IMDb > Transporter 2 (2005) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Transporter 2
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Transporter 2 More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 11 of 34: [Prev][6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [Next]
Index 335 reviews in total 

Highly Disappointed...

Author: zbam-1 from United States
24 January 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I started this movie with great excitement; only it turned into disappointment about a quarter way into the movie.

You quickly learn that Frank has coded in God_Mode and No_Clipping in this movie along with Wings and Invisibility.

Lola is cute, but she is awfully skinny.

I love her voice.

She has corny lines and a terrible last scene.

Way too many sound effects.

On a good note, cool driving scenes.

Also, I prefer BMW over Audi.

Not that anyone cares. The End.

Was the above review useful to you?

Transporter 2 Will Transport You Too.

Author: gnome11-1 from United States
22 January 2006

I was 12 years old when Goldfinger came out and it was a big deal for my mother to go let me see it at that age. I went with my cousins, who always got to do a lot of things I didn't. Transporter, the first, brought me back to that golden feeling I had after seeing Goldfinger: exotic locations, exotic women and an artfully understated man's man hero. The only difference between Jason Statham's Frank Martin and Bond, is that Frank is less self-assured with women in distress. Transporter 2, unfortunately, loses that magic boundary. You can almost see yourself as James Bond. You could never see yourself as Frank because the stunts are physically and cartoonically unreal and the martial arts fight scenes are as believable as WWW wrestling. Even though the door was closed to the land of Mitty, it was open to an entertaining ride. If writer, Besson, would return to the élan of the first Transporter, I think he could establish a franchise to rival Bond. If he doesn't, I think Transporter 3 will be the last. Outrageous stunts are cheap compared to realistic heroes.

Was the above review useful to you?

good sequel

Author: william86 from United States
21 January 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I thought this is a good sequel and a lot better then the first movie

the thing about this movie is that you have to watch the first movie before you watch the second one because the ending to Transporter 2 has something to do with the first movie, but it's only a little reference from the first movie, but if people watch the 2nd movie before they watch the 1rst movie then they will get all confuse about the ending

what would've been better is if they include info somewhere in the 2nd movie that the main character Frank use to do illegal transporting before, just so the audience would understand the ending to the 2nd movie when the ending ever does come

if they ever have done that, then people wouldn't have to watch the 1rst movie before watching the 2nd movie

also, their is one scene that I thought was kind of unrealistic where that one women had shot down a helicopter with her gun, kind of a dumb scene, but I do like the rest of the action scenes in the movie

Was the above review useful to you?

More action; less character

Author: lastliberal from United States
21 January 2006

I felt so good after starting my organization project that i decided that I would make this a guilty pleasure weekend and just watch films that have no socially redeeming value other than to entertain me.

Of course, I started with Transporter 2. I loved Jason Statam in the original and he is pretty much the same in this one. I really though they made a mistake in not picking him to be the next Bond. The trouble is that he had Qi Shu in The Transporter to play off of, and here he has to make do with Amber Valetta and newcomer Kate Nauta, neither of which provide the same appeal. So the time is filled with action, and there is a tremendous amount. More fights and car chases and excitement than the original in that respect. Still, I do miss Qi and wished Jason had someone to round him out in this film. Well, she's on to Wesley Snipes and Ken Watanabe in Chasing the Dragon, and we'll just have to catch Jason next in Revolver.

Was the above review useful to you?

Transporter 2 delivers a mixed bag

Author: jpkwolf from Finland
19 January 2006

In some things Transporter 2 improves over it's prequel but unlike the prequel has much more faults. The action scenes were mostly awesome. Frank Martin played by Jason Statham is cool as the transporter that has lots of rules to follow. Kate Nauta was cool as the psycho bitch from hell and she apparently sang some songs for the movies soundtrack. Both Transporter movies have quite great soundtracks with nice instrumental tracks working as the background music for the action. Some things are way too over the top in the car chase sequences and that somewhat ruins a great action movie. The final battle is inside an airplane and completely anti-climatic with a really bad CGI airplane. They shouldn't have shown any view from outside the plane. Also the fight with Kate Nautas character is lame. I hope there will be a third movie where they leave the silly over the top antics behind and return fully to the style of the first movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

Rapid-Fire Silliness Knows Its Audience Very Well...Very, Very Well

Author: Ed Uyeshima from San Francisco, CA, USA
18 January 2006

I am the first to admit that I am not the target viewer for this film, as it serves up crash-and-burn car chases, blood-splattering shootouts, cartoonish "Kill Bill"-inspired martial arts fight scenes and a stoic, vigilante hero. None of the contrived premise of this 2005 action thriller is original, but the rapid-fire and thoroughly preposterous execution should satisfy fans of the genre. It all focuses on unflappable Frank Martin working temporarily as the chauffeur for the son of a rising US government drug czar. Of course, the kid is the target of a kidnapping by a nasty drug lord and his gang of thugs, including a bloodless supermodel killer who looks like pop singer Pink's bodybuilding sister. The plot kicks into high gear with a by-the-numbers "deadly virus" angle which conveniently kills anyone within breathing distance from the infected. Your eyes will be rolling throughout, especially the downed plane toward the end, though what barely saves the film is a sense of humor about Martin's anal-retentive nature and super-human dexterity.

