“These are the miracles of transformation,” I thought after about half an hour of watching the new film Isaac Florentine's "Close Range" with Scott Adkins starring.
This is necessary - just yesterday I was Adkins, and now Statham. Scott is even more similar to Statham than Statham himself is to himself. And the film itself, like a twin brother, is similar to the last ten films of our eternal Carrier, especially to some “The Last Frontier”. Either this is a conscious scheme, or following a tired fashion. Or maybe it’s even another tribute to the old school, or the already meager trickle of Isaac and Co.’s imagination has simply dried up, but the film looks more secondary than secondary and clumsier than clumsy, being stuffed to the brim with borrowings from all famous action films, starting with John Woo and the same Statham, and ending with abundant self-quoting . It seems like the script was written by a high school student and the film was directed by a trainee director rather than a seasoned professional. And he staged it 30 years ago.
Having saved where possible, Florentine made such a passable and unnecessary action film that he "Ninja" They seem like a masterpiece. One gets the feeling that the guys had one more film written in their contract, but they no longer had any money or strength left, and they were forced, extremely lack of initiative and despondently, to fulfill the clause of the contract. There’s not even anything to say. We see the entire film as a concentrated brutal, short-haired and stubbled man in a leather jacket, of course, a former special forces soldier, with a schizophrenicly flat and irritatingly serious face, sadly and monotonously killing the local Mexican mafia in a small town, breaking dilapidated furniture in his sister’s house. Colton MacReady, Adkins' character, is perhaps the most playful and flat character in his filmography.
Apart from the colorful opening credits and some good long takes, nothing was memorable. Neither the acting (what are we talking about anyway), nor the mockingly terrible script, or rather a stubby script about ex-Rimbaud, who, apparently, in a fit of kleptomania, stole a mafia flash drive (the one in only one copy) with all the mafia’s dirty deeds ( I just had an allergic rash at that moment), neither the music nor the lifeless fight choreography, which was supposed to try to pull this film out of the abyss by its underpants, but after the same "Undisputed 3" which was also not without its shortcomings, completely uninventive fights and senseless home or desert shootouts from Kalash rifles, full of numerous blunders, look like some kind of ridiculous joke, not to say a parody.
Overall, in terms of artistic value or interesting action, this film is zero. The wildest bad manners that only bury Scott. Scott could have spent his time doing something else. For example, go bowling with friends.
Author: Ravenside
Especially for fight-films.info
People, you've gotten too greedy) They almost never make such strong, honest and tough action films) Great movie) Watch and re-watch) But the opinion of authoritative critics of this resource is once again negative)))) Everything is wrong for you) Kindergarten by God)
Cyclonus,
- perhaps you are right, but only if you haven’t watched truly STRONG ACTION FILMS. And most importantly - quality. Almost all of the “authoritative experts,” as you say, explained their point of view with arguments, with which one cannot but agree, and did not just say - Wow, cool! So they don't take it off? Where are they not filming? Maybe you just don’t follow filmmaking? And I personally don’t understand what to watch and review here. Try to explain your point of view. What is there in this film that you haven't seen in Scott's previous films, or in action films in general? What can be reviewed?
Cyclonus,
I'm waiting for your review. We'll publish it.
And the authority of critics is a very relative matter.
By the way, I forgot to add about the camera work, it was filmed very well!
And as for the Wild West, Westerns.....I’d rather rewatch Florentine’s Rebel, with Daniels, it’s cheaper, but at the same time it’s much cooler and Gary has one of the best roles.
JOHNSON,
A controversial point about the operator, although they correctly noted - in the same REBEL everything was several heads higher. And especially for camera work! And the installation is very clear and competent. With the exception of one moment (the flying fall of the villain in the final fight. A couple of frames still needed to be trimmed. The twitching on the cable was very annoying to the eye.) REBEL, AMERICAN SPECIAL FORCES and UNDISPUTEABLE 2 are the best that Isaac has. The rest is all just a matter of time to watch. Although I don’t know how the DRAGON BATTLE with Dolph will go now. I haven't reviewed it for a long time.
What about rewinding and speeding up battles? I thought the fights would draw out the movie, but no....... This is just a regression of the Adkins/Florentine duo..... I'm disappointed, the film is not even category "B", but already category "C", if not lower.. .
