Original and unpredictable

Rating: 7/10 (1 August 2009)

Let's see...it's a big budget movie, so it has to be based on a comic of some kind. No? Well, then a book maybe. Not that either? Sequel then? Perhaps a remake. Wow, wrong again. Well then it has to repeatedly rip off something else. Wow. Am I dreaming? "Taken" is probably the first big-budget action movie that is neither based on anything else or ripped off another movie or a TV show. Given how tired I am of comic books and other media being turned into movies I would have been more than willing to look the other way for having stolen bits from other movies, but no. Pierre Morel's 2008 film is completely original. I guess it helps that it was co-written by Luc Besson, an action-film director, but never mind. It's a pity it wasn't better.
Okay, fine. "Taken" is actually pretty good. It's unpredictable, and it doesn't follow a strict formula. More importantly, it kept my attention. But it didn't get my adrenaline pumping, which is the main reason why a person would see a movie like this.
Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) is an ex-CIA guy who retired to spend more time with his daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace). Unfortunately, his wife Lenore (Famke Janssen) divorced him soon after. Now retired, Bryan has nothing better to do than to protect pop superstars (Holly Valance) and drive his ex-wife and daughter nuts with his "paranoid" views on what the world is REALLY like. But Kim and her friend are kidnapped while on a European vacation, Bryan sets out to find her, and woe betide anyone who gets in his way.
"Taken" is a revenge thriller and a investigative thriller mixed into one (no, I'm not giving anything away). By nature, these movies are violent and brutal, and this one is no different. There are two words that explain why "Taken" was given a PG-13 rating instead of the R-rating it deserves: studio clout. I guess the corruption of the MPAA helps, but I think that's the same thing.
That being said, "Taken" has some things going for it. Liam Neeson is one of the better working actors out there today, and although Neeson is known for his protagonistic roles, he has no problem tackling the role of a man who has no qualms about killing anyone who gets in his way. Unfortunately, he's the lone good performance. I think part of the problem is that we don't care about Kim's fate. Part of the reason why is that she's played by Maggie Grace, who's pretty bad. At 26, she's too old for the part, although she tries to capture the same mannerisms and energy of the someone the same age (unfortunately, this makes her look ridiculous). I'm wondering why Famke Janssen took her role. She's a respected actress, but she doesn't have anything to do. The bad guys aren't vicious enough, either, which is another knock down.
Cinematographer turned director Pierre Morel has been given his first big chance at directing a major film (his first credit, District 13, was not widely seen in the United States), and he doesn't screw it up. He uses the shaky cam technique (something that I generally hate), but overall, he does it well. Usually it works, although there are times when it makes things confusing.
Although "Taken" lacks the visceral thrill that makes these kinds of movies work, it's still worth a viewing. And you might like it a lot better than I did. The person I watched it with loved it.