Crime Story Thread

[Guest Chen Zhen]

Well, you are most certainly right that I am challenging you sir. I have wrote a detailed reply that is a specific breakdown of the action film aesthetics of a Jackie Chan fight scene versus what he has done in Crime Story. You, on the other hand, have yet to say something more profound then, "No one does fights like that! You can tell it's Jackie!"

well, that makes the 2 of us, cuz i cant believe i have to reiterate things too. ok, u want me to breakdown the fight in detail, i'll do that for u. refer to the youtube clip posted earlier. look at the way jackie parries and avoids attacks. he'll fall on the ground...kick a table at an attacker, who trips over it (1:32)- typical jackie there. notice when jackie is bein held against a garage door with that chair, and someone else is coming to hit him with a shovel. jackie 'cleverly' moves the garage door upwards which causes the folding chair to rise, ultimately causing the shovel attack to miss jackies head, and hit the chair (1:35) - another jackie antic, which is a bit too "perfect". jackie gets hit and falls to the ground and an attacker attempts to bash him with a chair. jackie cleverly grabs a tray on his side, which an attacker is lying on, and protects himself at the very last second - another jackie staple (2:30). jackie grabs an attacker (chung faa?) throws him into the garage thingy, and closes the garage door on his back (1:46). notice how the attackers grab just about everything in the room to use as a potential weapon...tvs, tables, chairs, shovels, teapots (?), food, etc. in a nutshell, the way that jackie uses the FULL ENVIRONMENT to his advantage in the fight scene is typical jackie. jackie's fight scenes, 9 times out of 10, always utilize the environment in interesting ways, whereas, most other choreographers just do kickboxing..and the only environment usage, comes in the way of stuntman falls.

now does this mean that the scene as a whole is "typical" jackie? nope, as i sed b4. i never once sed that the fights in crime story are "typical" jackie chan fights. the fight is quite different for jackie, which i already admitted, but not "totally" different, many of his staples are still in it. and im saying is that i can still tell its a jackie choreographed fight (ignoring the fact that jackie is in it), for the reasons above. that being sed, i already stated that its quite different for jackie...with the camera is the biggest difference. take that exact same fight, and use jackie's "regular" camerawork, and i believe more ppl would be able to recognize it as "typical" JC stuff. and the fact that i guess some of jackies parries and moves arent as "perfect" as some of his other films, but the scene still contains many jackie-isms. its easy to notice the differences, as u stated b4 with ppl u kno saying they hate it. but anybody who really analyses fight scenes can find similarities between this and other jackie moments. well, i guess i cant speak for everybody else, but i can at least. so there, i provided u with ur detailed breakdown like u were so sure i couldnt do.

[Guest jirpy100]

As a minor note I'd like to add that during the "interrogation" scene at the police station Jackie does a somersault, jumped off the wall (literally) and does a perfect jumping spin-kick. Is that to be seen as realistic?

And Chen, you can also add to your description of the fight the fact that the gun was very hot (after lying in soup) so he couldn't hold the gun properly at first, shaking his hand a bit, which he has often done in comedy films when his most valuable tools are hot. Another staple of JC films, perhaps?

[Guest Chinatown Kid]

Everybody's got a right to their view or opinion on any given subject and there's nothing wrong with a healthy debate or disagreement. It just that people should use some tact when giving their views and respect other peoples viewpoints that may differ from their own. When you belittle, ridicule, and tell someone they don't know what their talking about you offend people and come off as obnoxious and lose their respect. It's fine to give your viewpoint, but don't @#%$ on somebody else's views too.

[Guest Yakuza954]

The kidnapping? That wasn't a shoot out.

It had guns fired, was an important action scene that had more of a Kirk Wong influence than his, and would be another scene Jackie would have had to re-shoot.

I've never heard of such a rule.

I never said it was a rule but it's good filmmaking because it dosen't make the film inconsistent once it switches between guns and hand to hand. It's already been portrayed as consistent in the film's context.

Only the first Tiger Cage had an amount of gun action that can be mentioned. Part 2 has barely any gun action (unless you count that dude sliding down the pipes at the end in slow motion shooting guns) and in part 3 I can barely remember any from my head. If there is such in three then please mention it cause I forgot. And btw, I mean more than just pick up a gun and shoot it once.

I meant to say just Tiger Cage 1, since I haven't even seen Tiger Cage 3. Crime Story, on the other hand, has a huge disparity in the amount of guns and hand to hand used in different scenes, and hand to hand combat dosen't even make an appearance until halfway through. No way that was the plan of the film going in, and was a result of Jackie Chan taking over Kirk Wong's directing spot.

