Preneurs

Takers is a heist film that's pretty much the same as other heist films, where there's plenty of room for loud action, camaraderie, the elaborate planning stage, and how Murphy's Law enters to screw everything up. This film has it all which makes it pretty average. but there were moments which stood out and made it noteworthy, and hey, an ensemble cast (even if for a few scenes only) with the likes of Paul Walker, Hayden Christensen, Matt Dillon, Jay Hernandez, Idirs Elba, Zoe Saldana and the notorious Chris Brown doesn't hurt either.

The thieving bunch here comprises of a close knit group of brothers real and sworn who take a year to plan their large heists, in part to have some time off to allow for their latest escapade to cool off and fade off from the police's radar, to spend their ill gotten dough and of course, to allow for the meticulous planning of their next hit. They follow a strict regime of communication and the reliance of unique skills they bring to the table, and we see how that all come together in concert with their money making objectives. They don't kill unless necessary, and they don't see themselves as desperate robbers. They're above that - they take.

Director John Luessenhop slaps together scenes that tried to go beyond just a simple heist film, and dwells at length to the background of these characters, where we have one who's about to get married, and another grappling with his sister's drug rehabilitation. Even the token cops in the film doesn't get spared, with the story squeezing some time out to showcase how dogged Matt Dillon's Jack Welles is to his job at the expense of previous quality time with his daughter. In fact I don't see how the cops' stories are that compelling to be included in Takers other than to highlight that the world isn't made out to be black and white, but always with that constant opportunity for grey. Given the way the cops' story and subplot got resolved, it could have been totally eliminated and yet there'll still be plenty left in the tank for the film to entertain, since they don't add much to the plot.

The film really picked up past the halfway mark where their new heist proper gets put into action, courtesy of a plan from one of the team's past buddies Ghost (T.I.) whose multi- million dollar proposition involving an armoured truck and pulling off the equivalent of The Italian Job in the tunnels of Los Angeles is too much to handle, that the team chucks their one year per job mantra out the window for that once in a lifetime opportunity. Which spells trouble of course, beginning with a nail-biting build up right down to the ending. Despite being riddled with clichés and plot conveniences at times, or even gaping loopholes that stick out like a sore thumb, such as creating such a prolonged ruckus in a hotel room/floor that the police couldn't arrive on time until the action was over.

Don't get me wrong, the extended shootout was one of my favourite scenes in the film given director Luessenhop's flair in crafting it out and injecting something fresh in the presentation. For the most parts the story (with a total of 4 writers involved) made it out for the team to seem to be on the losing end, and having to execute their exit plans fast, only for some other incident to drop in unexpectedly and derail those plans, testing their resolve and their honour amongst thieves. There's the classic Mexican stand-off moment too ala John Woo and Johnnie To involving both sides of the fence that got resolved pretty quickly, unfortunately, devoid of meaningful suspense.

Still, Takers still had its essential ingredient that fuels average B-grade Hollywood action films, so if you're ready for a compromise of a plot that will stretch what's believable and that of the actors constantly swaggering around, this is for that action junkie in you.

Heists, robberies, thieves all seems very attractive words when it comes to movie business. And some names like Italian Job, Oceans 11 have proved to be the brim of excitement and thrill and made movie history bit more vivid and interesting. However not always this is true. Even though some movies come out with stunning trailers and impressive cast they fail to pull out the obvious, the story and the drama. And I think 'Takers' fail in the same spot.

'Takers' is a story about a gang of thieves who live luxurious life from the money they manage to rob. Well informed, organized and trained in their livelihood of taking what belongs to others, they seem to know what they are doing. But one day their history starts to bite them in their back and meanwhile a restless cop starts to sniff his way up to their doorstep. In between thundering loud bullet exchanges and lightning fast pursuits 'Takers' have its moments of thrill and suspense. And even the cast is not bad. Eye candy for the woman viewers for sure with Paul Walker and Hayden Christensen in front seats of the whole game the movie, but has poor female characters presentation. The hot Zoe Saldana represents a bit of woman on the movie but her face time is quite unnoticeable.

Even though the action, cinematography, cast is quite good there are certain key areas where 'Takers' fail to deliver. One big failure is the plot. There is no magic in it. Looks Cliché and quite predictable if you are a fan of heist movies all along. And the character development is very poor. You hardly get to know any character so you don't actually feel anything towards them when the story throws emotional moments at you. So the impressive cast is not actually worth it after all.

'Takers' is a thrill ride with a big emptiness surrounding it. I won't consider watching it again unless it's free on HBO and its a lazy jobless day.

