It was bound to happen. The Transporter films couldn't sustain momentum forever.
The first Transporter film was breezy with moments of outlandish action (the oil fight, parachuting onto a moving truck), and it moved Jason Statham from supporting parts in Guy Ritchie films to the "Action Star" spot that was largely vacant*. Transporter 2 took everything from the first film and pushed into ludicrous extremes, turning some fans off but ushering others into the next level of action films: Cartoon Action.
Cartoon action films follow a similar violence ratio to mid-eighties Schwarzenegger films but throw logic and physics out the window. Films like Transporter 2, Shoot 'Em Up, and Crank pushed the action film into the world of Looney Tunes physics, increasing the improbability of each sequence until the film was impossible to take seriously. Viewers are generally divided on this trend in action films but the Cap'n finds himself on the "for it" side.
Which is why I was so disappointed with Transporter 3. I would expect a film directed by someone with the last name of Megaton to be more exciting, if not outright ridiculous. Instead, Oliver Megaton, Luc Besson, and Robert Mark Kamen scale back the outlandish signature "style" of the first two films. The end result is, at best, lackluster.
Jason Statham movies, whether starring or supporting, are rarely what you'd call "good" movies (this would include Death Race, Ghosts of Mars, and In the Name of the King), but at least he's generally entertaining in them. In Transporter 3, he has nothing to do and nobody to work with. Aside from returning cast member Francois Berleand, none of the supporting case is interesting at all. The plot is pretty pedestrian: a kidnapping attempt to force the Ukranian Minister to allow toxic waste into his ports.
Frank Martin (Statham) is knocked out and attached to a bracelet that explodes if he gets more than 75 feet away from his car. Also in his car is a mysterious passenger (Natalya Rudakova) and a GPS system telling him where to drive. What should be an interesting gimmick turns bad at two junctures:
1. Valentina (Rudakova) isn't a character so much as she is a set of annoying habits hinging on what the writers need Frank to do next. Sometimes she's grouchy, sometimes obnoxious, sometimes they don't have anything for her to do so she sleeps. The dynamic between Frank and Valentina gets old pretty fast.
2. More importantly, Besson and Kamen (who co-wrote the film) can't figure out many interesting ways to play with the bracelet gimmick. When they do, the results are far from the giddy stunts of the first two film. There's a short bicycle chase when Frank is separated from the car, a way less interesting than it sounds car-on-train sequence, and a moderately interesting way to keep Frank's car from sinking to the bottom of a lake.
The action sequences are few and far between but generally okay. Statham gets to have some fun in a scene where he strips off layers of clothing and uses them defensively against armed attackers. It lacks the thrill of Frank's "Mansion" set-piece in the first film or the oil fight, but certainly beats anything in War. Some of the car chases are fun, but nothing as exciting as the sleazy content of Death Race. Part of the problem is that if you've already seen Death Race and then watch the trailer for Crank 2 that opens the disc, Transporter 3 pales in comparison.
If you liked the first Transporter and hated the second, this might be for you. I warn you that it's trying a little too hard to split the difference between action movie and thriller with less than desireable results, but as a generic action film (rather than a cartoon), Transporter 3 is middle of the road: not too bad but not that great. It's just there.
Fortunately, Crank 2 looks to be an extension of the rather ludicrous Crank, and maybe even further than that. I wait eagerly for the return of Cartoon Statham.
* The Bourne Identity, released the same year, propelled the unlikely choice of Matt Damon into a similar role.
No comments:
Post a Comment