Don't listen to the negative reviews
Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.
At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.
The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one
Jumper was a pretty enjoyable movie that features good acting and well constructed writing. Hayden Christensen is great as the lead! He is hot, very likable, and good in action sequences. Rachel Bilson was very good in her role as well. And Samuel L. Jackson was good as the villain/antagonist, he was ruthless, menacing and obviously evil. Diane Lane does also have a small role in this movie, and fit the role well, she was good in the limited amount of screen time she received. Max Theoroit was alright in his small amount of time in the film, so was AnnaSophia Robb. The action sequences were well made and very enjoyable, one of them was just a little hard to follow, but the rest were good. The plot is very interesting and it's fun too. Jumper is a fun, smart, and well written film, not quite sure why it received poor reviews. 8/10. I also love the ending, the ending was smart and was one of the smartest scenes in the entire movie. And Hayden Christensen will steel your freaking heart, I mean he is just so great in this movie, very impressed!
General comments: I enjoyed it. Clever creative use of the teleportation powers. Good actions scenes and visual effects. The romance is a simplistic one between characters who aren't quite mature, but the story doesn't pretend that its characters are anything but immature, so that's fine. Story wastes no time with exposition at all, doesn't bother explaining everything in detail and instead prefers to thrust you right into the action at all times. I actually liked this minimalistic story telling style. Yes, it doesn't even bother detailing where the "jumping" power even comes from or explaining much backstory behind the villains; but the main character doesn't even know these things - he's just blindly thrust into it all, like we are - so it's fine if we, the audience, doesn't get a clear explanation either.Themes: I see people complaining that this movie's main character is not a hero and they're right. Hayden Christensen's Jumper character is immature and selfish and doesn't use his powers to protect people or save the world. It's a superpower story, but the main guy is no superhero - but that's actually what I think makes this story interesting.Jumper's story is an interesting exploration of an idea we've all thought of: What would you do if you had superpowers - use them for altruistic or selfish purposes? Most of us would probably like to imagine ourselves as heroes. If we had superpowers, we'd all try to save the world, right? No, I think that's just an unrealistic fantasy. The truth is, most of us would probably be just like Hayden Christensen's Jumper character and use our powers for selfish gain. I am Hayden Christensen and so are you! That's the truth! This idea dates back to Greek philosophy and Plato's Ring of Gyges. If there are no consequences to your actions, could you resist doing bad things? This is deep stuff, not just simple "popcorn-flick" material!I've been a fan of superhero stories since forever ago, but I always find myself wondering, why don't more super powered characters use their powers for their own personal fun and profit. If you had super strength, would you rather risk life and limb fighting street muggers, or would you rather earn mega-millions as a superstar athlete? If you could read minds, could you resist flying straight to Las Vegas and raking in cash by beating everyone at poker? Even beyond imaginary scenarios, look at the real world we live in: we have computers and the Internet, technology of the future that allow us abilities, essentially superpowers, that people of the past couldn't have even imagined. Do we use these "superpowers" for saving the world? No, most of us are on our computers for personal entertainment and enjoyment! When so many of us don't mind illegally downloading music/movies/software, because we know we can't get caught online, can we criticize Hayden Christensen for using his "jumping" ability to rob banks? If you could teleport, you'd rob banks too! Don't deny it!But then, here's another idea I've thought about long before ever seeing this movie: If you had superpowers, do you simply assume that you're the only one, or could there be others out there with powers to match your own? Could the use of your superpowers attract unwanted attention from hostile forces? Jumper explores this idea too, with the emergence of Sam Jackson and Jamie Bell's characters. They represent the other people out who might not like you and your powers, people who have powers of their own. What do you do when you suddenly get caught for crimes you thought you could get away with? To refer back to the computer/internet analogy again, it's like if you've been downloading pirated copyrighted content for years and then suddenly the FBI confronts you at your door. You'd think you don't deserve punishment because you were never really hurting anyone, right? But as Sam Jackson says in the film, "There are always consequences!"Conclusion: Anyway, I think this is an underrated movie with deeper themes than some people realize.
