IMDb > Transporter 2 (2005) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Transporter 2
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
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
Promotional
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 6 of 34: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [Next]
Index 332 reviews in total 

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

crayon actioneering

2/10
Author: Autlan
22 February 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was created, yet I am nothing.

I tell a story, yet I have no substance, continuity or suspense.

Within my domain even sounds are visual.

'What am I?'

'Tramsforter 2,' chirps the annoyingly quirky kid.

'Bingo! You lose!'

I'll start by saying it's a good thing driver doesn't appear anywhere in the title, because driving is only a third of what Frank Martin does. He's a pilot who doesn't need an aeroplane. He's an acrobat in a graviton suit. He's a martial artist with an overactive imagination. He's even a driver in a vehicle without wheels.

Starting to sound like an entertaining B Movie, right? Well, no. You won't find any 'I tried my best, but I guess I just suck' here. It's like someone hand picked the members of Team Fail. A Cinematographer trying to emulate Technicolour; a minimalist special effects troupe, led by an eccentric who never considered life outside his bouncy castle; a truant script girl; a plot jerked along by a piece of toilet paper, snared to King Kong's shoe; and an overactive product placement supervisor.

So what is the story? A well-manicured, ugly South American is hired by some of his countrymen, who are outraged that the Law is eating into their profits. They hatch a brilliant plan involving a Soviet expatriate Biochemist, a green biological warfare agent, a purple antidote, a mercenary, a gun toting lingerie model and the ruling body of the Drug Enforcement Administration. So some bureaucrat gets his coffee poisoned? No. The public are poisoned and the DEA is held to ransom, while a mother-load of cocaine is pushed over the border? Nope.

It's hard to tell if the plot is supposed to remain a mystery until half-way, or if it's just delivered poorly, so I'll reveal it carefully, without any pointers as to the obvious outcome.

POSSIBLE SPOILER POSSIBLE SPOILER POSSIBLE SPOILER POSSIBLE SPOILER

The son of a DEA big shot is kidnapped against the best efforts of his school-run driver Mr. Martin, infected with a virus and then bizarrely returned without any of the millions of ransom money being taken. The kid infects his father, mother, driver and half the Miami police department with this highly contagious airborne pathogen. The ugly South American transfuses himself in about ten minutes with what appears to be the only half litre of antidote in existence and tries really hard not to go to the bathroom.

Seems to me an extremely convoluted delivery method and a ridiculous insurance policy, but then I'm not a French screenwriter.

I'd advise everyone to avoid this and watch the original instead. To those people who are now chanting, "Suspend your belief," I say, okay, I've got a great investment opportunity for you. You give me your cake, I'll eat it, and then all you have to do is give it time to mature. Trust me. It's going to pay off!

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Half a B-Movie

Author: Bob Smith from New York
9 September 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am a big fan of Luc Besson (Fifth Element, Leon) and Jason Statham (Snatch, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels), but this movie was a big disappointment.

The movie lasts 75 minutes, very short by any standards. The number of incongruities in this one really made me wonder whether anyone had read the script, and though I don't usually do this, here is a short listing:

1- school bell rings, kids are all out right away, screaming "yeah!". 2- professional driver (Statham) driving an automatic 3- why kidnap the kid to get to the father, when all you had to do is get someone to sneeze on the father? 4- plane crashes, all one has to do to stay alive is dive towards the back of the plane 5- Gassman is beaten up enough that he does not try to escape but alive enough that we can get the antidote to the masses 6- police boats, cruisers, everyone somehow knew where plane would crash and all had a welcome to the ocean party for the plane 7- somehow a huge vial of antidote was needed to save just one person, but draining Gassman will give enough antidote for the thousands infected 8- people receiving antidote from Gassman, are immune to his perhaps conflicting blood type.

I mean come on!!! The actors are actually all pretty good in this one, and there is a lot of action pretty-well packed in the 75 minutes, but a DVD rental or drugged up matinée is the best I can recommend for this one considering how annoying the story's nonsense is.

Jason Statham (Frank Martin) 7/10

Alessandro Gassman (Gianni) 5/10

Amber Valletta (Audrey Billings) 8/10

Kate Nauta (Lola) 6/10

Matthew Modine (Mr. Billings) 7/10

Luc Besson 0/10

Robert Mark Kamen 0/10

Louis Leterrier 4/10

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Great Movie - If You're 7 Years Old

2/10
Author: dgz78 (dgz78@yahoo.com) from United States
1 March 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Crappy plot - bad guys and a bad virus; bad CGI, I mean really bad; bad acting - I've built tree houses out of 2 x 4s less wooden than some of these performances.

I like good action movies but they have to at least pretend not to insult my intelligence. This movie makes Gilligans Island look like Masterpiece Theater.

Item 1 - Jason Statham dives out of a 2 or 3 story building, landing on the top of a car with enough force to crumple in the roof. He rolls off like he's getting out of bed in the morning. I thought Michael Douglas getting hit by a car and not getting scratched in Basic Instinct was the worst non-injury scene ever but this one topped it.

Item 2 - He drives a car through a railing in a parking garage, across a street and fits perfectly into another parking garage. The physics are ridiculous. The motorcycle jump into the pool of True Lies was just as impossible but at least in that one the driver could see where he was going.

Item 3 - He goes from a car into the wheel well of an airplane as its taking off and then just pops up into a closet. This was unbelievable in so many ways my mind went numb.

Item 4 - The plane goes into a stall and begins a free fall to the ocean. Jason Statham and the bad guy fight like they are standing on the 50 yard line of the Rose Bowl instead of, oh I don't know, being affected by the law of gravity.

And don't get me started about the fight scenes. He takes on 10 bad guys at once, all of whom are nice to attack him one at a time. When he doesn't have a gun, hey, what do you know, neither do the bad guys. And when they have a gun, they don't shoot him.

Katie Nauta plays a bad villianess. I mean, her character is not only bad, she really is a bad actress. And the evil mastermind is even worse.

Never do you think Frank is in real trouble and that it won't end on a happy note. Most sequels are not as good as the original but this one makes Caddyshack II look as good as the original Caddyshack.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

yeah....

8/10
Author: The_Dinosaur from Australia
23 August 2006

This film is not a thriller or crime as it says in the summery. It is a pure action movie. The acting is not great but lets face it it is a action film and they did not want to waste the budget on 40 takes of the lead face telling billy it is okay. The action is done incredibly well. It is not overdone most of the time. It is over three quarters action. I myself am not a fan of action films and so watching it to begin with was more of a chore. When it was over though i was entertained, it took an hour and a half out of my life but i don't mind. Friends who like action movies loved it and they were the films target audience. Most action movies these days are just stupid but this was less stupid. Not stupid enough to draw attention to its own stupidity at least. The characters are easily identified as good or bad characters. There is not anything wrong with this film for what it is, which is a action film and that is all. For a action film it was made perfectly and did not make a attempt to cross genres which many action films do these days, ie; films try to put in mystery or crime and just make a bad film. this is what it is and cannot be criticized by somebody who doesn't know about action films.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

paint your bathroom instead...

1/10
Author: mr-syfx from United Kingdom
14 September 2005

OK, i watched the first transporter on DVD a few days ago, after seeing this i feel cheated out of my money, the first film was a little far fetched, but it worked in its own typical action movie way, #2 how ever is absolute garbage, how any man regardless of army special forces training can dislodge a bomb by 'BARREL ROLLING' a car up a pipe ramp onto a crane hook and successfully land on all 4 wheels is beyond me, i doubt god himself could do it.

next the car chase with the psycho hooker with the Uzi's leaping a 100 feet into a half built tower block, and ass usually, stopping 5cm before the edge (typical) and then a helicopter being blown up by a few Uzi rounds is to put it mildly, very far fetched... it would been better if he had decided to elbow the crazy lady in the face a few times, knock her groggy, open her door and shove her out. end of movie, what a way to spend my £6 on a ticket :D this film is frankly total garbage, its like Kenan and Kel on acid with a fire arms permit, i SERIOUSLY hope that he was paid well for this rubbish.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 21 people found the following review useful:

Might end up on the worst of 2005 list

1/10
Author: Greg (gregmoroberts@yahoo.com) from Oakville, Ontario
11 September 2005

Ranking right up their with the audiences yearning for another sequel to the Bad Boys franchise, Jason Statham is back in the very cleverly titled Transporter 2.

Now for those of you who can hardly remember the first film, don't worry. Both it and now its sequel are tailored so that you can waste time inside an air conditioned theatre and forget almost everything you've seen just hours after the lights come back to full illumination.

This time round script writers Robert Kamen and Luc Beeson decided that it would be easier to just copy the premise of last year's Man on Fire and throw our hero Frank Martin (Statham) into the Denzel Washington role. That means there will be a kidnapping of a small child that was under the protection of our hero and there will also be plenty of mindless violence as he searches for the youngin he feels responsible for losing.

Now I happen to like Jason Statham. I liked him in Snatch, The Italian Job and even Cellular. He has a charisma to him. A coolness this side of Steve McQueen. Problem is he keeps picking up scripts that even John Saxon would have turned down.

Transporter 2 has nothing going for it outside of Statham's presence. It's filled with enough bad stunts and even worse cartoonish villains that even the most outlandish of James Bond films would be embarrassed to utilize such farce. Take for instance the scene where Frank must flip his car through the air to hit a suspended wire in hopes of tearing from the autos underbelly a very well hidden car bomb. I watched this scene uneasy in my theatre seat and would not have been surprised if Wyle E. Coyote was shown in the background huffing and puffing as his plan was foiled.

Things do go boom and Jackie Chan would probably be impressed with the fighting contests in particular one clever scene where Frank utilizes a fire hose to engage the baddies. But amongst the few half decent moments there are countless mindless scenes and plot lines that include a virus antidote being stored inside the bad guy (never seen that before!) and a completely implausible ending that takes place inside a private jet.

Transporter 2 may not be the worst movie of the year, but I highly doubt that by the time I get to the end of the calendar for 2005 that this clunker doesn't end up on a few Bottom 10 lists.

Recommendation: Stay away at all costs. It will be on TBS four times a week starting in 2006.

www.gregsrants.com

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 69 people found the following review useful:

The BEST WORST movie ever!

6/10
Author: borixxx from Canada
29 January 2006

Wow... just wow... I remember watching the first Transporter movie. I never had high expectations, and I was neither surprised or disappointed. Same thing went with this action flick. It was so bad that it was good! It did not have any real storyline, it was amazingly corny, and so badly directed that it was one of the most entertaining films in movie history! Definitely worth a watch, it seriously should also be categorized as comedy.... The only problem I had with the movie was... "Where the hell did the hot Asian chick from the first movie go? It's as if he dumped her and never spoke of her again...."

Either way, give the movie a shot, you will definitely enjoy it...

6/10

Was the above review useful to you?

Diverted but yet better than the first

6/10
Author: Nishant Srivastava from india
30 July 2012

The duo of Luc Besson & Robert Mark Kamen does the magic again to keep up their reputation. Much better screen play then the first part but a bit diverted, how? i will discuss as i go further. This movie is a tribute to Michael Stone (director of photography for this flick) , who died in an accident. We will surely miss him & remember him with his implacable Cinematography in flicks like Pearl Harbor & Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines.

Movie starts as Frank has relocated to Miami, Florida where as a favor to a friend, Frank is driving for the wealthy Billings family . He unexpectedly bonded with junior Jack Billings age 6, who he drives to school. But when Jack is kidnapped, Frank must use his battle- tested combat skills to retrieve the boy. At first it looks like a kidnapping for ransom but it turns out much bigger conspiracy.

With better screenplay & much better villain(Alessandro Gassman) who fights till the end, which is so real to watch. Jason Statham shows his skills in performing stunts. That fighting sequence with water melons as boxing gloves was so creative & hilarious at the same time & the sprint on the roof was amazing.The leading lady Amber Valletta as Audrey Billings was much more powerful in her performance then Qi Shu in the first part.

Many negative aspects again haunt this sequel. To start with main theme, all that illegal transportation ,with those rules in the first part gone .Fighting sequence with Lola(Kate Nauta) should have been more thrilling, it was very short.The stunt where frank removes the bomb plotted under his car by flying through the ship anchor was so unrealistic. Matthew Modine (Jefferson Billings)performing so weak in this flick with much better screenplay,this flick again lands 6/10 in my list with so many loopholes , i recommend it only for entertainment.If u want to watch some thing which is more meaningful better watch something else.

Was the above review useful to you?

A good film, but unrealistic

8/10
Author: Pjtaylor-96-138044 from United Kingdom
26 January 2012

So i watched transporter 2 yesterday, and let me say, its one of the most ridiculous films i've seen. But that's not to say it's bad. It's good fun and has some great fight scenes. It's under 1hr 30mins, so its short. But the film offers some good moments. I liked the far fetched car chases and action scenes. It provided a break from the many realistic action films out there. And that's what this film is. Pure action. From beginning to end, it provides thrills. This is one of the better action films i've seen, but by far not the best. But this is a good film to watch when you have a spare hour or two. I would recommend this.

Was the above review useful to you?

More of the same but that was a winning formula so what the hell

Author: patrick powell from United Kingdom
19 November 2011

If you saw the first Transporter, this is for you. If you did but didn't like it, give this a miss. In my view the first Transporter had the virtue of being a cut above other films vying to be top dog in the car chase, martial arts, cool hero blah-di-blah slot and as such it did the business, thanks mainly to high production values and Jason Statham, who does only one thing really, but does it very well indeed. If anything Transporter II improves on the original. At least it has a plot of sorts - which is, however, total ludicrous, but a plot it is - and there is some attempt at characterisation, what with Jason Statham displaying that he connects with kids. Then there are enough fights and car chases to last your average teen dude a lifetime, so given that both films have no pretensions whatsoever and simply want to entertain you, it has to be rated another success.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 6 of 34: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [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