Reviews & Ratings for
The Courier More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 3:

[1] [2] [3]

Index

22 reviews in total

---

40 out of 43 people found the following review useful:
There's No There, There, 29 March 2012

Author: messiercat from Oregon

This movie certainly had style. It seemed to be directed well. Editing was crisp enough and on the surface it looked pretty interesting. Cinematography was basically very good and quite inventive with a lot of action. But the whole package was a mile wide and an inch deep because the screenplay was a muddled mess, the storyline was laughably inane. Mickey Rourke and Lili Taylor, two actors who can really deliver the goods, were incredibly wasted and about a third of the way into it you realized it was going to be all style and no substance, and that was when I just stopped caring. A clue as to what happened comes when the credits roll. Producers, co producers, associate producers, executive producers galore. Too many cooks in the kitchen destroyed the soup. I've never quite seen a movie like this that had promise and so much energy put into production, but ultimately fell flat on it's face. The first movie that I've seen where I'm completely at a loss as how to rate.

---

20 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
A wasted opportunity, 5 April 2012

Author: bastiaan0740 from Belgium

As a fan of 'the transporter', I looked forward to this, because it's 'the courier'...which means basically the same. Only this time, not so much with cars. The movie started out great, getting to know the courier and his type of work, just finishing a job. He is then forced into his next job, which is a bit out of his comfort zone - making an unknown delivery to an unfindable crime lord - played by Mickey Rourke! The premise allowed for so much, I was genuinely excited by now - but I soon got disappointed. As a whole, the delivered briefcase, the job, and the impossible plot made no sense. All the obligatory elements in the movie viewed apart - the sidekicks, the stolen airplane, the torture, the assassins, the bugged apartments, the murders, the arrests, anagrams, and much more... - had a feel of pointlessness and irrelevance to it, as if someone just grabbed some spy story ingredients and threw them together. Our courier stumbles through his unlikely adventure to complete his job and gets, true to the movie, an ironic surprise ending that made no sense. A total let-down.

---

18 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
Utter Garbage, 24 March 2012

Author: Raydio from Deloraine, Tasmania

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What is truly amazing to me is that in these days of post-GFC fiscal austerity, a film such as this can attract funding. Seriously, either the tax write-offs must be very attractive, or their are some very wealthy individuals who are really desperate to be able to say, "I'm making a movie" to their friends.

"The Courier" has so many flaws it's hard to know where to begin. Firstly, the story itself is woeful. A painful mishmash of assassins, FBI agents, Elvis-impersonating arch villains, and the obligatory female tag-along love interest. Add to that the father- figure, who like Huggy-bear, seems to know everything and everyone that's happening on the street and, well you're starting to get the picture.

It's as if the writers were working from a "Scriptwriting for Dummies" book.

Then there were the many obvious technical mistakes, such as a woman hostage falling from a great height while bound only by her wrists and seemingly not suffering any ill effects when the rope breaks her fall. I would have thought having both shoulders dislocated would result in at least a mild discomfort! Then there was the protagonist with a clearly unloaded revolver which fires bullets in the next seen. Perhaps the two killers who captured and tortured him, loaded it while he was unconscious in the bathtub? What about the ease with which the hero and his girl accomplice borrow an aircraft, not once, but twice, and land it in St.Louis and Las Vegas. Did they even bother to lodge a flight plan?

I was especially amused by the hero's uncanny ability to instantly hack any computer to instantly locate just the info he was looking for. I mean why bother being a high- risk delivery man, which is clearly not paying off too well for him, when he could make a ton of money working for Google?

I could go on, but I feel the less said about this movie the better. Suffice to say that of 968 films I've rated on IMDb, "The Courier" ranks as number 3 in my all-time worst list, only bested by "Little Nicky", and "2001, A Space Travesty".

