Transporter 3 Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x816 | 8115.12 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x544 | 4457.69 MiB | 720p | |
|
688x288 | 700.15 MiB | divx | |
|
320x144 | 383.17 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
This time, the rules are the same. Except one.
Frank Martin puts the driving gloves on to deliver Valentina, the kidnapped daughter of a Ukranian government official, from Marseilles to Odessa on the Black Sea. En route, he has to contend with thugs who want to intercept Valentina's safe delivery and not let his personal feelings get in the way of his dangerous objective.
| Jason Statham | Frank Martin |
| François Berléand | Tarconi |
| Natalya Rudakova | Valentina |
| Robert Knepper | Johnson |
| Jeroen Krabbé | Leonid Vasilev |
| Alex Kobold | Leonid's Aide |
| David Atrakchi | Malcom Manville |
| Yann Sundberg | Flag |
| Eriq Ebouaney | Ice |
| David Kammenos | Driver Market |
| Silvio Simac | Mighty Joe |
| Michael Bennett | Garage attendant |
| Farid Elouardi | Yuri |
| Justin Rodgers Hall | Horatio |
| Gregory Loffredo | Johnson's man |
| Olivier Megaton |
5.90 out of 10 (28585 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Transport me away from this dull thriller
posted on 21 Aug 2009Once again I find myself stuck, I really do want to like Jason Statham movies, the sad fact though is I can't. Once again into the fire we go. "Transporter 3" while better than the second, lacks the story and depth of the first transporter movie. Frank Martin (Jason Statham) is approached by hired goons with an offer to drive a package for their boss, Johnson (Robert Knepper) He refuses and gives them the name of a friend, Malcom Manville (David Atrakchi). The goons tell Frank that their boss doesn't take no for an answer. The ensuing fight displays Jason's body in all it's muscled glory. When Malcom crashes into the Franks home, he calls for an ambulance, when they arrive and take Malcom away, he looks into the back seat and finds Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) laying in the back. She is the package. She tells Frank about a device on her wrist that if she or Malcom get more than 25 feet away from the car, three liquid explosives started to join and at 75 feet away they exploded. Frank runs out to stop the ambulance carrying Malcom, but is to late. Frank returns to the house and is knocked unconscious by the goons from before. He wakes shirtless (of course) and finds he now has a device strapped to his wrist. He meets Johnson and they agree that Frank will deliver the package for him. Valentina is the daughter of a Ukrainian government official, whom Johnson wants to sign a package deal for the company he is representing. A company that is underhanded is beyond doubt. The trip will be across several European countries. Frank drives off and while on the road takes his car to an old friend to see if they can remove detonation device from the car. Frank is being tracked and several more goons come into the shop where Frank has taken the car and is told that Johnson wants him back on the road, again a long drawn out fight between Frank and a large number of goons. There is a scene where it looks as if Frank is bent over waiting for the punch to be thrown, that's poor choreography. Also why do ten to twenty guys always attack Frank in these movies? And why when they do, do they attack one at a time? Frank prevails over the goons and then a huge giant of a man comes in and grabs Frank. The fight between the muscled hero and the giant is about the best fight in the movie. Frank uses every tool at his disposal, even a shovel. Back on the road Frank tells Johnson he wants to meet him, but when Frank arrives Johnson calls and tells Frank he is no longer needed. A guy (David Kammenos) walks up while Frank is on the phone and drives off with the car, frank is forced to grab a bicycle and chase after the speeding car. Along the route Frank is keeping in touch with Inspector Tarconi (François Berléand) and the two plot how to capture the bad guy and save Frank. Frank is forced to turn Valentina over to Johnson's men and then is forced to drive his car into the water, the scene where Frank raises the car by filling luggage with air from the tires is stupid. The final battle on the train is kinda cool, Frank is unable to reach Johnson because he happens to be more than 75 feet away from where Frank left the car. Frank goes back and gets into his car and drives it into the travel car of the train in which Valentina is being held by Johnson. Frank beats Johnson and ties him to the steering wheel of the car, Frank takes the device from his wrist and attach's it to Johnson's, he reverses the car out of the movie train car while Johnson is untying himself, the car falls to the tracks and leaves Johnson behind, when the trains travels more than 75 feet away from the now idle car Johnson blows sky high. This movie is better than the last couple Statham movies ( Death Race, The Bank Job and War) I hope the next couple will be better, including the upcoming sequel The Brazilian Job. I give Transporter 3 a 2 and on my avoidance scale I give it a 2. Video here it comes.
So disappointing...
posted on 19 Aug 2009I'll keep this short and sweet because I don't want to waste any more time than is necessary on this movie...I am very easily pleased when it comes to movies - I loved the first two Transporter movies and thought Crank was brilliant. I am not expecting cinematic brilliance when I go to a movie like this... I like to check my brain at the door and enjoy.Unfortunately, Transporter 3 is brutal - absolute rubbish. This movie should be all about the action scenes. There are a few, but they are pretty lame - on their own I'd rate them 5 out of 10. If you have seen the trailer, you have seen anything worth mentioning action-wise from the movie. Between these flaccid action scenes we are tortured by bizarre and awkward filler... what is with all the talk about food and restaurants?! Bottom line - a very disappointing, 1 star movie.
Exciting film
posted on 17 Aug 2009I saw Transporter 1 and Transporter 2. Serise 2 is the most exciting of the Transporter series. So, I'm looking forward to Transporter's last mission. But the film...is so-so. I was a little disappointed. The action & story is the same. The action is wonderful!! Exciting!! The fighting like a show. Main actor has nice muscles, a nice face and a nice voice. He is stronger than the other people. But he is weak for a woman....... He fell in love with a woman. Maybe one minute later he was dead. But the love??? It's impossible.. The movie is ACTION! Why did he fell in love with the woman? It's not a romance movie, but the action is perfect
not what i thought
posted on 17 Aug 2009It was really disappointing. i loved 1 and 2 but this one was stupid.the action was in fast forward and you cant see anything.One punch sent someone flying across the room.the story line was good and Jason Statham still looks cool but it was pretty bad and predictable.i think it was probably bad because it was made by a different director.anyway it is maybe worth a watchthe movie was a bit stupid because in one scene his car is being stolen in the desert and there happens to be a really nice BMW motorbike next to him
Better than the second one in concept, but not better in quantity.
posted on 17 Aug 2009I find the Transporter series to be a means of a quick and easy escapism, and Jason Statham certainly doesn't disappoint as an action star. The marketing wasn't as special or engaging as the previous installments however I did intend on seeing it sooner than later.I won't spoil the plot it does have more at stake than the last one had, as the first for that matter.The action sort of lacked, but they were very well done and all out enjoyable. The action scenes also never get repetitive like Transporter 2's. However non are above the action set up in the last installment.the humor was funny, not that over-the-top but funny and lightened the mood. Nor does it ever feel forced.Like all sequels Transporter 3 introduces new characters into the mix, all are more interesting than the ones seen in the last installment.The chemistry between the actors was good, especially between Statham and Rudakova. The actors themselves were good, however Rudakova was annoying as was her freckles, I know looks don't dictate talent but couldn't they have gotten someone more...Vuloptuos? Unless they were aiming at a more realistic angle then I can see.The musical score was nice, but not memorable.Lastly unlike a lot of reviews have stated, this isn't brainless, it's quick thinking, clever, has good humor( some show irony), and avoids going so "out-there." I really wish the critics here would try to understand just because something may seem surreal and there's a one liner doesn't make it stupid. People are too critical, or just don't quite understand the nature of action movies. Okay, my little rant there is done.All in all this was good fun, but I feel it would make a better rent.6/10.
Out of gas.
posted on 15 Aug 2009Jason Statham, in the form of Frank Martin, is knocking bad guys around yet again. What is there to say? He's good at it. This movie, however, is not so good and doesn't give the very likable star enough original material to shine and impress. That doesn't mean a good plot, this type of movie doesn't need anything more than just something to move it along. The place where it needs to be original and truly creative is in the action scenes, that's why people will bother to see this movie, after all.And that's where "Transporter 3" fails and sinks into the mediocre depths that the two films preceding it enjoyably leaped over. Folks, the action is seriously lacking in this movie... there is not one decent car chase and might I remind you this is a film about a 'transporter' and that is very bad news. The one chase scene there is has no decent stunts or spectacular crashes. The second movie in this series had Frank Martin jumping a car from one building to another... here zip. He does jump onto a train, as evident in the trailer, but it looks better in the trailer. Then the two major fight scenes are essentially overly edited repetitions of one another.The film is tired and seriously lagging. The attempt at a serious plot is also a bad move which the filmmakers are at fault as is a romantic subplot which the first two films either ignored or minimized... here it is actually a driving force, pardon the pun. --- 5/10BsCDb classification: 13+ -- violence
A treat for Gordon Ramsay
posted on 15 Aug 2009This film was brilliant. One of the best films I have seen in the past decade. Im only joking. It wasn't.If your an aspiring chef, definitely watch this film. There are so many comments about different foods, different restaurants that you kind of get the feeling that the female character is a wikipedia for recipes. If your an avid BMX fan, then you can learn some swift new moves from Jason. Overall, this film was about as entertaining as a microwave meal. Oh, and the sound quality was terrible. In a cinema, I expect to hear things clearly. When the Russians or whatever they were spoke, it sounded like they were talking Jelly baby. As a side note, I've learned how to make a lobster thermidore.Also, if the bad guys had watched the other 2 transporters, then they would have surely realised that Jason CANNOT be beaten. Even by a group of 10000000 guys. The guys a soldier. You have to give him that.
Bad lead woman, and bad editing, pulled this one down
posted on 15 Aug 2009Transporter series sounds good on paper, but fails miserably when put together with poor plot choices and actors. This one choose the wrong lead woman, there has to be better choices for a Ukrainian woman than this one. Her English made me laugh when it seems liked she tried really hard to pull out some attempts at emotional scenes. The editing made the film more of joke by too many fast motion scenes, and disjointed fighting scenes. Felt almost amateurish, and the car scene with the two trucks was filmed good but completely ruined by the editor.If you did not like the previous ones, you will definitely be disappointed.Music choices were good, Jason does his part, and the French cop probably the best actor in the movie. If you are bored and there's nothing else to see, you could watch it, but go in with very low expectations.
Don't watch it!!
posted on 13 Aug 2009Everyone know already that the transporter is a bond wannabe type of movie.Kind of movie in which the plot ain't the primary reason you want to watch it.But for the action.But that when the action come second that you know something's went wrong .Yes the plot is still terrible and it's just a poor excuse to make another action movie.The Over editing of the fight scene.AKA where you can barely see what happens .Movie like equilibrium own better action and actually has a plot and brilliant acting with no budget at all.So i don't buy the no budget part.It's not a reason to reach such mediocrity.And all the other non-sense and the predictable scene.The acting was poor and the romance between Frank and the babe was seriously not needed.I cried at the sunset scene because i wanted it to end.Actually the best acting was the french friend of Frank.Even with a poor screenplay(If he had any ) it's was actually refreshing in each scene he was.It's when you yell in the cinema at the final scene *NOT HER AGAIN* that you realize something went wrong.But can't really blame her.The material she worked with was quite low.But not well know actress try every occasion? Plus the hole toxic trash.I don't know if it's me or not.But i did not understand properly the point of the story and the role of the villain.
What did I just see, a romantic movie or an action movie?
posted on 09 Aug 2009No where near as good or funny as the first two.Very boring! Really, really disappointed.I loved the first two films and Jason, but this one was just stupidly bad.There wasn't much action and there was a 30 minute scene on him and that girl. Its supposed to be an action movie, not a romantic one.Also the story line wasn't very good, he just couldn't get too far away from the girl or his car or it would kill them, thats about it to be fair.Don't waste your money, unless you have an unlimited cinema card like me.Hope you take my advice!
