To save everyone some time, I will teleport to the end of this article. "Jumper" is absolutely awful.
From extreme plot holes to uninspired storytelling and acting, "Jumper" manages to teleport from one problem to the next.
The story is set up simply enough; a young boy named David Rice is thrown into a life-threatening situation and finds out he has the ability to teleport.
Fast forward a few years. Enter older David, played by the wooden "Star Wars" star Hayden Christensen.
He is a successful young bank robber, living life in the fast lane and spending his entire day teleporting around the world.
It is here that the story stops making any sense. David goes back to his hometown and picks up his middle school crush, played by Rachel Bilson of "The O.C."
After talking to her for about 30 minutes, they jet off to Rome.
While in Rome, he is attacked by two men and rescued by Griffin, played by Jamie Bell ("Billy Elliot").
Griffin informs David that he is part of a vague "war" between Paladins and Jumpers.
This war is apparently fueled by religion, but is never really explained. The offered explanation is that Paladins kill Jumpers, and have been doing so since the Middle Ages.
Enter another "Star Wars" alum, Samuel L. Jackson, the main bad guy in the film, looking like he could break into a spirited rendition of "The Thong Song" at any moment.
For reasons unknown, he really hates Jumpers. He wants them all dead. Pretty simple.
Cue the awesome action fight scenes, right? Wrong. Almost every fight scene in the film is incredibly boring.
Even Jumper versus Jumper is somehow not at all interesting.
Throw all of that together, along with an incomprehensible cameo by Diane Lane, and you have the recipe for a terrible movie experience.
As the movie goes on, the plot hole count rises. It seems that every single time a character teleports, it rips open another hole in the story.
Also lacking in this film is a real, likeable character. The main character, David, is a total jerk and has little emotional growth throughout the entire film.
At an early point in the movie, he catches sight of some people trapped in a flood and completely ignores them. At the end of the movie you still feel that he wouldn't help anyone out of a flood. He remains as much a jerk as he was at the start.
Other than Bell, the acting in this film is terrible. Every line reads like nails on a chalkboard. The script is completely uninspiring.
Director Doug Liman, whose resumé includes "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" and "The Bourne Identity," has achieved a definite low. Hopefully he can get back to the stuff that made the "Bourne" movies entertaining.
That isn't to say that all of "Jumper" is bad--just most of it.
There are a few things worth merit. The actual teleporting is cool, the locales are numerous and exotic and Bell turns in a decently humorous performance.
Unfortunately, these few moments do not outweigh the bad.
Throughout "Jumper," questions piled up in my head. How can something as cool as teleportation become so lame?
Who are these Paladins? How is David, having never met another Jumper, suddenly a source of knowledge about jumping?
Why do people keep putting Christensen in movies?
What really hurts about "Jumper" is that an intriguing idea amounts to nothing more than a 90-minute-long trailer. Teleporting and fighting can be totally awesome--just check out the beginning of "X-Men 2."
Unfortunately, "Jumper" doesn't deliver on any front.
If you ever find yourself anywhere near this movie, teleport as far away as you can.
