Maybe the action genre is dead?

[latinojazz]

Now the point for me is:

Who will be the next action hero?

We are lack of them, Willis is growing old and anorexic, Seagal is growing old and the opposite side with the food than Willis, Stallone for the Rocky photos looks not very well to continue making action movies and Arnold only another Terminator and after a really great plastic surgery...

Maybe the action genre is dead?

 

[supertom]

In theatres there's only really the Rock who's a conventional action man, and his films so far are mixed. Rundown was pretty good though.

Martial art films are losing their appeal again. Jet Li is apparently giving up fighting in movies, Jackie Chan is getting on a bit and not doing very good films, then all the DTV bunch we grew up watching are well into their 40's.

I can't see who is going to come through and be an action man. I think they'll continue hiring actors in action films to go for a more human approach, ala Tom Cruise, Matt Damon.

I'd love to see some old school 70's and 80's style action movies coming out. I odn;t think I'd accept new action stars anyhow becasue I grew up on a diet of Seagal, Stallone, Schwarzenegger, VD and Lundgren, and all those guys.

It's the same way other generations never followed thoses guys like they did Eastwood, Norris, Bronson or further back, John Wayne.

 

[latinojazz]

In theatres there's only really the Rock who's a conventional action man, and his films so far are mixed. Rundown was pretty good though.

Martial art films are losing their appeal again. Jet Li is apparently giving up fighting in movies, Jackie Chan is getting on a bit and not doing very good films, then all the DTV bunch we grew up watching are well into their 40's.

I can't see who is going to come through and be an action man. I think they'll continue hiring actors in action films to go for a more human approach, ala Tom Cruise, Matt Damon.

I'd love to see some old school 70's and 80's style action movies coming out. I odn;t think I'd accept new action stars anyhow becasue I grew up on a diet of Seagal, Stallone, Schwarzenegger, VD and Lundgren, and all those guys.

It's the same way other generations never followed thoses guys like they did Eastwood, Norris, Bronson or further back, John Wayne.

Thanks supertom

Well,

The Rock - 6´5´´, 3?, perhaps, it´s of the Arnold club, no?

Jet Li-Yes superb, BUT He is 42 difficult age, we need youngers for the future, in ten years he will be very different.

Tom Cruise-4?, Action commercial, It´s not of our club, I think

Matt Damon-35, in Bourne 1 yes, but another one that is not of our club, Steven will never film The Grimm Brothers!!

Jackie Chan:48?, it´s nice to see him, but more comedy type and it´s of another generation

Lundgren:48?, he is in very good shape but in ten years...we need youngers!!

Thanks again for your comment, supertom

 

[supertom]

Jackie Chan is now 51! He is still in great shape and does amazing stunts, but how long can he keep on doing it? Rush Hour 3 might be an enjoyable movie, but then again might suck big time. Within 5 years a lot of these aciton guys, will be perhaps trying to venture into different territory and doing different movies, which in the end won't satisfy their fan clubs. Eventually Lundgren and Van Damme will retire their guns. Seagal who is now in his mid 50's must be getting close to retiring. Arnold should stay out of the game, because he is nearly 60 and really it would be disconcerting to the max to see him as a Terminator or action hero again. The same goes for Stallone. I'm looking forward to Rocky 6 and he's in excellent shape for a man nearly 60
(certainly the best I have seen a man that age) but Rambo 4 is stretching it a bit.

However Stallone, like Willis, has an advantage on the other guys, he's a good actor when given the right material. Stallone can move into dramatic stuff, something Schwarzenegger could not do. I think all these old guys, especially the top guys still in theatres, should bring an end to flogging dead horses. I'll welcome one more Rocky film from Sly, one more Die Hard from Willis (and another Under Siege from Seagal) but after that they should give it a rest. Up until the mid fifties is just about the limit but when the guys start approaching the big 60, retirement age in some places, they should call it a day in the one man army careers.

 

[TDWoj]

A lot of the problems with action movies today is that very few - if any - do realistic action, realistic martial arts. It's all wire fu and dazzle - and I think the public is getting a bit jaded. The Matrix, I think, was the beginning of the end. People were so dazzled by the special effects type of action that everybody had to jump on the band wagon and emulate it to some degree.

