If I were suffering from serious head trauma and/or taking strong ADD/ADHD medication I might have been able to enjoy this as much as others have, but I'm not so I didn't. Jumper had all the makings of a great sci-fi adventure film but due to piss poor performances from all involved it came up woefully short in all aspects. I'm sure there was a good movie in there somewhere, but Liman decided to cast terrible actors in the lead roles (Christensen, Bilson) and the always over the top Jackson, while leaving the entire backstory of why the Jumpers are who they are and how they came to be in the trash can in his office. I for one am not hoping for sequel as this movie failed on every level to pique my interest in the story or characters enough for me to want to watch another go round.

Still not as bad as Meet the Spartans

Grade D+

Fun movie and that's it.

A

It's entertaining, though nothing memorable.

B-

Millions and millions. This is what was spent sending director Doug Liman and an extensive cast and crew around the globe, from exotic locale to exotic locale, to film elaborate action sequences. It's also what was then spent to design innumerable VFX shots. And, in the end, it's what was spent to promote the film to audiences. But every problem which restrains this film from graduating to major hit from minor pleasure could have been fixed with a relatively inexpensive contraption: a computer with a screenwriting program. Because this isn't a full-fledged movie so much as it is a thin collection of Cool Ideas which will no doubt blossom into Great Film in subsequent JUMPER films (if any are greenlit) - at the end you realize you paid full admission price for the longest trailer ever. It's an intro. Every minute represents Liman saying to the audience, "Isn't this cool?!? Just wait until I truly show it in the sequels!" And it doesn't matter how taut and stylish Doug Liman's action helming is or how rebel-cool Jamie Bell is as a supernatural anti-hero, you can't help but feel a bit fleeced.

C+

What I liked: the action. and, uh....the first ten minutes were pretty cool. But the action definitely!

What I didn't like: The inconsistencies. The logical fallacies. The dreadfully awful script. The bad acting from Christenson and the leading lady (instantly forgettable).

There is a lot of potential here to be an awesomely awesome action movie. It had some of the ingredients, most notably of which is a unique premise around which to build the action.

It wasn't a wasted movie perse. It wasn't very good, but the action entertained me quite a bit. There simply wasn't enough of it. I really really hope that Jumper 2 is greenlit and some new writers come on board. I don't know who originally said it in this thread, but the whole movie truly does play out like an extra-long trailer for J2. Hopefully they bring it on. I'll be waiting.

C

B+


I liked this, so sue me! It's definitely one of the most fun flicks of the year so far. It should have gotten a summer release as it definitely feels like a summer popcorn flick. Yes, it is corny. It is also an 85-minutes long set-up for a sequel and most of the acting is far from great. However, I loved the movie's visual style and...(I'm gonna get a LOT of heat for that)...I liked it more than Liman's previous two films - The Bourne Identity and Mr. and Mrs. Smith. This one was simply more fun and it never took itself serious in any way, while it still delivered on the goods - meaning the locations shifts were pretty cool, the effects very well-done and the few action scenes quite effective.

I think the movie definitely benefitted from its short running time, never really leaving the viewer much time to relax and lean back, jumping (no pun intended) from one action scene to another. Christensen is a fairly bland lead, but his acting is not that bad. Jamie Bell outshines him here, but Samuel L. Jackson's slightly over-the-top turn definitely steals the show (he's been playing many baddies lately!). This is how I want my fun sci-fi actioners!

The whole Jumper mythology set-up is quite interesting and I really really hope they'll follow this up with a more mature sequel. For what it was, it did its job pretty well, though. It entertained me, much more than something like 10,000 B.C.. The attempts at character development failed miserably and the ending is a bit abrupt too, after a big revelation, but as I said, it all sets the whole thing up for a sequel very well.

5/10 -> C-

Watchable and at times a very fun flick that had so much potential to be a great sci-fi adventure.

The story isn't bad, the bad thing is how irrational it progresses. He comes back to his town (where everyone thought he was dead and apparently proclaimed his father crazy for believing he was alive) where the people who recognized him act like he went out of town for a few days and came back. His school love just leaves her job and her life and goes to Rome with him the same day without any thinking... People are impulsive, but you'd have to be pretty damn brainless to be impulsive as people in this movie.

I'm usually not the one to ask for all the why's and how's from a character in a movie, but here it's impossible not to ask.

The acting from Christensen isn't bad. Well at least compared to Bilson. Jamie Bell stole the show. By far the best and most rounded character in the movie. Too bad they didn't have any decency and added one more minute to the movie to say how or where he ended up.

And the set up for the sequel is so lame. And it's very Star Wars-ish...

JUMPER - 7/10 (B-)

Very flawed, but entertaining. Hayden Christensen is such a poor actor though.

It's not even pleasurable in the guilty sense. Terribly acted by basically everybody, with no lucid or interesting narrative to speak of, and only some occasionally cool effects to mask its many, many, many shortcomings, it can't even qualify as stupid fun. And WTF was Diane Lane doing here? I don't mean what was an actress like her doing in a film like this, I mean what in the hell was the point of her character? The incomprehensibility of the narrative boggles my mind.

Obviously she was setting up a sequel.

Obviously.

I changed my mind from earlier. This movie is horrible. Ew.

Yeah, this is rather lame after more thought (and half of a second viewing, because I got too bored to finish it).

A-
Fun popcorn flick. Don't take its acting seriously because they don't really need to act here.
It's not an Oscar movie. You want bad acting? Walhberg in The Happening.
That wasn't really a disaster film compared to one that was a tale of survival which focused on acting.
Don't hate. Some movies are made to have a blast.