I think the film could have benefited from more blatant comedy, but sadly director Louis Leterrier and screenwriters Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen seem to take the ridiculous plot line pretty seriously. Jason Statham returns to the title role in this sequel, and he handles the athleticism and Clint Eastwood-like speech mannerisms to the presumed requirements of the role. Alessandro Gassman is appropriately greasy as drug lord Gianni, while supermodel Amber Valletta actually has some credibility as the mother of the kidnapped boy who unsurprisingly becomes drawn to Frank. On the other hand, Kate Nauta plays the supermodel killer as if reading cue cards. Although I like François Berléand as Frank's cop friend, he feels merely like a convenient plot device, and I was disappointed to see Matthew Modine, apparently in a career downshift, playing the drug czar in such a predictable manner. There is a standard making-of featurette with the DVD, as well as a fitfully amusing blooper reel. I have to give the filmmakers credit for earning a PG-13 rating for all the implied violence they provide here.

Was the above review useful to you?

Hollywood Has Upped The Drug Dosage

Author: patrickmmc from United States
11 January 2006

What can I say about this film that hasn't already been said not long after the film was in the theater. For me, I bought this film on DVD expecting that it wouldn't be great, but at least entertaining. My opinions prior to watching were based on the b-film opinion of the first. Though the first wasn't great either, I like Jason Statham, so I figured "what the heck." After just the first 5 minutes of the lead-in, I knew that the works hadn't improved any from the first film. Unfortunately, my opinion sank even lower when a car flew into the air, rotated, and pinpointed a dangling crane hook to remove a bomb from the bottom of the vehicle just before it exploded.

To enjoy this movie you MUST suspend all concepts of reality and plausibility. This was like watching the Road Runner and the Coyote going at it. The only thing missing was the big ACME logos. I can honestly say that I would have enjoyed Mel Blanc's work over this any day.

If the world ever wakes up to smell the crap Hollywood is shoveling out, theaters, cable and satellite companies will need to find a new means to make money.

If you crave good entertainment, stay away from this one and beware of any follow-ups.

As for Jason Statham, I feel sorry for the guy because he has terrific potential at being a good action star. Unfortunately he continues to be casted in some real duds with poor screen-plays.

My final note is this... This picture is only indicative of all films being released today. In each you will find a lot of special effects that while spectacular, are often too unbelievable without any story to support the efforts. It is truly my belief that Hollywood has upped the dosage and potency of their drugs. This is what you get when you have a lot of money to spend and no sense to direct the expenditures.

Was the above review useful to you?

Mindless and mostly entertaining, but ultimately forgettable

Author: trancejeremy from St. Louis
11 January 2006

I liked the original Transporter. It was a nice mix of different action types - car chases, gunfights, and martial arts. While French, it had a heavy Hong Kong flavor, thanks to one of the directors (Corey Yuen) and one of the stars (the delectable Shu Qi), and so was somewhat over the top, but reasonably realistic. And all the stunts were actual stunts.

Transporter 2 veers into comic book territory, dropping the gunfights (he does get shot at, but no shooting himself) in favor of more martial arts style fights (good, but where almost no one gets hurt) and drops realistic vehicle stunts in favor of lots and lots of mediocre quality CGI. If I wanted to see a CGI car jump over things, I'd play a video game.

The plot starts off okay enough, but quickly devolves into silliness as well. Basically, the Transporter is chauffeuring a politician's kid as a favor to a friend. But the kid runs afoul of a kidnapping plot, and he is implicated for reasons that aren't that clear.

Anyway, it is enjoyable in a mindless way. Jason Statham has a pretty good screen presence, and does a job job as the stoic Transporter. Most of the other acting is either bad or unremarkable. The kid's mother was pretty annoying, and the implausibly dressed villainess seemed to be channeling Bridgit Nielsen (not a good thing). Worth a rental.

Was the above review useful to you?

Good Escape-ism

Author: freshwayne
3 January 2006

This is a good movie if you want a bit of thrills and spills without having to task yourself with epic story lines. Stunts are quite good in this one - every imaginable car stunt possible happens at some stage, there is however some dodgy blue screen work in places, where its obvious - small slap on the hands there! Now what of the characters - the enigmatic Transporter himself as in the first movie is coolness personified. Brilliant Martial Arts expert as well here - there is a fight scene with a hose that has to be seen to be believed! The villains are typical comic book villains, all they are short is the maniac laugh, but they serve their purpose well enough. The plot is a bit flimsy, and nothing we've not seen before, but if you are going to pick holes, don't bother renting this film. If you want to sit down and escape for a while without taxing the brain, I'd recommend this!

Was the above review useful to you?

Jackie Chan movie without Jackie

Author: siderite from Romania
19 November 2005

Replace some of the Jackie Chan humor with driving and you have Transporter 2. Completely unrealistic in grandeur, super cool effects and fights in an implausible setting. So it's a complete no brainer. Nicely done, but nothing but action all around.

Jason Statham has some extra muscle and some new suits, Kate Nauta looks awesome, but in a cliché role of a psychotic killer, Alessandro Gassman has a completely secondary role, Matthew Modine also, Amber Valletta is the helpless mother.

There is really nothing more to say. Dull fun. I can also say that I've seen Transporter 1 yesterday and, while it is also completely unrealistic, it has more to do with the title and it is better done than the sequel.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 11 of 34: [Prev][6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history