Now, though, if someone does plain, old fashioned, realistic martial arts in a movie, it looks ordinary and bland. The expert practictioners of "the real thing" are all getting on in age, as someone pointed out, and they were never accepted as good actors. These days, they are using actors with a few months of training (with really good stunt doubles for the really hard stuff), because they are box office draws, where the "old guys" (Steven, Chuck, Jackie) are no longer leading them into the theatres.

The other issue is, of course, Hollywood's skittishness at the moment regarding original works. Almost everything in the action genre (theatrical release-wise) is either a sequel, an adaptation or a remake.

I think the action genre - where you have the actor who actually has studied the disciplines doing the actual work - is pretty much finished, at least for the moment. The studios aren't willing to take a risk on an unknown since the change toward dazzle and decieve in action/martial arts stunts has taken over, believing that their target demographic - the 18-40 year-olds won't accept the "real thing" anymore.

 

[supertom]

So many action films are now also marketed towards teenagers. The are all about selling soundtracks or satisfying boarders or whoever else. So what we get is softened pg-13 tripe like XXX. So many films have to be careful now to get that soft rating because action movies are now no longer trying to sell just to adult males like they did in the 80's to mid 90's. Even T-3, although that got an R-rating it was clear they were trying for a pg-13 and didn't quite make it. It was the softest R-rating I have seen in my life and that is proven by the fact that its British rating was a 12A (conventionally R rated films transfer to UK with either a 15 certificate or an 18 certificate.)

I don't like these cookie cutter action movies. That is why I really enojoyed Lundgren's latest The Mechanik, which I think is one of the better proper action movies of the last couple of years, because for it's subject matter, they didn't hold back. Being DTV it doesn't need to worry about all that marketing garbage. There's no flaovur of the month Nu Metal or Hip Hop star on the soundtrack. The hero doens't go around in the latest fashions in trainers and clothes, and the violence isn't candy coated. It's a revenge film that is violent, in the viegn of great films from the 70's. You can't shirk violence in some films (A History Of Violence was a great film) similarly Van Damme's Wake Of Death which was a real hard 18 certificate, although not as well made as Mechanik.

Even Seagal's latest, while they may not be great, still at least aren't afriad to be a bit nasty. Submerged in the top 10 most violent films of the year gives me a sense of pride for Seagal. I'm an adult and I want aciton movies marketed for me, but on the big screen, with big bucks spent on them but very few are made. Tarantino gave s Kill Bill 1 and 2 but not many more have come around.

Generally if an action movie has a cool hip soundtrack of more than 5 songs in the end credits it's a lameass pg-13 kids ac tion movie, probably starring Vin Diesel or Paul Walker.

 

[shihonage]

A lot of the problems with action movies today is that very few - if any - do realistic action, realistic martial arts. It's all wire fu and dazzle - and I think the public is getting a bit jaded. The Matrix, I think, was the beginning of the end. People were so dazzled by the special effects type of action that everybody had to jump on the band wagon and emulate it to some degree.

I agree, but I also think that even with CGI, when there's an experienced martial artist in the scene, the scene becomes kinetic and interesting to watch - see the B-category action flick "The One" where Jet Li throws motorcycles and punches a dozen of SWAT members floating through the air in slow motion.

Yes, they used balls hung on strings for him to punch in a sequence, and then replaced them with CGI actors - but the WAY he punches them is still focused martial artist way ! That looks kinetic !

On the other hand actors who just aren't good at MA (Uma Thurman I am looking at you) look downright horrible in the action scenes. They do things which are clearly, obviously, insultingly impossible, because their stances are wobbly, powerless, their shoulders are tense, and they punch with their arms instead of their whole body. They force stuntmen to act like they're dumb, slow, supersensitive to pain, and 150lbs lighter than they actually are. Needless to say it looks like crap.

With Seagal films, the stuntmen didn't have to act. They just had to throw a predetermined sequence of attacks and then land without breaking themselves. The true physics were there.

Also, if you look at the variety of beautiful throws in Seagal films... and imaginative sequences in Jet Li films... like in "Unleashed" where he fought a British Tae Kwon Do stylist actor and they got stuck between two tight walls... that is CREATIVE.

All these newfangled CGI-assisted Uma Thurmans and Charlize Therons can do is stupid backflips and one throw repeated over and over (the most common Hollywood throw - a variation of unfinished sankyo ending with kokyunage, where the stuntman waits patiently for the actor to turn under his arm and then falls down complacently).

Ugh. Don't get me started.

 

[ORANGATUANG]

Now the point for me is:

Who will be the next action hero?

We are lack of them, Willis is growing old and anorexic, Seagal is growing old and the opposite side with the food than Willis, Stallone for the Rocky photos looks not very well to continue making action movies and Arnold only another Terminator and after a really great plastic surgery...

Maybe the action genre is dead?

Nobody is perfect latinojazz and nothing lasts forever..

 

[latinojazz]

A lot of the problems with action movies today is that very few - if any - do realistic action, realistic martial arts. It's all wire fu and dazzle - and I think the public is getting a bit jaded. The Matrix, I think, was the beginning of the end.
Now, though, if someone does plain, old fashioned, realistic martial arts in a movie, it looks ordinary and bland. The expert practictioners of "the real thing" are all getting on in age, as someone pointed out, and they were never accepted as good actors. These days, they are using actors with a few months of training (with really good stunt doubles for the really hard stuff), because they are box office draws, where the "old guys" (Steven, Chuck, Jackie) are no longer leading them into the theatres.
QUOTE]

You´re smart, TD

 

[latinojazz]

So many action films are now also marketed towards teenagers. The are all about selling soundtracks or satisfying boarders or whoever else. So what we get is softened pg-13 tripe like XXX. So many films have to be careful now to get that soft rating because action movies are now no longer trying to sell just to adult males like they did in the 80's to mid 90's.

I don't like these cookie cutter action movies. That is why I really enojoyed Lundgren's latest The Mechanik, which I think is one of the better proper action movies of the last couple of years, because for it's subject matter, they didn't hold back. Being DTV it doesn't need to worry about all that marketing garbage. There's no flaovur of the month Nu Metal or Hip Hop star on the soundtrack. The hero doens't go around in the latest fashions in trainers and clothes, and the violence isn't candy coated. It's a revenge film that is violent, in the viegn of great films from the 70's. You can't shirk violence in some films (A History Of Violence was a great film) similarly Van Damme's Wake Of Death which was a real hard 18 certificate, although not as well made as Mechanik.

Tarantino gave s Kill Bill 1 and 2 but not many more have come around.

Generally if an action movie has a cool hip soundtrack of more than 5 songs in the end credits it's a lameass pg-13 kids action movie, probably starring Vin Diesel or Paul Walker.

Of course, supertom, that´s one of the important issues that Hollywood must restart.
Tarantino makes good violence films with great dialogs, it´s another level, the Kill Bill Vol.2 dialogs ´bout life and reality are really impressive, and the violence(the eye in the fingers, for example, or the snake bitting the face of Michael Madsen) is the oppositte of the LIGHT VIOLENCE you´re talking about.

Ooooh, if Tarantino would revive, ressurrect Steven Seagal in a brilliant movie will be the best dream of my life.

The real fight trademark of Segal without stunts and the Tarantino concept...
Waw, I can imagine it...

 

[latinojazz]

I agree, but I also think that even with CGI, when there's an experienced martial artist in the scene, the scene becomes kinetic and interesting to watch.
...and then replaced them with CGI actors...

On the other hand actors who just aren't good at MA (Uma Thurman I am looking at you) look downright horrible in the action scenes. They do things which are clearly, obviously, insultingly impossible, because their stances are wobbly, powerless, their shoulders are tense, and they punch with their arms instead of their whole body. They force stuntmen to act like they're dumb, slow, supersensitive to pain, and 150lbs lighter than they actually are. Needless to say it looks like crap.

With Seagal films, the stuntmen didn't have to act. They just had to throw a predetermined sequence of attacks and then land without breaking themselves. The true physics were there.

