MovieChat Forums > Taken 3 (2015) Discussion > Better than 2, worse than 1. (Spoilers)

Better than 2, worse than 1. (Spoilers)

posted 9 years ago by Stewatson35
7 replies | jump to latest

So what happened to Bryan's famous background checks that he performs on everyone his family comes into contact with?
Especially with how close he was getting with his ex wife, i was pretty surprised to see that he hadn't done his homework with Stewart. But then, where would the story be?

I think it made him look an idiot. The fact that he's apparently the best at what he does, he really slipped up this time didn't he?
He managed to find gangsters in France in less than 24 hours just by a voice on a phone, but he failed to see that his ex wife's husband was a crook of the highest order?
It didn't make any sense, if he's as good as he was supposed to be in the first movie, he wouldn't have had to have gone through all that crap.

[–] junkyme 9 years ago

I thought it was the worst of the trilogy. I felt cheated after watching it.

[–] Neil_Williamson 9 years ago

It was much better than 2 but a few levels below the first

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ricky_may-47537 9 years ago

They're both vastly inferior to the first (one of my all time favorite action flicks), but 3 is a surprising step up from part 2. 2 was good, but fell flat in certain areas, while 3 was pretty engaging all the way through (at least, in my own opinion it was).

History is written by the victor. History is full of liars.

[–] youngsteve 8 years ago

The first film was very good, with the 2nd just average. This was easily the worst one, & hopefully last in the series.

[–] bishop-69757 8 years ago

First was good
Second flawed but still fun

Third was The Caddyshack 2 of action movies.Not just bad but also boring

[–] LeeVing88 8 years ago

Caddyshack 2 boring? Check your pulse.