterious man named Roland (Samuel L. Jackson), who wants to kill David for the gift that no man or woman should have. Which Ronald called these people "Jumpers", which he has to hunting them for years. Now David returns to his childhood home to make up lost time with Millie (Rachel Bilson) that he still has a crush on. He decides to bring her to Rome without using his gift to appear as a ordinary man. Then David finds out, there's more like him... especially a wild young British man named Griffin (Jamie Bell) warms David that Ronald and other hunters, who called themselves "Paladins". They will stop at nothing to destroy all "Jumpers", whatever if they are good or bad. Now David and Griffin find themselves on the run, while David tries to hide from Millie to tell her the truth.Directed by Doug Liman (The Bourne Identity, Go, Mr. & Mrs. Smith) made an above average, although disappointing sci-fi/adventure that misses on Character Development from the supporting characters that could have used some major fleshing out. Christensen looks the part but like his recent performances, he's quite stiff and there's almost no joy in his role. I thought this film could focus more on the younger David character at the first, i felt Thieriot was enjoy his role as David briefly than the adult David did. Best performance from this movie is Bell, who seems to be having a hell of a time with his part. But the screenplay by David S. Goyer (Blade Trilogy, Batman Begins, Dark City), Jim Uhls (Fight Club) and Simon Kinberg (X-Men:The Last Stand, xXx:State of the Union) tries to make this story coherent by adding sub-plots that doesn't always pay-off & it's also feels tight for everything that runs for under 90 minutes. What should have been 2 hour feature.The single DVD edition has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer (also in Pan & Scan) and an strong Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD includes an interesting audio commentary by the director, screenwriter:Kinberg and producer:Lucas Foster (Equilibrium, Man on Fire "2004", Street Kings) & three featurettes. If you are an major fan of "Jumper". There's an two-disc special edition that is presented in Widescreen, includes DTS track, additional special features and a digital copy of the movie if necessary. Overall "Jumper" is a watchable movie that could have been much better. Some of Liman's stylish touches and energy on his previous features are still there. The cast are fine, although Rooker and Lane roles are disappointingly short. Some of the CGI effects and action sequences are nicely done but at times, they are more confusing than enjoyment. Many viewers, who have seen this movie... if they liked it or not. It certainly got me curious how good the novel "Jumper" by Steven Gould could be. Worth a look. Super 35. (***/*****).
A good movie, but I really would like to see it with Tom Sturridge as the lead.
posted on 04 Aug 2009Honestly this movie was exciting and had action and romance. I really liked where the storyline went and enjoyed the movie throughout. There was one weakness. I like to refer to Hayden Christensen as the next Keanu Reeves. He has little or no ability evoking his emotions in a way that make him interesting and exciting to watch. Understandably he is well known and helped to draw more people to the theaters. I crossed my fingers hoping he had left behind his awful portrayal of Anakin Skywalker. But throughout the movie he continuously proved he lacked the emotion in a convincing love line and his interaction with the other characters were a bit hard to believe because of this weakness. I really would like to have seen this with the original cast lead Tom Sturridge. Possibly untested, I feel this movie could have driven him to greatness. Yet now the movie itself is on a evil walk to forgetfulness. The concept, a 10. The storyline, exciting. The action, everything you could want. The romance. . .hard to believe, thanks to Hayden. In the end I want to see what comes next, I think it would be another fun movie to watch, but in the end it will come down to what Hayden can do.
It's only February, but I think we have the worst film of 2008. Right here.
posted on 02 Aug 2009Let me start by saying that I like action movies. Sci-fi ones? Even better. The Fifth Element. Aliens. 300. All excellent.But this? I am still reeling 6 days after being stuck in the cinema for 80 minutes (I left once the credits rolled). It is astonishingly bad. Thank goodness it was a free preview pass.The premise was promising enough. A boy (Hayden Christensen, who should just give up acting) discovers in a near-death situation that he can teleport to anywhere he wants. So he grows up to become a rich globe trotter (where is the IRS when you need them), courtesy of bank vaults he can enter undetected, "jumping" from one end of the Earth to another, living the high life. Maybe because he was bored (I knew I was bored out of my mind by then), he goes back to his hometown to look for his teenage crush (Rachel Bilson, who is painful to watch). Interestingly, no one bats an eyelid to see him come back from the dead, the girl doesn't question where he has been, and agrees to fly across the globe with him to Rome. There he bumps into a fellow "jumper" (Jamie Bell, the sole glimmer in this abysmal mess), who warns him that there are "Paladins", lead by Samuel L. Jackson (sleepwalking through the role) who are out to get them. Right. Who ARE the "Paladins"? Why the vehemence? No one knows. And by now, I am sure no one cares. Lots of destruction ensues as our hero tries to save the girl and beat the "bad guys". Oh and there is the mom (Diane Lane in a thankless bit part), a Paladin, who is conflicted about having a son who can "jump", and abandoned him to save him. Whatever.But the thing that clued me in as to how bad a movie I was about to sit through was the voice-over at the beginning. Note to the writers: Narration should ADD to what is on the screen, not TELL US EVERYTHING THAT IS HAPPENING. It reminded me of annoying people in the cinema who comment on every action played out on the screen. You just want to find the remote and hit "Mute".The ho-hum ending points to future sequels and prequels. It is the only logical reason I can think of to explain why a good director and THREE excellent writers left out so much to make this crap.Can I vote "0"? No? OK then. "1". For the trailer. Nice job, Doug.