I agree about the long takes, they are good. And by the way, Scott is trying to play here, and he seems to be succeeding.
PS Raven, I still hope to see reviews of the Undisputed franchises from you and I would like to see Transporter (+legacy).
And Offtopic: barsug, please upload a teaser of Kickboxer, in case anyone hasn’t seen it)
JOHNSON,
“Transporter: Legacy” has been in draft form for a long time, I planned to post a review of it earlier than “Close Distance,” but I have too little time for a lengthy text, so I don’t know when I’ll post it. The text for “Close Distance” was simply short because there was no subject for a lengthy review.
Regarding the old Undisputed and the old Transporters... well, I try to review new films, this is more relevant.
As for old films, we need articles. But timing, timing...
In general, I'll think about it.
We go further ...
A fragment when two shooters were looking for Scott's hero in one of the rooms at the time the girls escaped.
Bang bang on the door and then..the cartridges ran out. And accordingly, the choreographers could not come up with anything other than the banal breaking down of the door by the main character and its fall on the petty villain. Well, of course...the IQ of the choreographers, director and main character is obvious. Or on the face.
And if so:
Shooting at the door. The cartridges are out. Danger. The villain kicks down the door, shooting... when suddenly the next door suddenly swings open IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION from the blow of his foot and flies off its hinges, immediately covering the unlucky sniper, who flies off along with the door a couple of meters. Powerful, confident, spectacular!!!
Why the second door? But because they shoot at the first one and the hero has no choice but to use the second one. For personal safety. + show the effect of power and intelligence.
You immediately feel the urge to run to the gym and read something intellectual to develop your brain chakras! + at the same time we also say - Wow!!! Acquiring the required emotions. And then there’s also the desire to show it to someone I know.
Is it really that difficult? But you just need to remember that the film is still being watched by the viewer, and not by the film crew who came just to hang out.
A little moment:
"The camerawork is top notch, the fights are spectacular."
- I would say they were filmed as they were filmed. The cameraman didn’t bother much, managing to film something.
Here's even the first fight scene:
Filmed at eye level, periodically with Scott falling out of the frame + the wide-angle lens reveals simply wild distortions of the geometry. Someone will say - Yes, this is all bullshit and it doesn’t matter. Wow...how important. And even if someone is not an expert in camera work and other technical aspects, everything is visible to the naked eye even to non-professionals.
The fights between Jackie Chan and Sammo Hungg - this is camera work! Really up to par.
Let's imagine for a moment.
The whole same fight, with all the blows and falls, BUT.
Let's replace the lens with another one. Let's say 35th. It's practically wide, but without distorting the geometry. Let's leave the same camera movements, but where the villains fall, we sit down with them, a split second before they fall, so that they get into the frame from a lower angle. We give more close-ups of Scott's reaction to what is happening and, accordingly, the reaction of his opponents. We pay a little attention to the girls in the room. Literally for a second. Scott's hero examines who is in a given place and only then enters into battle. That is, we pay attention to the emotional plane instead of mechanical fights. As a result, we get a very decent film that claims to be close to a respectable category.
Is it difficult? Does this require a mind-blowing budget or knowing Hamlet's final dialogue by heart?
What are the problems?
Personally, I don't see them at all. Except for one thing - human laziness!
Eh, damn, I don’t even know what to answer. As a viewer, I don’t even notice such nuances. But it’s a cool remark) Although, honestly, I liked everything there. I still have no complaints about the cameraman and editor. In Hollywood there is a lot of shaking and flickering, and they are great.
Freestyler90,
I can agree on some things. Sometimes I just watch a movie and switch off. Which happens extremely rarely. For example, in the first UNSTOPPABLES. I tried not to worry too much. But what’s interesting is that I have no desire to rewatch this movie.
I have a lot of friends who don’t bother at all with how it’s filmed and all that, but when I start to sort out all the intricacies with them, we come to the conclusion that TECHNICALLY COMPETENT THINGS ARE MORE INTERESTING FOR THEM TO WATCH. On the subconscious. This is at the level of human psychology. They say VIDEOK is a strange film. Yes, not strange. He's normal. True, the cameraman there sins big time, exaggerating Depardieu’s shnobel frame by frame in a close-up, so it seems like something from ArtHouse. Here too...we look and say - Oh, that seems good. But if you look closely, it was good both in the previous movie and in the previous one... And when was it good? Well, that's very good. Ahh...three hundred years ago.
