Taken 2 vs. Taken

1 comments

16 comments

Critics hated both, while audiences loved them, judging by the box office. I really hated the first film, but the sequel surprisingly works well enough for me.

I'm the opposite, I liked the first, but I found the second awful. Too much Maggie Grace.

Taken will take this in a landslide. While I didn't mind Taken 2, it had so many issues with logic that I even found the Die Hard sequels more engaging by comparison. Liam Neeson kicks ass in both, but only in the original Taken is it for any kind of purpose. The original Taken takes it!

I have to agree that Taken 2 certainly respected the first and tried to continue the story it just came up short. It could have used more of his "specific skills" and a better plot. Taken was an instant classic for the genre. Taken 2 is nowhere near as good.

Loved Taken. Having his daughter in a bigger role in Taken II didn't work for me.

I came into Taken 2 expecting to hate it, but actually enjoyed it a bit. I'm not sure why, it is terrible in comparison to the 1st, and almost every reason that the 1st was good was absent from the 2nd. And Maggie Grace was 28 when this was filmed, I don't know why they are trying to pin her as a high schooler. I'm going to chalk up 100% of my enjoyment of the second to Liam Neesan oozes charisma. The 1st had much more going on for it though.

TAKEN TOO.

I loved Taken, the action was breathtaking and Liam Neeson was awesome. But Taken 2 just tried too hard, and the direction was horrible. I'm glad I didn't see it in the cinema because I think I'd have felt sick with all that shaky, fast camerawork. Maggie Grace throwing grenades over rooftops was unintentionally funny for me! Neeson still kicks ass, but it wasn't enough.

I agree with Kate668...Taken 2 is simply awful. Poor direction, terrible cinematography. I mean, half the action was too difficult to tell and the story is a jumbled mess. Throwing grenades off a roof made me nearly turn off the film.

I'm not a fan of either...but I could actually feel my self getting stupider while watching Taken 2.

I find it fascinating that anyone who claims to have hated the original would actually watch the sequel. Seriously? You don't have something better to do than watch a sequel to a movie you disliked? Whatever. Anyway, I quite loved Taken, and I was pleasantly surprised that Taken 2 worked as well for me as it did. Nine parts Liam Neeson, one part Rade Sherbedgia, no doubt. But reasons listed here are reasons it is definitely inferior. While I didn't clue in to any obvious logic gaps that detracted from the movie for me, the direction is definitely sub-par. That didn't surprise me, as Olivier Megaton directed Transporter 3 for Besson, and that there is an action sequel that is total crap. Taken 2 is almost a masterpiece by comparison. Anywho...the original, by far, but Taken 2 was not a waste of my time.

I agree johnmason, Transporter 3 is such a terrible movie! Megaton actually made it a boring movie, plus the woman lead is one of the worst actors I have ever seen. Taken 2 is nowhere near as bad as Transporter 3, but that's not saying much.

lol, what johnmason said cracked me up! Who would actually watch this if they hated the first!?

Taken 2 is one of the most predictable and brainless movies I've ever seen in my life. If the original Taken was mediocre and racist, the second one is just pathetic on every level. Taken wins this because it was a little less bad.

Taken is one of my favourite action movies of recent years, but Taken 2 was unnecessary and didn't even come close to reaching the heights of its predecessor.

I think Taken 2 is a decent movie but the first one beats it in every way.

Taken.

The 1st Taken is much better than the 2nd!

Taken

Taken is a pretty decent action romp. The sequels are really really bad...