I wish I could have jumped out of the theatre

This past weekend, my friends and I continued a long tradition beginning my freshman year of college: watching low-rated, shitty movies for the singular purpose of ripping on it later. Though movies like "Man of the Year" and "ATL" have some redeeming qualities, the film we watched this past weekend, "Jumper", is so bad that it was worth not only a blog post, but also an attendant analysis as to why it's so humiliatingly awful. Jumper is so horrid that it shouldn't have even been a straight-to-video. The director, Doug Liman, and the screenwriters involved should be banned from Hollywood for conjuring up such dreck. I think banging my head with a frying pan repeatedly would have been a more constructive use of my time.

When I think about this movie, there were a few things that stick out in my head as being the death-knell of this movie. If they had been corrected, MAYBE Jumper would have been mediocre. But then again, it may be an impossibility to salvage such a Titanic failure of a movie.

1. Casting anyone other than Hayden Christensen

I think it's only fair to start with the most explicit, dunderheaded decision of this movie. I used to think Hayden Christensen was just a victim of a bad script in Star Wars. Although that was definitely the case with Jumper as well, Hayden Christensen really seemed to go out of his way to be god-awful. The guy has been in the industry long enough for me to make this assessment: Hayden Christensen is the worst actor working in Hollywood today. Keanu Reeves is a better actor. There, I said it.

He has no concept of voice inflection and how to convey emotion. His line delivery was so bad I found myself laughing out loud during moments that were meant to be poignant. "Wooden" or "stilted" don't go far enough to describe the Hayden school of acting. He just sounds apathetic and/or fatigued when he talks.

In fact, I really think Hollywood studios are conspiring to make Hayden Christensen a popular actor. They think America's stupid enough to not know the difference as long as you have cool special-effects.

2. Giving Jamie Bell a more prominent role

Jamie Bell was the lone bright spot of this movie. You know why? Unlike Hayden, Rachel Bilson, and Samuel L. Jackson, you actually feel empathy for his character. He has a likable, snappy personality, which is a glaring contrast to David's childish adolescence.

In fact, Jumper would have been exponentially better if Jamie Bell was made the main character. Instead, the casting people went with the better looking, safer choice in Hayden Christensen.

3. Reducing the love angle and fleshing out the story of how David is a Jumper

Basically, the whole romance between Millie and David was wholly unnecessary. It's not even believable that these two would love each other. David is like that moody, somber kid who hates his life. Millie is the prototypical, cheery popular girl.

Eight years elapse before they see each other again and, when they finally do, it doesn't even seem like Millie is that enthused. The guy nearly dies getting back that stupid snow-globe, runs away from home, and has been out of her life for eight years. Not only that, but after 5 minutes of seeing each other after such a long time, he takes her to Rome (her childhood dream).

I know this is a movie, but that's totally unbelievable. In real life, Millie would think nothing of a moody loser like David and when he appears out of thin air later to take her to Rome, she'd think he's a creep. To add insult to injury, the chemistry between the two is non-existent. It just feels weird seeing them having sex or an intimate moment.

They should have replaced the love story with an explanation of why the paladins are after the jumpers, Mary's relationship with David, Griffin's backstory, etc. In other words, AN ACTUAL, COHERENT PLOT! They should have made the movie throwing a blind eye to the possibility of a sequel. Those type of loopholes central to a movie are inexcusable.

4. Better script

This is obviously the most egregious mistake. I've already mentioned the loopholes that exist in this film, but compounding the problem is some of the worst dialogue in a major film release in a while. It just seems like the writers neglected to proofread the script. And Hayden Christensen and Rachel Bilson are much too inept to know the difference. Here's a sample of what I can remember:

"You don't have to tell me anything, just don't lie to me, David." -- Millie

ok, so abject lying is bad, but omitting key details is alright. Makes a whole lot of sense.

"Remember when I said you don't have to tell me anything? I changed my mind." -- Millie

What made the line bad is that it was delivered dramatically AND it hearkened back to a line that was crappy to begin with. A bullshit bonus.

"Only God should have this power, the power to be anywhere." -- Roland

Now, this is the ONLY line proferred as to why the Paladins want to kill the Jumpers. Atleast in the Matrix, you get a slew of dialogue as to why the agents want to kill Neo and company. I must point out as well that this line and its delivery perfectly encapsulates what Samuel L. Jackson has become in the last decade: a parody/caricature of himself.

So I can go on and on, but I feel like I've made my point. Jumper is a movie with a shallow plot, bad acting, and numerous plot holes. It's a confusing mess and I expected much, much better from the director of the Bourne movies. I guarantee if you watch this movie you'll alternate between cringing and snickering at the sheer inanity of it all. I watched it purposely to continue this weird tradition of ours, but Jumper was so atrocious that I think we should end it. Giving 10 bucks to Hollywood for making this rubbish is simply immoral.