Despite some of my fondness for liking parts of the outrageous stunts of the first “Transporter”, directed by Corey Yuen and written by producers Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen, I really didn’t care much for the film. I quickly logged it as another string of action pictures with lots of Hong Kong wirework and rapid rock video-like editing, but without heart and no plot. Louis Leterrier was credited as ‘artistic director’ of the first film, a mere fact I did know (or much care) about at that time. Still, “Transporter” was a good time waste of a popcorn movie, I only wished it could have been more.

It seems I may have gotten my wish with the release of the sequel, although clocking in at 88 minutes, I don’t think a few extra scenes to catch a breath now and then wouldn’t be too much out of the question. All the principals from the first film return: Yuen is only a choreographer this time, with Besson and Kamen again on producing and writing duty (although an early opening scene credit – “based on characters created by Besson and Kamen” seems odd, seeing how they are credited with the script), and Leterrier is at the helm, fresh off the Jet Li picture “Unleashed” last spring.

Also returning, of course, is actor Jason Statham, as former Special Forces soldier turned courier Frank Martin. This time around, Martin is ‘doing a favor for a friend’, filling in as a chauffeur and bodyguard for a young kid named Jack (Hunter Clary) whose father (Matthew Modine) is a top DEA advisor. Under pressure and away from his family for long periods of time has also put a strain on the advisor’s marriage- so much so that the wife (Amber Valletta) has eyes for our Transporter. Frank constantly thinks of professionalism, he doesn’t fool around. He does however, have respect for her and has become attached in a big brother sort of way to young Jack. In some respects the early points of the plot thus far are not too far from the recent remake of “Man On Fire”, but that’s where the two films similarities end, for this isn’t a revenge themed picture.

The bad guys (and one real bad, bad girl) quickly make their presence known (rather easily; they aren’t convincing as doctors or office receptionists), as they kidnap Jack, and believe that they killed off Frank. Frank gets some blame for the crime, as, the local authorities assume because of Frank’s military record and the lack of a background check, that he may be in on it. There was some nicely done action to this point- a shootout here, a shootout there, the setup of the villains, namely mercenary Gianni, (Alessandro Gassman) hired by a Columbian drug cartel, who practices Kendo in between plots of kidnapping and assassination by lethal virus; his underwear gun babe named Lola (Katie Nauta) who gets aroused by not only being on the edge of violence, but also by causing it. Also notable among the baddies is a Russian oaf named Dimitri, played by Statham’s “Snatch” co-star, Jason Flemyng. Here we get a far better setup, and while in general the plot is only to serve up more crazy and neat-o stunts, there’s more at stake. Not only does Frank have to clear his name, but he also has to find the baddies who have the antidote for the lethal virus.

The action scenes in this film are more effective and exciting than the original, and I think it might partially due to that those who Frank fights for are not made from cardboard. In fact, I was nearly awestruck that the kid wasn’t annoying as most movie kid characters are. The notion that Frank has ‘a code’ and doesn’t break them (although a ‘code’ was lightly in place in the original) makes him look a bit more heroic. There’s also some comic relief, but instead of taking it over the top, Frank’s friend (“Well, he’s not a friend, he’s french…” Frank says early on in a deadpan style) Tarconi, (François Berléand, also reprising his role from the first film) is likable to some extent, showing US Marshals how to cook….and using the Marshals computer database when no one is watching. Do you believe any of this? Is any of this plausible? Of course not.

But most people will go to see the film for the mere showcase of watching someone’s rear get handed to them. There is no shortage of that, by air, land and sea, from fights with a fire hose, a fight on an airplane spinning out of control, fights that results in some opponents getting handcuffed, and others lined up in a dumpster one by one.

Yes, there are gags which are great to look at, and if it wasn’t for the first film establishing such outrageous possibilities, such as Frank jumping in the air to avoid two cars, and an entire CGI car jump, because such scenes would imply that Frank also has a sixth sense of sorts, knowing perfect timing, the layout of the land, defies rules of velocity, and anticipates moves his pursuers make before they make them. All this thrill ride is more thought out by just a few notches to make a guilty pleasure of entertainment. I’m not sure why they didn’t have more use of secondary characters- such as the talented actor Keith David, whose small part as a Marshal is so throwaway it makes little sense of having the actor there. Come to think of it, Matthew Modine doesn’t do a lot either. I’m still going to reccomend this, since if it is big screen action and fight gags you want, don’t worry, you’ll get your fix.

I just wish the filmmakers could have done more. Sometimes raising a bar isn’t all about the gags, it’s also making an audience give a care about the characters. “Transporter 2″ screams to be on the tip of such aspirations, and in at least in a mild attempt at doing so, this is not just a better sequel, it is one of the best action films so far in 2005. Come to think of it, it is the best action picture of 2005.

Transporter 2
Directed by Louis Leterrier.
Starring: Jason Statham, Amber Valletta, Alessandro Gassman, Matthew Modine, and Katie Nauta.