Director's duet Stanley Tuna и Jackie Chan gave the audience quite a few masterpieces that can be reviewed periodically: "Police Story 3: Super Cop" (1992) "Rumble in the Bronx" (1995) "First hit" (1995) "Chinese policeman" (TV series, 1998–2000), and also good "Myth" (2005). As for Jackie separately, the release of his films has always been an anticipated event for fans of the action genre. The high bar for film quality that he set in his time Jackie Chan no one was able to jump over, even Jackie himself has long been unable to be at least at the level of his minor films. Almost his entire filmography is masterpieces upon masterpieces, they had everything the viewer needed: interesting and varied plots, good mood, a lot of humor, interesting and charismatic heroes and villains, the best fight choreography, an incredible number of real and varied stunts, good cinematography work and editing, duration and quality of action scenes. Filming took place in different parts of the world, in general, there was always something to look at and nothing to complain about (and I didn’t want to). All this always left the viewer full and satisfied.
But at some point, everything began to change, and in terms of the quality of films, Jackie gradually began to approach other action heroes, like modern ones Bruce Willis, Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nicolas Cage and others. No, films with Jackie still have huge budgets, unlike the listed actors, but the quality of the film itself does not get any better, or even worse. Previously, they filmed cheaper, but better quality.
So let's move on to Tung and Chan's new film "Vanguard: Arctic Wolves".
Even at the stage of watching the trailer, everyone was struck by a large amount of computer graphics of low quality (doubts crept in even then), but in general, it was impossible to form a clear opinion about what we should expect from the film - everything looked like an ordinary action movie with Jackie Chan. But after watching, we can say for sure that the doubts were more than justified, and bad computer graphics and the amount of them are not the worst thing about this film.
This time, Jackie plays the head of a secret security company, who and his team take on the task of protecting a businessman from an international mercenary syndicate. There is no point in delving into the nuances of the plot; there is nothing interesting there.
The first thing that catches your eye when watching is how out of place Jackie is, how cardboard and not native he is, as usual. This is the most uninteresting and undeveloped character Jackie Chan. His first and subsequent appearances on the screen do not evoke any feelings or emotions at all! Most of the screen time is taken up by members of his team, consisting of young, little-known actors who do not have even a drop of charisma and acting potential, and there is no need to talk about the elaboration of the characters themselves. A good director is simply obliged to introduce the viewer to his characters using certain artistic techniques, but in this case there is simply no exposition - they are simply shown to us immediately during the operation. After 20 minutes of viewing, it becomes clear that Jackie does not have the main role here. There is no main role here at all, and the focus is scattered on many absolutely cardboard and uninteresting characters with disgusting acting.
From the very beginning of the film, you can feel some kind of lack of ideas in the narrative, everything is very standard and banal, starting from stupid dialogues, ending with the very idea of the film, which does not touch you at all. As you watch, this feeling only intensifies, something that has never been seen before in films with Jackie Chan. And the question “why are they showing me all this?” does not find an answer from beginning to end.
The second thing that catches your eye is a brightly colorful Bollywood video clip. Not a film, but a set of color pictures with contrasts turned out to the fullest and bright rich colors. It seems that the director wanted to hide very meager content behind this screen. But okay, let the picture be bright like in Bollywood, but the director also wanted action, like in Bollywood! As a result, we are looking at computer cars, computer animals, a complete lack of physics and realism, drawn explosions and pyrotechnics, and constant ragged editing. In general - complete "blewd". In other words, all non-melee action looks terrible. As for the hand-to-hand combat, there are good moments, but without a good plot and dramaturgy of the film itself, it just looks like a beautiful leg-swing that is not catchy. But Jackie’s films were wonderful because there were no special effects! Now it’s a complete special effect.
One of the main antagonists is played by a well-known stuntman and supporting actor, an eternal villain. Brahim Achabbake, who managed to fight with almost all modern action movie actors like Scott Adkins и Jason Statham. It would seem clear why he is in this film - to clash with Jackie in the final fight! Yes now! Another surprise awaits us,” the director again decided to surprise us with another plot twist, and he did not let Jackie fight with Brahim. Instead, one of Jackie’s team members did it, finishing him off in a couple of blows! But before, Jackie’s final battles were the main culmination of the entire film, which were replete with various stunts performed live, as well as long and spectacular fights. It can be attributed to the fact that, they say, Jackie is already over 60, what kind of fight is there with Brahim? But this fight didn’t even happen with Jackie’s character’s young colleague! A couple of hits don't count.
The action scenes have some good moments, but the style Jackie Chan is read only in one - when he jumped into the car while it was moving. This is a truly great trick in the Jackie tradition, reminiscent of his old stunts with the ladder and jumping out the car window. There is nothing else interesting here from Jackie's performance, except perhaps a couple of blows.
It would seem - what kind of film with Jackie Chan without good jokes and funny scenes? Jackie's films always had a lot of humor of quite good quality. Here, not a single scene evokes a smile, although the actors seem to be trying to be humorous. Generally, "Vanguard" does not create any particular mood, it can hardly be called an action movie (although there is a lot of action) because there is no seriousness of what is happening. You can’t call it an action-comedy either, since the humor here is extremely primitive and unprincipled. Everything here is completely uninspired.
Imagine, that's not all! Throughout the entire film you have to listen to a disgustingly pathetic orchestral incessant soundtrack, in the style of American sub-blockbusters. The task of music in cinema is to emphasize the atmosphere and mood of certain scenes and situations, but here it is generally unclear what role music plays. It just goes on in the background throughout the entire film, it has no melody or mood.
It is completely unclear what the director wanted to say with this film. It carries absolutely no thought or idea. If in "New Police Story" (2004) touched on the topic of teenage violence and the nature of its occurrence, there were interesting relationships between characters and drama, then in "Vanguard" we were simply shown a special operation by Jackie’s team against criminals in the most primitive storytelling style. The result is a Chinese-Bollywood fake "Fast and Furious". And no less attention was put into creating the credits than into the film itself - they last as much as 10 minutes!
The director himself is listed among the screenwriters Stanley Toon and some girl with the same last name, for whom there is no information on Kinopoisk. Apparently this is my daughter Stanley Tuna, who decided to write a script and persuaded her dad to make her a movie. A Jackie Chan was simply invited to the film out of old friendship. Listening to all the dialogues and looking at everything that happens in the film, you really get the impression that a child’s hand is behind it. This is the worst movie since Jackie Chan from the ones I watched. Even "Armor of God: In Search of Treasure" и "Armor of God 3: Mission Zodiac" Compared to this work, they seem like masterpieces, but these are rather weak films by Jackie’s standards. Even recent "Hostage" with Adkins, it would seem that he had reached cinematic rock bottom, but then appeared "Vanguard"... And now it’s unclear which of these “films” will become the talk of the year, or even the decade. For fans Jackie Chan I can only advise you to be prepared for the fact that you will see the worst film with his participation, and popcorn is unlikely to help you. If the past films with Jackie were good in all aspects (to one degree or another), then this film is bad in all aspects! Not a single film with Jackie Chan I haven’t forced you to watch it on rewind yet. Is it possible to find a worse “compliment” for a film than rewinding?
I understand that our assessment system is fundamentally different. I absolutely do not subscribe to the “But I used to be” approach for the reason that for me Jackie Chan is like an “older brother”. Yes, he has grown older, sand is pouring in from everywhere, but does that make me love him less? I’m rather glad that “brother” is still with me and can even “light up”, well, maybe, than to be killed about what happened before. In no way do I impose my point of view on anyone, I just share my emotions.
Dmitriy, I love and respect Jackie Chan immensely, but this does not mean at all that I will look with emotion at how he is straining to do “like before”, but at the same time bashfully hides behind the graphics that it is no longer possible as before. I just don’t like drawn stunts with completely unnatural cinematics and fake emotions that are supposed to appear as if the stunt was actually performed. I will spit on any such film, be it a film with Jackie Chan, Schwarzenegger or, for example, Donnie Yen, Tony Jaa. I just don't like these types of films. In general, in principle, like a class. Therefore, I will sometimes review Jackie’s old films, and from new ones I will look for pearls like “Extraction” with Chris Hemsworth, etc.
With all due respect to Jackie.
