i really liked this movie,it deffenatly makes you think about going on vacation and where,i cant believe that people out here really do stuff like that, for money. She is very lucky that her dad was a cop, cause he knew alot about what to do, and he can kick some mean ass...

i was not expecting any thing from this movie, but it turned out extremely well. really interesting and thrilling action heist movie. pretty enjoyable. Should you see this movie? Yes, it will keep your attention and most of the action is believable. There is genuine balance and chemistry amongst the characters. The director did try something different by putting a twist in the middle of the movie instead of at the end. He gets points for that. He also gets points for the elaborate shoot out scene; I applaud his choice of string instrument background music and lack of loud gun noises to give it a huge impact. If you are into heist movies, ensemble action flicks, westerns etc., you will definitely enjoy this, but do not expect more than what it says on the box. A Michael Mann-ish heist thriller with a pulse-pounding foot chase and some terrific stunt work offsetting its hackneyed plot and dialogue.

Action. Directed by Jon Luessenhop. Starring Idris Elba, Chris Brown and Hayden Christensen. (PG-13. 107 minutes. At Bay Area theaters.) After sitting through "Takers" with my stomach rearranged by hyperactive camera spazzing, I hereby formally request all directors and cinematographers to just get a grip already and STOP. WIGGLING. THE CAMERA.The wobbly handheld approach has its place in documentaries, first-person horror and small Danish movies, but any filmmaker who considers going jiggly should first sit down and watch Fritz Lang's "M," and then decide whether scrambling the audience's visual field is truly the best approach to telling a story. Even in an action movie. Especially in an action movie. I thought the point of watching fistfights, chases and shoot-outs was to actually see the fistfights, chases and shoot-outs.

Take "Takers." It's a mindless, hyper-stylized heist movie, but the mindlessness is inoffensive and the stylishness is slammin'. These are hip dudes who make plans, wear suits and smirk, especially if there are explosives in the offing and a grinding dance beat underneath it. They are a gang of sleek L.A. robbers who do high-class, high-yield work and then retreat to a penthouse for drinks. They include Hayden Christensen in a porkpie hat; Idris Elba as an earnest English ringleader with a crackhead sister (Marianne Jean-Baptiste); Michael Ealy and Chris Brown (yep, that Chris Brown) as a pair of smart and dingbat brothers, respectively; and Paul Walker doing what he does best: glaring with purpose.

When an old gang member shows up, fresh out of prison, he wants them to jack an armored car carrying 25 or 30 million bucks. Elba's character arrives at a razor-sharp conclusion: "We're takers, gents. That's what we do for a living. We take." So while the hip dudes do their thing, a tough-guy copper played by Matt Dillon sniffs around the edges.Director/co-writer John Luessenhop and his colleagues go overboard with the mega-zoom close-ups, quick edits, herky-jerk camera work and other visual chaos, none of which shows anything - it just shows off. So I put it to you: If something's worth seeing, isn't it worth seeing clearly? And if a film is worth shooting, isn't it worth shooting well?

I didnt expect it to be good but i was at least expecting decent. Usually movies like this are at least good for some action but heed my warning when i say you will regret seeing this, its more predictable then you could possibly imagine. Very rarely, if at all, do characters in a movie actually say the title of the movie that they're stealing their idea from, but T.I. says the words "Italian Job" when they're planning the big heist.

It isn't often I review a film. As many others have written, it's easy to see where this film gets its influences (Heat, The Italian Job, the opening scene of Casino Royale etc). My problem was in character consistency. The director establishes that the "heroes" are a well run team of criminals who are smart about the crimes they pull and even know how to take care of their ill gotten loot, but when a "too good to be true" deal lands in their laps by someone they OBVIOUSLY don't trust, with no good reason for them to jump on it... why would they? The acting was really not bad given the material they had to work with, but ultimately the film fails because of unlikely reactions on the part of the characters that make the audience disbelieve the situations. Decent special effects, reasonable acting, mediocre story - except it was badly assembled. Might have made more sense with a different edit.

Takers gathers a lot of high profiled actors but fails to deliver as an ensemble. The story plot is too familiar and been done over and over. It becomes pretty predictable at some point as the story exploits familiar territory. The actors do not stand out and the performace seems enough for a pay check. The script is loopy and there are a lot of question within the inconsistencies of the storyline. Is it worth your time ? If you have nothing else to watch, then do the honors but i can find no merrit for this flick