And why should they? This film is supposed to a slick, adrenaline-fueled romp through action sequences and cheesy one-liners. Pay no mind there, though, because I doubt very much the filmmakers care even an iota about continuity or timelines. This story is apparently meant to go back in time to a younger version of Miller, though that seems to be in plot point only because the flick clearly takes place in a future beyond the original movie.

Did I mention this movie sucks.After a successful box office run ($250 million worldwide through three flicks) and moderate critical success (53%, 51%, 37%) The Transporter franchise turns to reins over to actor Ed Skrein to play a younger version of Frank Martin in the newest film. Given the choice between this movie and the also-terrible Die Hard 5, I would take A Good Day in a heartbeat. At least Ed Skrein would redeem himself with Deadpool a few months later. All The Transporter Refueled has is slightly better ass-kicking. At least Taken 3 had a good performance from Liam Neeson and a decent, if cliched, set-up despite its issues with editing and dialogue, among other things.

One of the worst action movies of the 2010's, newcomer Ed Skrein tries his best as Jason Statham's successor and Ray Stevenson does a decent job as Frank Martin's dad but action sequences that, while not terrible, are a major step down from the original trilogy which were essentially martial arts movies in disguise, a weak story, production values that look outright cheap at times, cases where I strongly suspect that dialogue was dubbed over due to how haphazard it sounds and occurs when characters' faces conveniently aren't facing the camera and the Transporter being left out of focus in his own movie make Refueled a genuine misfire.

The transporter 4 refueled roten tomato