Bad
posted on 07 Aug 2009Bad. Bad movie. The action was there, but the writing was terrible. I was peeved at the chick throughout this movie, stupid dancing and always looking around like a lost bird, until I realized that it really isn't her fault... she wasn't really given anything to work with... the plot just didn't make sense to me at all! The motivation for the characters made zero sense.... the bad guy ALREADY HAD THE GIRL... why did she need transporting UNTIL THE DEMANDS WERE MET?!? I mean, stoooooooo pid! Nothing really happened in this movie. Bad guy wants to transport waste, so he kidnaps girl. Chase is on. That's about it. Sad. I really enjoyed the previous 2 movies and was looking foreward to this one, but what a letdown. This is destined for late night basic cable.... sad.
Such a shame
posted on 07 Aug 2009It seems the creators think they can stick Jason Statham in a car along with some foreign chick who cannot act (Would just like to ask, was it just me or does she look like Bianca from Eastenders!!) and that's enough. The story was terrible, there is nothing wrong with the original idea of the transporter why go to all this effort to ruin it!-They didn't need this 'can't go further than XX feet from the car' business, it just ruins it. -All the action scenes are sped up, which just makes them look silly, they may have done this on other releases but not so I've noticed. -All the silly things that happen during the film, BMX, car/water/air, Train/bridge, train/car. They are all just ridiculous! (I hope that doesn't spoil it for anyone)After the quality that was 'Death Race' I was so looking forward to this film. Now I have given up all hope for anything special in 'crank 2' and 'Brazillian Job' The only saviour in this film was Robert Knepper who in my opinion doesn't receive enough screen time, after watching him for years in Prison Break he has so much more potential than the opportunity he was given.I will stick to the first (and my favourite) Transporter. This is the very reason why some films should not have sequels!
Mindless, fun action.
posted on 07 Aug 2009Transporter 3 is an action film starring Jason Statham as the no-nonsense hire-for-anything driver lead character. It's a quick pace movie with no time to spare and has a few flashback scenes that leaves the audience guessing for more.Frank Martin is back behind the wheel after a short break, to deliver Valentina who, unbeknownst to him, is a kidnapped daughter of the Ukrainian government official, from Marseilles to Odessa on the Black Sea via the highway. On his way, he has to deal with thugs who want Valentina, find out who is the man who had hired him, get the bomb off his wrist, and not let himself get too attached to the "package"...The movie is an action-packed movie, which will work best if you just switch off your brain for the whole 1 hour and 40 minutes. We get to see the driver, Frank Martin, defeat an entire gang of thug while making sure his car get full "maintenance." And considering there's a bomb strapped on his wrist that will explode if he gets too far from the car, you can expect a lot of the scenes has something to do with being near the car. There's an intense chase scene where Frank had to chase his car from getting stolen on foot and then on bike. And also a scene where Frank tries to get his car afloat from the bottom of a river while avoid being drown and getting blown to death. Yes, please turn off your brain while viewing.The acting is generic. Nothing Oscar-worthy, but not bad either. I'm happy with the directing and editing of the movie. Nothing too confusing and you can see the action very well and get the whole idea of what's happening on the screen. And furthermore the camera isn't that shaky, which is a good thing.The fight scenes are well choreographed. Again, there are all pretty much no-brainer fight scene, but entertaining nonetheless.The movie is overall generic. The quality is still great though. If you have some extra time and money, be sure to catch it for a bit of fun movie-viewing.
