Taken 2 Is A Go, With Neeson

In Taken, Liam Neeson successfully takes on the French underworld with a gun, a few well-placed punches and kicks, and some truly epic one-liners. The unassuming actor is an unlikely action star, but he was a perfect fit for the role of retired government ass-kicker Bryan Mills. And now, he’s going to do it again.

As much as the recently released Unknown felt like a sequel to the 2008 film, an actual sequel is now getting off the ground with Luc Besson once again set to produce, Deadline reports. Besson is working out the script with the first movie’s writer Robert Mark Kamen, and Transporter 3 director Olivier Megaton is in talks to helm it. If there’s a better recipe for success, I’m not sure what it is.

Neeson’s participation in the sequel was initially a question mark due to concerns about the actor’s schedule. However, in an update to the original post, Deadline writes that Besson and Neeson have worked out those issues and a deal is being finalized. The plan is to shoot later this year or in early 2012, presumably for a release later next year.

Fantastic news for one and all. Who else can’t wait to see which nation gets a taste of Neeson’s boot in Taken 2?

News From Our Partners

Comments

  • http://johnleescomics.wordpress.com John Lees

    I think the plot should be that Liam Neeson gets kidnapped, and Maggie Grace has to rescue him.

  • Matt

    What are they going to call it, “Taken…Again”?

  • http://www.jonahweiland.com/ Jonah Weiland

    I only watched this movie a couple of months ago — on Adam’s suggestion — and was blown away by it. One of the best action films I’ve seen in … well, forever!

  • Anonymous

    Oh best news I heard all day. We all need more Neeson in our lives.

  • http://tpbtavern.blogspot.com/ Farson89

    *WARNING, THE FOLLOWING POST CONTAINS SPOILERS FOR TAKEN, CONTINUE AT YOUR OWN RISK.*

    So was I the only one who hated Taken? I thought it was so reliant on blatant xenophobia it genuinely disgusted me.

    HURR DURR EVUL FURRNERS TOOK MAH DAUGHTER. His daughter hadn’t spent five minutes outside of the great and glorious US before she was kidnapped by the dirty foreigners, of course Liam Neeson was against his daughter going to the god-forsaken hell hole that is… France. He treats his French friend like shit, but then of course it turns out that the friend is in on it but then of course he’d be because he’s another dirty, raping foreigner. They try to subvert it by throwing in the American big bad at the end but it feels very hollow by that point.

    It’s ironic that the films stars an Irishman and was directed by a Frenchman and written by another, although I can’t help think it was very intentional, as if they subtly taking the piss.

    I’ll admit that the action was well done but the attitude of the film bothered me too much to enjoy it, and it doesn’t help that every cliche in the book was thrown into the mix. But then again I’m a dirty foreigner, so I would think that.

  • John

    @Farson89

    Or maybe the world doesn’t revolve around your country and you’re reading way too much into it.

  • Dan_pillo

    I think your points are irrelevant, they have taken a legitimate issue, human trafficing, and produced a story around it. They in no way tried to say it was because of ‘dirty foreigners’ as you so eloquently put it.

  • Mike Phillips

    You’re being a little too sensitive, Farson. But then again, maybe I’m saying that because I’m a Glorious American.

    Loved the movie. It made me think, “This is what happens when you kidnap the child of a retired James Bond.”

  • http://tpbtavern.blogspot.com/ Farson89

    John, I’d love to know how you deduced what country I’m from since I didn’t even mention my country in my post. Not once. Which would make it difficult to suggest that the world revolves around it, y’know, what with not having mentioned it.

    In fact the point of the post was that the film rather insultingly played up on perceived US xenophobia, if anything Americans should feel that their intelligence was insulted by it.

    Now then, Dan. Human trafficking is indeed a legitimate issue, and this films handles it in an incredibly insulting way. Neeson’s character doesn’t give a flying shit about human trafficking, happily leaving other drugged girls to their fate to be raped once he’s gone. Every single non American in the film appears to be in on the trafficking, the girls are kidnapped by eastern Europeans literally five minutes after getting out of the taxi from the airport. You don’t have to read into it, it’s clearly there. And let’s not even get into the implication that the human trafficking in Europe is only still going because it hasn’t angered the Americans, because the first American that decides to intervene kills off half the trade in a week.

    Also, if you’re going to try and take intellectual high-ground over a film it probably shouldn’t be in defense of a brainless revenge flick that would suit Steven Seagal.

    I feel I should point out that I didn’t insult people who like this film, I went to see it with two friends who both loved it, and I respect your differing opinions. Perhaps you could do the same instead of insulting me and instead come up with an actual defense of the film you’ve leaped to the protect from my meaningless opinion which will discourage precisely no one from seeing the sequel.

  • http://tpbtavern.blogspot.com/ Farson89

    I’m not actually from any of the countries in the movie, as far as I remember no one of my nationality appeared in it, so I don’t take any kind of direct offense, if anything I’m surprised more Americans weren’t insulted by the film’s rather patronizing attitude towards them.

    I did like things about it, the action was well put together and Neeson pulled off the ‘intense badass’ thing really well, the ‘particular set of skills’ speech was also awesome. But the attitude of the films towards Americans and non Americans really rubbed me the wrong way, implying an insult towards one group and directly insulting the other.

    It is possible I’m looking too much into it, that’s just how I interpreted it.

  • Stathamciaran

    Did you even watch the film? The big bad wasn’t even American, he was some sort of Sheik or whatever in the market for a virgin to add to his harem.

  • http://tpbtavern.blogspot.com/ Farson89

    Not him, there was a businessman just before him who was running things, as far as I remember the Arab was just a client, being the last to die doesn’t make him the big bad.

    According to Wikipedia the character was named Patrice Saint-Clair, which would suggest that the character was actually French and I’m remembering it wrong, but I was sure he sounded American. I’ve tried to find the scene on YouTube with no success, so I can only assume I was wrong on that point, but if anything that makes it worse, since now there isn’t a token American, it’s ALL evil foreigners that Neeson must slay. But yeah, I saw the film ONCE when it came out three years ago, so specific details might escape me.

  • http://twitter.com/1retrohousewife The Retro Housewife

    OK Mr Dodo (Farson89) – first of all, Americans have no idea Albanians live in France, are involved in human trafficking, or even that they exist – the film was not made so much for Americans – and the stereotypes presented in the movie are very European. Which is easy to understand when one considers the French director. Put in that context, the Americans are the foreigners and Luc Besson is making a social commentary on his own country – ie France, vivre la. So lighten up you liberal freak – the movie kicked ass.