Hayden Christensen will never be as good as he was in Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith. Many critics and even viewers disagree with me, saying that in the final installment of the Star Wars saga he mistook an evil, meaningful performance for "pouty faces and mumbled lines". Or something like that. I must agree that he had an interesting selection of evil faces; they looked like evil was totally warping his face into a wide-eyed, hate-filled glare. I just think that it worked for him.In Jumper, though, I would fully understand--and possibly agree with--anyone maligning his performance. It wasn't the worst acting; maybe it was just the fact that he was cast for the role, considering that his interesting character and voice inflection definitely doesn't fit with most roles that can be provided for him. Jumper was a good action movie, with good directing, cinematography, and editing. The jumping was handled well, and the fight scenes likewise provided exciting entertainment. Considering the storyline, though, I believe that the movie had a lot more potential, and could easily have been a great movie. But the writing is unoriginal, as is the dialogue, and the characterization could have been done much better. Also, it was completely unnecessary to bring along a white-haired Mace Windu, with a reconstructed lightsaber, and then make him into some sort of "religious nutjob" serial killer, trying to kill off all of the Jumpers because, "Only God should have this power." I've heard of men like this in jokes, not movies.The movie starts with teenage David Rice, discovering that he can jump (teleport) through time and space to different locations...simple enough. He keeps jumping to the Ann Arbor Library (Did it have to be Ann Arbor, Mr. Goyer?) on accident, and after his first jump, of course he wants to try it again. Most people probably would have needed a manual, like "Teleporting 101", but to make the movie work, he just practices it and...Voila! He finally gets it down--sort of. Just like every superhero, he decides to keep his talents a secret...but not for very heroic reasons. For whatever reasons, he figures his skills would be best put to use robbing a bank. "Hey, I was a kid. What would you have done?" I dunno, but I definitely wouldn't have robbed a bank. Oh well, we're all raised differently.Fast forward a few years, David's all grown up, and he's living in a mansion, with a closet full of dough. Maybe it's not a mansion, but it's quite a house, that's for sure. I forgot to mention, ever since his first jump, everyone has thought he was dead...how could you be living in a mansion if everyone thinks you're dead? He gets by somehow, until Mace Windu shows up, no longer a Jedi; instead he's a Paladin. It's quite a shock to David, after convincing himself after all these years that he's safe, to have someone invade his house and try to kill him. So he goes on the run, meets up with his childhood crush, and offers to take her on a vacation to Rome. She asks what job he has. "I'm a banker." L. O. L. So they take off for Rome. Very smart, David, while you're being chased by evil villains--what other kinds of villains are there?--why don't you bring along your clueless girlfriend. Forgive my sarcasm; turns out bringing his girlfriend along wasn't a very good idea, considering he once again gets attacked (Surprise, Surprise!) in the Coliseum, meets another, more experienced Jumper, and follows his "jump scar" to his lair. The other jumper turns out to be someone named Griffin, a smart-alek, rather unattractive person played by Jamie Bell, who has been jumping and living alone longer than even David has. David Rice follows him around everywhere, asking questions and irritating him, but perhaps he's not as irritated as he should be. "Paladins kill Jumpers. I kill Paladins. Class dismissed," says Griffin. The chemistry between the two continues to be interesting and humorous.Despite the ridiculousness of the movie, Jumper still manages to be an entertaining, if disappointing, action film, and although Hayden Christensen has lost the touch he had in 2003, he's still a good actor. David S. Goyer will never again create a film as good as the Batman trilogy, which he and Christopher Nolan collaborated on together, but this movie proves that he still has his writing touch. The movie keeps you excited and entertained throughout, providing good imagery and clever dialogue and characterization.My Official Score: 84/100
Jumper is a film with no redeeming qualities to speak of. It's boring, mediocre paced and the story is utterly horrendous. What slightly saves it is the idea, but the execution to explore the idea felt like it was pulled of be a third grader. The film had no direction, cliché riddled and explosively repulsive. Poor acting on top of this makes the film a living hell to watch. A nightmare film pulled off and no, I don't mean a Nightmare On Elm Street, I mean terrible. The film is so below average that it takes a massive amount of energy to pull through the entire film. Sometimes doing nothing is better than doing something and that rule applies to this grotesque movie.