Transporter 3

This is a sequel with no energy and a plot that focuses on all the wrong things. The girl that Frank is stuck with for most of the movie is obnoxious and a frustratingly horrible actress.

This could have been a good movie. I mean, it's got Frank having to drive a girl around, with an explosive anklet that'll blast him to smithereens if he's separated from his car. And she's the daughter of a politician who's being blackmailed into signing some document to allow chemical ships to get into the country without a hassle. Oh, and it's got Robert Knepper, an underrated actor, playing the villain.

Where did it go wrong? Maybe it was the fact this installment didn't match or surpass the fun ridiculousness of the first two (with the exception of Frank driving his car onto a train--and then THROUGH the train--to get to the bad guy). Or maybe it was the fact that the fight scenes were sped up (they literally fast-forwarded through some of the fights!) and blurry, with too many close-ups for you to tell just what the hell is going on. Oh, and that girl. That girl was terrible.

Some people may enjoy this, but for me, it was a huge disappointment.

I read many of the reviews on rottentomatoes and almost did not go to see this movie. What a mistake that would have been. If you want to go to a movie,sit down and be entertained for 1 hour and 40 minutes with non stop action then this is the movie for you. I am not a serious movie critic I am just an average guy who wants to go to a movie that will be enjoyable. This movie is fun to watch from the beginning to the end. I asked others that were sitting near me what they thought of the movie and they all liked it. I thought that Jason Statham was perfect as Frank Martin. I wish that I had a body like that, I would do a striptease for a living. I enjoyed that the French Inspector was more involved in this movie over the last 2. He brought a lot of humor. The girl at first was annoying but she kind of grew on me and by the end of the movie I liked her.

This film was brilliant. One of the best films I have seen in the past decade. Im only joking. It wasn't.

If your an aspiring chef, definitely watch this film. There are so many comments about different foods, different restaurants that you kind of get the feeling that the female character is a wikipedia for recipes. If your an avid BMX fan, then you can learn some swift new moves from Jason. Overall, this film was about as entertaining as a microwave meal. Oh, and the sound quality was terrible. In a cinema, I expect to hear things clearly. When the Russians or whatever they were spoke, it sounded like they were talking Jelly baby. As a side note, I've learned how to make a lobster thermidore.

Also, if the bad guys had watched the other 2 transporters, then they would have surely realised that Jason CANNOT be beaten. Even by a group of 10000000 guys. The guys a soldier. You have to give him that.

Read through all the reviews of this movie. Big fan of the first two myself and just got back from watching this. Pretty surprised that nobody has articulated the real reasons why this movie doesn't work.

Firstly, if you didn't enjoy the first or second movie all of this probably won't be very relevant. I would have thought that most people watching the third would have likely seen and enjoyed the other films in the series.

So, why is this the weakest film in the series? Anybody's review who criticises it based on a unrealistic plot or implausible action is missing the point. This might be obvious but there are numerous reviews citing these as the reasons for the film being average/bad. It's also an important part of the formula that worked well in the first and second films.

The reason this third effort doesn't work as well and is not as enjoyable is due to a variety of factors - TONE and PACING probably being the key reasons and also areas where it departs from the previous instalments.

By tone i mean a few things. Is there ridiculous over the top action in this film? Yes, most definitely, but the problem is in how it is being presented. The other movies made you laugh in their almost comic book presentation and stunts. This film is genuinely trying to sell itself as a serious action movie. They completely took the humour out of all the potentially very humorous moments through the more 'arty' editing, over the top score dramatic score (soundtrack definitely plays a big part of the different tone in the 3rd movie) and generally lousy script.

This leads on to the pacing, which is far too slow at times. Way too much dialogue between Statham and the girl. Yes we know the character fairly well but the movies were always about the action and less the dialogue. Jason Statham is capable but the script can't really be saved here.

So, a dramatically more realistic Transporter movie but sucked dry of all the humorous and fun tone that made the previous instalments so much fun. As I said there are plenty of silly and deliberately humorous moments but the way it was constructed and presented meant I wasn't laughing anywhere near as much as I was in the other films. This in conclusion is the main failure of Transporter 3 - 5/10 just for being a new movie in an otherwise cool franchise.

I do not fully understand why this film has been so severely slated. As far as action films go it ticked all the boxes, plenty of guns, car stunts, good fights, romance and even some corny humour, and has a happy ending .........what do people expect ..........Sir Laurence Olivier doing bloody Hamlet?

If you have had a crap day at work, and want to watch a good action movie which is not demanding then this is very good "action" film, if you require something demanding then watch a good foreign film.

I had as much fun watching this as I do watching a James Bond or Jackie Chan film. 8/10