Regrettably one or two decent actors took part in this disaster, so it's clear that work is hard to come by in tinsel town these days. Their valiant efforts are the only reason this film didn't get 1 star. Definitely one to avoid. 2/10

---

22 out of 32 people found the following review useful:
So full of cliché, just hard to get why they keep doing it..., 24 March 2012

Author: jon747

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well, let me start by saying, the production is good. The camera work is perfect, the scenery shots are great.

That being said...

The movie starts with our hero, the courier, living in a dump (after being paid thousands of dollars for every job, and basically being rich), using speed-glue to mend a huge swelling cut in his arm.

I guess they want us to see how he hates his life. However, the next scene shows how he has people he loves and wants to protect. So it makes you wonder if either: A) He's a complete idiot... or B) He's so macho that he won't even use iodine and a bandage.

Yes, a terribly bad start.

When he asks around about how to find the bad guy, people answer him with "You don't want to find him" and "What he touches, dies, he is the hand of death" kind of answers, that just want you want to puke.

That bad guy, whose nickname makes you want to roll on the floor laughing... Is only showed from behind, in the shadows. He is said to have died and come back from the grave. The way they describe it in the movie. At first you're not sure if its going to turn into some black comedy... Its only when you find out they're trying to make it realistic, that you realize how bad this movie is gonna be.

Problem is, it gets worse. If you really have nothing else to watch, then go ahead and find out for yourself. But you're much better off picking some random B-grade 80s action movie and at least having half a good time.

So to sum it up... Full of cliché doesn't even describe this movie, literally sounds like a 12 years old kid addicted to Schwarzenegger movies wrote the script.

---

32 out of 58 people found the following review useful:
I liked it. And it doesn't have Tom Cruise., 24 March 2012

Author: diggus doggus from United Kingdom

OK this film isn't bad.

The first reason why it's disappointing it's because - just like Black Death (2010) - it tries to "keep it real" way too much .. films need escapism, to a point, and here it almost seems that they decided to go full speed for the not-Hollywood look.

Now i'm not one to defend Hollywood, but what kills this film is that the direction is poor; it fails to capitalise on the realism, instead giving me a film that looks like an amateur production. Some of the shots are truly amateurish, and often the camera-work fails to make a scene interesting.

Having said that, The Courier isn't half bad, there are plenty things i liked in it, from the fight moves to the casting (the lead is a bit wooden, the girl fits the part OK~ish, the detective is perfect), and the whole production is pretty decent.

I also don't subscribe to the whole "it's full of cliché'" thing; if anything, it tries to avoid clichés in a film genre where everything has already been done.

All in all, i can say that it's an interesting film to watch, even though i get the feeling the director has a background in TV - seriously, you (whomever you are) truly murdered what could have been an interesting flick.

So, after all considerations, i give The Courier a decent 6/10 - better than MI3, and no Tom Cruise.

---

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Atrocious wreck that redefines drivel, why oh why!!, 16 February 2013

Author: Robert W. (Robert_duder@hotmail.com) from Ontario, Canada

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The Courier actually read really well. I had it at the top of my weekly movie viewing and I happen to really, really, like Jeffrey Dean Morgan although the poor guy has such a hard time finding his way in Hollywood and this won't help him one little bit. This is simply trash. It is horrendously written, directed, edited, acted...you name it, they destroyed it. They try to slap together a few ingredients from other like minded action films and things that someone "thought" would look cool on screen but its cheesy, incredibly cheesy, with terrible dialogue and a story that makes absolutely no sense. Who is chasing who? Why are they chasing him? Who hired who? And most importantly who cares? I knew what I was in for right from the first scene (which seems to have very very little bearing on the actual story) but is blatantly done on a green screen so much so that it looks hokey. And then the very first fist fight is so poorly edited that its like watching two high school kids do prat falls and "pretend" fight. There are some genuinely violent scenes, the shoot outs are actually not bad, and some of the cinematography and locations settings are actually pretty good but it doesn't even come close to saving this absolute garbage-fest.

I love Jeffrey Dean Morgan! Why can't this guy get a break! I will say that I think he really does try his utter best with what he is given which is virtually nothing. He plays a brooding, angry, violent courier of sorts who has been essentially set up although the reasons are extremely convoluted and confusing. Without him I never ever would have bothered to sit through more than fifteen minutes of this. Why Hollywood keeps casting Til Schweiger I will never understand. His style of acting is better suited for porn films because the guy is just atrocious. He tries to be serious but everything he does comes across as completely campy. He is as expected in this, awful, as an FBI agent who seems almost cartoonish in his performance. But cartoonish is par for the course in this film as you have a Dr. Claw type villain named "Evil Sivel," (seriously? That's an anagram from Lives just to ruin the surprise for everyone...believe me I'm doing you a favour,) whom they show only in shadows and from behind to mask his identity when its obvious from voice, profile and the cover of the movie that its Mickey Rourke. He's awful and pointless because they under use him and make him into a cartoon character. Miguel Ferrer and Lili Taylor are straight from Rocky and Bullwinkle playing bumbling sidekicks that are supposed to be terrifying. I like both these actors and its a real shame they are wasted on this. And finally Josie Ho is atrocious as some sort of sidekick romantic interest who is literally painful to watch act. She is awful and the chemistry between her and Morgan is completely nil and awkward.

As if the film couldn't get any worse they tack on this ridiculous non-sensical twist ending that is a complete laugh and is really the perfect lid on this garbage pail movie. As the story goes, the cast jumped on board simply because Hany Abu-Assad was directing and I'd love to know...why?! I've never heard of this guy before or any of his projects and if this is the quality of his film making then God help them all. There is absolutely NO WAY the budget on this film was 15 million dollars. There is nothing that would indicate any significant budget was put into anything and furthermore anyone that would give this script 15 million dollars needs their head examined. There is nothing worthy of your attention in this film. I sat through it out of respect for Jeffrey Dean Morgan but I won't ever lay eyes on this again. It was an undeniable atrocity. Avoid this at all costs!! 2/10

---

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Started mediocre, and all downhill from there - vague spoilers, 29 March 2012

Author: Matteus72 from Ottawa, Canada

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Like a previous review mentioned, this movie actually started out fairly promising. The first 20-30 minutes were exciting enough to stay interested, despite the fact that you've seen the clichéd premise before. I have no problem with clichéd premises provided that it's done well with a few original sequences and even partially compelling characters. Though it seemed to be a lower budget and weaker scripted version of The Transporter, at least it had some credibility with favored actors like Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Til Schweiger, not to mention Mickey Rourke, and the action was fast paced and fun.

Unfortunately, by the time Micky Rourke even shows the back of his head, I no longer cared. After 30 minutes, the movie starts to fall apart. A character or two whom you've never seen before or even heard referenced start showing up, and are ascribed importance for no fathomable reason. The action sequences, though not terrible, no longer hold any weight due to the confusion caused by the messy script, and plot holes and character inconsistencies abound.

Til Schweiger is totally wasted here, and Mickey Rourke is practically non-existent, though I can't say I blame him. Josie Ho as the love interest(what?) seemed very miscast, and I found her hairstyle distractingly ugly. At the end of the movie they try to wrap up all the many confusing loose ends with what was no doubt supposed to be a shocking reveal-all diatribe prior to the "boss battle", but I couldn't have cared less even if I wanted to understand. I found myself getting angrier that I was still watching this mess as the minutes rolled by.

The end could not have been worse. It's like it ended in the middle of a scene, though it's hard to say. I was busy watching condensation roll down my glass by this time, then was startled back to the screen by the movie ending abruptly.

So all in all, not good. I give it a 3 for the first 30 minutes, and for Jeffrey Dean Morgan who did his best with what he had.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Yeah, I Watched This Movie, 1 January 2013

Author: Bob_the_Hobo

A Courier (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is tasked with delivering a package to a crime boss (Mickey Rourke) thought to be dead. Hilarity ensues.

"Yeah, I Watched This Movie". That's the attitude I had when "The Courier" reached its conclusion. We have seen this type of movie before, often, and we have had more fun at the expense of a larger budget. But like so many other movies nowadays, we feel a bit let-down when the screen goes black.

Jeffrey Dean Morgan, an exceptional actor who never seems to be the right fit for his character, does the best he can with what he has. His character wakes up in a crummy apartment infested with mice. He uses superglue to fix a nasty cut. Yet despite all this self-loathing, he has good friends and family that he cares about. What's with that?

The female lead is bizarre. Her hairstyle makes it appear as if her follicles are desperate to escape from her scalp, and considering how bad it is, I can't blame it for trying. She also has an unnecessary dubbing-over occasionally when she speaks. Perhaps they shot the film and forgot to record her at places.

Mickey Rourke and Til Schweiger, the other draws on the cover, are under and wrongly used. Rourke's head is only visible for the first half of his scenes, the latter's introduction is corny. Schweiger's bodyguard hasn't ever seemed to have used a fire arm before, let alone in a movie.

An odd assortment of has-beens and ne'er-do-wells fill out the rest of the cast. Lily Taylor and Miguel Ferrer play a Team Rocket type pair of villains who never say much besides grunts and gunshots. Mark Margolis, the definitive "that guy!" of actors plays Morgan's dad, or something. I'll give you one guess as to his fate.

"Yeah, I Watched That Movie." That is what I will say to people when they ask if I have seen "The Courier". And it might take me a minute to remember exactly what they are talking about.

---

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Watchable, 24 May 2012

Author: dileo67 from Germany

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As a Rourke Fan (especially Angel Heart !!!) i found the new film from Director Hany Abu Assad quite amusing. Jeffrey Dean Morgan was refreshing and most sympathetic, while our Star Til Schweiger was not as bad as i usually remember him. Most impressing were a couple of good action sequences ( hard core torture with Miguel Ferrer) and the most hilarious scene I've ever seen Mickey in...him doing a rather short Elvis impersonation...as I said: hilarious.

The Storyline lacks here and there an it does indeed remind one of "The Transporter" (I heard they had this movie already a couple of years in the pipeline, hence the "old" story) and "Angel Heart". On the other Hand it is strict and forward,no big misleading story lines, which of course means that you know rather quickly, where the train is going...unless you have never seen Angel Heart, that is.

One thing stroke me odd though, the End is a bit ...let's say unusual, or maybe I did not understand the film at all ;-)

Do not expect a great action thriller - because it is not ! Do not expect anything and I bet you'll be surprised.

---

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Nothing at all like the Transporter. Comparing the two is like comparing Armageddon to Deep Impact, very different. I say B-, 21 August 2012
Author: Tony Heck from United States

"Walking out the door doesn't mean it's over." The courier (Morgan) is the best at what he does. If you have a package that needs to be delivered he will ask no questions and get it there on time. When he is approached with a deal, deliver a briefcase and get a million dollars, but if he fails his family will be killed. Realizing he has no choice he accepts. When he finds out the recipient is a feared killer and people he meets are out to get him the job becomes much more then a simple delivery. I know what you thinking...this sounds like the "Transporter" and you couldn't be more wrong. The courier in this movie doesn't drive everywhere, he runs too. He doesn't find a girl in the trunk of a car, he just finds her. He doesn't try and deliver a briefcase to someone but ends up being a target himself....wait...never mind. This is not a 100% copy but it's close. I like Morgan but Statham is really the only one who should do this role. If you liked the "Transporter" then you will probably like this one. The ending did make it a little better and the second half was entertaining but this is pretty much "Transporter 4". Overall, not bad but they should have called it what it is. I give it a B-.

---

---

Page 1 of 3:

[1] [2] [3]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Ratings	External reviews	Parents Guide
Official site	Main details	Your user reviews
Your vote history