Something definitely needs to change in BI films. Lack of scripts? I do not believe. The Internet is teeming with interesting stories! But of course there is a lack of “sick” specialists in this matter in big cinema. Young people need to be promoted. young...
jaidev,
I would say this: if an object has interesting content, dressed in a high-quality form, the object works 100%. A high-quality form is not necessarily technically ideal. But it must be fully consistent with the content, verified in this regard. If it’s careless, then it’s on purpose, if it’s licked, then it’s deliberate. Any work of art is form + content + cultural context.
What do we have with “Close Distance” - the form is so-so, the content is so-so, the cultural context... well, I won’t say anything).
So, it’s not enough that Scott’s arms and legs were cut off by the cameraman and his horizons were “blocked.” First and foremost, the problem is that this is a stupid, superficial film that evokes almost no emotional response. People may like it, they may not like it, but admit it - this is an ordinary action movie. And even if we see that the main character fights better in it than in other action films and without doubles, this is still generally unnoticeable, because the viewer is watching the film as a whole. When we talk, the main thing is fights, and everything else is a lie.
Ravenside,
“A high-quality form is not necessarily technically ideal. But it must fully correspond to the content, verified in this regard.”
- I completely agree. Even Jackie Chan sometimes in his own films was slapdash in terms of “form” (I’m not talking about physical form), but this did not stop me from watching his films again and again.
Because there are not only fights. And that's right. We watch movies not only for the sake of fights, even if we are amateurs or fans of films with BI.
A few more words about the main character.
Looking at the poster, I see a criminal from the NTV channel and, to be honest, I actually don’t want to watch this movie at all. There is only him in the frame and some kind of shack in the background. The authors really took great care of the attractive advertising of the film!!! What to talk about next? I think that comments here are generally unnecessary. Besides, I think that this film is not worth much attention at all.
Personally, I expect ON THE TRAIL. Based on the trailer and materials about the film, it is very lively and interesting. + I think the Chinese team with Renny Harlin will be able to produce something worthwhile. Unlike all the American directors with whom Jackie has ever worked. But that's a completely different story.
Guys, how can I make the text hidden or color it in a different color so that it is not visible?
I haven’t finished the text yet, plus I didn’t finish it, I wanted to write
“Scott doesn’t really play here, he comes out here with a proven image.”
Plus I also wanted to add about the battle scenes. First the pros:
- The camerawork is top-notch, the fights are spectacular.
- Scott's character has his own signature features here that are not present in other films.
Apparently he came up with them in the context of this film. Namely: a painful neck grab followed by turning the opponent over - looks great; a belt with a knife, which he takes out if necessary and, let’s say, “makes a smile from ear to ear” at the enemy - also cool.
- Quoting action is quite appropriate here. For example, a shootout around a wall. Collision between a car and a person. Yes, it's John Woo! Plus a little slowmo. Florentine does not abuse this here. But it looks nice. Although the scene with the jeep could have been made more interesting. Van Damme did a somersault at a difficult target, but here Scott calmly stepped over, well, this is not real))) And this one - the machine gun jammed, and after being hit by the car, it started working again, well, well))
And now about the cons:
-As I said, Scott is controversial here. And in the murder scenes he goes too far in cruelty. Using his trademark knife, for some reason he makes too many blows to the already dead body. And one day, in the end, it completely hits where no man would wish. This was not necessary.
-Colt’s opponents are trying to stand out: one has a checkered shirt, the second has a pigtail, the third has a cap. But they are all extras, cannon fodder for Scott. As a result, you know that he will screw everyone. However, I also always knew that Statham or Chals Bronson would not die in their films, but still...I wanted to worry.
