IMDb > Abduction (2011/I) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Abduction
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
Abduction More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 4 of 16: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [Next]
Index 157 reviews in total 

5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

never judge a book by its cover

1/10
Author: miketaylor2007 from Canada
20 January 2012

The trailer for this movie looked interesting. I had high expectations for Abduction because in the trailer it looked like it had a lot of action and suspense. This in my opinion is the worst thriller ever created and I would feel ashamed to produce or direct such trash. The story was not put together well at all and Taylor Lautner's acting abilities are laughable throughout the entire film. I just came to realize this kid can't act at all and he should never have a staring role in anything. I absolutely hate the movie. What is next Hollywood? Bieber to star in Commando 2?! I believe Abuction is not even worth a one time watch and I hate the fact that they would get somebody as untalented as Taylor Lautner to star in it. I guess even if this movie had Van Damme it was already doomed anyway.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Bad, bad, bad, then worse

1/10
Author: vlcal61 from United States
27 January 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The movie takes place in Pennsylvania. I live in Pennsylvania. At the start of the movie the friends talk about the Pirates opening game, making it early April. It's not warm enough for pools to be open. Trees are just starting to bloom in April, the leaves would have never been that big, or dark in the beginning of April. High school wrestling would have ended by the beginning of March. And that's just the beginning of the inconsistencies. Everybody seems to find where everyone else is, and get there awfully fast. I know if I wanted to find someone, putting them on a missing children web site is the way to go. They're in Pa, they're in VA, they're in PA, and everybody knows where they are. And the bad guys never shoot when they should because they're too busy talking. I understand it's a plot device to allow the good guy time to get there and be a hero, but it's just soooo lame. The whole thing was just do lame. And the final nail in the it's really a lame movie coffin is that my husband liked it. He likes the worst movies.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

All round terrible.

Author: Troy_Campbell from Sydney, Australia
6 October 2011

I'll admit it, I thought the trailer for this action-thriller looked pretty good and, despite it being a Taylor Lautner vehicle, was quietly excited about seeing it. Well why shouldn't I have been? It stars legendary thespians Sigourney Weaver and Alfred Molina, as well as respected actors Jason Isaacs and Maria Bello. And the close quarters combat looked appealing too. I figured it couldn't be too bad. I was wrong. Way wrong. One of the worse blockbusters to grace our cinemas in recent times, Abduction demonstrates just how poor a film can be when those involved are only there for the money. The aforementioned veteran cast are positively woeful, John Singleton's direction is stilted and lead star Lautner (you may know him as Jacob from Twilight) has a long way to go before he will make a decent headliner. With crappy special effects and a forgettable soundtrack, this is all round terrible.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Don't Even Bother Waiting For The DVD

Author: Sriram Rengachari from Singapore
29 September 2011

We've heard comparisons between Taylor Lautner and Matt Damon, which is frankly an insult to the latter.

Lautner may be a staple in the action genre in years to come but right now, the comparisons are premature. His performance is stoic at times, which is a problem that permeates through the rest of the cast. None of them except Lily Colins provide a convincing performance, which says a lot because the young actress isn't any good herself.

I won't even bother typing a synopsis here because you probably won't understand the film even after the end credits start rolling. The storyline is all over the place. The directing is terrible. The camera angles confuse you on many occasions.

The movie is riddled with scenes and sequences that seem to be ripped off other well known films like Death Proof, Disturbia and maybe even the Bourne series.

I felt like the movie came across unintentionally as a satire but I assure you the movie is a serious action flick that just fails to be... serious.

I really don't know what else to say apart from "this movie sucks!"

Yes, I used a cliché line to review a movie. But Abduction doesn't merit any further analysis. How it even got shown on the big screen is beyond me.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

Awful... Abysmal... so bad it was funny

2/10
Author: crazybilby from Australia
30 September 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I couldn't help but laugh at how poorly done this film was. Taylor Lautner, aka one of the worst actors of our time has really tried not at all to change that reputation...

He has managed to take his stilted, generic, or just downright awful dialogue and deliver just as you'd expect: bland, uninteresting, and pretty unemotional (his face is wet with tears, but his voice says "what do you mean I'm meant to change inflection and tone?") His performance unfortunately doesn't stand out from the veteran actors around him seem to be amiss as to how to turn around their dialogue and lack of character depth into something salvageable.

There's no amazing twists or turns, no big surprises. The plot goes along just as you'd expect it, unless you were expecting imagination. I kept laughing at Lautner's bad delivery, at the obvious clichés or stupid plot devices. It gives its twists away quite deliberately leaving nothing for the end but a poor attempt at a tear jerking introduction of Nathan's father. Some things don't even make sense, like how Nathan keeps travelling - as he's on the run, he obviously is going to try and get out of the city right? - but he can conveniently call his best friend to come meet up with him somewhere to give him things (this happens more than once in less than 24 hours. Where did he run to? Down the street?) Thank goodness the CIA didn't think to tap his friend's phone!

The entire movie seems to reek of an uninspired first draft.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

A movie that's as badly directed as it is acted.

3/10
Author: NIck Bassett (nickbassett1981@hotmail.com) from Bournemouth, UK
29 September 2011

Lautner plays Nathan, a seventeen year old guy who seems to live two separate lives. He is the popular adrenaline-seeking kid who rides to school on car bonnets, gets drunk at house parties, and has unspoken feelings for the girl next door, Karen - overacted here by Lily Collin. He's basically Mr 90210, with less cash.

But then there is the other side to Nathan. Behind closed doors, he regularly spars with his father in physical battles that become increasingly aggressive and relentless. He also suffers from insomnia and bouts of rage, issues that he discusses with his therapist, Dr Bennett (Weaver) in regular counselling sessions. In short, he is a mixed up young man.

And if life wasn't tough already, it's about to deal him one more major bad hand. When assigned to work with Karen on a project about missing kids, Nathan's life comes crashing down around him, when he sees his face staring back from one of the ads. Suddenly he has to deal with the fact that his parents aren't who they say they are, that his whole life is built upon a lie, and that everything he thought he knew, he didn't.

It's no surprise then, that he is rather preoccupied by the time the bad guys arrive to get him. Men with guns turn up, Nathan does a runner with lusty Karen in tow, and what ensues is a cat and mouse chase across the country. It usually sees the youngsters get to one place, a phone call gets tapped, and then they move on. Then some foreign guy turns up to beat them up, they beat him up. They move on. It's quite straightforward really. Predictable to a 't'.

That's not to say that it's not entertaining. Remember in the '90s, those action movies where the ability to act was a 'would like', and the ability to kick the asses of Eastern European villains was a 'must have'?

Well, those action movies were EVERYWHERE. A corrupt government or body take on one guy who is pretty good at high kicks, and which typically ended in some mass chase-cum-action sequence, set in a massive public forum such as a football game or a crowded theatre.

That is the standard of movie we're talking here. And if we consider Lautner's performance at that level, then he didn't do too badly at all. He may still have the acting prowess of Joey Tribbiani from 'Friends', but there's also something rather watchable about him.But, my guess is that this wasn't supposed to be seen as a B movie. It feels like a botched attempt to put together a Bourne movie aimed at the teen market. But the Bourne movies appealed to the teen market, so why dumb the formulae down? One of the big failings of 'Abduction' is that rationale and reason becomes so diluted, that you have to throw all common sense out of the window, for this movie to hold together.

But that's the least of the worries. By far, the biggest problem with this movie was the script and direction which was absolutely diabolical.

The camera work seems very lazy. When chatting with his therapist, the camera just pans back and forth, back and forth between Nathan and Dr Bennett, as if the man behind the lens is filming a wedding. Scenes in the gym with the Nathan and his pals, have so much happening on screen that you don't know who to look at. But with Lautner skipping up and down off centre, in a vest and short combo, you can imagine where my eyes were focused.

The worst part - or funniest part, depending on how I look at it - was that you never felt you were watching a natural performance from anyone involved. It felt SO staged throughout. In fact, this is the first time that I have watched a movie at the cinema and literally felt like I could input the director's comments at every appropriate moment.

"Taylor, hold her in your arms. Kiss her head. Now look up to the sky." What makes me feel like this is more a direction fault is that it was not exclusive to Lautner. Even acting legend, Sigourney Weaver moves like a spasmodic marionette, and whilst she delivers her dialogue, there is no real emotion behind them.