Guns did not disappear from the movie. If they did, then how did Jackie kill those two people at the end of the fight scene at the climax of the film? Which that reminds me, I find it interesting that when I pointed it out before (in response to your reply about how there were more deaths in one scene than in the other when it wasn't true) but you didn't bring that reply up at all in your last response. Interesting...

I did not mean dissapear literally, but the amount of guns is miniscule compared to the first half and hand to hand combat is the main form of action used. And about the amount of deaths, I did think there was more deaths in the first scene than in the last, but having the same amount of deaths dosen't really change anything considering final action scenes usually have many more deaths than the ones in the beginning.

That's obvious. Jackie didn't want any sex in his movie and he most likely found the subplot unnecessary (I wouldn't blame him, the extra footage of the subplot is silly). However, the tone and style did not change and that is what I argue.

And what I'm arguing is that a cinematographer has little influence in keeping the tone and style the same. He may use the camera the same, but the plot and direction, which is most important, is going to be different.

Excuse me...is this a debate or a game of numbers? Sad that you fall into this, "No one agrees with you territory" rather than take my point on for yourself.

It's sad that you fail to see that it's not "obvious" that the action in Crime Story is completely different from the action in any other Jacke Chan film if 3 people disagree. I am directly responding to something you said, and not just trying to play a numbers game out of weakness.

No. Stay with me here. Police Story 3 is more of a film that is closer to Jackie's style than Crime Story is it not? We agree on this. Therefore a decision to pick a film for an introduction into Jackie Chan for a market that does not know him would obviously go to Police Story 3 between the two. If such a incident took place, then that's obviously the reason why. You're just adding the fact that you don't like the film into that equation.

None of this really applies to this situation as Crime Story wasn't going to be an introduction to Jackie Chan.

Yes, and I would even admit that Jackie is not very smart since he doesn't look past sex in a movie and doesn't try to understand it's context. But stay with what you are arguing. You argue that Jackie changed the tone and style of the movie entirely and essentially made the second half into "Police Story" and that includes his action. I argue he did not and the action, while still mostly hand to hand, is in the spirit and tone established by Wong. That is why the film aesthetics of the fights are so different from what Jackie has done before and since. That says something and is why I stand by that.

I've argued from the beginning that Jackie Chan made changes to Crime Story because he was worried about his international image. So when I say kicking off Kirk Wong has to do with his international image, then I'm still in line with what i've been arguing.

Right. Because some over zealous nerdy commentator, who only looks out for himself by supporting the likes of Harvey Weinstein on his commentaries only to further his own career, is more right than the actual man who filmed the movie in question. I also find it interesting how you color Jackie by painting his history as "shady". And such a clean history Bey Logan has. This is the same man who was in a commentary track with Roy Horan on Tower of Death where he was corrected numerous times on his "facts" by someone who actually made the movie. This is also a man who has virtually ever major point on his commentary for Bullet in the Head debunked on the second disc of the HKL DVD by the people who actually made the movie. But what do those people who made the movie know about the own movie they made right? Their names aren't "Bey Logan" and Bey Logan is a god just cause he talks a lot during his commentaries.

lol. I don't like or hate Bey Logan, but I would agree both him and Jackie have questionable track records. Jackie Chan has outright lied before too, like in an english-language interview when he said he has never undercranked his fights. Yeah right. And I am not saying Jackie Chan wouldn't know about his own movie, but that a comment during Gorgeous wouldn't be the final say on the topic either. And Bey Logan has also been right before, and there is a chance there is some validity to the stuff he says about Crime Story.

This is Jackie Chan. He can make stuff like that happen if he wanted to. Do you know of another action film that has totally different cuts and versions of the action scenes other than The Protector? Also, no other HK film cost as much as they did when Jackie started doing films like Miracles and Armor of God 2. Re-shooting scenes that was barely half a movie wouldn't have cost peanuts on the account of Jackie.

Plenty of HK films have had different cuts and versions of the action scenes other than the Protector. Off the top of my head I know Righting Wrongs, Tiger Cage 2, Heart of Dragon and Black Mask have. And there are plenty more.

Both Kirk Wong and Jackie have noted that Jackie was very interested in the project because of it's drama, crime elements, and dark nature. If Jackie didn't want any of that he could have cut them out and just re-shot stuff. But like I said, Jackie didn't want to create a light version of the film. If he did he wouldn't have been involved with the project from the get go.

As far as the scenes are concerned, in the context of Jackie's version the scene with the psychiatrist is just to establish his character. What Kirk Wong wanted was to take that and turn into a romance subplot. There was no further footage of Jackie "wrestling with his mind" with them from what Wong shot unless you count a really silly scene in a tennis court where Jackie hits tennis balls with fury and then says thanks and runs away. And Jackie's character is still obsessed with the case throughout and the final scene completes his arc when the woman goes back to thank him.

In Jackie Chan's version, keeping the scene with the psychiatrist is a useless way to try to establish the character if there is no follow-up to it and the character exhibits no more mental problems. That's like drawing a portrait and not finishing it. They were also based on real events and would also be a natural continuation of Jackie Chan's character, instead of just being a case of Kirk Wong adding a romantic subplot to the film. Now these are scenes Jackie would have easily been able to re-shoot if he wasn't happy with their quality, but instead he didn't, and it's why the inconsistent nature of the 2nd half, coupled with Jackie Chan's inexperience in non-martial arts Triad films, helps to bring Crime Story down.

[Guest The Running Man]

the way that jackie uses the FULL ENVIRONMENT to his advantage in the fight scene is typical jackie.

All of what you wrote is that he uses the environment. That's it. You just point out that that's what he is doing. Therefore it's proof of it being just like Jackie's films always are? No. Yes, he uses the environment, but not the way he does in his movies. All of what you mentioned falls into line what I wrote before and that was this:

notice that when objects are introduced in the scene they are used in a raw manner and not in the visually pleasing manner Jackie always does. Someone picks up a pot and just hurls it, someone picks up a shovel and just thrusts it, someone picks up a chair and just pushes with it, etc...

In that entire fight scene, not once is Jackie picking up an object only to flip it the air, or bounce it around, or juggle it with others, or spinning it all over the place, etc..

In that scene all of it is raw. When Jackie kicks a table to someone...that's it. He doesn't do a kip up, spin around, roll over, close the table, spin the table around so that people avoid it, hop over the table as it's spinning, kick someone coming at him as it's still spinning, then open the table again, flip back, and then kick the table at them.

When someone comes at him with a shovel, Jackie doesn't kick the shovel out of his hand, cartwheel over, punch him in the face, grab the shovel, cover his head with it, hit him in the stomach with the other end, then swing back to him only to hit someone else he didn't know was behind him, etc...

Jackie did not invent the idea of using the environment in a fight. What Jackie is famous for in his choreography is using the environment in a complex, visually satisfying manner. Jackie picking up a tray right before someone is about to hit him is barely complex. Jackie lifting up a gate right before someone hits him for him to avoid being hit is beneath visually satisfying. All of what is done in that scene is nowhere near the level of what Jackie does. It's all practical. It's just there and at most he'll just kick something away.

I've also given other examples in my post to you before on this such as him struggling with another person with the gun. It exemplifies what is being

It's not a typical fight and the camera is not just the biggest difference. Look further then just the use of the environment. It's not just the use of it, it's how it is being used.

so there, i provided u with ur detailed breakdown like u were so sure i couldnt do.

:lol

I never said you "couldn't do it", just that you were severely lacking in putting up a good argument beyond what gave. You certainly put a better one than you did before, although it took a bit of coercing to get you there.

But leave the repeating my comment as your own just to sort of slap me back in the face. That's unnecessary.

jirpy100,

A note. Discuss something for yourself. Don't come in to "add" something to someone else's post. You started before on this, then stopped, and then only come back to just "back" someone up. What? You couldn't do it yourself before? That's lame.

As a minor note I'd like to add that during the "interrogation" scene at the police station Jackie does a somersault, jumped off the wall (literally) and does a perfect jumping spin-kick. Is that to be seen as realistic?

True, but that is a different scene, not the scene that was being discussed. In any case, the two biggest "Chan" moments are when he hops off the wall and his flip after he kicks the guy over. In the context of the scene, Jackie was trying to show this guy who's boss by tossing him around mostly. When the guy tries to push that thing over to stop Jackie from coming at him, Jackie just hops off the wall to avoid it. Sort of it being like Jackie will keep coming at him and to underline how pathetic the guy is. Jackie then flips off right after he is done to put a stamp on the fact that he just put the guy in his place.

