Some Jackie Chan questions and opinions by a newbie
Doug Hoffman
>Is the voice I'm hearing on English dubbed Jackie Chan films actually
Jackie
>Chan? I think so because it's the same voice as in Rush Hour, which is the
only
>JC film I recall where people's lips were synchronized perfectly.
Yes it is (He did his own voice in the US release of Operation Condor,
Supercop, Twin Dragons, Jackie Chan's First Strike, Rumble in the Bronx)
>The majority of JC's movies are filmed and spoken in Cantonese, which
explains
>why the lip movements are way off. Who Am I is more synchronized than most
and
>I read that it was done in English. Why was it redubbed in English then?
Who Am I? was redubbed (I am not sure it it was shot with sync sound), but
it was shot entirely in English.
All Hong Kong movies with the exception to Police Story III:Supercop was
shot without any sound and dialogue because they had to dub the movies in
Mandarin, Cantonese, and English.
>Are there any other movies besides Crime Story where JC actually kills the
bad
>guys? I'm used to the Schwarzenegger and Eastwood style of getting rid of
your
>bad guys as quickly as possible (with a good twist of the neck or a bullet
in
>the forehead) instead of JC's style of playing fist & foot games for 5
minutes
>and then letting all the bad guys survive. I'd prefer to see JC use his
fancy
>moves to get the bad guys down and then finish them off.
In most of his films, the bad guy either colapses or dies (I can't tell the
difference) from a fight. People don't want to see Jackie shoot someone, but
rather beat him into submission. Some movies that I can remember are the
Protector, Heart of Dragon and some of his early stuff. Keep in mind that
Jackie Chan movies are comedies and he also doesn't like to use excessive
violence. Crime Story was Jackie's most serious film and far off from his
usual comedies.
>People say he performs most of his own stunts. A few of his stunts I
thought
>were really crazy... such as jumping between buildings in Rumble in the
Bronx
>or onto the helicopter rope ladder in Crime Story. Did he really do those
>stunts?
I believe that jump between buildings in Rumble wasn't him but the director,
Stanley Tong. Jackie did do most of his stunts.
Check this site out if you want to know more on Jackie's stunts
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Bridge/8181/index.html
There are more good Jackie Chan movies out there. Check out Police Story,
Project A, Project A II, Drunken Master, Snake and the Eagle's Shadow,
Wheels on Meals, Dragons Forever, and the superior JC film Drunken Master
II.
Donald
you can see Jackie down there on the platform after the stunt. He looks
pretty happy that he made it and I'm pretty sure that it was him.
It wouldn't make much sense to have the director do it.
-Donald
Doug Hoffman <yuen...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: I believe that jump between buildings in Rumble wasn't him but the director,
Millenia X
>bad
>guys? I'm used to the Schwarzenegger and Eastwood style of getting rid of
>your
>bad guys as quickly as possible (with a good twist of the neck or a bullet in
>the forehead) instead of JC's style of playing fist & foot games for 5
>minutes
>and then letting all the bad guys survive. I'd prefer to see JC use his fancy
>moves to get the bad guys down and then finish them off.
Half the fun of a Chan movie is to see his cool moves, stunts and fight scenes.
Shooting someone is too easy. Plus, Chan's movies are more action comedies than
bloody crime drama thrillers. That's why I love his movies.
Dan Walimaa
Bryon Davidson
Norman wrote:
>
> Is the voice I'm hearing on English dubbed Jackie Chan films actually Jackie
> Chan? I think so because it's the same voice as in Rush Hour, which is the only
> JC film I recall where people's lips were synchronized perfectly.
>
Not in many of the early ones. Jackie started doing his own English later. If you
watch some of the earlier movies that have been dubbed, you hear another actor
doing the english voice.
> Are there any other movies besides Crime Story where JC actually kills the bad
> guys? I'm used to the Schwarzenegger and Eastwood style of getting rid of your
> bad guys as quickly as possible (with a good twist of the neck or a bullet in
> the forehead) instead of JC's style of playing fist & foot games for 5 minutes
> and then letting all the bad guys survive. I'd prefer to see JC use his fancy
> moves to get the bad guys down and then finish them off.
>
In interviews with Jackie, he says that he does not like those kinds of movies. To
paraphrase him in the A&E's "Biography", "I like action, but not violence." He went
on to explain that he included to out takes at the end of the movie to show kids
that it was just a movie, not real.
> After
> Rush Hour and Who Am I, it seems I'm more disappointed by each JC film I see.
> I'm going to try watching a few more, but I may give up soon if I don't find
> any more as good as Rush Hour or Who Am I.
>
Well, you've started with his most recent and worked backwards. If he gets better
with every movie (which you will find much debate about that here) then each movie
further back will seem "more disappointing" to you.
Sorry. But the good news for you is that he is still making movies. If you like
the new stuff, but not the old, at least you will be getting more of them. Those
people who like the old "chop-socky" stuff have to make so with the old stuff. He
isn't making that kind of movie any more.
--
Bryon
Antonio Dellamorte
Bryon Davidson <br...@eventbooking.com> <wrote>
Those
people who like the old "chop-socky" stuff have to make so with the old
stuff. He
isn't making that kind of movie any more.
Yes, and I´m starting to hate him for that!!!!!!!!
so bored with his new movies
AD
dENA
Try Once upon a time in China..
!peace
dENA
[ the more i learn, the humbler i get ]
John P. Hayes
maybe somebody at least who will inspire him to pump up the kung fu!
In article <%R3P3.11965$0t5....@news.chello.at>, "Antonio Dellamorte"
<dellamort...@gmx.net> wrote:
--
Visit the Anti-VillageTronics homepage at
http://home.pacbell.net/jp_hayes/avt.html
If you've ever been burned by unkept promises then visit our site.
David Scott Lessenberry
24.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net>,
jp_h...@pacbell.net (John P. Hayes) wrote:
> Got to agree with you. I think he needs to reteam with Sammo and
Yuen or
> maybe somebody at least who will inspire him to pump up the kung fu!
>
> In article <%R3P3.11965$0t5....@news.chello.at>, "Antonio
Dellamorte"
> <dellamort...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> >Bryon Davidson <br...@eventbooking.com> <wrote>
> >
> > Those
> >people who like the old "chop-socky" stuff have to make so with the
old
> >stuff. He
> >isn't making that kind of movie any more.
> >
> >Yes, and I´m starting to hate him for that!!!!!!!!
> >
> >so bored with his new movies
> >AD
>
Jackie has never made a chop-socky movie with Sammo and Yuen Biao. The
only chop-socky he has made with either is John Woo's HAND OF DEATH
with Sammo. Chop-sockies are period movies (perhaps even costume
dramas) characterized by the dominance of martial arts (since most pre-
date modern firearms). Most chop-socky plots revolve around the world
of martial arts. Most people would also claim that chop-sockies are
low budget by definition. For example, PROJECT A is a borderline chop-
socky, but it transcends the genre for several reasons. 1) It was a
high budget HK film for the time. 2) Although not a contemporary
setting, PROJECT A is definitely not a pre-modern story. 3) Martial
arts is not the focus of the film. DRUNKEN MASTER II meets most of the
definitions of a chop-socky, but it was a high-budget and prestigious
film, not what people usually mean when they call something a chop-
socky. I suppose Jackie's last chop-socky would have been DRAGON
LORD.
I don't claim that this is the one true definition of "chop-socky," but
I believe that this is what most people mean by this term.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
John P. Hayes
this stuff right? Your last line sums it up for me!
In article <7ul778$ltl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, David Scott Lessenberry
<dsle...@earthlink.net> wrote:
--
Vyper
news:380ba4c6...@news.quik.com...
| Until I watched Rush Hour I had no idea who Jackie Chan was. Needless to
say I
| was very impressed with his cool moves, so I watched Jackie Chan's Who Am
I?
Well welcome, it's always great to see some more people interested in
Jackie.
| liked that one too, but as someone who likes to see the bad guys blown
away
| instead of just punched out, I was a bit disappointed.
If this type of action is what you like, you are going to be disapointed.