Dmitriy,
My attitude towards Jackie Chan has not changed, on the contrary - every day I understand how much of a contribution he made to the formation of my personality and my tastes, I just share personality and creativity. I only criticize creativity. It's hard to carry this around)
In my opinion, it is too categorical, and in the assessment there are more emotions like “that was the time, I was young.” However, the world has changed, cinematic standards and audience tastes have changed. In this context, the film is not bad at all. Not a masterpiece, but a cheerful and entertaining action movie like the latest "Fast and Furious". Well, Jackie can even be praised for trying to keep up with the times. I don't think everyone would have been better off if this film had not existed at all. I watched it with my daughter. She really liked these handsome guys with fashionable haircuts.
Dmitriy,
Tastes and standards have changed - that's right. But the question is - in which direction? Is it interesting to watch a real trick or a computer animation? Do you want to watch an aristocratic white Briton or a black man as James Bond? Do you want to watch real feminine characters as heroines, or dorks in a skirt with balls?
It’s strange to call this a “movement over time.”
I'm glad that my daughter liked it (sincerely). This is exactly the target audience of this film - teenagers who don’t know who Jackie Chan is.
There is a term called the uncanny valley. And it applies not only to the appearance of dolls and robots. While the graphics were really bad, they weren't disappointing. Absolutely realistic graphics also do not cause rejection. But this is close to realistic - even if you shoot me, I want to puke. And most of the film industry is stuck in this uncanny valley.
Wave,
It’s strange that the only thing I remember about the entire film was the graphics. In my opinion, in general, the “action” was done well. For example, the initial fight in the restaurant, the shootout with the lion, and the release of the hostages. Indeed, golden cars are too much, but objectively, even in John Woo, hundreds of extras dying in the hundreds looked at least funny and as unrealistic as flying Volvos. I'm afraid that in your case the biased approach plays a cruel joke, and if you watch the film not with the goal of reproaching Jackie Chan for not being the same, but just to have fun, then you can even get pleasure.
The review contains criticism not only of the graphics. Yes, and I’m ready to close my eyes to the quality and quantity of graphics, although this is completely contrary to the “Dzhekichan style”, but if the film was good as a film...
John Woo is a different matter - there are always interesting characters, heroes and villains, and sometimes in one person, there are always interesting confrontations (of characters, not just action), there are always dialogues, drama, intrigue, everything is done with soul. Against this background, it is inappropriate to find fault with comic-style shootouts. This is the author's artistic vision, not realism.
The action in Vanguard, as written in the review, is quite good, but with a small clarification - it is not catchy due to weak drama. Action for action's sake, in other words.
I haven’t seen this film and don’t plan to, but I have watched, for example... What’s it called, “Bleeding Steel”? Science fiction about nanorobots and immortals, in general. From the film I only remember the crappy (only slightly more Russian) graphics and Jackie Chan on the Beijing Opera building. I watched Dirty Rotten Partners. In general, I even liked the film, and at the moment when those coastal slums began to collapse, it even seemed that Jackie Chan was back! But as soon as it seemed, a green screen immediately appeared and ruined the whole impression. I also watched, although not completely, “Armor of God 4”, I don’t remember what they are called. In short, what was filmed together with the Indians. The graphics there made me sick.
Of the late Jackie Chan, I definitely liked only “Police Story 2013” and “The Foreigner”. And what a coincidence, both films were made without graphics. Well, I also partially liked “Dirty Rotten Partners,” but not as a Jackie Chan film, but as a light slapstick comedy that you don’t have to watch.
The times when it was necessary to watch every Jackie Chan film without fail lasted (IMHO) from 1982± to 2004. None of the subsequent films aroused such emotions in me and I did not want to re-watch any of them. Sixteen years. This is a guarantee that there will never be another masterpiece. And I don’t like the direction he took.
Wave,
There was computer graphics in Police Story 2013, not as much and not as obvious as in Vanguard, but there was some.
Police Story 2013 had powerful drama and a couple of good kung fu vs muay thai fights. The rest of what happened is that every film now has: retouching, covering up some unnecessary details and drawing the missing ones, something like that. This is no longer in the graphics category, it’s just a gentleman’s processing set.
Depressing. But you still have to watch.
I haven’t been following Jackie’s films for almost a decade now. Although, of course, they do come across them. Some people even like it. But, apparently, this particular one is not worth even trying to watch.
I already feel the contrast very well. Stunts on a green screen and flying on wires almost always have unnatural cinematics, which is like that fly in the ointment.