NOTE IMDb
5,5/10
49 k
MA NOTE
L'ancien espion de la CIA, Bob Ho, assume sa mission la plus difficile à ce jour: s'occuper des trois enfants de sa petite amie, qui n'ont pas tout à fait adopté la nouvelle conquête de leur... Tout lireL'ancien espion de la CIA, Bob Ho, assume sa mission la plus difficile à ce jour: s'occuper des trois enfants de sa petite amie, qui n'ont pas tout à fait adopté la nouvelle conquête de leur mère.L'ancien espion de la CIA, Bob Ho, assume sa mission la plus difficile à ce jour: s'occuper des trois enfants de sa petite amie, qui n'ont pas tout à fait adopté la nouvelle conquête de leur mère.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 nominations au total
Magnús Scheving
- Anton Poldark
- (as Magnus Scheving)
Avis à la une
CIA super agent Bob Ho (Jackie Chan) has been dating Gillian (Amber Valletta) for three months. Her kids Farren (Madeline Carroll) and Ian (Will Shadley) hate him. Little Nora (Alina Foley) thinks that he's a cyborg. He is retiring for Gillian but she doesn't know his secret life. Glaze (George Lopez) is his handler and Colton James (Billy Ray Cyrus) is a fellow agent. His Russian nemesis Anton Poldark escapes from capture. While the kids snoop around in his house, Ian downloads a file from his secret computer. Poldark tracks it down and comes after Bob and the kids.
There is absolutely no chemistry between Jackie Chan and Amber Valletta. The kids have better chemistry with him. Maybe they could have made up a story about him being a secret nanny instead. That's where the comedy is anyways with him as Mr. Mom. The movie almost works with him and the kids. Many comedians have mined that rich vain and Jackie could easily do that too. Also I don't know why he has to wear those glasses. It's not like he's Superman and this is his secret identity. The rest of the movie is a bunch of unfunny cartoon characters. It still has Jackie Chan doing his acrobatic fights. That's impressive at his age. With a few changes, this could have been a passable kids movie.
There is absolutely no chemistry between Jackie Chan and Amber Valletta. The kids have better chemistry with him. Maybe they could have made up a story about him being a secret nanny instead. That's where the comedy is anyways with him as Mr. Mom. The movie almost works with him and the kids. Many comedians have mined that rich vain and Jackie could easily do that too. Also I don't know why he has to wear those glasses. It's not like he's Superman and this is his secret identity. The rest of the movie is a bunch of unfunny cartoon characters. It still has Jackie Chan doing his acrobatic fights. That's impressive at his age. With a few changes, this could have been a passable kids movie.
6tavm
All right, I'll admit right off the bat that I didn't expect a high quality movie when I picked this one and I didn't. What I did get was a harmless 90 minutes with Jackie Chan doing what he does best, which was executing his creatively funny stunts to entertaining effect. There's also a filler story of him being a retiring spy who falls for a divorced woman with three kids who, for the most part, don't think much of him since they mainly think of him as a loser. Oh, and some bad stereotypical Russian accents for the male and female villains too. Still, like I said, Chan provides the main reason one would watch and enjoy this movie and it's nice to occasionally see the supporting cast also get in on the action. Besides, any movie where Chan sings a lullaby to the youngest daughter in Chinese and a former resident of my current hometown of Baton Rouge (Johnny Rivers) is heard singing "Secret Agent Man" during the beginning can't be too bad...
There is something strange and irrational about the human psyche that draws us to films that we know are absurd and bad, but in spite of the glaring flaws of such films we get drawn in anyway because the experience is pleasurable. One of those films is "The Spy Next Door." It was obvious to me that "The Spy Next Door" had almost nothing to offer its audience in terms of a plot or even characters that could transcend their stereotypes. These stereotypes include (1) All Russians are evil; (2) the female love interest always finds an implausible reason for dumping Bob Ho (Jackie Chan)before she later reconciles with him; (3) If you want to gain the respect of bullies, you have to beat someone up - preferably an evil Russian who is storming throughout your house looking for a secret formula; (4) If you have Jackie Chan in your film, give him lots of choreographed karate or agile tricks to do; and (5) If you want to win over kids who are not your own, you better be a great action hero. I also realized that this film was trying to get by on Jackie Chan's personality and the characters of the kids.
Yet I did not care because up to a point reliance on the Jackie Chan persona, which this film was clearly doing, actually worked. The reason is that Jackie Chan is a good natured guy, very modest and very nice. It is to an extent amusing watching Chan perform his tricks as he copes with babysitting and then takes on the bad guys. The action scenes were, in my mind, not like the ordinary, overly violent action scenes where the good guy shoots up a bunch of bad guys. They are dance routines, some of them plain silly and others that are pretty good - and you get the impression that even if you are a bad guy you are unlikely to get badly hurt. Jackie Chan himself has often said that he abhors violence and his Bob Ho character is not a violent man. He gets involved in action scenes reluctantly and, even as he wins his little battles, one gets the impression that they were all a lot of fun. Now this is not to say that I can guarantee that you, my readers, are going to like this film. You may dislike it for many sound reasons, but for me "The Spy Next Door" is one of my guilty favorites.
