I need clarification wrote:

Damocles wrote:

I need clarification wrote:

...I should judge Jackie Chan by his entire body of work.

Here's the thing: I've seen the new stuff, and it sucked. I saw an old one, and it sucked. If I saw LXG, and then I saw Dr. No, I'd probably want to watch a lot more of Connery's earlier work, but I'd probably only look at the Bond stuff.

Even then, Connery was doing pretty much the same movie over and over. From what I've seen of Jackie Chan, so is he. The problem is it's a horrible fucking movie.

Actually, it's more like watching the new Star Wars movies and knowing they suck, and then watching THX-1911 and being bored, and therefore dismissing Empire Strikes Back and Raiders of the Lost Ark as crap. Which is stupid.

No.

First off, George Lucas didn't direct Empire or Raiders. YOU LOSE.

I need clarification wrote:

Secondly, no one is going around saying "George Lucas is the greatest thing ever." People may like Star Wars, but do you know anyone who was saying Lucas was a genius before or after that? People still talk about Jackie Chan like he never made a bad movie until Boogie Night or whatever that shit was. My experience tells me different! I'm now permitted to assume most of his movies involve the amateurish clowning that has been a BIG part of everything I've seen him in.

I need clarification wrote:

Damocles wrote:

Police Story, Drunken Master, Armor of God... find a movie in one of these series, and you'll understand why everybody can't stop gibbering about this guy.

(Or just watch Drunken Master 2. )

See, if everyone had told me, "Hey, Drunken Master 2 is a pretty good flick, you should check it out," that would be one thing, Instead, I get litanies of how great Jackie Chan is. My post is a reaction to that.