A Scientist at the Movies Reviews by Greg Paris

The Evaluation System Reviews by Title Reviews by Date

Reviews from Video Reviews of the Classics Personal Background

Title: Jumper

Date Viewed: 2/23/08

Details:

Hayden Christensen

Samuel L. Jackson

Diane Lane

Jamie Bell

Rachel Bilson

Director: Doug Liman

Score: 0

The Review: A young Darth Vader (Hayden Christensen) discovers some unusual powers with which to protect himself and further his ambitions; Jedi council member Mace Windu (Samuel L. Jackson) becomes his antagonist. Oops, sorry -- wrong movie. Right actors, almost the right characters (albeit symmetry inverted), wrong movie. But it makes you wonder if the script was spun as a reverse Star Wars "borrowed from" an obscure science fiction novel?

In the first few moments of Jumper, we are introduced to David Rice (Christensen), and find out that he can teleport. In essence, that's all you need to know about this movie to decide whether to see it or not -- does teleportation interest you? Or is it too far out to consider even as the driving gimmick of a film?

Teleportation is a classic science fiction trope. From James Blish's Jack of Eagles (a psychic ability), to Alfred Bester's The Stars My Destination (where it's an individual psychic trait, the inspiration for Gould's first novel, and the source for this movie), to the disintegrator-reintegrator gadgets in the original story for The Fly, to an obscure Gordon Dickson pulp, to Larry Niven's displacement booths (he's also written an essay and history of teleportation to be found in his short story collection All the Myriad Ways) to the beaming devices of Star Trek -- they none of them really talk about the physics of what's happening. (Niven's essay does, and transforms the concept into a very leaky conceptual sieve.) And that is one of the more interesting parts of the screenplay for Jumper -- we are offered some insight into what's happening in a physical sense, what it does to the space-time continuum, what fossil debris is left behind in each jump, how the debris can be manipulated, the limits of what can be jumped, the limits of jumping itself, etc. This removes the act from the realm of psi or magic -- not that that's a bad thing, it's just not what this movie is about -- and with all the constraints and limitations, places the phenomenon firmly in the real, physical world. This makes some of the plot into a puzzle, something that can attract a few brain cells.

So, Rice can jump. Here now, there next -- accompanied solely by the popping sound of air filling a vacuum. What's to watch? Well, the purported physics of what's actually happening imply that there will be special effects, and so there are. And until the central character hones his skill, he tends to damage his destinations inadvertently. OK, is Rice alone? Are there others like him? Might there be some antagonists? You'll have to watch, to see. (Although if you query Amazon and read the reviews, you'll get the answers to a few of these...)

The problems? Manifold. As my wife put it, Hayden Christensen has the emotive range of a gnat -- making it very hard to have any interest or sympathy with his character. Samuel L. Jackson is wasted in this flick, and besides, his hairdo (such as it is) makes him look decidedly dorky. Plot-wise, the early background of Jumper (David's first teleport, its consequences, and the consequences of the consequences) is told rather telegraphically -- in a rush to get it out of the way and get on with the action. On the other hand, the movie ends rather abruptly, clearly signaling the intent for a sequel.

When I saw the posters advertising this movie, long before the trailers were released, I noticed they referred to the novel by Stephen Gould. (Note first that his is not Stephen J. Gould, the paleontologist and exponent of evolutionary theory, but Stephen Gould the science fiction writer.) I'd never read anything by him, so I happened to pick up a used copy of the original edition and read it, and in the process put some part of my enjoyment of the movie at risk. I now have some cognitive effort invested in one particular view of Jumper -- the story told by the novel -- and cannot erase it from my experience. So when I read some critics complaining that this movie does not sufficiently explore the effects of this skill on the development of a teenager, I have to quietly disagree -- but also have to remember that I experienced this self-same material in the novel, not in the timeline of the movie. Indeed, the movie is quite sketchy on ethics, morality and maturity -- although these are covered quite explicitly in the original novel. This exposition fits the content and reading style of print, but it's hard to see how it would fit the movie -- a very different medium and an audience with a very different attention span -- so it's simply not there. Its lack is telling, leading to marginal motivation and flat stereotypes as opposed to interesting characters. What I recommend is to find the novel and read it (not the movie novelization). The book has a distinctive time and feel (the early 1990's), and it even offers a way in which the skill can be put to good purpose.

Interesting concept, curious character (from the novel), flawed movie.

(23-Feb-08)

Back to the chronological list of reviews