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 8 of 34: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [Next]
Index 335 reviews in total 

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Don't Make a Sequel You Have No Intention to Invest In

1/10
Author: Linda from United States
16 November 2006

This sequel was awful. I really enjoyed Transporter I and was anticipating a second that would have been at least just as slick as its predecessor. What I found was a sloppy attempt to spurt out another film to make money. There were fight scenes where I realized there was no music. If I closed my eyes all I would hear would be clanging and sighs, sounds that could've just been done in a studio. The second film, I suppose tried to build more story and less action, but that took away from the appeal of the movie. The antagonists were unconvincing, borderline comical and were over the top. Statham should've turned down this offer. Unlike the first, it was made with no effort for coolness.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Awful, unbelievable action that takes it way too far!

2/10
Author: saci from United States
27 September 2005

I'm sure you've all heard of the old adage "dodging bullets". Well in this sequel to Transporter 1, the character Frank Martin (the Transporter) has taken it to the literal! Even Rambo was more believable, as we see Frank moving down a corridor literally stepping side to side to avoid bullets shot from only feet away! The movie is full of action that pushes the boundaries of believability way too far, further than I can remember any action movie doing for a long time, and leaves one leaving the theater feeling they have just seen one of the stupidest movies of the year. This movie was a major disappointment. Two thumbs all the way down!

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

This movie is an insult to the intelligence of anyone over 13

Author: (Navin-R-Johnson) from Atlanta, GA
11 September 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Like most of you, I've seen hundreds, perhaps thousands of movies in my life. Transporter 2 ranks among the worst. I've never felt more 'taken' after watching a movie. I struggle to write a review of Transporter 2 because of the additional time it forces me to spend thinking about this horrifying movie, and because it's quite hard to adequately describe in words how terrible this film is. But please know that it's not just me. OUR ENTIRE THEATER LAUGHED OUT LOUD at the ridiculousness of this movie at several points.

I'm quite surprised (and disturbed) that this movie currently has an average rating over 6 on IMDb.com *across age groups and genders*, and the fact that it continues to be a number one grossing film at the box office is simply shocking, as bad as this movie is. But this also says something about how it's possible for Hollywood to continue making so many terrible movies. Studios probably break-even on 9 out of 10 of their terrible films (which seem to make up the major of films in the American market), but it only takes one bad film to 'stick' in our more-is-better culture. And this film will make them hundreds of millions of dollars. This money is simply reinvested in more bad films, and the cycle continues.

Anyway, for me personally, I had *very* low expectations for Transporter 2 based on the previews. I only saw it because nothing else was playing (we got there late) and I actually had some hope for it because I really liked Luc Besson's 'The Professional'. Well, even my low expectations for Transporter 2 weren't met. I rated Transporter a "2" instead of "1" because the fight and chase scenes were somewhat entertaining, and they had the sense not to prolong the torture of the movie by turning it past about 1hr 30 min.

My particular complaints revolve around the mother's poor acting, laughably preposterous stunts and formula as overdone as what we're seeing with the release of 'The Man'. To give you a sense of the ridiculousness of the stunts in this film-- To dislodge a bomb stuck to the bottom of his car, the Transporter took a jump to rotate his car upside down just in time for the bomb to latch onto a hook suspended from a crane overhead. (There are many more such scenes.) A final slap-in-the-face comes toward the end of the film-- there was a short scene of a jet in distress; the jet was clearly a fake balsa wood model, and appeared to be nothing less than what you could buy at a dollar-store. Every other ingredient of this film is of equal and poor taste- the dialog, acting, plot, ...

So, why take the time to write a review of one of the worst movies I have ever seen? For one, I want to warn as many people as I can that this movie is much worse than its IMDb rating might currently suggest. Second, the fact that so many people are giving this 6/10 stars, across age groups and genders, is quite eye-opening and helps explain so many terrible movies are produced and so few good ones. Finally, I clearly needed an outlet for my disgust over this film.

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:

Tranporting Stuff!

1/10
Author: pumpkinshade from United States
11 January 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just when you thought you had all the bases of how to transport stuff already covered, this movie comes along!

I'll admit it: when I saw the trailer, I actually thought it was a cheap UPS commercial, but, boy was I wrong!

UPS wishes this could be they're infomercial!

I mean, I thought I knew all the different ways to transport things! And, geez!, the stuff he ends up transporting!

