Dragon Blade

I've read some of the reviews -- the bad reviews, I generally agree more, the good ones were often too exaggerated. Although I am not a master of the Chinese language, I'm able to understand both English and Chinese movies without subtitles, so I'd like to first address the title. I've no problem with the English title, whatsoever, but to the reviewer who said that it has something to do with lions? He's WRONG. If you want me to translate it, it's something along the lines of Top Gererals, Brave (Mightly) Armies (Troops).

Now, to my review. First, the good. The actors were good. The fight choreography was good. The cgi was good. That's pretty much it!

So, what was so wrong about the movie? The message of the movie is simple, to promote harmony among people despite the obvious differences in race, ethnicity, culture, creed, etc, etc. I get that! I have nothing against that either. The challenge however, is to incorporate that message seamlessly into the story without it feeling too forced or cliché -- and that was exactly how I felt when I watched some of those scenes.

But the bigger failure... is that the story makes absolutely no sense at all. It makes no sense to me how easily they could move and deploy their armies along the Silk Road from Rome to China or vice-versa. It makes no sense that they were all able to understand a common language, that is English. In ancient China, Chinese don't speak a common Chinese language, they speak different dialects. And if you add to the mix, the European languages, and the Middle Eastern languages, there is just no common ground in there for them to be able to understand each other.

It makes no sense that Jackie Chan is so trusty from the start (almost like a fool). It makes no sense that Adrien Brody would (for the sake of not spoiling) find himself eventually in that predicament. A lot of things that happened in between didn't make hell of a lot of sense either...

DRAGON BLADE isn't a great film at all, but given that the previous Jackie Chan film I watched was Chinese ZODIAC, it seems somewhat acceptable by comparison. Certainly it's a messy movie, which is typical of Jackie's more recent efforts, but it has some good stuff included alongside all of the tat. The story is supposedly based on historical fact and involves some Roman soldiers who traverse the Silk Road and find themselves in China. They're split into two factions, the small number of good guys and the overwhelming bad, and the good guys end up joining forces with Jackie and his men to fight the enemy. What DRAGON BLADE boils down to is a heady mix of laughable sentiment, Chinese comedy, war and battle sequences, and some very bad acting.

Jackie himself doesn't really seem to do much that's new in this film. The director throws in a few of his old-fashioned fight scenes to recall his glory days, and while the action is acceptable, it's never memorable. It's the western actors who do surprisingly well: Adrien Brody as the quietly menacing villain, and John Cusack as the likable ally. Some of the set-piece sequences are well-handled, like the building of the defences, and the large-scale action at the climax is quite a lot of fun. I was glad to see that director Daniel Lee has calmed down since the days of DRAGON SQUAD and can now direct reasonable fare like this and THREE KINGDOMS: RESURRECTION OF THE DRAGON. DRAGON BLADE isn't perfect by any means, but there's a good film hiding underneath the mish-mash of styles and ideas.

I wont describe the actual movie here as you will be able to read other reviews already published. I will however will try to avoid you suffering the pain I have just gone through.

I was very disappointed in this movie, perhaps because I expected better from a movie with John Cusack, Adrien Brody, Jackie Chan. Perhaps I should have looked at who was directing the movie such as Daniel Lee and the typical movies he has made.... or maybe it was because the movie was just "really" bad.

I watched the movie on a quiet Wednesday night and I would estimate that a third of the audience left well before the end, some really early. When the credits came up it was like a fire evacuation alert had just came on. Please, Women and Children first.. We will all survive!

Jackie Chan fight scenes were well below par and I thought they were more like a "Charlie Chaplin/Harold Loyd" Silent movie style rather than a "Rush Hour" style.

John Cusack character was extremely boring and I could have fallen asleep in I was at home.

Adrien Brody was the only positive in the movie, but the movie was so bad that his acting was lost.

The child actor was badly filmed (always) like an old Asian hero film and I found the child annoying.

The production and cinematography of the film are cringe-worthy throughout. flashbacks are random and not in line with story. Slow motions are extensive and really annoying.

Recommendation - Go and see something else.

Let me set one thing straight before I begin this review, I am not here to defend this movie's honour, indeed I can see that it does have a great many flaws. However it is absolutely undeserving of many of the criticisms put forth in other reviews and I feel that someone has to put the record straight, and call out a worrying trend.

This movie was not perfect, it was mechanically sound, the acting while nowhere near award winning, was human enough I could enjoy it, and the choreography and special effects though they rarely came into play were even enjoyable. All this could be fairly pointed out to add to a product that is sub par, and yet what are almost all the most vehement protractors of this film gnashing their teeth about? The realism! Yes in a fantasy martial arts movie people are concerned with the plot, with geography, with trifling details.

Now look, I understand people having personal preferences for more grounded realistic movies. I also understand how some people cannot suspend their disbelief over such a mighty chasm, but to call this movie terrible, garbage, or any other pejorative for that is simply wrong. It is wrong, because it misses what this movie, and movies like it are supposed to be. Like many older films out of china, what this movie is striving to be is a throwback to idealized legends. To stories who's actors are idealistic people, who embody ideals and provide a moral message. This kind of storytelling is present in nearly all culture's legends and tales. This is what I like to term as a whimsical film. Now I admit it is not a shining example for all to follow, but it needs to be judged by other standards. Just as a romcom needs to be judged by different standards than that of true cinematic brilliance. A movie like this doesn't have to be realistic, it shouldn't be. Furthermore to see so many people demanding realism, expecting everything must play out like a well thought out novel frankly saddens me. It saddens me because I fear that this prevalent attitude is why we get so few movies these days that are willing to be silly, to be unrealistic, to give us idealistic and hopelessly unworkable moral lessons.

Maybe you disagree, maybe you think I'm a blithering idiot so full of sh*t it's pouring out my mouth. That's okay too, but please, next time you see a fantasy movie like this, please try to enjoy the flow and the essence of the movie, before resorting to cold literary analysis of it.

Anyways to wrap up this rant disguised as a review, my personal thoughts on the movie were that it was enjoyable, though I'd hesitate to recommend it to anyone but people who share my love of fantastic and improbable meetings of ancient cultures for a fantasy romp. 6/10 it's okay.

If ever anyone in the history of cinema has earned 2 hours of my life, it's Jackie Chan. Unfortunately, I was repaid this sentiment with two of the most horrible hours of cinema made in recent years.

When I heard of Romans fighting it out in the Silk Road, I liked the idea. But instead the film starts out with two Chinese historians (who speak English, naturally, since this is aimed at an international audience) searching for a lost city that the Romans built. The beginning is bad... ominously bad, and it only gets worse from there.

Rewind 2,000 years and with the tone set for a serious affair, until Jackie Chan adopts his usual "stunt-fu" in a fight scene completely out of place, but hey, it's Jackie Chan, so carry on.

Enter the Romans... John Cusack is his usual self but he seems to be accompanied by two of the most horrendous actors I've seen, in the guise of a child would-be Emporor and his male nanny. Actually, aside from Brody, Cusack and one or two Centurians, pretty much everyone who speaks English will make you cringe with how god-awful their "talent" is.

Anyway, the script's a total mess and for long periods, is actually very boring. Brody turns up as some power-craved maniac Emporor who didn't need to do anything bad since he was always going to be the Emporor anyway, and then we have a battle and, thankfully, the film ends.

Only, it doesn't. Instead, it goes back to the historian couple who enjoy the romantic scenery of the few sand-blasted columns remaining upright before they illogically announce that they'll never share their discovery, even though it's the whole point of their very existence!

Sigh. This film is just bad, illogical and painful and unless you're a die-hard Jackie Chan fan, I implore you to avoid it. For those of you who are Jackie Chan fans, just know that this is one of - if not THE worst film he's ever made and ask yourself: "Do you really want to taint your opinion of the great man by sitting through this?"