Badmovies.org Forum

(https://www.newdvdreleasedates.com/images/posters/large/the-foreigner-2017-12.jpg)

I saw this a few days ago: both Jackie Chan - as the vengeful ex soldier - and Pierce Brosnan - the former IRA operative - play completely against type and the film, while good, is almost sickeningly violent at times. There is one scene which nearly made me go el-puko: let's just say it involves a wounded, uncooperative terrorist and a strategically placed pistol barrel.  :buggedout: :buggedout:

My nine year old nephew expressed interest in seeing it: I think not.  :buggedout:

I haven't seen this movie, I will try to look for a clear copy. The reviews and the story looks promising,

It is a good movie - directed by Martin Campbell of James Bond fame - but please be advised that it is very, very violent: the South African censor gave it an age restriction of 16.

It's available on Netflix if you have it.

I've been looking forward to this, and it's interesting that Jackie Chan has gone in a more violent direction in his later years.  For ages, he has eschewed graphic violence in favour of his very stylized action sequences, as well as comedy.  But a few of his more recent movies can be quite brutal, like Shinjuku Incident, where someone gets their hand cut off in a rather nasty way, and the whole movie is dark and depressing.

Jackie Chan is actually the bad guy in this - he has a reason to be - but the other people are worse than his character is. I actually felt no sympathy with Jackie Chan's character here, which is odd. The last time I saw Pierce Brosnan as a bad guy was when he was holding a gun on Bob Hoskins in The Long Good Friday.  :teddyr:

(https://www.empireonline.com/images/uploaded/pierce-brosnan-long-good-friday.jpg)

Saw it recently, amd found it very enjoyable. But you shouldn't expect your usual Jackie Chan film here. It's more like a Jack Higgins novel, something action packed but with decent plot and character development. I think it's been a good move for Chan, because I've wanted to see him in a real film for ages. Now don't take me wrong, I like his HK stuff, but those aren't real movies, at least IMHO.

Brosnan is quite good as well. He plays a slimmy variation of Gerry Adams.

Exactly: I was almost put off by the violence but stayed with it.


He was really p*ssed off throughout the film: I think that's the first time I've ever heard him curse in a film. "You come here and put a [expletive deleted] bomb in my toilet?" :bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle:

Welcome back, BTW.  :thumbup:

Neville, can you expand on this?  Is it that many Jackie Chan movies revolved around extended fight scenes and stunts, or that many of them lack seriousness and character development?  Even in the 80's, Jackie made lesser known movies like Heart of the Dragon, in which he played the brother of a mentally retarded man, played by Sammo Hung.  There's a particularly intense scene where Jackie's character lets out his pent up frustration and sadness from the burden of being his brother. I'm wondering what you consider a 'real film' in this context?

The only other really very serious film I've ever seen Jackie Chan in was The Protector (1985): very serious, lots of blood and gore, too much bad language - even from Jackie - and no out-takes at the end.

(http://www.lovehkfilm.com/reviews_2/ab5734/protector.jpg)

Oh yeah and it was directed by James Glickenhaus, who brought us The Exterminator.  :smile:

It's a personal feeling. In most of his HK films the plot and the characters are so barebones that I can't really get into them. I feel they are more acomplished at set piece level than as a whole. This is why I was happy to see Chan in a "real" movie this time.