Jumper

Maybe it's because I'm on vacation, but I didn't find Jumper to be quite as horrible as everyone has made it out to be. Will it destroy Doug Liman's career? Is Hayden Christensen finally reduced to hack films? Can Jamie Bell do no wrong? The reviews are not without some merit.

Here's my take. The film is kind of dull, surprising given how frenetic it is. The concept is much more interesting than the film turns out to be, largely because there's not much of a plot to drive it. Christensen is bland, but a heck of a lot more interesting than his Annakin Skywalker. The reviews are definitely correct that Jamie Bell is the most compelling person in the film.

Jumper is not hard to follow, as the reviews have suggested. It's just not interesting enough to make you want to follow it. But for a night out after a hard day of skiing, it's not too bad.

Now, back to the hot tub!!

Update: Have things changed in the light of morning? Don't know yet, because it's not morning. But it occurs to me that my capsule review said nothing about the plot, as feeble as it might be. There are jumpers and there are paladin. The jumpers can teleport to any place they can envision. The paladin are a religious cult that believes "only God should have that power." (We hear this line a lot.) They'll go after family and friends to bring down a jumper. David (Christensen) has lived below the radar, but for the fact that 8 years earlier he jumped into a bank vault and robbed it. Now, the oddly white-haired Roland (Samuel Jackson) has David in his sights and will get to him through his sort-of girlfriend Millie (Rachel Bilson). But Griffin (Bell), another jumper, has also been keeping tabs on David. Hi jinx ensue.