- Well, the duel, as I already said, was meaningless. Plus, it was obvious to the sheriff that it was better to choose a more reasonable solution, because he had something to live for. Colt was ready. The sheriff wouldn’t have been able to get out of the sitting position with the armored vehicle. But for some reason Florentine puts such emphasis on this as if it were Charles Bronson versus Henry Fonda from Once Upon a Time in the West. Also one person's view/another's view, high-speed editing back and forth. I understand if they were equal. For example, if Colt had a gun on the ground (well, he ran out of cartridges or he would have deliberately thrown the gun, saying I don’t want to kill you), and he has a shotgun on the ground, too, like in the film, after shots were fired at the armored vehicle. And so they would simultaneously grab their weapons.... I don’t know as an option, it’s also not very convincing. But still, there must be some tension. I just didn't like the approach.
Well, it’s a normal action movie, a C grade. I'll buy it on Amazon. Still, this duo still has something to say.
But there is also something to work on in terms of shortcomings. The only question is: will they work on them?
Well, it no longer depends on us.
Guys...what is Leone like? What Statem? Van Damme...? What are you about? Scott was initially clumsy and will remain so forever. The best that he was able to show was already - American Special Forces and Undisputed 2 - the most chic! On contractions, energy, filming and editing. He's a great athlete! And even more than that! But he won't act. Because he can't. But if he could, Sammo and Jackie would have cast him in a larger role, and not as a give-and-take. But God bless what we have, we are happy with it, as they say.
As for fights and stunts... Watching a guy kick for the hundredth time from the same position, you must admit, the picture is not very promising. This is not Jackie Chan, who can think through hundreds of manipulations with one somersault. And the somersault of which will always be in an unusual context. Or it was.... Whatever you like.
As for Florentine and Leone. Maybe he loves Leone. But his films are no different from the films of Corbucci, Barboni, Baldi, Fulci (as the director of a couple of westerns. That was a guy too!!! And he directed horrors and dramas and westerns. And at the same time, very well)??? How??? I recently rewatched SAVATT. NOT bad in some ways, but before Leone it’s like before China. The fight between the main character and the villain in the Colts in the finale did not come one step closer to the same fight between Henry Fonda and Bronson in ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WILD WEST. Leone had his own special world, which he created. Its own energy, tension. Which was felt in every frame. So let Florentine first learn to understand what’s what, and then speak. We can talk a lot, but the result...? And the result is disappointing.
Someone will say - What about the long takes here? What about doubles? Here in TOM YUM GONG it was justified and served deliciously. Everyone knows what I mean.
Someone will say again - budget? What's the budget? The same blows for the same money and there is no need to make an epic here. To put it simply, my brain is simply dry.
What to do?
Make your own movies! There is KickStarter and BoomStarter, as well as God help you. Practice shows that the same GROUNDHOG DAY and KUNGFURI were a hundred heads taller than this garbage with famous, like actors.
This site could easily organize such a thing. The main thing is to approach this issue head-on. If everyone here is such an expert on cinema, then why not make it yourself. We reason well. Or are our attempts here limited only to who is good or bad? But as they said above, what does it matter to Scott or anyone else that we are talking about all this here?
I haven’t written anything lengthy here for a long time, but I decided to shake off the old days. But because there is no point in wasting your time. Although... I come in regularly.
Something needs to change. and then a lot can change. Definitely. Law of action.
jaidev, not as a complaint, but still - when will we be able to see at least “Precipitation”?
Wave,
In 2016. 10 years since filming began! We will issue it on this date.
In the meantime, in December there will be a comedy LOVE BY REFERENCE. And even with a comic fight. The sound for the trailer was already done a couple of days ago. I am gluing the video sequence.
Wave,
Well... personally, I have snow outside my windows)
Ravenside,
Likewise!!! I would even say - 100%!!!
Ha, I downloaded and watched the movie. And I rather liked it than not.
On the one hand, I agree with Ravenside's claims about the film's secondary nature.
But from the point of view of action: skirmishes and fight choreography - I liked everything.
I have long wanted Florentine and Scott to go beyond prison rings and kimonos with katanas.
And so it happened. And if you don’t compare the Undisputed and Ninja series, then this is the best action movie
after the Shepherd. An example for comparison is certainly unsuccessful, but still. Plus, you can see how Florentine wanted to make a nod to Leone’s favorite westerns:
There are also desert ranches reminiscent of the Wild West.
Bad guys with guns and cowboy hats.