Teen action movie masquerading as sci-fi with a cheap gimmick.
posted on 02 Aug 2009First written by Steven Gould back in 1992, this science fiction story is now directed by the maker of Swingers (1996), The Bourne Identity (2002) and Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005) Doug Liman. With this pedigree, is it any wonder that his latest addition to the family tree is also lacklustre and drab? Basically your teen movie masquerading as science fiction with a cheep gimmick, maybe the book fairs better, but as a movie, it is beyond the pale to be calling this sci-fi.Starring Hayden Christensen, who played young teen Anakin Skywalker in the Star Wars franchise, this transgression from the Dark Side to the capacity to be able to jump vast distance and across the other side of the world is his most unchallenging script and role to date. Breaking new boundaries with this project has left him with his feet landing firmly back to square one. Jumper has its future very well mapped out, and seeing over the fence before one jumps is all too painful, the plot here is extremely all too easy to predict and with no train of thought at play it can very quickly turn into stumble and fall rather than a jump for joy.Sadly, the lush locations here cannot save this limping animal, with shots of Rome's Coliseum, Egypt's Sphinx and Pyramids and London's Big Ben they alone cannot add texture, depth or personality to this film. It is simply a flat liner that needs a heart resuscitation. To use these marvels in this manner smacks of insult and embarrassment toward them.With its lack of depth comes what seems too many lacking answers, with gaping holes in the narrative, not plot holes I may add, this then leaves the players and their lives feeling and looking more than empty shells which a good script would see them quickly coming out of.If you like you sci-fi, no, action movie cum sci-fi, simple, easy going and all too plain, then Jumper will foot the bill. Expect no high octane burnout here, just take it as it is: all of the above and possibly a movie that needs a little help when the power is running a little flat, a jump start may be required.
Nothing to "Jump" up and down about!
posted on 02 Aug 2009"The Bourne Identity" director Doug Liman's new science fiction thriller "Jumpers" (* out of ****) qualifies as one of the worst super hero adventure sagas since the dreadful "Hulk" fiasco. This enigmatic, incoherent, melodramatic gobbledygook belongs to a sub-genre of science fiction that relies on teleportation. Basically, how do sci-fi characters get from point A to point B? They teleport! Teleportation constitutes a form of time travel, like in H.G. Wells' "The Time Machine." First, most sci-fi films and TV shows use a teleportation device for time voyages. Prominent among these were the cult British TV series "Dr. Who," the vintage American TV show "Star Trek" with its franchise of TV shows and films, "The Time Tunnel," "Stargate" with its spin-off TV shows, and "The Matrix" trilogy. Characters enter elaborate contraptions that propel them ahead or behind their own time. Second, fewer sci-fi movies and TV shows rely on personal teleportation with no mechanical device between the traveler and their destination. "Jumper" chronicles the exploits of a young man that leaps around in contemporary time and space. Previously, the best known personal teleportation TV shows were the obscure 1970s' British series "The Tomorrow People" and the American entry "Quantum Leap." "Jumpers," loosely based on Steven Gould's sci-fi novels, doesn't tamper drastically with the formula."Jumper" opens in Ann Arbor, Michigan, with young David Rice (Max Thieriot of "The Astronaut Farmer") giving a snow globe of the Eiffel Tower to a girl, Millie (AnnaSophia Robb of "The Reaping"), that he has a crush on. Obnoxious high school bully Mark (Jesse James of "The Butterfly Effect") snatches the globe and hurls it onto thin ice on a frozen river. Fearlessly, David crosses the ice to retrieve it. The ice breaks beneath him, and he is swept out of sight and presumed dead. Suddenly, he finds himself splashed inexplicably into the local library. Afterward, when David goes home, his alcoholic dad William (Michael Rooker of "Tombstone") rants and raves at him so maliciously that he makes another 'jump' to escape this abusive home life. We're told that David's mother Mary (Diane Lane of "Untraceable") abandoned him when he turned five. David runs away to New York City and uses his new found powers for monetary gain. He visits a bank and later teleports himself back and forth into the vault, hauling off bags of loot to his cheap motel room. At this point, "Star Wars" heartthrob Hayden Christenson assumes the role. In time, he is jumping all over the world, enjoying lunch atop the Great Sphinx in Egypt. Meanwhile, unbeknownst to David, somebody is watching him. Griffin (Jamie Bell of "King Kong") has his eye on our hero, because Griffin has the ability to 'jump' across time and space, too. However, more sinister eyes are focused on David. Eventually, David encounters his worst nightmare, Roland (white-haired Samuel L. Jackson of "Pulp Fiction"), a mysterious individual who masquerades as a government agent that wants to kill David. Roland totes a baton that works like a taser. According to Griffin, Roland is a Paladin, and Paladins have been hunting and killing jumpers without mercy since medieval times.The chief problem with "Jumper" is that Liman and his scenarists never fully explain the origins of either Paladins or jumpers. The Paladins lull around an unwieldy device that tracks jumpers. Jumpers can jump anywhere as long as they have seen their destination or been there before. David reunites with his girlfriend Millie (gorgeous Rachel Bilson of TV's "The O.C.") after eight years and takes her to Rome where the Paladins really make life rough for him. As rough as things are for Dave, they are even rougher on anybody that tries to make sense out of this nonsense. Hayden Christenson gives his usual wooden performance, while Jackson chews the scenery with flair as the villain. Mind you, the PG-rated "Jumper" with its 89-minute running time is no "Quantum Leap," and discriminating audiences will probably wish that they could teleport to better movies like "Step Up 2 The Streets" or "The Spiderwick Chronicles" before their 89 minutes elapse.
