Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Jumper

dlx1

Well-Known Member
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489099/

A clip was on the telly last night looks good a looks as if could have the feel of Heroes

A genetic anomaly allows a young man to teleport or ‘jump’ anywhere. But soon he finds himself in a war between "Jumpers" and the enemies who’ve sworn to kill them.

Trailer UCI :cool:

Hayden Christensen
Jamie Bell
Rachel Bilson
Diane Lane
Samuel L. Jackson - mm maybe be shit as he in it :D
 
Hayden Christensen

pumpkin-vomit.jpg
 
You just know sometimes when films are gonna be made of fail, I just can't help feeling this has all the ingredients for a big-time flop.

1) Take a science fiction story.
2) Remove any interesting ideas and replace them with loads of action that doesn't make any sense to the actual story.
3) Hire some director who looked like he had a promising career, but is now willingly bending over backwards to do any old shit for the money.
4) Hire a handsome male for the lead, a sexy female for his love interest and a half-decent actor for the pantomine villian of the piece.
5) Hire Samuel L. Jackson (optional)
6) Spend about 60 million dollars.
7) Show the film to the test audiences, who hate it and can't understand any of the plot.
8) Re-shoot 90% of the film with an entirely new cast. Spend another 60 million dollars.
9) Release the film 7 months after it's scheduled release date to mostly bad reviews and awful word-of-mouth.
10) Watch ticket sales plummet in the second week and vanish completley in the third.
11) Pray DVD sales will re-coup all the loses made.
12) They don't.

Et voila! You've now made the film Paycheck! Or possibly Jumper if you decided to follow option 5.

Either way, you'll never work in the film industry again, congratulations! :)
 
This is exactly why I have this love/hate relationship with urban..

Someone comes on and says they might go and see x/buy x/eat x/shag x..

..and everyone comes on and pisses on their parade.

:D + also :mad:
 
You sure this is based on a book ?

I'm not very excited from the trailer and can't figure out what people see in this. :confused:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumper_(novel)

The book was a trim and personal first novel. You could tell the author was working out some personal issues by writing a fictional story by using his abusive, alcholic father as a character. There was nothing about a "teleport war" in the book, it was just a kid trying to get the hell away from his family.

I liked this quote for its understatement:

The preview indicates that the film will have significant differences from the original novel.


As a bonus it makes the list of the American Library Association's most challenged list at number 94. That's the list of books that people try to censor or have taken off library shelves.
 
The film looks like it borrows 'jaunting' from Alfred Bester's Tyger Tyger.
Anyone? Bueller?

GS(v)
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumper_(novel)

The book was a trim and personal first novel. You could tell the author was working out some personal issues by writing a fictional story by using his abusive, alcholic father as a character. There was nothing about a "teleport war" in the book, it was just a kid trying to get the hell away from his family.

I liked this quote for its understatement:




As a bonus it makes the list of the American Library Association's most challenged list at number 94. That's the list of books that people try to censor or have taken off library shelves.

Ok, cool ! :) It didn't credit a novel on imdb.
 
Ok, cool ! :) I didn't credit a novel on imdb.

IMHO his stuff started going down hill once he stopped writing about his personal issues and started writing strait SF. Helm was ok, but a bit less trim. Outside was drifting badly. His next novel was both unreadable and unmemorable.
 
You just know sometimes when films are gonna be made of fail, I just can't help feeling this has all the ingredients for a big-time flop.

1) Take a science fiction story.
2) Remove any interesting ideas and replace them with loads of action that doesn't make any sense to the actual story.
3) Hire some director who looked like he had a promising career, but is now willingly bending over backwards to do any old shit for the money.
4) Hire a handsome male for the lead, a sexy female for his love interest and a half-decent actor for the pantomine villian of the piece.
5) Hire Samuel L. Jackson (optional)
6) Spend about 60 million dollars.
7) Show the film to the test audiences, who hate it and can't understand any of the plot.
8) Re-shoot 90% of the film with an entirely new cast. Spend another 60 million dollars.
9) Release the film 7 months after it's scheduled release date to mostly bad reviews and awful word-of-mouth.
10) Watch ticket sales plummet in the second week and vanish completley in the third.
11) Pray DVD sales will re-coup all the loses made.
12) They don't.

Et voila! You've now made the film Paycheck! Or possibly Jumper if you decided to follow option 5.

Either way, you'll never work in the film industry again, congratulations! :)

Replace 4 with "Hire Vin Diesel" and you have his career in a nutshell.
 
Samuel L Jackson growling out

"I hate Jumpers"

and

"You're not a hero, you're a JUMPER!"

Is fried gold.
 
Yes, I'm afraid it is rubbish. Devoid of characters (with the exception of Jamie Bell, who's OK). Story goes absolutely nowhere (to the extent that the whole thing just reads as a franchise set-up). Romance, which is at the heart of the story, fizzles with all electricity of a AAA battery that's been left out in the rain.
 
Back
Top Bottom