Vanity Fair profiles The eXile: "Gutsy...visceral...serious journalism...abusive, defamatory...poignant...paranoid...and right!"
MSNBC: Mark Ames and Yasha Levine
Broke the Koch Brothers' Takeover of America
Entertainment / movies / February 1, 2009
By Eileen Jones

Liam Neeson tries to be reasonable.

Genre films are beginning to creep back into theaters after the big parade of Oscar-contenders—praise be to God—and one of them, a little actioner called Taken, is now tops at the box-office and deserves a quick hosanna.

(Not that the Oscar nominees aren’t an exciting topic too. Oh golly no. I’ve been meaning to write all about them and somehow just haven’t gotten around to it. After all, what could be more riveting than making a case for which heart-tugging spectacle should win Best Picture, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button or Slumdog Millionaire? Or wondering whether Meryl Streep even has room in her bathroom for another Oscar? Stars all keep their awards in their bathrooms, see, to show how joshy and down-to-earth they are! It’s fascinating!)

Taken is a short, punchy B-movie, countering the ever-longer and more brooding big-budget action spectacles we’ve been seeing for a while now (the Bournes, the Bonds, the Batmans).

Luc Besson, best known for directing La Femme Nikita, The Professional, and The Fifth Element, is producer and co-screenwriter here (with frequent collaborator Robert Mark Kamen), and through his company Europacorp he’s grinding out consistently lively B-action fare like the Transporter series, assorted Jett Li movies, etc. Besson and director Pierre Morel last gave us the eye-popper 2004 action-fan-fave District B13.

Their new one, Taken, is an old-fashioned vigilante film about a father rescuing his daughter from sex slavers who will, naturally, die in droves. The formula is freshened up with some unlikely casting: Liam Neeson as the lethal dad. Neeson is one of those stodgy respected actors, Irish, obviously, and with all sorts of classic stage roles and prestige pictures to his credit. He’s an odd fit for the part of an ex-CIA American with an impressive homicidal skill-set who’s given it all up in order to repair his relationship with his teenage daughter (Maggie Grace).

But it works pretty well. Neeson is sad-faced and lumbering and low-wattage, which is great for the early scenes when he goes through the ritual everyday-life humiliations that will key us all up to watch him do maximum damage later. He lives in a crap apartment in L.A., and he’s scorned by his gratuitously mean ex-wife (Famke Janssen, who really ought to think about whether she needs the money this bad) and her rich buffoon of a second husband (Xander Berkeley).

Sad Dad also has to take stupid jobs to get by, like guarding a Britney-esque pop singer at a concert where someone with a sensitive ear for music is sure to want her dead. In his free time, he sits around at home staring at photos of his daughter.

Some action fans will wonder if we needed to see quite so much corny daughter-love and cringy dad-humiliation before getting to the action. It IS a little weird, the lingering thoroughness of the set-up. But it makes sense in the long run. They’re piling it on in the old-melodrama style, so that when the daughter finally gets abducted while on a trip to Paris, by evil Albanians yet, the violent payback can be unleashed with a whoosh. When I saw it, you could hear the whole audience settle tensely in their seats, as if to say, “Okay, NOW it’s on.”

Because Neeson is big and slow-looking—in certain shots he looks like Frankenstein’s monster’s handsome brother—there’s a real pleasure in seeing him break somebody’s face swiftly and efficiently. He can run, too, with a sort of speeding-train heftiness. And he looks invariably stoic, with a nice middle-aged melancholy in his creased face. He’s even reasonable a lot of the time. If they’d just give his daughter back, everybody could walk away. But they won’t. And this begins to irritate him. At one point, he shoots somebody who’s pleading, “Wait, we can nego—!”

It was great to be back in the atmosphere of intense audience involvement after seeing so many films viewed in the dutiful stupor produced by “quality” cinema. There’s a scene in Taken when Neeson gets jumped, and we all groaned “Ohhhh!!” in unison. If there had been time to warn him, someone probably would’ve shouted, “Look behind you!”

Of course, this kind of audience identification flushes out some unpleasant emotions as well. I was in an urban downtown theater that’s going to seed, and there were some of the usual fringe types there, exuding vague menace. These are often middle-aged men who look broke and on the edge, and each one sits alone in simmering silence. Occasionally one will boil over and yell something at the screen. This time around, it was, “Slap her!”, regarding Famke Janssen’s harpy ex-wife character.


There can be no question that movies like this are built to give an adrenaline rush that’s stoked, in part, by bitter resentments, crude old prejudices, and weird lusts. All that daughter-love, for example, devolves into some very peculiar scenes like the one when the girl’s virginity is being auctioned off to zillionaire creeps in glass booths, and her dad winds up putting in a bid himself. In order to save her, of course. But yeesh!

(This calls to mind aspects of Luc Besson’s earlier work, like, for example, The Professional, which focuses on disturbingly beautiful twelve-year-old Natalie Portman, dressed and acting like she’s twenty-five. Besson has her telling baggy-eyed old hitman Jean Reno that she has very strong feelings for him in her, uh, lower-stomach area. One suspects Besson’s got issues.)

In short, any sensitivity to aggressive misogyny and racial stereotyping—which are long-standing components of the action film, as well as most of the artworks of Western Civilization, and are more or less the price to be paid for enjoying them—should be checked at the theater door or untold suffering will result.


