Hayden Christensen stars as a self indulgent young man with the ability to teleport around the world. Samuel L. Jackson, Rachel Bilson, and Jamie Bell round out the cast
“Jumper” has an obvious visual appeal. A film that features globetrotting and teleporting antics is certain to at least entertain on a visceral level. Unfortunately this is all the film does, and even the eye candy is rough around the edges.
Everyone, at one time or another, has wished they had the ability to teleport. Whether it is to a sunny destination, or simply to avoid commuter traffic, the thought has crossed the minds of most. This thought appears to have been more than a passing fancy for novelist Steven Gould, whose 1993 novel “Jumper” found critical success and mass appeal. It was only a matter of time before Hollywood decided to adapt it for the big screen.
David Rice (Hayden Christensen) discovers at a young age that he isn’t like the other boys. He has the somewhat unique ability to “jump” to any destination he has seen. Logically, his initial reaction to discovering a secret power is to exploit it for personal gain by robbing banks. David spends years of his life living an indulgent lifestyle in a fancy New York penthouse, while jumping around the world seeking adventure. This is interrupted by the arrival of Roland, a religious fanatic referred to as a “paladin”, who hunts “jumpers” sending bolts of electricity through their bodies rendering their abilities useless. Roland’s origins are hinted at, but never clarified -- along with many other plot points.
Realizing that he is being hunted, David decides to visit his father (Michael Rooker) and rekindle a high school romance with bar wench Millie (Rachel Bilson), ultimately putting them both in danger. His reasons for doing so are never really explained, and act as yet another plot hole.
David’s frequent jumping also puts him in contact with a fellow jumper Griffin (Jamie Bell) who helps David in his battle against Roland.
Doug Liman has often been championed for his propulsive, frenetic direction, which is a verbose way of saying that his action scenes are filmed with a constantly moving camera and multiple edits. If you think of “The Bourne Identity” or “Mr. and Mrs. Smith”, you’ll get the picture. Although, those who remember the highly entertaining “Go” will note that the action in the film was the weakest part. What appeared to be his strength was getting great onscreen chemistry from charismatic performers. This is perhaps why putting him behind the lens for a visual effects laden action film with very uncharismatic performers is such a mess. While the action sequences are certainly entertaining, they’re often incoherent and lacking polish. As the rest of the film lacks any sort of development with the characters, their interactions often result in sluggish pacing and a viewer wanting a fast-forward button.
The screenplay for this film is particularly weak, applying no logic or development to the leading characters and borrowing listless dialogue from standard genre clichés. It’s interesting that between Jim Uhls (Fight Club), David S. Goyer (Blade, Batman Begins), and Simon Kinberg (X-Men: The Last Stand) such a messy unfinished script was delivered. One can only suspect multiple rewrites and studio disagreements are to blame.
Another problem with this film is the acting. Hayden Christensen has delivered yet another wooden, uninspired performance. There’s no sense of urgency or passion in his eyes or his voice, leaving the audience uninterested in taking a journey with him. It is difficult to invest ones energy into a film when you genuinely don’t care about the protagonist. Rachel Bilson fares slightly better, but still isn’t particularly dynamic. A lot of energy is invested into developing a romance between these two, but their lack of chemistry detracts from these efforts. Christensen was slightly better with Bilson’s “The OC” co-star Mischa Barton in “Virgin Territory”.
Jamie Bell, on the other hand, is great here. He brings a badly needed excitement and urgency to the film that will likely make most viewers wish that it was his journey we were following. He steals every scene that he’s in and makes the film slightly more engaging.
If the premise of “Jumper” sounds appealing, or the promise of great visual effects is a driving force, then this film should entertain. Otherwise bland leading characters, enormous plot holes, and inconsistent direction will likely make for a less than savory viewing. It, like this years "Rambo" will have a built in audience, but offers few surprises.