Identité secrète

Let me open with what any film review should address: I did not enjoy this movie. But first, a disclaimer: despite my reasons, I want to assure you that none of my negative points will verbally lambast lead actor Taylor Lautner just because 'he's some guy from Twilight.' Nor will I make scalding reference to his gratuitous lack of upper body wear; the kind that one would hope comes off as witty commentary but ends up sounding more like an awkward combination of contempt and jealousy. So, with that out of the way, let's get started.

When the shy but short-tempered Nathan (Lautner) is paired up with girl next door Karen (Lily Collins) for a school research assignment, he is shocked to find an image of his younger self on a 'missing persons' website, prompting him to question everything he thought was normal about his life. When the cover is blown, he and Karen find themselves on the run, unable to trust anyone in their search for the truth.

Not only will I not target any more of this review towards Lautner personally, I will even concede that he does his best on what is otherwise a sinking ship from the opening scene. Naturally, his acting skills do need refinement, and I expect we're not looking at the next De Niro here, but his occasionally lackluster delivery is simply a branch of a much bigger problem- the script.

As an unapologetic actioner, it should be expected that Abduction possesses some of the clunky dialogue clichés associated with the genre. These include, but are not limited to 'trust has to be earned', 'I'm not leaving without her' and perennial favourite 'wait…how do you know my name?', which is actually used more than once. But among these tired expressions is a handful of headscratchers; lines intended to act as cool quips but possessing an undoubtedly cringe-worthy aftertaste. For example, after Gerry (Sigourney Weaver) helps Nathan escape using balloons to cover security cameras (a la Ocean's Eleven) she releases them with the deadpan, utterly serious line of 'I hate balloons'. So you see my point.

The set pieces are just as ludicrous, asking the viewer to buy into the movie too much when we have not been given any reason to engage with the plot in the first place. In one instance, we bear witness to a CIA agent (operating undercover as a suburban housewife) easily take out two trained assassins. The climax set at a baseball game is a storytelling train wreck, fraught with inconsistencies and overly convenient outcomes. At the very least, I hoped a film set in Pittsburgh would show some love for the mighty Steelers instead of the lowly Pirates, but I digress.

General flaws in logic and realism are other aspects that can be attributed to this type of movie without having them become a major concern. Often, we tend to overlook moments which would result in serious injury for the hero in real life simply because he's just that, a hero. I'm also willing to pass these moments off, but in Abduction they occur so often, and on such a noticeable scale that they severely detract from any engagement with the film that could be developed as it progresses, and therein lies its greatest letdown.

I commend the satisfactory action scenes, which minimised the kind of close-up, rapid camera movement that has drawn the bulk of my ire in recent months. Also, I was pleased to see the film show a bit of gumption by avoiding an entirely happy, alls-well-that-ends-well conclusion, but these upsides are not enough to sweeten what is otherwise an inherently flawed film.

*There's nothing I love more than a bit of feedback, good or bad. So drop me a line on jnatsis@iprimus.com.au and let me know what you thought of my review.*

Watched this last night, and it was mostly what I expected. After a wonky beginning, it's generally a popcorn, action/date movie that's not exactly high-art. The film is not the worst thing you've ever seen - it's really just an escape, with a good production, and that's it.

Zillions of reviews say Lautner was horrible. Huh? I really think people are just jealous. He was fine and didn't overact - he was sincere, fit the role & there is little reason to be upset.

These reviews lacerating Lautner were like people destroying Paris Hilton from "House of Wax," when in actuality, she was honestly alright in that. Not a big deal. Granted, I don't have strong feelings about either performer.

With a strong budget of $30M, the film looked confident and solid by John Singleton, the film is a fairly easy watch as it goes along, & the supporting cast of admired actors (Weaver, Molina, Bello) were fine.

Singleton isn't too flashy, and might just be cashing a check... but one thing he would do is make sure that the actors would have their moments, instead of too many quick cutaways.

The story is kind of fun in the moment, but, sure it's silly when you think about it afterwards. But, mehh. It was fun. Nothing is horrendous about 'Abduction.' I saw two of the Twilight films and thought they were easy to watch as well & not really a big deal. And Lautner's disposition is somewhat similar in Abduction as he was in Twilight. I think that's alright & he fit the roles fine.

If I were to complain about anything is that ½ of the fighting looked good, but ½ wasn't that great. Secondly, the dialog was usually fine, but it could get so dull/ cliché I felt sorry for the actors.

Thirdly, the ending climax with the villain was just straight-forward; you really see it coming. It's not clever at all & it felt very '80s. Fourthly, some of the chasing sequences were good, but sometimes they could lack blood-pumping momentum. Despite the complaints, the film is still a fun adventure.

I'd read so many bad reviews of this film...that maybe my expectations were low. But honestly, the film was fine and kinda fun. Just an escape.

This film is a prime example to why certain actors are very underrated in Hollywood....I call it "The Luke Skywalker Syndrome"....One hit franchise that wrecks a young actor's career before it can really get started....

The Twilight franchise....Although successful....Isn't a franchise that is critically acclaimed or well liked by fans other than young people with out-of-control hormones....And because of this...Films like Abduction is either overlooked or totally panned by fans...

Sitting down to watch this film with Twilight in mind is going to ensure that viewers will NOT have a good time....Which is why wonderful movies like "Welcome To The Rileys" and "The Runaways" both starring Kristen Stewart didn't get nearly enough attention....

Now is this particular film original..??...No, it's not....I have seen the "My picture on the milk carton" routine used more than once....But is Abduction a fun movie..??...Yes it is...