Mexican music, which in some places is reminiscent of Morricone.
At the end there is even a duel-type scene.
All these elements create a good atmosphere in my opinion. An action film with western elements. OK.
BUT not all elements work in favor of the action movie. For example, Mexican music works well when
There are calm scenes with dialogues or the camera is simply filming locations, but when the action starts, it becomes, in my opinion, inappropriate. It had to be exciting, something on the level of the music that was in the teaser when Scott was fighting in the corridor. If there was such a mix of disturbing music in action scenes and relaxed guitar in calm ones, it would only be better. Well, okay, this is a small thing.
What was most disappointing was the motivation behind the actions of some of the characters. First of all, the complaint is against Adkins, or the writers who wrote his character.
!!!ATTENTION !!! SPOILER!!! Why does Colt kill the villain’s nephews in the course of the story? I actually felt sorry for the first one, to be honest, because he said that everything was okay with the girl and she confirmed it, but he flunked “you’ll get off with minor injuries,” thereby only aggravating the problem, inciting and further angering the dangerous guys against himself and their loved ones. It’s the same with the second one, especially when he says: “And now I’ll kill you, bitch”... after such a phrase I get the feeling that this is not a bad cartel, but Colt is bad, for whom it is important not to save his loved ones, namely that killing everyone doesn’t matter and it doesn’t matter that the opponent didn’t do anything like that. And this does him no credit. It is not clear what Colt is motivated by. Then, of course, Sheriff Calloway tells the villain that he was a soldier and in Iraq he was moved by his mind, as a result of which he developed the inclinations of a ruthless killer and became a mercenary. MacReady's relatives, in turn, calmly justify him, saying, “He kills those who deserve it.” Well, I don’t know, I don’t know. !!! END OF SPOILER!!!
The writers seem to come up with a reason for him why he is so bad, but it seems to me that this is not enough to justify him. A very contradictory character. Although he fights cool and looks organic in the image ala “Statham + Boyka”. Scott isn’t really here, he goes with a proven image, you know which one) But it’s time, as Ravenside said, to experiment and be different.
But Scott is great, despite my criticism. He gave it his best. This is more of the writers' fault...
Next, the complaint is again to the writers and the one who moved the story of the film. There, in addition to the kidnapping, everything revolves around a certain flash drive, which...!!! SPOILER ALERT!!! hanging around his nephew's neck. And in this flash drive there is all the criminal dregs, what a crazy idea to store information like that, what kind of stupidity!!! END OF SPOILER!!!
Well, the final duel was more disappointing, but it was clear who was winning. It’s one thing for Leone to be equal there, but here it’s a kind of pseudo duel. Predictable.
Freestyler90,
Only 2 of Florentine's films resembled the wild west - Savate and The Mercenary. And then, very remotely.
About the logic of the plot - I agree, I could have added a lot more about this, but I just didn’t write it in the review, because it’s not even interesting.
And it’s clear that the fault lies with the director and screenwriter.
By the way, about the acting. It seems like I read in an interview or in some review that they say there are no rehearsals left for it. All the strength and energy is spent on the action due to the limited number of shooting days, and as a result there is zero emotion on the dialogues. But Van Damme supposedly has experience, well, he...partially uses doubles, as a result of which the game is his norm. But of course this doesn’t sound like an excuse.
In general, I remember an interview with Scott, where he talked about his favorite actors, like Anthony Hopkins and Gary Oldman - and I think, well, since you cite prominent actors as examples, why is he so clumsy in his films? I would look at their facial expressions, how they create images, what kind of presentation they have, so to speak, I would use their influence and techniques. I don't understand him.
freestyler,
I need to study.
Of course, there is talent from God, but there is also craft. Collectively, this is what is called “profession.” One does not exist without the other. You can't swim on potential alone.
Adkins is no slouch. Just work on it, look for your acting organicity, liberate yourself, experiment, try to be different, study and study, acting courses alone are not enough. And not just try to work out dialogues on the fly while filming. I think he's just focusing his time on other things.
Ravenside,
Ravenside, I agree, I agree. I also don’t like the fact that he exploits the same type. Well, Florentine, too, of course, says in an interview that he likes Leone’s westerns, so why doesn’t he himself make this western with a fighting game, adjusted to modern realities. Either the producers are limiting him, or he himself has no desire, they say, but it will do anyway, the main thing is the action.
By the way, I haven’t seen the film yet. I'll take a look and share my impressions)
Ravenside, By the way. It would seem that one would have to look for such a monotonous actor as Statham. Watch "Spy" - Statham turns out to be a decent comedian. It’s a monstrous pity that there’s so little of it, and the main character is a fat woman that really infuriates me.
Wave,
Well, in general, Statham immediately seemed to me like a good actor, with character, with a spark, when I saw him in Guy Ritchie. Now he is simply a hostage to an image, a well-established scheme.
Ravenside, I read these “he needs to study, he needs to experiment, he needs to...”, and - honestly - it’s not even funny. He is neither cold nor hot, because in distant Russia, on some fan site, someone writes about what he (Scott) needs.
Wave,
Of course, he is neither cold nor hot. I have no illusions about my place in the world. However, since Scott doesn't act in films that he then puts in a drawer, but tries to sell himself in the film business, I and hundreds of other no-names will discuss him. And that's okay. Otherwise, life is boring.
Moreover, they are trying to sell their goods to these no-names. So...
Yes, I just imagined how, in a fight to the death in a small room, Boyka does guyver kicks and other somersaults.
The question is, what is better, “Close Range” or “Wolf warrior”? Should we make cheap films with a 22-year-old script, but with fights, or break into a big movie for roles several minutes long and with no fighting?
"War of the Wolves"
"The Expendables 2"
“Wolverine” (I don’t remember which one)
"Medallion"
Did Scott show anything outstanding in all of this?
Wave,
The Expendables are not much special. But he is the character who was able to almost trample Statham + the only normal 1 on 1 fight there (I expected more from Van Damme).
Wolverine is the first, he stunted Deadpool there and not Reynolds). The scene is memorable, but very little.
I don’t remember/didn’t watch the rest and I agree with the question - is Wolf Warrior better or worse than this film?
uranium,
Wolf Warrior is about the same. Even worse, probably.
Wave,
Because you liked the movie, you try to "justify" it.
Nobody expected Guyver kicks. All fights in “Close Range” follow the same principle: a kick to the chest, then a painful throw/throw, a few blows to the face. In one variation or another. Almost all of Adkins' fights begin with a kick to the chest, which knocks the opponent back further along the established pattern. He has this scheme in so many films. But that's not the point.
Guys, aren't you bored? Aren't you tired of it? This is all...it’s happened to everyone a hundred times already, boyan drives boyan to boyan. Don't give a damn about the script, it still doesn't delve into it, but since we're talking about fights, well, that's what it is, what is everyone waiting for? Just throw the mafioso left and right and wave a Kalashnikov with a frozen face? Is this “the one”? Statham? Seagal? A lighter, more academic "Raid"?
These films are for schoolchildren. Can anyone recreate the fights from Close Range in their heads? Will it be possible to make a parody of them? Did anyone remember the names of the villains, their costumes, and the distinctive features of the fighters? What about the fighting traits of the main character? How is it different from all the others? Do you empathize with him? He’s a cardboard hero, they made a hole in his side with a knife, and he rode for another half of the film and rode off into the sunset on a motorcycle. Damn, they would be better off fucking cutting off his hand and letting him fight them with his stump. He arrived, showed off and left. What's the point?
Of all the films listed, only "Wolverine" is interesting - the rest have nothing to do with the "big" cinema. "The Expendables" is just a cranberry that everyone is interested in purely nostalgically. The third part was no longer interesting to anyone, and the fourth would be complete agony. “War of the Wolves” is a small-town movie, “Medallion” is a film, in my opinion, no one really remembers at all.
And what does this have to do with the cheapness of films? You need to turn on your imagination. People shoot good films for pennies on their own camera or write cool music in the bathroom on a cheap laptop.
Let's forget about Hollywood, don't give a damn about it. Here Adkins sits in the niche of DTV films, but hurray hurray hurray with fights and Florentine at the helm. They've been making films for so long, they're all the same. “Indisputable” only fired, and even then not as well as it could have.