90s revisited
posted on 03 Aug 2009Unlike some, I actually find the 3rd part fits in line with the previous "Transporter"s with one major "but".Ridiculous? Fine. Unrealistic? That goes almost as a rule lately now, doesn't it? What haven't we, the poor movie goers, been fed by this time - be it a tad smelly or rotten down the middle.Seriously, before I continue with the "but", let me ask you: have I been watching the wrong action movies or do 99% of them contain masked or open references to the controversial, worn and boringly propagandistic "war for freedom", "the fight for peace", "democracy at any cost" or some such? But wait - what's so special about "Transporter"? Nothing really, just that it also manages to fit into the remaining 1%, a little retro into the roaring post-Cold War 90s this time, with a Russian-speaking Ukrainian woman who appears nothing less than an imbecile and not even of the charming kind. I mean, coupled with the Hollywood's "remake tendency" this dead loop of ideas is starting to push my doubts about the imaginative ability of its crew or staff, or whoever they got there to a whole new level of fear - the one you get while still hoping for the best - for the industry's dire fate and those millions of mutilated minds who might never even know it, which makes the matter all the more grave.Filmmakers, I don't know where you get your Russian characters, but please, if you want to laugh at something - make it smart (take Rocknrolla, for example), so we can understand you. Otherwise, having no other point to connect this to, it inevitably interprets as an insult to our culture and that is just low, besides I saw this stuff done too many times back when I could walk under a table. Kinda thought it was somewhat cool even - stupid Russians, funny! NOT. Not anymore, not for me. Maybe you should start putting age "caps" on your movies, maybe that's the issue here.Anyway, closer to the point - all in all the action is OK (5/10), I expected as much, can't really complain. But the leading female character ruined it for me.
absolute cheesy junk, so predictable too
posted on 03 Aug 2009This film really has got to be one of the biggest let-downs in 2008 for me Now i wasn't expecting something of the quality of 'the dark night' but i also wasn't expecting it to be this bad.Some parts were OK but mostly it was just so predictable and cheesy and at the same time the stunts were completely unbelievable.I'm honestly struggling to find something good to say about this movie but i cant, hopefully this will be the final one.overall i give this film a 4 out of 10 and i honestly think that that's fair, i cant justify a 5 anyway, i wouldn't even feel comfortable recommending it to a friend even if they had nothing else to watch.if you do decide to make a Transporter 4 then could we please have abit of effort and at least a half way decent storyline, oh and lose the annoying girl, thanks.
Stuck In Neutral
posted on 01 Aug 2009Jason Statham must be one of the hardest working men in movies; in the
last year I've seen him in The Bank Job and Death Race and now this.
Statham made his name in Hollywood with The Transporter in which he
plays delivery man Frank Martin, who lives in the south of France and
transports often suspect packages in the boot of his gleaming black
Audi. However, this second sequel sees Statham idling in neutral, if
not in reverse.
Good news first; this occupies the same universe as the first
Transporter film, not the preposterous cartoon reality of the second.
The plot owes something to Statham's Crank this time; he must wear a
bracelet that will set off a massive explosion if he is 50 metres away
from this vehicle, which is reluctantly coerced into driving from
Marseilles to Budapest. And actor Francois Berleand, who played the
French inspector is back. Transporter's charm owed much to the sly
rapport between Frank and the inspector, much like Claude Reins and
Bogard in Casablanca.
The bad news? It's not a good movie. Say what you like about the latest
Bond film, but at least the director had some ambition with his set
pieces even if it didn't always come off. The worst aspect is that
Frank is saddled with a sulky uncooperative East European girl, a
freckly bob cut ginger-nut who is quite devoid of charisma and a very
annoying character (though not down to her looks I hasten to add). It's
sort of meant to be funny like Magda, the sulky home help in Brit
sitcom Lead Balloon, but it doesn't work. Worst is when she humiliates
Statham by making him do a strip tease for her - this takes place on
the edge of some deserted quarry in Eastern Europe under a grim,
overcast sky. Bizarrely, it leads to a clinch between them.
Berléand is back but here is an ally of Frank, the sort of well meaning
copper who the maverick hero can rely upon to get him out of scrapes or
provide information at the drop of a hat.
The car stunts are nothing special and it's all based around the
countdown to some politician (Jeroen Krabbé of The Living Daylights)
signing a document. The main villain is a Dragon's Den Duncan Bannatyne
lookalike - if they'd had the old bag from Dragon's Den they might be
onto something.