Yet I did not care because up to a point reliance on the Jackie Chan persona, which this film was clearly doing, actually worked. The reason is that Jackie Chan is a good natured guy, very modest and very nice. It is to an extent amusing watching Chan perform his tricks as he copes with babysitting and then takes on the bad guys. The action scenes were, in my mind, not like the ordinary, overly violent action scenes where the good guy shoots up a bunch of bad guys. They are dance routines, some of them plain silly and others that are pretty good - and you get the impression that even if you are a bad guy you are unlikely to get badly hurt. Jackie Chan himself has often said that he abhors violence and his Bob Ho character is not a violent man. He gets involved in action scenes reluctantly and, even as he wins his little battles, one gets the impression that they were all a lot of fun. Now this is not to say that I can guarantee that you, my readers, are going to like this film. You may dislike it for many sound reasons, but for me "The Spy Next Door" is one of my guilty favorites.
Before taking the kids to see this, I read through some quick reviews online (such as RogerEbert.com, etc.), and groaned thinking about the 90 minutes or so I'd have to sit watching this...not to mention the annoying ads stuffed down your throat before the trailers even start.
You know, I'm not going to spend time trying to justify why I liked it, laughed at the corny scenes and dialog, slapstick, etc. - but the bottom line is I/we enjoyed it - despite it being a Chan film which usually I'll pass on. How refreshing not to get any propaganda thrown in your face, political innuendos/viewpoints - whatever, which unfortunately you have to bear in even many kids & 'family' films being pumped out these days ... just a basic family comedy which accomplishes its purpose - to simply entertain and nothing else. What's wrong with that, Mr. Ebert? I think you need to stay away from kids' films. Anyone?
So if you decide to see it, make your own judgment. The negative reviews I read before seeing it prepared me to expect the worst....which in turn actually helped it to be a quite a pleasant surprise. Go figure. So far I find it amusing how some of the reviewers on here spent so much time writing in detail how awful the film is, spending the time, space, and effort into dissecting & critiquing it as though it were the latest Coppola or Scorsese project. Who are they writing to? Those expecting a modern cinematic classic (via Jackie Chan) bringing them to standing applause ... or to parents like myself taking their kids out to have a little fun? Right! LOL.
You know, I'm not going to spend time trying to justify why I liked it, laughed at the corny scenes and dialog, slapstick, etc. - but the bottom line is I/we enjoyed it - despite it being a Chan film which usually I'll pass on. How refreshing not to get any propaganda thrown in your face, political innuendos/viewpoints - whatever, which unfortunately you have to bear in even many kids & 'family' films being pumped out these days ... just a basic family comedy which accomplishes its purpose - to simply entertain and nothing else. What's wrong with that, Mr. Ebert? I think you need to stay away from kids' films. Anyone?
So if you decide to see it, make your own judgment. The negative reviews I read before seeing it prepared me to expect the worst....which in turn actually helped it to be a quite a pleasant surprise. Go figure. So far I find it amusing how some of the reviewers on here spent so much time writing in detail how awful the film is, spending the time, space, and effort into dissecting & critiquing it as though it were the latest Coppola or Scorsese project. Who are they writing to? Those expecting a modern cinematic classic (via Jackie Chan) bringing them to standing applause ... or to parents like myself taking their kids out to have a little fun? Right! LOL.
OK, where story is concerned, there's nothing new here. Chan plays a spy on the verge of retirement because he wants to settle down with his girlfriend Gillian (Amber Valetta) and her annoying kids. Now the kids hate Chan and Gillian has to leave for a couple of days in order to spend some time with her ailing father. So who offers to look after the kids? It's not hard to see how clichéd the story is but it is Jackie Chan with his creative stunts who makes this a fun watch. The actor's flair for comedy has become common knowledge and he is as energetic as ever. Moreover, his pairing with the beautiful Valetta is refreshing. Valetta doesn't get much to do other than play the usual girlfriend/divorcée/mom of three but she holds her own. The rest of the cast is forgettable. The child actors are initially very annoying. They sort of grow on you as the film proceeds. Overall, the film is nothing out of the ordinary. It doesn't even compare to a majority Chan's superior works but at best it's an amusing one-time watch.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesOnce Jackie Chan got involved with this movie, it immediately attracted a wide array of talented actors and filmmakers. Executive producer Ira Shuman recalled: "Everyone on the film, actors and crew, wanted to work on a Jackie Chan film. Not only is he a legend, but his good will, generosity, and charm attracted everyone to the project."
- GaffesEarly on in the film when Bob rescues the cat, it's 2 completely different cats. The cat on the roof, and the cat the little girl is holding are different.
- Crédits fousOuttakes from the film play during the end credits.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Trailer Failure: A Christmas Carol, Spy Next Door and Wolfman (2009)
- Bandes originalesSecret Agent Man
Written by Steve Barri and P.F. Sloan (as Phil Sloan)
Performed by Johnny Rivers
Courtesy of Soul City Records, Inc.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Spy Next Door?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- The Spy Next Door
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 28 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 24 307 086 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 9 726 056 $US
- 17 janv. 2010
- Montant brut mondial
- 62 574 241 $US
- Durée
- 1h 34min(94 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant