IMDb > Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back
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
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 19:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 186 reviews in total 

71 out of 99 people found the following review useful:

★★★ - never go back

5/10
Author: Elliot D. George from United Kingdom
20 October 2016

"Never Go Back"? Shouldn't have. Let's be fair, it's not a bad film, it's just very middle of the road. For me the main problem is the director - Zwick has made some great movies in the past (Glory, Blood Diamond, The Last Samurai), but he's just not as good an action filmmaker as McQuarrie. So, all the cheesy bits of writing feel tacky, misjudged and amateur, instead of tongue-in-cheek and fun.

The cast - Cruise is Cruise, he never changes. Despite the backlash, I actually thought he did pretty well in the first Jack Reacher film, he's tough and brutal as he should be. This time, he doesn't have that same power, and I think the film would've benefited from someone with more physical presence. Smulders also does fairly well with her character, though it's fair to say she's massively underwritten as the good soldier who wants justice for her murdered men and ends up being a mother figure. Even Yarosh isn't too bad as the problematic youth, though sometimes it was hard to take her seriously when she was being a feisty teen. The chemistry between the core three was fairly believable too, unlike the awful villainy hounding them.

A big problem is the story. There's really very little mystery or suspense - why are they being set up? Who's the real killer? We should be more interested in the answers to those questions, but actually I couldn't care less. We also know who the primary antagonist is from near the start, so the rest of the film is just a slightly dull cat and mouse game with sporadically decent fight scenes.

All in all, it's not as good as the first, but it's still a fairly reasonable action flick. Definitely not worth paying to see on the big screen, but it'll undoubtedly find a small following on Netflix in the next year or so. I wouldn't expect enough traction to warrant a third in the franchise though, this could be Jack's last.

3/5

Was the above review useful to you?

61 out of 95 people found the following review useful:

I wanted to walk out early

3/10
Author: merpman-94402
24 October 2016

My wife convinced me to go, even though i didn't not much like the first Jack Reacher movie. I do like Tom cruise in general though.

The plot is very generic, i mean like we haven't seen something oh so very similar a thousand times. No surprises along the way.

The action was extremely poor, Jack and his sidekick consistently not carrying weapons even though their opponents are and even when they beat down their opponents (who have guns) they don't then pick up the gun and take it with them (ok maybe they did once). There was a scene where Jack is fighting the professional killer,

The dialog was boringly average, as if to just stretch out the movie, most of it not really having much to do with the plot or moving the movie along.

The girl is hyper annoying, keeps getting into trouble, Jack has to save her yadda yadda yadda, except if Jack had acted as smart as he is supposed to be, he would have made sure she didn't get into said trouble in first place.

Worst movie i have been to in quite a while.

Was the above review useful to you?

27 out of 32 people found the following review useful:

Not an improvement over the original

6/10
Author: admtech69 from Canada
27 October 2016

While the trailer gives too many of the best scenes away (as do seemingly most Hollywood trailers of late), the second entry in the Jack Reacher franchise fails in it's attempt to capitalize on the momentum of the original.

With the titular character ably portrayed by Tom Cruise as the quintessential and confident bad-ass, the surrounding cast and paint-by-numbers story-line struggle around his nucleus to present a believable and involving action flick.

One of the issues that plagues the franchise is that the source material portrays Reacher as 6'5" tall at a beefy 250 lbs, capable of taking on 4-5 attackers at a time. Cruise is in great shape and appears at least 10 years younger than his actual age but even with strategic camera angles, at 5'7", it is fairly obvious that he is physically outmatched when surrounded by 4 of his assailants. Yet much ass is kicked with relative ease. This affects the realism meter as the film progresses.

Another issue is the somewhat stilted dialogue and a few "Oh, come on, that would never happen!" moments that elicited a few unintended laughs from other audience members during the viewing I attended.

The supporting cast do their part in workman-like fashion and some of the dialogue between Cruise's Reacher and Co-star Cobie Smulders' Turner entertains and engages as they argue while being simultaneously attracted to one another. Rounding out the cast as the chief antagonist, Patrick Heusinger is an effective (if somewhat clichéd) ex- Special Forces Psychopath who hunts Reacher throughout the film.

It's unclear at this point whether there will be a third film instalment but based on early box office returns, a sequel is likely. I hope they can take the best elements from the first film which had better fight scenes, less stilted dialogue and fewer formulaic plot devices. Seeing as the Jack Reacher Book series is currently at 21 novels, there should be a worthy successor in the Lee Child-penned Canon to put the film franchise back in good stead the next time around.

If you are looking for a breezy action flick with low expectations regarding plot twists or realism, Jack Reacher: Never Go Back fits the bill.

Was the above review useful to you?

27 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

OK... just OK

6/10
Author: bob-the-movie-man from United Kingdom
8 November 2016

I'm a big fan of Tom Cruise. He is a real old-fashioned film star, generous with his fans on the red carpet and with real star power at the box office. And I can happily sit down in front of just about any one of his DVD's time and time again and still enjoy it. Unlike many critics, I even enjoyed his last outing as Jack Reacher.

Unfortunately, and it pains me to say this but, his latest outing - "Jack Reacher: Never Go Back" - is a bit dull.

Lee Child's Reacher has many years before turned his back on his military past and wanders the country as a drifter righting wrongs outside of the law. In this film, his military past again makes a major ("No, ex-Major") intrusion into his life. Potential love interest Major Susan Turner (Colbie Smulders, from the "Avengers" world) is arrested on trumped-up espionage charges and Cruise sets out to clear her name. Along the way he accidentally (and rather too conveniently for the plot) discovers that a paternity suit has been filed against him and Reacher confronts the rebellious and light-fingered teenager Samantha (Danika Yarosh, aged 18 playing 15).

Unfortunately the big-cheeses involved in the international arms skulduggery are determined to tie up each and every loose end in their intrigue, and that includes Reacher, Turner and young Samantha by association. Needless to say, the villains - led by a one-man killing machine (Patrick Heusinger) - haven't counted on Reacher's 'particular set of skills'.

My problem with the film (after an entertaining opening) is that the screenplay lumbers from standard thriller set-piece to standard thriller set-piece in a highly predictable way. It's as if the scripts from 20 different films have been stuck in a blender. Shadowy arms dealing shenanigans: check; Cute teenager in peril: check; Gun fight on a dockside: check; Rooftop chase: check.

Are all the individual set-pieces decently done? Yes, sure. But the combination of these bits of action tapas really don't add up to a satisfying meal. The story arc is almost non-existent as there is no suspense in the 'investigation': the plot is all pretty well laid out for you.

Where there is some fun to be had is in the play-off between the born- leader Reacher and the born-leader Turner, both trying to be top-dog in the decision making. The romantic connection between the leads seems almost plausible despite their 20 (TWENTY!) year age difference: this is more down to how incredibly good Cruise still looks at age 54 (damn him!). Turner makes a good female role-model right up to the point where there is a confrontation in a hotel room and Turner backs down: despite Cruise being the "hero" it would have been nice for female equality for this face-off to have gone the other way.

The director is Edward Zwick, who helmed Cruise's more interesting movie "The Last Samurai".

The trailer started off well and then progressed into general mediocrity. Unfortunately - for me at least - the film lived up to the trailer. Watchable, but not memorable.

(Agree? Disagree? For the graphical version of this review and to comment please visit bob-the-movie-man.com. Thanks.)

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 31 people found the following review useful:

This is a Jean Claude Van Dame level movie B-

3/10
Author: D H from United Kingdom
2 January 2017

This is worse than part 1. Part was wasn't too bad, but this is plain awful. It is wrong on many levels - the plot is incredibly weak, the acting is awful, and the script is straight out of a 70s B movie.

In an alternate universe this movie star Jean Claude Van Dame. However in this universe Tom Cruise appears to have failed miserably, as did direction, script writing etc.

Corny lines like, "They ran out of Medal" when referring to how heavily awarded this former MP is, happen to be just one example amongst the many.

Then there is the plot, the pointless proactive attempt by the bad guys to lock up and kill Major Smulders, follow Jack Reacher, create a professional baddie that takes things personally.

This may well be the tipping point decline in the career of Tom Cruz, he just looked past it, slow, completely unbelievable.

I won't say much more, this movie isn't worth wasting the time on the critique.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Never Go Forward.....

5/10
Author: s3276169
26 October 2016

Jack Reacher: Never Go Back ought to be bi-lined "Never Go Forward".

This flick is firmly mired in 90's action "corniness". This seems to be a "old" "new" trend. Revisiting past formula's that worked once upon a time, with the hope they will work again, in the 21st century.

Fact is, viewers have, for the most part, become more sophisticated. For me, the new Jack Reacher is an anachronism. Its watchable but its comes across as dated, "silly" and utterly implausible, even by Hollywood stands.

