"Poor film redeemed by excellent fight scenes"
You just described Jackie Chan's whole career.
But seriously, his movies are never that good 'as movies' - if it wasn't for his screen presence, stuns, fight scenes and maybe even some of the slapstick humor, I don't think many people would watch these movies.
There are some exceptions, of course, but you know a Jackie Chan movie, when:
- acting is ridiculously bad
- everything looks dubbed
- the story is simple and predictable
- the cinematography is passable
- there is clearly no 'vision' in directing
- stuns are amazing
- fightscenes are deeply engaging and enthralling
- fight coreography is super imaginative and interesting
I mean, put your hand to your heart; does _ANYONE_ watch Jackie Chan movies for the story, plot, characters, directing - - - to put it another way, for ANY other reason but Jackie's stuns, fight scenes and maybe some of the slapstick humor?
HONESTLY - does anyone?
It's amazing how CONSISTENT this thing is.. I usually just go straight to the fights and stuns and skip the rest, then just watch the ending and that's it. You can list 10 Jackie Chan movies from the top of your head and I bet at least 9 of them would fit my description; great stunts and fightscenes, mediocre or sub-par everything else.
That's just how these movies are, but that's OK, because that was probably the goal anyway.
Having said that, in many movies, the fight scenes are a bit 'over-edited' - whenever Sammo Hung is involved, you can bet SOMETHING is majorly ruined - he has an unpleasant screen 'anti-charisma', that makes my stomach turn for some reason, and I never liked him. I have no reason to hate him, but I guess he's just one of those people that rub me the wrong way.
It might be a coincidence, but every time he's involved in almost any capacity beyond a short cameo, the movie is somewhat ruined or gives the viewer a bad feeling for one reason or another, and even Jackie can't completely save that movie.
reply
share