And Chen, you can also add to your description of the fight the fact that the gun was very hot (after lying in soup) so he couldn't hold the gun properly at first, shaking his hand a bit, which he has often done in comedy films when his most valuable tools are hot. Another staple of JC films, perhaps?

No. It wasn't played for laughs. If that were a Jackie Chan moment, Jackie would have done something like really exaggerated his face and then accidentally shoot the gun (cause it's so hot), and miss shooting someone barely. Then everyone would have stopped fighting. Instead, Jackie at first tried to pick up but didn't cause it was so hot, but then sees that it's his only option then shoots to kill (something that Jackie would never do in one of his movies).

[Guest The Running Man]

Yakuza,

I somehow missed an entire section in your last post. I'll start with that. I'll reply to your most recent post later.

For example, In one of the scenes in the second half when he's in the police office, he starts to confront one of the cops and suddenly mouths off about how he hates the HK Police force or something.. He had never shown any prior disdain toward the HK Police force before that and it sorta came out of nowhere, feeling more like that scene from Police Story with his chief than anything else.

I have no idea what you are talking about. If I am to take your example literally though, then that is definitely not a typical Jackie Chan thing. Jackie never bad mouthed the HK Police Force in Police Story. Don't know what you are talking about. In fact, he's whole thing in his movies is to show the law enforcers in a good light. If he was bad mouthing them in Crime Story (again, I don't remember such a scene) then that is opposite of what Jackie would do in his movie. If anything, it would exemplify how pissed off the character is at the case that he would say something like that.

Also, it has not been mentioned yet, but the action scene with him fighting those Triads on what I think was bamboo scaffolds, is a classic example of Jackie Chan choreography.

To a point yes, but again you are not looking passed the obvious. I see the majority of that fight as a bunch of people fumbling around not being able to control their environment at all and just using stuff when they can. In a Jackie Chan fight, even if the environment is influencing them, there is still enough control that visual complex stuff can occur. None of that is happening. Just people fumbling around and at the least it's not even played for laughs.

And the other action scenes you mention as some of his best, must original, and most realistic in his career,

I never wrote "most original".

I just consider to be Jackie hopelessly imposing his choreography on a film that didn't warrant it and hadn't planned for it.

You don't know that.

Most importantly, Jackie, after being an anti-hero character in the first half of the film that was dealing with personal trauma and nervous breakdowns, becomes your run of-the-mill Jackie Chan underdog character that has no such problems to speak of and can win a fight by making the right move at the right time and oh yeah..

No such problems? What movie were you watching? Jackie in the second half is one troubled guy. You seem to be influenced from an outside source here because you are taking the "first half" and inserting it into a context that doesn't exist in the current version.

Jackie's introduction of his problem with that incident at the start of the film establishes that he isn't easy with his job. It's a consistent burden. By the time he is assigned to the case after the kidnapping he is now working for a man he admires who is a decorated cop. When he finds out the man is dirty he is in disbelief. He was a man who has been in the game longer than he has, but he sees that he has well has snapped and couldn't take it anymore. When Jackie is yelling him at the end, he is coming from that place he was at the start of the film. After all of that, when the woman comes back to thank him for saving her husband, it was the only time that he ever seemed to have been appreciated for what he is doing. That means quite a lot to him and it leaves him speechless.

[Cognoscente]

It's sad that Jet Li didn't get to play the lead role as originally planned. The closest that he got to working with Kirk Wong was High Risk. On the Chinese net, it's regarded as common knowledge that Kirk was one of the directors.

Back to Crime Story, I wish that Kirk had joined Bey Logan for the HKL audio commentary.

[TibetanWhiteCrane]

10 hours ago, Cognoscente said:

Back to Crime Story, I wish that Kirk had joined Bey Logan for the HKL audio commentary.

Does for the DD comm.

[Cognoscente]

I know, but it would have made the HKL DVD more worthwhile of a purchase. I regretted purchasing it when DD had their release. It's one of the few times when I gave away a HKL copy of something.

I remember Jackie referencing the film in his Gorgeous commentary, and thinking how awesome it would be if him and Kirk did separate commentaries so that someone could do a comparative video like Rashomon.

[Cognoscente]

I've been browsing the Chinese equivalent to Barnes & Noble where I found the 265th issue of Cinemart (February '92). It contains photos of Jet Li in character. Two months later, his manager Jim Choi was murdered on the same day (April 16) that Once Upon a Time in China II was released in Hong Kong. This was 10 days before Jet Li's 29th birthday.

http://book.kongfz.com/314103/3083889902/