I have wanted to see this movie since the first trailer I saw last year. I am a big fan of heist/action movies. Seeing Idris Elba and Michael Ealy and Paul Walker in the trailer, I knew I would at least get my quotient of eye candy. After seeing some of the reviews for this movie, I had very low expectations.

Takers turned out to be a decent heist movie. They didn't do anything that was all that original. It was pretty predictable. It was just mindless entertainment that I enjoyed watching. I thought there was some good action sequences...I wish there were more of them. There was more melodrama than I was expecting, but I think it helped give the movie an ounce of depth. Don't expect Oscar worthy material or big unexpected plot turns and I think you will end up enjoying it.

'TAKERS': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

An impressive diverse cast of mid-level celebrities and some pretty stunning action scenes highlight this bank robber / obsessed cop heist film directed by newcomer John Luessenhop. The cast includes Matt Dillon, Idris Elba, Paul Walker, Hayden Christensen (who after having to deliver such awful dialog and mellow drama in the last three 'STAR WARS' films has actually done pretty well for himself career-wise, compared to like Mark Hamill or Carrie Fisher), Jay Hernandez, Zoe Saldana, Michael Ealy, Jonathon Schaech, pop singer Chris Brown and rapper T.I. (Brown and T.I. Also executive produced the film). Like 'THE EXPENDABLES' this film made the smart choice of putting all these actors together, any one or even two by themselves wouldn't have drawn much attention or cash but adding them all together made for a flashy looking film (It made $21 million in it's first weekend, that's pretty impressive for this type of film). The movie is a pretty routine cops and robbers film, sort of a second rate 'HEIST', but it's also surprisingly entertaining!

The film follows a team of five expert and professional bank robbers (Elba, Walker, Christensen, Brown and Ealy) as they team up with an ex-partner of theirs (T.I.), who was just released from prison, on a dangerous armored truck heist, worth $20 million. The movie also focuses on an obsessed cop (Dillon) hot on their trail and his seemingly more 'by the book' partner (Hernandez). Drama ensues as the 'loose canon' cop neglects his young daughter and the bank robbers feel friction and mistrust for their ex-partner. There's also a side story revolving around the crooks leader (Elba) and his drug addicted sister (played by Marianne Jean-Baptiste).

For the most part the characters are underdeveloped and what is developed isn't something we haven't seen hundreds of times before but the cast adds a lot of character and charm to their roles. Each actor is cast perfectly in his or her part (although the female parts are pretty small); Dillon and Elba are always at their best but actors like Walker and Christensen are actually given a brief chance to shine in movies like this. The action scenes are also stunning. The two heists are extremely impressive and there's a breathtaking foot chase scene! The movie is surprisingly entertaining. I went into the movie expecting to be mildly amused but I was hooked for the most part, largely due to the cast and action.

Watch our review show, 'MOVIE TALK' at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNa6Ky58lm8

This movie is fast-paced and the cinematography (specifically the shaky camera thing) is clever and interesting when it's not irritating. Also, there is some eye candy for the ladies and some of the cast is full of interesting and appealing characters, some who actually do decent acting jobs ("some" is the operative word.) Those are the good points.

Now the other side. I like T.I. as a rapper and even thought he did an okay acting job in ATL a few years ago, but his acting here was just downright criminal. There was one scene in which he dominated the dialog that I actually said out loud, "his acting is so bad, it's offensive." You're actually offended that that is being pushed off as something you should buy as a viewer. You're wondering how no one in the director's booth was offended by it. In fairness, the fast action of the bulk of the movie shields the poor acting a bit, so the blow is blunted a bit. But between his poor acting and Chris Brown's sometimey acting, it was just a lot being asked of the viewer. Speaking of characters, the lack of character development is also a low point of the film. I agree with another commenter that you're asked to feel something for a character who dies, but you feel nothing because you really haven't been given anything to know or care about. And finally as others have stated, the plot is clichéd to the point that you're wondering if it's supposed to be a satire of some sort. But no, no satire. They're seriously trying to wrap Heat and Set it Off and Dead Presidents up in a big bow and pass it off as a new present. Just not a good thing to do.

I rate it a 5 on a 10-point scale because while it's not a great movie, it does hold your attention and as bad as some parts are, it's not the worst movie I've ever seen. So I say giving it about half credit is pretty accurate. In that vain, I won't say you should pay to see this or you shouldn't pay to see it. I say do the 50/50 thing--flip a coin. Either way, the earth won't shatter. This movie is just not that significant either way. It will probably be forgotten pretty soon.