micke-bystrom The story is pretty stupid and tame with lots of logical errors or unlikely twists and reactions. Tom Cruise is as one-dimensional as ever in Action mode. Suspense is not killing us, just mildly entertaining if, and only if, we accept the thin premises the story is built on.Still it's actually more watchable than the first Jack Reacher movie. Don't waste your time on either of them, unless you must see Tom in all his movies.

gpxdlr I saw this in the theater and enjoyed it since I'm a fan of Lee Child's books. Seeing this again on DVD, I see a few errors I don't like. Tom is in another fight being surrounded by thugs and he beats them all. Just rush in and beat his a**, don't do it one-at-a-time! Same as in the 1st Reacher film. Same as in the Samurai film. The fights I felt were poorly choreographed. Huge hard punches but no bruises or blood. Tom/Jack got 'whupped' on the roof in the final fight but no blood or visible bruises on his face after 2 vicious punches and 1 kick. "C'mon, Gimme A Break!" A little more real please. Too bad Jason Statham wasn't chosen for this. He would have been 100% better and the right physical size too.

Kapten Video How the heck can a man in his fifties stay constantly in such a good shape and fit for starring in physically demanding action movies? Those who know, don't tell but show - including Tom Cruise who keeps currently not one but two franchises active.The sixth "Mission: Impossible" will arrive in July. The second "Jack Reacher" reviewed here didn't have much of a box office success - even the first one was struggling, actually. Here's hoping there will come a third one, because I fnd this honestly quite entertaining.It's a little hard to figure out the aim of Jack Reacher series. It's a typical action movie but then again, it's not typical at all. The makers throw out much of the usual genre filler - including on-screen romances, explanations about the world the intriguing character operates in, light humor etc.The emphasis is on tempo and suspense, building and holding of it, and somehow, somewhy, this lean mean approach works, even without spectacular setpieces of "Mission: Impossible". At least it works for me.Of course, the Cruiser fancies himself an event actor and larger than life, so every movie starring him must have its fair share of "Cruise moments" - mostly shots of him standing, smiling and lurking around in specific way that is instantly recognizable for anyone who has seen his most famous works."Never Goes Back" has a good amount of them, especially in the final third. So if you don't stomach or care about Cruise wearing his Cruise-ness loudly and proudly, you will probably have some hard time with enjoying the result.There seems to be even less room for plot development than in the first movie, but they still have time to bring in two intriguing female characters to go alongside the Cruiser.This gives otherwise action-centric movie a short but moving finale, full of Cruise shots, of course, but still. And it gives hope to see him again and learn about him as character, not just the man who comes and kicks ass. I for one would like that.

jimbo-53-186511 When Jack Reacher learns that one of his former colleagues Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders) has been arrested for espionage Reacher takes it upon himself to rescue Turner (despite her advising him against doing this). It turns out that there is a wider conspiracy involving a company called Para-Source and Reacher and Turner must get to the bottom of who Para-Source are and why they want Turner dead? Matters are further complicated when Reacher finds himself with some rather unexpected baggage...I enjoyed the first Jack Reacher film (in spite of the fact that it offered very little that I hadn't seen before). It was fast-paced, entertaining whilst also offering a fairly decent storyline. I really wanted to like the sequel, but just couldn't quite warm to it in the same way that I could with the first film...Part of the problem with this sequel lies with the story and no matter how much it tries it simply isn't as involving or engaging as it was in the first film. Despite the fact that this film runs slightly shorter than the original it actually felt much longer. The original film suffered slightly with poor character development and underdeveloped villains. This film has the same problems only they are worse in this sequel. Robert Knepper is on villain duties as normal, but he's only featured in a couple of scenes and isn't given the opportunity to make any real impression on the picture. The story is also a little weak and if I'm totally honest a little uninteresting. In this sequel, Reacher also discovers that he may have a daughter and finds himself having to protect the girl who he believes may be his daughter as well as exposing the truth about Para-Source. I presume that the potential 'daughter' may have been introduced to show a different side to Reacher and perhaps to give him a back story, but truth be told it didn't feel entirely necessary and in all honesty it's a strand of the story that I didn't much care for.Having said all that, the film isn't all bad and does still have some impressive action sequences and some of the chase scenes towards the end are moderately exciting and entertaining. However, as I've said the story is weak and uninvolving, the supporting cast don't make much of an impression leaving the action sequences being the only thing worth watching in this film.One other thing; how did the hit-man manage to get to New Orleans before Reacher and Co when they left for New Orleans before him? Unless Para-Source are sending their hit-men by private jet in order to carry out their hits? Yes it's sloppy, largely uninvolving and weak in comparison to the first film. However, when the focus is on the action then it rarely disappoints. It's not great, but it's just about watchable I suppose.