Jackie rarely carries a gun, if ever in his movies. We like Jackie because
he is not a blow them away action star, instead he does crazy stunts, fights
like a mad man and has time to do a bit of comedy in between.
| Each time I found myself saying "great stunts, but the story was weak and
| the dubbing was bad".
This is the disapointment with most English speaking fans have, but you have
to realise one thing... All the films before Rush Hour (excluding Who Am
I?, First Strike, Mr. Nice Guy, The Protector and Battle Creek Brawl) were
produced with an Eastern audience in mind, not a Western one. Jackie has
tried for an American audience in the early eighties (two of the films I
mentioned Protector and Battle Creek) but they failed mainly because the
Western directors didn't let him act the way he wanted to. And so as a
result they weren't that good. For you however, since you like blow them
away type movies you might even like The Protector, because the director
made him try and act like Clint Eastwood or Dirty Harry. I wouldn't
normally recommend the film to others, especially since I hate it myself.
However the remake he did for Hong Kong audiences is much better because the
action he added to it is more like his fighting style, much better IMO.
The dubbing is bad because all his previous films were done in Cantonese
then later redubbed in English. Now to tell you how hard this is to do, it
can take two or three words in Cantonese to say one English word. So
sometimes if the actors are mouths are still going to be moving after the
English translation they would add extra words to their sentances. This is
what they did in all the movies from the eighties and before hand. However
the reproductions by Miramax (Dimension) and New Line Cinema are much better
because they cut the film to make the scenes shorter. This is especially
noticeable in Rumble in the Bronx. You'll see the actor start to talk but
the scene will change to something else while the actor is still talking.
This is so the lip syncing is not so much of a problem. If you have a
problem with the dubbing watch the better ones from these production
companies.
As for the plots well, who ever watches a James Bond movie for their plots?
We don't watch Jackie movies for their plots either, although there are some
movies that he has done with some strong plot in them - like Crime Story,
which you mentioned. We mainly watch Jackie movies to see his action, his
fighting style, his stunts, and his humour.
| After searching the web and reading a few Jackie Chan web sites (I liked
| Vyper's the best),
Well thank you for the praise, I do try. :)
| Is the voice I'm hearing on English dubbed Jackie Chan films actually
Jackie
| Chan? I think so because it's the same voice as in Rush Hour, which is the
only
| JC film I recall where people's lips were synchronized perfectly.
The only films you will hear Jackie's own voice is in the New Line and
Miramax reproductions, like Operation Condor, Supercop, Twin Dragons, and
Rumble in the Bronx. Now all these films are redubbings because they were
originally made in Cantonese.
Rush Hour was done in English (hence the reason why the lip sync is
perfect). But Who Am I?, First Strike and Mr. Nice Guy were also done
(mostly) in English. I say mostly because there were some actors who
couldn't speak English that were dubbed. However Jackie does speak English
himself.
| Are there any other movies besides Crime Story where JC actually kills the
bad
| guys? I'm used to the Schwarzenegger and Eastwood style of getting rid of
your
| bad guys as quickly as possible (with a good twist of the neck or a bullet
in
| the forehead) instead of JC's style of playing fist & foot games for 5
minutes
| and then letting all the bad guys survive. I'd prefer to see JC use his
fancy
| moves to get the bad guys down and then finish them off.
As I said have a look at The Protector, you might like it. But if you don't
have a look at Police Story or Police Story 2, and you'll see the reasons
why we like him so much. Granted the dubbing in these is not so good
because they were made in the mid eighties but they show Jackie in his full
grit action mode.
| People say he performs most of his own stunts. A few of his stunts I
thought
| were really crazy... such as jumping between buildings in Rumble in the
Bronx
| or onto the helicopter rope ladder in Crime Story. Did he really do those
| stunts?
Not most, all. Yes he really did those stunts you mentioned. However the
helicopter / rope ladder stunt is in Supercop not Crime Story. About the
only stunt I haven't seen him do in a movie was in Rush Hour, where he fell
into the banner, it's not him unfortunaltely. Which is typical of American
movies because they don't want to risk the actor while the movie is still in
production.