Jack floats around like an avenging wraith, solving crimes for the military, whilst breezily moving in and out of military facilities, as if he has been given a lifetime pass to a weird, uptight, country club. Worse still, the antagonists come across as bumbling and inexplicably foolish. His success is never in doubt.

The result is a film that's "light weight" entertainment at best. Its not bad, as such, its just rather nondescript and not overly engaging. Five out of ten from me.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Huge disappointment

Author: Vondaz from United Kingdom
7 November 2016

Having read all of the Reacher books, I was one of those who cried "What??!!" when Cruise was cast as Reacher, but I changed my tune when I saw the first Reacher movie. I thought Cruise carried it off well.

So I was really looking forward to this next instalment . . . and what a disappointment.

The difference between the Reacher stories and other so called anti-hero stories is the realism that Lee Child brought to them. For example, none of those long slugging punch ups, Lee Child made it clear that a single punch would suffice and if not delivered correctly, then there was a danger of broken hands etc. And they followed this ethos in the first Reacher movie. But in this latest offering there was just slugging match after slugging match after slugging match, with nothing to show for it other than a cut above Reacher's eye. Where's the bruising and swelling? I'm sure he got smashed on the arm by a pipe, but there's nothing to show for it the next day when he's wearing his t-shirt.

On top of that, there's a hell of a lot of running throughout the movie - I'm surprised they didn't run to the toilet. This, with the camera work and editing had a way of making the movie feel rushed.

Finally, the script had one of the clever wit in the books.

All in all a disappointing follow up. Was it the Director? I think so.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Never Go Back is more like 'Never Go in the First Place'

1/10
Author: Toastr11 from England
19 November 2016

It's just so so so bad. Cliché, No action and dreadful production.

I had heard about how bad this movie was from a friend, but since me and some other guys were stranded in a shopping mall with nothing to do for 3 hours, I decided to just let go and enjoy an action blockbuster for once. I was so wrong. It's an atrocious piece of filmmaking, which has literally EVERY cliché in it, from the stroppy teenager to the Afghanistan reference to 'These people were under my command!!!!!!!' to the person in the control room shouting 'I want eyes on every asset they've got / I want to know everywhere he's slept in the last four years, I want to know how he takes his eggs, what his favourite flavour of ice cream is...'. This is why we need to stop Tom Cruise from producing his own movies, because he can't carry a whole movie on his own. The directing is atrocious and the script is disgusting. Tom Cruise is okay, but everyone else might as well have been picked straight from the street. There is literally NO ACTION UNTIL THE LAST SCENE. Anyone who says this movie is 'Action Packed' is lying. Just don't watch it: these people don't deserve any more money after putting such sh*t in my face.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Please don't ruin any more Lee Child novels!

1/10
Author: Paul CF from Calgary, Alberta, Canada
20 November 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The first JR movie was acceptable. This one, terrible! It opens with 4 guys beaten and laying in a parking lot. JR is inside a diner. We don't know what exactly happened or why it happened. But of course JR is responsible. Not even sure why this scene was there. It serves absolutely no purpose or story enhancement.

There are so MANY plot holes it is impossible to keep count. JR may have a daughter, conveniently he finds her almost instantly. Guys with guns never used them properly or hit JR.

The scene when he is in prison and talking with his attorney, at the exact moment he is looking outside the window (convenient), he sees 2 bad guys coming in. They of course look the part, and park right outside the window at the exact time JR is looking outside. He then gets his lawyer to go get him a sandwich and she leaves her briefcase and wallet behind. JR then proceeds to escape a maximum security prison with little effort.

It goes on and on like that. He spots his 'daughter' in a huge Halloween parade in New Orleans, with literally thousands of people on the streets.

It is really a terrible injustice to Lee Child and his wonderful novels. Typical Hollywood hack and slash job on brilliant novels and story.

Don't waste your money and pay to see it. If you must watch it, wait for it to be on regular cable TV shortly.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

Tom Cruise struts his stuff again

6/10
Author: Figgy66-915-598470 from United Kingdom
25 October 2016

25 October 2016 Film of Choice at The Plaza Dorchester This Afternoon - Jack Reacher Never Go Back. Tom Cruise returns in the title role and plays the hero part with aplomb. The film begins, continues and ends with action and intrigue. In this outing Reacher has to uncover a government conspiracy to clear his name and that of a colleague. A complicated plot entwines itself around the characters and it takes a little concentration not to get lost. There is however a rather refreshing chase scene that doesn't involve a single car. Highly watchable but not as good as the first film. Always easy to watch Tom Cruise when he's strutting his stuff, whatever the plot.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 19:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

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