Ong Bak 3

Can anyone tell me what is actually going on in this film??

Firstly, and this is key, the fight sequences are top notch and I come to expect nothing less from Tony Jaa. Having seen the prequels to this film (Ong Bak in particular is fantastic) and Warrior King this doesn't quite live up to first Ong Bak but it has a good go. There is no question that Jaa's physical prowess is phenomenal, a serious Jackie Chan if you will. Jaa's directorial style in places is snappy with some interesting tricks. Lots of long tracking shots in the fights really help to prove that there are no Wires, CGI and certainly no stunt men.

Secondly, and this is the problem, the film is a classic case of style over content. The storyline has more holes than a string vest and what bits you can understand are silly, out of context and flat out odd. I have watched this twice and I feel no more clued up. Can anyone explain the man with the wicker basket on his head?

To sum up - this is one of those films that you will want to fast forward until there is a fight which means it will take you about 20 minutes in total to watch this film. Great fighting but not much else.

If you want to watch a fantastic martial arts film in the last 5 years then when you have skipped to the fights in this, go out and get yourself RAID and RAID 2: Berandal, then you will have to opportunity to watch two modern classics of the martial arts era!!

Well, picking up where part 2 left you hanging, the 3rd installment of the "Ong Bak" movies was somewhat of a disappointment. Why? Well...

The storyline was almost non-existent, and whatever story was being told there was told in a really confusing and weird way, so it was difficult to make any sense of the movie.

It seemed like this was a showcase of how cool can we make Tony Jaa look? Let's put him in front of all these wonderful, beautiful scenic locations and have him work out his martial arts there. That was what most of the movie was about. Sure, the scenes were nice, and sure Tony Jaa sure knows how to fight and show it, but it is a very weak broth to make soup of.

The action and fight scenes were top of the line, as always with Tony Jaa movies. And there is something very dynamic and energetic to his movements and fighting style. So, if you like that, then this movie doesn't let you down in that department.

As for the acting? Well, not much of that actually going on here, to be honest. It is mostly just showing off Tony Jaa and have these really cool images of ancient Thai traditions shown off on the movie. Honestly, I liked seeing those cultural scenes, but again, not really something that can carry a movie.

I think "Ong Bak 3" is pretty much as weak as the 2nd part, except the story in this one is more confusing. They should have stopped after the original "Ong Bak" movie which was a blast of an action movie.

I was disappointed with this movie, and I was actually just sitting through it at the end to watch Tony Jaa fight and show what he can do. The movie lost me somewhere in the beginning already, because it was way too confusing and didn't really come together in a greater sense. Lots of action, but that is about it that this movie has to offer. Which is a shame.

Recently I was re-watching all of the Ong Bak trilogy and found it much better than a decade ago. Obviously part one is a milestone and true classic of martial arts movies. The 2nd installement was set in a different time and thus did not feature modern muay thai/muay boran. For part 2 I recommend, to try and get hold of the european cut, that runs about 20 minutes longer, than the theatrical version. Then we come to this here part three. Yes, it's the weakest of the trilogy, yes it cannot live up to what most of us fans hoped for. BUT, it's not half as bad, as some people want you to think. I am not Thai, so I need to watch it with subtitles, but it's still giving me joy, when I understand part of the conversation. And concerning the "lack of action" that some reviewers mentioned before me, the first part of the movie is really rather historic or telling the background, but the final twenty minutes, are outstanding. And to combine classical siamese dance moves with muay thai/muay boran is not an easy feat, the coreography is beautiful in my personal view.

Just take it for what it is and enjoy, don't try to find a deeper truth within.

It's a martial arts film. Nothing more. Jaa is one of the best movie fighters on the business and that is what you get after seeing this movie: a fun and amazing experience from one of the best martial artists of today. If you want "something more", go on and watch "The Notebook" or something like that.

For those who doesn't think that a movie should always try to be a "masterpiece", this is their kind of movie: pure fun, full of kicks, a history of vengeance, some love, and a lot of people getting kicked on the head.

Maybe is not at the height of Ong Bak 1, but it doesn't mean that it isn't a good film to watch if you like martial arts flicks.

Tony Jaa is an incredible athletic specimen, and his last three films – "Ong Bak" (2003), "Tom Yum Goong" (2005), and "Ong Bak 2" (2008) – were fantastic exhibitions of buttkicking. Considering the production hell that "Ong Bak 2" endured, it seemed like Jaa could do no wrong. But then something unexpected happened. He pulled a Dave Chapelle on us and stuck a big middle finger at his fans. Instead of sucking it up like a man and simply enduring the last few years on his contract, Jaa chose the crybaby route and ran like a child into the woods. I was still looking forward to "Ong Bak 3" (2010) despite the horrible online buzz it has been getting, because deep down inside I was hoping that Jaa would give us one last exhibition of glory before taking a (hopefully) temporary vacation for the next few years. Unfortunately, he left us a fluff piece that's merely watchable.

This picks up immediately after "Ong Bak 2" ends, with Jaa being captured, tortured and beaten. Much of the first hour is dedicated to his rescue and recovery, which might get on the bad side of action junkies but this part of the film is actually decent despite a weak storyline (pretty environments and good scoring do help to hold one's interest). The script basically sucks, and is actually a downgrade from "Ong Bak 2" (which at least had a number of cool characters and scenarios). I seriously question the whole "king curse" element that was introduced in this film. I guess it could have worked in theory, but the execution leaves much to be desired.

Of course, no one watches Jaa's films for award-winning scriptwriting, which means that the fighting represents the one major element that simply must work in order to earn entertainment value. One thing the viewer will notice in "Ong Bak 3" is that the degree of difficulty of the martial arts choreography is not nearly as high as Jaa's previous works. There's quite literally not one awe-inspiring exchange in the entire film, and it's obvious that Jaa was sleepwalking through this because his presence feels superfluous. It's no exaggeration to say that any B-grade Thai action star (e.g., Mike B., etc.) could have been inserted into the lead role and the film would have lost very little. The choreography itself is too simplistic to be memorable, and for the first time ever I felt like Jaa's take downs got repetitive after a while.

Now that's not to say that the fighting completely stinks. "Mediocre" for Tony Jaa is "good" for everyone else, which means that the action in "Ong Bak 3" is engaging enough to be moderately entertaining. One big blunder though was having Dan Chupong carry the load as the lead antagonist. It irritates me that people are talking this guy up like he's gonna be the next big thing when in reality he's only slightly above average in his athleticism and skill. "Dynamite Warrior" (2006) was terrible and "Born To Fight" (2004) was entertaining more for its other half dozen protagonists and unintentional hilarity than Chupong's physical skills. His punches and kicks look incredibly flimsy and weak when captured in wide camera angles and he doesn't have much in terms of diverse moves. If you want to rely on someone while Jaa is gone, check out Indonesian action star Iko Uwais – who recently gave us the impressive feat of awesomeness known as "Merantau" (2009).

"Ong Bak 3" comes with a very reserved, marginal recommendation. In reality it's on the same level as something like "The Sanctuary" (2009) or "The Bodyguard" (2004) and comes off like a poor man's version of "Ong Bak 2." Jaa's typical critics – you know, the people with awful taste in action films – will have a field day lambasting this one while giving it a 1/10 rating. Jaa's fans will be justifiably underwhelmed, and could probably skip it entirely without missing much of anything.