The first Transporter scored points by occupying much the same world as
Bond but doing it better - a guilty pleasure. This one is sub-Bond and
not much fun; the worst of both worlds. A bit like the first xXx movie
in fact. It's faintly embarrassing, with oodles of unintentional
laughter.
Just admit it Statham haters...Jason can act!
posted on 01 Aug 2009Some action movie stars simply depend on the stunts and special effects to make the movie succeed (that means you Steven Segal!). Jason Statham is not one of those actors. Statham is known for his high octane action flicks like Crank and Death Race, but he has also shown he can act with films like Snatch and Revolver, films in which little to no explosions were involved. While the 3rd installment of the Transporter series depends heavily on car chases and guns, Statham is able to inject a sense of feeling and humanity into Frank Martin, the titular Transporter.Part 3 of the series follows Frank and his return to France, where he is forced by an evil American (Robert Knepper) to transport a politician's daughter (Natalya Rudakova) across Europe. The film gets a bit deeper, but for the sake of spoilers I won't get into it. Viewers with no sense of fun will immediately point out plot holes, but honestly, this is a fun and crazy film.The plot takes a little away from the film's greatness, but there are a few more things that keep it from being perfect. Rudakova's character gets annoying once she begins to bond with Frank. But let's keep in mind, this was her film debut, so things can only go up from here. The only other thing I could find wrong with the movie was the fact that the film tried to give a environmental friendly feel (don't ask).There's one thing (other than Statham) that makes the Transporter series so great. Not the special effects. Not the fact that Luc Besson is involved. It's the character of Insepctor Tarconi. Other than Frank, Tarconi (Francois Berleand) is the only character to appear in all 3 Transporter films. Berleand portrays the French cop with a cool swagger and is a great source of comic relief. I really wish American audiences would see more of this guy.On the scale of Transporter films, it was better than the 2nd, but doesn't surpass the original. So, along with my recommendation, I leave you with this...enjoy this is film. But when you're done, join me in praying that Statham will return for a 4th turn as The Transporter.
Disappointing
posted on 28 Jul 2009This film is just that...disappointing. I loved the first movie, felt that perhaps the second one was not as good, but had high hopes for the third installment. Especially since I felt the trailer was great! Instead I feel that the director destroys much with the "shaky camera" on the martial arts action scenes. It just annoys me, it does not look good or innovative or artistic in any way, it just makes you..annoyed. As others have mentioned there are big plot-holes and also scenes that are just to unbelievable, even for a transporter film. No, I am not happy. If There is going to be a fourth film, I hope that they will look more to the first one, and let us enjoy the close-combat scenes in a clear and viewable manner.
Wait for video(DVD)
posted on 20 Jul 2009This Transporter is definitely number 3 as far as Transporter movies go. The first one was a surprise because it did not suck, the second upped the ante by being more outlandish and not sucking. But this one is only OK, especially if you paid full price to get in. Don't get me wrong, it's OK but renting it for a buck or seeing it on cable will only make it better. Jason Statham is the man. Weather greased up or with coconut hands or on a bicycle, Only he can seem to maintain his dignity and still remain cool. The girl is very annoying, to the point of "Why is he helping her?" For an action movie its not a good sign that the best parts are the little bits in between the action, like with the inspector and transporter. If you must see it wait for it to come out at your local video store.
Great Sequel - Feckles are now sexy
posted on 23 Aug 2009Those that didn't like the heroine have to admit that if nothing else, she has made freckles no longer just girlish, but downright sexy. The plot and director did not give her much chance to be more than the "spoiled rich girl", but the potential is there anyway. The action sequences were very good, but too choppy, which indicates lazy choreography (where is John Wo when you need him?). The plot was good, if you suspend belief of some things like - how did the bad guys expect to get away with their crime, even if they were successful. There was more acting from Jason, which came off well and shows he has come a long way from Hansom Rob. All in all a great ride and well worth seeing on the big screen. I will buy it on Blu-ray when it comes out.