Abduction is a popcorn movie....It's meant to simply allow the audience to have a good time....If people go into this movie expecting Oscar-like performances and a beautifully written storyline...Then those people are setting themselves up for a big let down...

But why put yourself through that when all that needs to be done is to simply sit back and enjoy the ride....And that's all there is too it...

Five minutes. That was how long it took before Taylor Lautner took his shirt off in his purportedly gritty action thriller 'Abduction'- and depending on how you took to that fact, you may find yourself enjoying every minute of it or cringing in disbelief. Right from the start, this Taylor-made vehicle makes no excuses for being a breakout role for the 'Twilight' star- after all, if Team Edward (or Robert Pattinson) can do it, then there's no reason why Team Jacob can't do likewise.

Nonetheless, it seems that Team Jacob should have just stayed in the woods of Forks, Washington, for this insipid Bourne-wannabe does him nor his fans no favours. Rather, (and we may be risking our life and limb by saying this) it only demonstrates his limitations as an actor, especially since he practically recycles the same angsty broody expression throughout the film that he had already put forth umpteen times in the 'Twilight' movies. And no, being a teenager who discovers that the people you call 'mother' and 'father' aren't in fact your real parents isn't much of an excuse too.

That's the predicament Lautner's character Nathan finds himself in one day, after stumbling across a website with photos of missing children and using some software to approximate what one of those kids could look like as a teenager. Though that's the very premise of the movie, the least we expected was for debut feature film screenwriter Shawn Christensen to come up with a better lead in than just some stupid research assignment Nathan and his girl next door Karen (Lily Collins, daughter of singer Phil) was assigned to work together on.

Logic and coherence are however too much evidently to demand, as one would have to suspend both to believe that Nathan is suddenly at the centre of global espionage with both the good guys (led by 'Spiderman 2's' Alfred Molina) and the bad guys (led by Swedish actor Michael Nyqvist from 'The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo') in pursuit. Apparently, Nathan is the son of a top secret CIA undercover operative whose 'parents' (Jason Isaacs and Maria Bello) are fellow CIA agents sent to protect him while his father is away. As with all chases, the aim is for something that Nathan has in his possession- some encrypted code with the names of dirty CIA agents.

It takes almost half an hour before the action kicks in, the introduction that sets up Nathan's adolescent issues and his secret high-school crush on Karen pure tedium that is definitely not director John Singleton's forte. Thankfully, the pace picks up considerably once Nathan is thrust into that implausible situation, with Singleton clearly at ease setting up the film's various action sequences. One of the first that sees Nathan's 'parents' murdered is shot and edited for maximum thrills, and the climax set in a packed stadium with a live baseball match also packs suspense.

To Lautner's credit, the action also looks good because he performs most, if not all, of the stunts by himself- whether tackling a bigger- sized guy MMA-style or fleeing from the bad guys with parkour. Singleton doesn't go for the shaky-cam technique, allowing his audience to appreciate Lautner's physicality in its full glory. Even so, taking on the lead role requires Lautner to perform some serious acting in order for us to identify with his character's inner distress, but the square- jawed actor with his one-note performance fails to inspire any empathy.

The fault doesn't lie with Lautner entirely- to appeal to the teenage demographic which the producers are relying on to turn up for this movie, they have decided to amp up the obligatory romance between Nathan and Karen, even to the extent of letting the two teenage characters engage in some heavy making-out that stops just before it crosses the PG13 boundary. It is distracting and laughable, although the latter seems to be in line with most of the awful dialogue in the film.

Not even veteran stars like Isaacs, Bello, Molina, Nyqvist and Sigourney Weaver (who plays Nathan's psychologist) can redeem this at-best made- for-TV thriller that tries to be the younger version of the Bourne series. So as much as Team Jacob may wish for Lautner to be their Matt Damon, or even Tom Cruise, it is clear from his debut headlining movie that once the 'Twilight' phenomenon fades, the same can probably be said of Lautner's acting career as well.

• www.moviexclusive.com

If you are a female fan of the "Twilight" series, there is probably only one thing you need to know about this movie: yes, lead star Taylor Lautner takes off his shirt at the slightest excuse to show off those washboard abs.

For those who are not interested in Lautner, I am afraid there's ABSolutely nothing in "Abduction" for you - unless you like half-baked spy thrillers, lame acting and asinine script.

The plot is about high school student Nathan Price (Taylor Lautner) who stumbles upon an image of himself as a little boy on a missing persons website. He realises that his parents (Maria Bello and Jason Isaacs) are not his own and that his life is a lie. As Nathan starts to search for his true identity and his biological parents, he is being targeted by a team of rogue agents, forcing him to flee with his neighbor, Karen (Lily Collins). He begins to realize that his fabricated life is hiding a dangerous truth.

In writing this screenplay, I suspect that writers Shawn Christensen and Jeffrey Nachmanoff must have pieced together ideas from The Bourne Identity and the recent Hanna - and come out with this harebrained plot. But the truth could be that director John Singleton and the film-makers do not really care about the plot: they just want an excuse to show heart-throb Lautner and Collins on the run from some baddies (who included Swedish icon Michael Nyqvist of "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo") in order to film some action sequences.

Indeed, many films have gotten away with idiotic plots - provided they have stars that audiences could root for. Alas, Lautner seems incapable of having more than a couple of expressions and he can't act to save his life. Neither can Collins despite the strong support of veterans like Sigourney Weaver (as Nathan's shrink) and Alfred Molina (as a CIA exec). All through the first half, Singleton keeps the audience wondering why Nathan is being chased and in the second half, his aim is probably to keep them from walking out of the cineplex. ABS-olutely for Lautner fans. (limchangmoh.blogspot.com)