‘Taken 2’ possibly one step too far

Taken 2Taken 2. Having seen Taken 1, I must admit to wondering how they could squeeze much more out of one man’s family. But they did.

Here are my incidental ramblings, by no means fully formed, about Taken 2.

Law of reciprocity, lex talons, prescribes an ‘eye for an eye’ is the appropriate recompense for a crime committed. The details of which follow:

‘Anyone who maims another shall suffer the same injury in return: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, the injury inflicted is the injury to be suffered’ Leviticus 24:19-20

Reciprocity was the standard of rightness, fairness and justice in Old Testament times. On the one hand, this is good, because it prevents people from the natural tendency to do more damage in retaliation.

The problem with revenge is as is beautifully noted, “If you kill my dog, I will kill your dog and your cows and your chickens – I will show you not to mess with me!” says James Bryan Smith ‘The Good and Beautiful Life’.

Those who kept the law or reciprocity thought they were being good and right. But where does that leave grace and forgiveness – both powerful and surprising weapons.

So Neeson kills … everyone in Taken. Then their big boss comes back in Taken 2 to avenge the dead and attempts to kill daughter, wife… Neeson, not to be outdone by Norris, of course does not allow this. I don’t want to give too much away, but these thoughts arise from a fairly confusing, weak ending in the final conflict in Taken 2…

Like I say, these are just thoughts. Lord help the scriptwriter for the, soon to be commissioned, Taken 3.

Mind you, there were some pretty breathtaking roof top chase sequences in Taken 2.

Comments are closed.