There, people in the group write that the author simply does not like films of this genre. Hehe. What genre? Do you like comedies? And you love every single comedy? And Galustyanovsky-comedyclub and Andreasyanovsky? And you look at them a hundred more times?
Ravenside, there are two options: don’t watch Adkins’ films or don’t expect something from them that hasn’t happened yet. All other discussions on the topic are fantasies from the series: if grandmother had a penis, she would be grandfather. All! He won’t have films with an interesting plot, deep acting, and so on. Yes, I would also like to see something like the first "Armor of God" or "Dragons Forever", but with Adkins and Jha in the lead roles. But this won't happen. There will be monotonous and disposable DTV, which I will nevertheless watch with more or less pleasure.
However, this is Adkins not on Florentine's budget. He will not climb higher, will not play the main role in an action movie of category A with a budget of a hundred or two lams of greenery. At best, he'll be a minor villain with a couple of minutes of screen time where he won't be allowed to show his potential. On DTV he is at least in the center. That's what I mean. That’s what I’m asking: “which is better?”
Wave,
And to hell with Hollywood, Adkins has no chance there, and what’s the point - they don’t film anything interesting in Hollywood now. 50-year-old Tom Cruise jumps on planes, the Avengers save the world from themselves....
The thing is that you can shoot interesting action films on DTV, you just have to try to do it. Florentine has either come to terms with his situation or is deliberately catering to a “niche” audience. Yes, I understand that there is the dictate of the budget, and there is the dictate of the producers. But damn, I don’t see a single attempt in films to jump over their heads. Here Gaidai fought with Soviet censorship and was cunning as best he could, and this is worse than the producers.
Do you remember, in the teaser trailer, Scott was fighting with the Mexicans to the cheerful Mexican music. Why was it removed in the final version?
As an on-screen fighter, Scott stands still. That's it, at the moment he has hit the wall. No progress. “Close Range” is even a step back, because in this film he can be replaced with anyone, even the elderly Gruner or the moth-pale Daniels. Well, perhaps the stunts with jumping on the car won’t be filmed, otherwise... the film won’t lose anything (there’s nothing to lose there).
If we are considering the option that it is better to have leading roles in DTV films and with fights, then Scott will simply play Boyka and all sorts of Boyka-like characters, clones of these Colton MacReadys and hundred-nin-ninjas, until his retirement. You have to live on something. True, most people will download his films. But one day what happened to Van Dam will happen. Or worse, Van Damme can at least act, but Scott is still an axe.
So, I will also watch DTV films with Scott with more or less pleasure, as well as with other actors, like any other films in this genre, the problem is that films in this genre are now not of very high quality, not only because for the budget, or rather not so much because of the budget, but because of the approach. “Nobody cares about anything except the action.” Great. But these will be films for one day. Because good action in a fighting game is much more difficult to make than anywhere else, because you will always have limited funds. Always. Edknis, Florentine and many others are now following the path of least resistance. In addition, they still do not know how to make films and do not work with the viewer on the screen in almost any way.
Ravenside,
Did they remove Pitbull? Was that music removed from the teaser?! What do you mean why ?!
And I think I know... copyright... they demanded money for its use,
which apparently were not there. Although, again, it was in the teaser, which means there should be no problems with rights. It's a shame, it's a shame.
Ahead of me, I just looked at it yesterday and wanted to join the group.
The movie has nothing but fights - and they, like clips of Emelianenko’s fights from The Salamander Key, can be searched on the Internet and watched separately.
The plot is sluggish, nothing is memorable and the film could have been a short film.
The shootouts are stupid, the plot doesn't move.
It was doubly hard for me to watch because I recently watched Samvel Gasparov’s action films, well, those Eastern films from the times of the USSR. If he had filmed, the girls would probably have been killed, but the meaning is similar.
uranium,
Uranus, just roll with it. It's interesting. And the fact that I’m the only one writing.
Ravenside,
It will turn out one on one with you. If only to compare it with other action films of the “thriller about a home defender” genre.
uranium,
Yes, write, write)
Hello Spaniards.
no hay proyectos de peliculas de tony jaa para 2016
Eve,
all the time
puede poner noticias de tony jaa y jet li, iko uwais
juanito,
Reminded me of Interrupted Path 2006 with senseless fights