Originally Posted by RoseCity07
I'm curious what you rated the first Taken. It matters because I thought it was about a 7. Is Taken 2 about the same?
Maybe id be generous and go 7.5 due to its highlight being a somewhat badass Liam Neeson.
The second one is not the same. The action portions are weak. The acting is just plain bad. The entire story is paper thin and the ending was as bad as it could possibly get. Taken 2 is completely useless in every way. And the only redeeming factor of the first one wasnt there.. Neeson is OLD.. He couldnt even walk throughout the movie, let alone fight. They had to do herky jerky camera cutting to make it seem as if more action was occurring than there actually was. Its readily apparent that Neeson was simply not capable of any physical acting. Plus, he was injured during the shooting of the movie, so that explains even more why he seemed stiff and burdened.
Take 2 is an even worse duplicate of the first one. It really lacked in every possible aspect.