From one place to another!

I don't want to ruin it for you, but... YEAH! He gets it there!

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Let down after the first movie

1/10
Author: hob63 from United Kingdom
8 September 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The first transporter I though on the whole was a tidy film, fast and the furious meets James Bond, but with a plot. The second film is not so, based loosely on "the transporter" theme, the first sign of a slipping plot is when the hero turns up in his car. The original transporter had I believe a sleek black m5 bmw, a very respectable car with performance to match. The sequel see's our hero turn up in a black audi, automatic. Not really classed as a drivers car, he may as well had parking sensors. The loose plot is predictable and is based around mission impossible 2. The effects unlike the original are mostly cgi'd and are poorly done at that, not that the effects don't look real but are impossible, for example, how would you get the bomb off the bottom of your car? How about flipping the car mid air, getting the hook of a crane to scrape the underside, removing the bomb, before rotating back for a nice safe landing? Or how about jumping through a re-enforced barrier at the top of a building, continuing to jump to the next "car park" landing on another level (lower) only about 1cm from the edge almost falling off. Close to the ending is the funniest example, you have to see it to believe what a plane can do, and the plane crashes into the water, tail broken off, but yet there manages to be a nice air pocket for our actor and evil enemy to have another fight, despite a huge hole, where the end of the plane was. In summary it truly defines moder hollywoods inability to make films and also continues the trend that sequels must be bigger louder etc etc (and also worse than the original). Still the upside is that the original transporter may be appearing on the TV soon.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

just terrible

1/10
Author: gdistunt2 from Australia
8 October 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is such a let down compared to the first one. I really liked the first one and when we had staff screening for the second one I hoped for it to be even better. Boy was I off the mark. It is too unbelievable in half the scenes. When he jumps from one building to the other, drives his car over an alley way driving along the edges of the building?? Like come on, how did he get down from there afterwards?? Just pathetic. Although the fighting scenes are good, the rest of it is just a complete waste of time. The fighting scene in the plane was just so out there it was stupid. Overall I gave this one. The fighting scenes do not improve on how crap I found this movie to be.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Insultingly bad.

3/10
Author: Liberty from California, USA
17 January 2006

Insultingly bad. In other words, the story/plot is so ridiculously bad (when not absent entirely), it is actually an insult to you, the viewer. The writers of this movie apparently think that if you like action movies, you must be an idiot. I generally like Luc Besson, and I liked the first Transporter, so I don't understand how this movie got to be so stupid. The writers and producers of this and similar films would be advised to note that the best action films have suspenseful plots that at least pretend to be based in reality. The more ridiculous you make your stunts (human or mechanical), the harder it is to enjoy them. Even with some good effects and a nice villainess, this movie is a complete waste of time for anyone looking for at least some pretension of reality in their movies.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

This movie isn't even for Kids...

1/10
Author: emiliosparks1982 from United States
14 January 2006

Listen, I was able to endure the First one. And after all the hype of the commercials and all I decided to buy it. The first time I watched it I fell asleep on it. I thought I was just tired. So I watched it again. The scenes in this movie are so hard to comprehend. That even if this movie was a cartoon I would be pi**ed off by the fact that someone wants to insult my intelligence and have me believe the CGI/Action scenes in this film. Don't get me wrong the concept of some movies are to leave your inhibitions behind and just enjoy. But not your intelligence. I was extremely insulted. But it did make me laugh, because it's not a comedy; that's the funny part about it. It just came out on DVD and I am contemplating throwing it out. If you want a great laugh, I suggest the movie. But if you want a good action movie, good plot. Stray away at all costs! E.Sparks

Was the above review useful to you?

Just fun enough to see (if your forgiving).

5/10
Author: Logic404 from Alberta, Canada
11 June 2006

I know this film has a lot of impossible stunts and actions but still I found it endearing enough to see it through.

I liked the first one (gave it a 7) and this is more of the same only more unbelievable and crazy.

I think for the inevitable Part 3 they should tone it back down closer to the first one's energy and make it less like a cartoon.

Overall with all that is wrong with this film I still managed to enjoy it. I can easily see why people don't like this film but I think you have to be in a certain frame of mind or have some tolerance to enjoy this.

The first film is worth a buy but this is worth seeing once for sure. Only buy if you must have every movie in a series and you already own the first one.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 8 of 34: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [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