Whats wrong with you people
posted on 02 Aug 2009ill come out straight...... i just became a Filmer and have started watching every other film. Before that i just used to watch the best films... There are so many bad comments about this film and everyone has a in-valid reason, some are saying that Hayden Christensen made them think about star wars in the whole film and Sam shouldn't have white hair some even said that the good guy should have saved those drowning people.....wtf People wanted this film be like every other typical superhero where the good guy wakes up smiling and start saving the world and in the middle of the film the bad guy comes in out of no where and tries to defeat him but loses at the end.......This film gave something different and everyone came out wining.....i mean change the way u ppl are thinking, like trapped in a box...... What i saw in this film was non stop action... no boring stuff like super heroes tend to fall in love and then u have to see their dating scenes which also leads to the scene when the heroin is captured by the Villain and hero has to save her(Spiderman and Superman).....then i also didn't had any problem with the acting the effects speak for them selves.....i don't need to say anything the idea behind the film was original so give them a little space guys im not saying it was a perfect movie but it still give it 8.9.....definitely a must see movie And stop thinking in the box, do you ppl want to stay with films like superman and spiderman till the end of the world??? Im afraid that they might not make a sequel All thanks to u damn critics..
very average
posted on 31 Jul 2009As a concept this film is great i was really looking forward to seeing it. After seeing it I'm quite sad to say i was not very happy with it, it was empty and had very little back story, Hayden Christensen was very wooden and it felt like everything was rushed which frustrated me a little, after about 10 Minutes the story was in full flow and because of that it was just to fast, i found my self asking why does Rowland want David dead and also where is the back story for those people, the high points are Jamie bell and Sam Jackson for me, if it wasn't for the them i doubt i would of even gave it 5 out of 10 bell wasn't introduced till maybe a little to late but he added a lot and i just enjoyed Jackson's part even though with the lack of his back story he did a good job with the role, despite all of this i would recommend you to see this purely to make your own mind up i have a feeling this film is going to be very Marmite for the causal viewer your either going to love it or hate it,
Big Budget B-Movie
posted on 28 Aug 2009I'm beginning to think Hayden Christensen can't act. Not so great in the Star Wars Prequels, not so great in Awake, not so great in Jumper. Is it entirely his fault? No, the screenwriters have handed him tiresome dialogue, clearly aching to 'sound real', but you can almost hear the typewriters tapping out these tossed off lines, in part because of the flat delivery of the actors. The only one here who shows some acting chops in this film is Samuel L. Jackson, and it's only because he's had plenty of practice: Jackson has been playing the same role ever since Pulp Fiction. Here the only notable difference is he has absurdly snow white hair.Dialogue isn't the only problem -- this hour and a half film tries to pack more plot in than it has time for, and thus has a tacked-on epilogue to clean up some plot points, almost as if it was forgotten that the . The ending is only that because it's the film directly before the credits roll: absolutely nothing is resolved. None of that is a particular surprise because the film has explained nothing, nor even hinted that there was anything to explain; instead we're treated to a short exposition of how the main character comes to find he has super powers, and then it's off to the races. Events seem to happen as a convenience for moving the plot forward; this means there's enough inconsistencies and plot holes that you spend half the movie thinking "Why doesn't he just ...?" (or, of course "what's with the...?" None of the questions are ever answered, by the way). Even the soundtrack is the dullest middle-of-the-road forgettable dreck I've heard in a long time.Here's the thing: I thought (like many others) that since the film had so much on-location shooting and an obviously large budget that it would be a fun action flick. Wrong -- in this case, even 85 million dollars, competent cinematography, and some big name actors can't make a boring story interesting. If you want to watch an interesting film about a 'normal' man thrust suddenly into a superhero role, watch Unbreakable.