Product: xXx (2002)
Rating: 2.0
Lame attempt at action
...I don�t even know where to begin. With the terrible CGI effects? How about the cheesy, unbelievable plot that makes any Bond film seem like reality? No, lets start with how all the mindless action scenes somehow succeed in not being interesting. Since this is supposed to be an action film, these scenes are supposed to be the main thrust behind it. But they�re not. On the surface they look like they should be fun, but somehow they�re not. ... Vin Diesel�s crook-turned-secret agent just isn�t interesting to me. And it�s not because he�s a criminal, rooting for a bad guy can be fun. He just doesn�t carry that cool aura around him, such as James Bond or Blade. To make an action film work, you need a central character who is fascinating to watch, and personally, Vin Diesel here is about as fascinating as c-span.The absurd plot of having a criminal do a secret agent�s job on behalf of the United States doesn�t help, either. I can hold disbelief off during a movie if it is handled right, but from the start I could see XXX was derailing from this department. I just didn�t buy it as the movie presented it. The bad CGI effects were also very distracting. Scenes such as one concerning an avalanche look like it was rendered five years ago. CGI keeps reaching new standards, and if you don�t keep up with it, you shouldn�t use it. Surprisingly enough, however, the acting, while nothing special, isn�t to bad. Sure Vin Diesel is no acting god, but he doesn�t give a cringe-worthy performance here. And while Samuel L. Jackson�s talent is pretty much wasted here in his role as Diesel�s boss, no one delivers poorly.XXX is best not seen at all, unless you�re a big Vin Diesel fan. There wasn�t much here to admire, and what is, truly isn�t worth the time to view. Stick to Bond.