The reason why Jackie does his own stunts is because likes the audience to
know it is him doing them. It is part of his type of action. Jackie
started out his movie career as a stuntman when he was a teenager, so
believe me he knows what he is doing. And it is part of the fascination we
have with him, because here is an actor risking his life for his movies. It
makes them fun bacause you never know what crazy stunt he is going to do
next.
| Needless to say I'm amazed he's still alive.
So are we. :)
| He has great moves and he can be funny, but I think most of his films
don't
| live up to his full potential. After Rush Hour and Who Am I, it seems I'm
more
| disappointed by each JC film I see.
Well I don't really agree with you there, Rush Hour was a big disapointment
for me, mainly because the fight sequences were just so-so and the banner
stunt wasn't really him. However Who Am I? I enjoyed a lot, mainly because
of the no holds barred fight at the end, plus the slide down the building.
But it came nowhere near my favourite Drunken Master II, which IMO is just
brilliant. To give you an idea, the fight sequence at the end of WAI is
only a small portion of what the fights are like in DM2. However neither
Miramax nor New Line have redubbed this one yet because of it Eastern
flavour, they feel that Western audiences won't really appreciate it.
Hopefully this will change after Jackie new movie Shanghai Noon (an American
produced movie with and Eastern flavour) comes out next year.
BTW, if you have any suggestions for my web site, post them here and I'll do
my best to add them to it in the future. I am always looking for new ideas.
After this conversation I'm now thinking about a newbie section to answer
some of the questions you asked.
--
Vyper
Remove NOSPAM to reply by e-mail.
"I can fight some people. But many people - bull! I could do that, but
it's the wrong thing. We are human and we do get hurt." Jackie Chan
Jackie Chan: DragonMaster Web Site - http://www.dragonmaster.webprovider.com
Vyper
news:7uggcb$erj$1...@news.laserlink.net...
| I believe that jump between buildings in Rumble wasn't him but the
director,
| Stanley Tong. Jackie did do most of his stunts.
| Check this site out if you want to know more on Jackie's stunts
| http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Bridge/8181/index.html
Jackie did do this stunt himself but it was first attempted by Stanley Tong
(who used to be a stuntman himself) to see if it could be done. Stanley is
of the mind where, if he can't do them himself then he won't ask the actor
to do them. This is one of the reasons why Jackie has great respect for
Tong, as he has the same belief. When Jackie directs he does the same
thing, he will do a stunt to show an actor what to do before they attempt it
(that's if they are willing to do it).
Wiggins
wrote:
>I hope they make Rush Hour 2. I don't like Chris Tucker at all. The only reason
>I liked the first one was because of JC.
Dude, the American public likes Tucker. Just like they like Eddie Murphy.
I think it was quite a coup to put Jackie in a conventional American-style
action comedy that was not terrible. Face it, my 25-year-old sister would
never see RUMBLE IN THE BRONX or TWIN DRAGONS but she saw RUSH HOUR in a
heartbeat. It's a way to ease Jackie into people's consciousness, and I
think it's great. It's not like he was in COLLISION COURSE or DEAD HEAT
(check http://www.imdb.com if you don't remember those clunkers).
Plus, the perfect setup for RH2 would be for officers Carter and Lee to
travel to Hong Kong to solve a crime; then Tucker would be the fish out of
water. That would be a chance to further imprint the HK style on the
multiplex crowd.
BW
---
Julia & Billy Wiggins <wwig...@earthlink.net>
David Scott Lessenberry
I agree. I didn't paricularly like RUSH HOUR, but I enjoyed it a darn
sight more than THE PROTECTOR (gag). If Jackie is going to make movies
in the US (with the corresponding inflated budgets), he needs to have a
few huge hits under his belt to secure that kind of financing.
(Imagine how much money FIRST STRIKE would have cost if produced in the
US.) If that means that he compromises his style a bit to prove his
earning potential, that's fine with me. Fans can be unrealistic about
these matters, but the bottom line is extremely important to Jackie if
he wants to exercise creative control AND secure 1,000+ rentals of a
new release. (I am talking about renting prints for theatrical
release, not home video, of course.)