Add your own

  • 1. Zulu Kilo  |  February 1st, 2009 at 1:28 pm

    I saw this movie a couple of weeks ago and found it extremely entertaining and well-made. Yes, there are problems with the storyline and it will never be remembered, but with the absolutely horrific selection of films being released since November (and probably through February), it is odd that this one gets so little attention.

    Of the three “big” releases this weekend, one prominent local reviewer didn’t even bother to review this one, opting for The Uninvited ($10 million weekend estimate) and New In Town ($7 million). Taken should bring in $24. Not bad. Especially on Super Bowl weekend.

    Thanks for the review.

  • 2. Zulu Kilo  |  February 1st, 2009 at 1:34 pm

    $24 millon.

  • 3. nobody  |  February 1st, 2009 at 2:26 pm

    Enjoyed the appraisal.

  • 4. a  |  February 1st, 2009 at 4:33 pm

    i like how many american reviews of this movie go “oh no, torture, not working with local governments, gung-ho slaughter? we don’t do that anymore! that’s so bush administration! now that we’re with obama it’s not cool to make such awful awful awful movies.” (new yorker for example) reminds me of how german nazi children are hyper sensitive to nazi image appropriation.

  • 5. Allen  |  February 1st, 2009 at 6:51 pm

    Eh’, I saw it a few months back on a straight to your computer release …

    It seemed pretty stock build up and boring revenge mechanic. I didn’t really care what happened to anyone in the film and as usual ended up cheering for the bad guys to win, if only to relieve the boredom.

    As in most action flicks, the protagonist isn’t a bad-ass, just a very, very, lucky (foolish) man in that scores of generic bad guys fortunately can’t shoot straight. That’s the cliched to-be-expected obvious; but some action flicks over come it with a sense of style … of which this film is lacking.

    Still, bland white male empowerment fantasy flick > pretentious “oscar nominee” leader bathed in the colour maple and A-list actor bullshit.

  • 6. jake1  |  February 1st, 2009 at 8:24 pm

    Its like Frantic and Payback had a baby with none of its parents charms. And come on. What kind of respectable white slavers prey on the wealthy? Any chick with enough cash for a plane ticket is going to have someone who is going to come looking for them. You’d only get away with it a few times before the wrath of god (rich people) came down on you. I know, I know. One shouldnt split hairs when it comes to action movie plots, but when the action is shot in that annoying jerky Bourne Identity-style, every little bit helps. Or hurts. All in all a C- effort from the Besson action factory

  • 7. LatexSolarBeef  |  February 1st, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    I saw this movie via The Pirate Bay a long time ago. Was kinda shocked when I saw a commercial for its impending release weeks later. Someone dropped the security ball on an early copy and it got loose into the wild.

    BTW The movie sucked. Except for the part where he shot his crony’s innocent wife, to get info. That made me laugh.

  • 8. abb1  |  February 2nd, 2009 at 1:56 am

    Aggressive misogyny and racial stereotyping – sure, but what struck me first was that this terrible place where the young girls are in grave danger, police is corrupt, and slave trade flourishes had to be Paris.

    Why, of course: Le Ventre de Paris; Paris, Eurabia; what an awful place. Why couldn’t she just go to New York instead?

  • 9. aleke  |  February 2nd, 2009 at 10:39 am

    ^What did maddox get a new column? Who gives a shit

  • 10. Nestor  |  February 2nd, 2009 at 1:38 pm

    Neeson has done plenty of action roles, Star Wars, Darkman, Batman, it’s not exactly unheard of to see him in an action movie.

  • 11. k_diggidy  |  February 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 am

    same plot as commando. Director pays tribute to it with the steam pipe scene – “Chill out Bennett”

  • 12. Carpenter  |  February 3rd, 2009 at 7:41 am

    Racial stereotyping? Sure, except that almost everything produced in Hollywood shows that Black is good and White is bad, whenever there are clashing interests. Oh, those evil racists, always out to murder and terrorize. And how many White gang members have we seen in the movies now? Many more than Black gang members. And a fun trivia: there were more White murderers in the NYPD Blues show than in NY in real life, a city where Whites are the minority. Studies show that the vast majority of murderers portrayed on TV are White; remarkable in a country where Blacks commit half of all murders, and Latino gangs commit a good chunk of the rest.

    So, racial stereotyping? Sure. But not in the direction the media bosses and their followers say it is.

    As for Taken, it is okay, but it could have used a bigger budget. Nevertheless, you can watch it in an evening and not feel like you have wasted your time. Liam Neeson is one of my favorite actors, I liked that movie where he plays the founder of the IRA (the real IRA, when all of Ireland was British, not the commies that came later in Northern Ireland and parasitized on the name).

    And in closing, The Professional is an awesome movie.

  • 13. k_diggidy  |  February 3rd, 2009 at 9:41 am

    correction: “blow off some steam Bennett”

  • 14. Nickxon  |  February 3rd, 2009 at 1:43 pm

    The Exile…movie reviews? Awesome!

  • 15. Hank  |  February 4th, 2009 at 1:47 am

    This was very fun to read!

  • 16. Rich  |  February 14th, 2009 at 4:15 am

    Allen and LatexSolarBeef are spot on. Shitty, boring movie, but more watchable than the Oscar-bait.

    Could have been genius if the daughter was raped and killed, considering that the film worked so hard at making her as fucking irritating as possible.

Leave a Comment

(Open to all. Comments can and will be censored at whim and without warning.)


Required, hidden

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed