MovieChat Forums > Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) Discussion > Did anyone else just feel this was gener...

Did anyone else just feel this was generic?

posted 8 years ago by mdm42
13 replies | jump to latest

I mean the production value or something just felt off. I swear if not for Cruise this thing would've gone straight to video. Even the opening credits felt unremarkable. It didn't even say "Jack Reacher: Never Go Back" It had the never go back part come after. I think the cast was also unremarkable as well. It had its moments, but the whole thing just felt off. I think there's still life here, but they have to get a new director next time or go back to the original's director.

[–] cowpattybill-08913 8 years ago

Agreed.

[–] Prismark10 8 years ago

A solid muscular thriller but it did look a little cheap.

It's that man again!!

[–] C-Younkin 8 years ago

I thought Cruise did fine and I don't think it being generic is the directors fault. It was adapted from a book which they took most of the plot from. I didn't think the action was bad in this either.

Trying to create a funny, engaging YouTube channel. If you guys check it out, hope you enjoy what you see. Thanks in advance.

Review of the film here-https://youtu.be/kLskmx1PkDQ

[–] Critomaton 8 years ago

Yes, everything about the movie felt like it was actually beneath the work Tom Cruise is usually associated with, and it seemed like he lowered his acting efforts accordingly.

[–] stacy0912 8 years ago

I couldn't believe it...out of all the Jack Reacher books, this is the one they use to make a movie with? It was terrible.

Die Trying would make a fabulous movie and I was hoping that was the next one up. Never Go Back had such a thin plot and even thinner characters. I would rate this, but I'd need a negative number line.

~Keep some room in your heart for the unimaginable~

[–] Beauq81 8 years ago

Doesn't matter what book they chose, they would still have butchered it. This has nothing to do with the book except for names of characters, Reacher's possible paternity and Turner getting arrested.

Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.

[–] philoj 8 years ago

It was very cookie-cutter, and I think the studio rushed way too fast to give Reacher a "family" - it would have been far better to have seen one or two more movies of him as a lone wolf.

--
Philo's Law: To learn from your mistakes, you have to realize you're making mistakes.

[–] hal-9010 8 years ago

Agreed. All in all sort of okay, but felt flat and surely far cry from the first which was great. And perhaps even Tom's worst ever (in a long line of solids, the worst is not necessary a put down though)
___________
** I am normally not a praying man, but if you are up there, please save me Superman **

[–] KingNee 8 years ago

I find the movie "Edge of tomorrow" to be fantastic, while this is only entertaining but nothing special.

"You'll be taking a soul train straight to a disco inferno where you never can say goodbye!"

[–] hal-9010 8 years ago

I think he is spot on in picking the right movie projects. Think about it? Tom has never made a bad movie. Or have been disappointing in a movie. And it is interesting how there are many different kinds on his resume. Not only action, but all sorts. I remember I feared he would not be able to pull of a good Jack Reacher. And despite the obvious difference from the fiction, I think the first Jack Reacher was a gem and had this wonderful old school about it. A solid movie, through and through. This second installment felt flat and I feel it was halfhearted made, in a way. Sure it was entertaining and not awful or anything like that, but surely a far cry from its prequel. It his long line of really good movies, perhaps this one is his worst.

___________
** I am normally not a praying man, but if you are up there, please save me Superman **

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Funny, that's how I felt about the first one.