With lines like "I hate balloons" followed by a dramatic pause, you can understand why she might not be investing everything in to this rather underused character. But if she wasn't happy with the script, she'd have not taken the role.

The romance between the two youngsters is supposed to be fledgling and, to give them their dues, there is chemistry there. However, when the pair aren't getting amorous, the dialogue is laboured and riddled with clichés that leave you either laughing out loud, or cringing in to your seat.

Karen: Two days ago, we were high school kids. That seems like a lifetime ago.

Nathan: That's because…(pause)…it was.

As the pace picks up, Lautner actually leaves the cocksure Nathan behind him, which comes as a relief, and indeed shows some actual character progression. A few big bangs, and action sequences are thrown in to the mix and those also help to maintain general interest levels, entertaining the audience for fleeting moments in time.

However the final denouement is a real let down. No originality. No risk. No surprise. The bog standard, by-the-book ending is as lazy as the direction and I left the cinema feeling a little bit cheated. If 'Abduction' had presented itself as the kind of movie that it ended up being, I'd have known what I was letting myself in for. This is a no-frills B-Movie. Don't let the supporting cast make you think otherwise.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

Hopelessly bland

2/10
Author: TheLittleSongbird from United Kingdom
1 October 2011

The premise of the movie, the veteran cast and a talented director were the reasons why I wanted to see this film, despite Taylor Lautner and that the trailer looked awful. Okay, I'll give the film some credit, it is not as bad as the trailer suggested.

However, the rest is hopelessly bland. The direction is rather plodding and never really that focused. Abduction doesn't necessarily look cheap, but the editing lacks finesse and feels stilted and the camera angles often have a dry and frenzied look to it particularly in the action sequences.

The music had some decent rock tunes on its own, but they don't always suit the tone of the film. The action itself is alright, but I couldn't properly enjoy it because the editing felt very awkward and frenzied, so any skill and intimacy was lost.

Dialogue-wise, Abduction is awful. It is very laboured, cliché-ridden and doesn't flow very well at all, complete with pop-culture references that I agree will date quickly. I liked the concept of the film, but I wasn't engaged by the story. The more dramatic scenes are unemotive, stodgy and contains Abduction's most stilted moments, while the ending is anti-climatic, the beginning was cheesy and plot points are poorly incorporated and resolved. I admire films that deal with themes that people can identify with, with Abduction using isolation and loss. The film's problem however is that it doesn't do anything with them.

Abduction's acting doesn't fare much better, with nobody looking natural in their roles. Taylor Lautner(he as an actor and the Twilight films I am very indifferent to) is wooden in a very irritating sense. He doesn't have enough charisma for the action and he seems very disconnected in the dramatic elements of the film. His abs look great but that's it. Lily Collins looks wonderful, but does or is given little else beyond that. Alfred Molina is a good actor, but not given much to do, while Jason Isaacs is wasted and Sigourney Weaver tries her best but hindered by awful dialogue and a character, like everyone else in all fairness, that I didn't care for at the end of the day.

Overall, a hopelessly bland, derivative, poorly acted and stilted film. 2/10 Bethany Cox

Was the above review useful to you?

OK I Watched the Movie

8/10
Author: dmaire1221-222-44515 from United States
10 July 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First I guessed the ending at the beginning . Why you ask , because there was other films out there just like this one . Actually a few out there with the same plot . It was done in the 90s. Not to shabby on Lilly Collins acting ,for her first leading role . Taylor Lautner, for his first leading role did a good job too . A little bit of Jacob Black bleeding out in this movie but not too much . I think people were expecting too much on a low budget film . I think the Taylor Lautner fans wanted more love scenes in the film . Had the plot not been done before ,(several times) it would have been more of a suspense in the film . I really think someone has it out for this kid / young adult actor Taylor Lautner and someone should let go of the grudge . The movie really wasn't that bad and did better then A LOT of films out there worldwide box-office profits . (with higher budgets ). The extras on the HS students could have been better . Father and son boxing fight, dumb.

Yet it was interesting to see Lautner really did know karate . I am starting to see what happens when you have connections in Hollywood and you don't . The reviews were rough on this film when and I don't see why .

I wouldn't say don't go see the movie but don't expect to see high budget film quality . I enjoyed the movie and it look like others did too . End of Story .

Was the above review useful to you?

Awful and Incompetent

1/10
Author: santosh-saddul from Mauritius
21 June 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Hands-down one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Nothing about this movie is good. All of its aspects fail to provide a good quality movie. A movie done without passion and with a lack and/or waste of talents. John Singleton might still be the youngest Best Director Oscar nominee ever, but his work on this film proves that this is far far behind us.

A lot of the movie doesn't make any sense (Nathan really never noticed he didn't had any picture of him as a baby? He still has that small t- shirt, with the mark still on it? How does his friend conveniently provides him with IDs and tickets? Where is the 'abduction'? ), and a lot of it is also so bad its hilarious, like "lets get some food!" while we are kissing passionately, or "I'll kill all your people, including your teachers, you will have no more friends on Facebook!", and would you really smile at how good the car looks while there are people out there trying to kill you?

The directing is bad, the writing is terrible, the acting ranges from awful to forgettable, the score is unoriginal, some of the cinematography is questionable, and the worst thing about this movie is the editing. Seriously, this has to be the worst editing I've ever seen (1 second long shots in a conversation scene?).

Anyway, I didn't had any expectations out of an action-thriller starring Taylor Lautner, but I didn't expect such an impressive level of awfulness from start to finish.

Avoid it at all cost.

Was the above review useful to you?

Pretty naive storytelling and sadly enough, not much more.

4/10
Author: eline-hoskens from Antwerp, Belgium
8 June 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

If you're irrationally fond of actor Taylor Lautner, you might like this movie. But even then, I would recommend you to create your own cut of 'sweaty shirtlessness' out of YouTube scraps. It would save a lot of time and would allow you to add the same exhilarating semi-naked scenes more than once. Personally I don't manage to look passed his huge potato nose but I remember having been fond of tanned dark-haired and brown-eyed types myself as a teenager so I'm not judging his fans whatsoever.

If you're looking for a good, coherent story though, I would skip this movie. (Here I am again with another of my annoying story-centered reviews) The opening scene is already very irritating, and I'm not just talking about the shallow score. I believe the intended function of that scene is suggesting the main character is a borderline juvenile delinquent bad boy who prefers transportation by lazing on the hood of a car before crashing garden parties and dozing off in his own puke. He does not like to obey his caring mom and peculiar and slightly sadistic dad, who reminded me of one of my former martial arts teachers.

The writers then introduced a school project to both establish his romantic interest (the girl across door) and to introduce him to a missing persons website that features his picture (and which turns out to be simple bait afterwards while he turns out to be simple leverage in a plot in which he has no further importance). He then loses his parents and home and is forced to run with his just as forced sidekick girlfriend-to-be ('cause as his shrink suggested him, he'd better left her in the car under her protection as she seemed to be able to manage herself). Then there's a succession of explosions, gunfire and chases to fill the rest of the plot. The whole is explained by vague and naive mumbling about a former CIA dad, a secret list of people who traded government secrets (that was in a cell phone Nathan had nothing to do with and wouldn't even have found in the first place if it wasn't for this unnatural plot development) and lack of details. I suspect that the writers did not know themselves how to tie this story together which lead to this faint infusion of a storyline. There's nothing really exciting about a story that revolves around a character who remains invisible and which flaws are masked by a main character whose only contribution is taking his shirt off once in a while, or is this a witty reference to the Twilight series that I missed? And knowing the semi-good as well as the bad guys have all the devices to track the main characters at all times does not add a lot of tension or necessity to the story. This movie is a bit belittling in that it assumes people only need a popular lead actor to appreciate a movie and that it considers its audience not smart enough to notice their attempts to cover the plot holes with a vague secret list of important names. It's also a sad waste of time for a great talent like Sigourney Weaver.

Despite its bad reviews I gave this movie a chance. Although a majority of bad reviews does not always mean a movie is crappy (if you can ever claim this objectively at all), in this case I would indeed not specifically recommend it to anyone. But if you plan to watch it anyway, I won't try to stop you. See if you enjoy it for yourself.

Was the above review useful to you?


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

Add another review


Related Links

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