Also, if you look at the variety of beautiful throws in Seagal films... and imaginative sequences in Jet Li films... like in "Unleashed" where he fought a British Tae Kwon Do stylist actor and they got stuck between two tight walls... that is CREATIVE.

All these newfangled CGI-assisted Uma Thurmans and Charlize Therons can do is stupid backflips and one throw repeated over and over (the most common Hollywood throw - a variation of unfinished sankyo ending with kokyunage, where the stuntman waits patiently for the actor to turn under his arm and then falls down complacently).

Ugh. Don't get me started.

Ha,ha,ha CGI really sucks, and "Unleashed" aka Danny The Dog, is superb

Thanks a lot everybody, we are changing a bit the things...

SEAGAL, SILVER, TARANTINO, READ THIS ****ING THREAAAAAAAAAAAD!!!

 

[Jules]

People seem to be always looking for change. Something different. When Mr. Seagal came on the scene with his style of martial arts, it was fresh and seemingly new. I hope we get to keep martial arts in movies. I enjoy it.

There have been changes in the movies.....is it good? ?????????????

 

[latinojazz]

Those kind of changes: Cheaper locations, cast, not proffesional A-class crew, bad directors, overstressed producers without art interest, untalent scriptwriters, music and editing...The same plot in every movie, forgot the basics of what must be martial arts in movies...

It is no good

 

[aikidoboynj]

I dont see anything good about Jet Li, I haven't seen any movies where his martial arts skills are shown as realistically as Steven Seagal's used to be. And I think the action genre is dead, and its because like stated before its way to complicated now. I think there is a simple way out, they need to take a few risks on some new on heard of action heros. Back when Stallone and Arnold were running the show, they gave Seagal, Van Damme, and Jeff Speakman a shot at around the same time, 2 of them gained worldwide fame, and Speakman at the very least made a few good movies and earned a living. I think they need to keep the storylines alittle more down to earth, I know its an action movie and things will have to be blown out of porportion someway or another, but enough wacko ideas where we are living in a computer, or someone was treated like a dog his whole life, even complete with a state of the art leach. I also believe that the stories should be able to be summed up in a few strong words...aka Revenge, betrayal, etc. No more pg13 action movies, these movies need to be marketed again to the older adult male. Rated R....No more politically correct bull****- leave that for more serious actors and their snoozefests. As I still believe, forget actors, an action hero lives and dies on his personality, his background and most importantly his look. If he has these 3 key ingredients, the roles he should be cast in will match him perfectly...For example I think Nico was acted excelently by Seagal, he was a tough guy who happened to be a cop and take no ****...I don't expect him to be joking and juggling balls during the movie for comedic praise like Matt Damon would attempt.
Come to think of it almost every successful action hero was just given a chance to shine....Van Damme had a small part as a villain, and that small part alone cast him in a little movie called Bloodsport? Exactly a star was born...Michael Ovitz convinced WB to let Seagal star in his own action piece, another star was born...Even Stallone had to beg for a chance to star in Rocky...and another star was born. Its a shame that now all these companies are doing is trying to have one actor play every role...I don't care how good of an actor, say Tom Hanks is as good as he may be he could never pull of a Seagal movie, and Seagal couldnt do one of his...This they must understand if they want to bring back the genre...I remmeber back when i was young action movies where all that people wanted to see, they were everywhere and they really kicked ass. You cant kick ass with a pg13 rating.
Hollywood wise up action movies were your #1 grossing genre for years and its about time you gave it some thoguht again.

 

[supertom]

We dinfeitely need new action stars, the only probelm I would find is that although I am a total action hound, if a new star came around I probably wouldn't be all that interested in them, really becasue I grew up watching those VD,Seagal,Lundgren etc films. That is simply the reason I watch their movies. Those guys hardly at all gain any new fans, they live off the loyalty of fans who have known them throughout their career. I don't believe there are a hell of a lot of Seagal fans under the age of 20. Same goes for the rest. Only a few of those guys have gained new fans, because they have done classic movies that are more widely re-appreciated, Stallone with Rocky, Arnold with Terminator 1 and 2, Willis with Die Hard. Something looking from a critical standpoint may not get round to looking at Bloodsport or Under Siege for example, cause while good they are certainly not classics. It is why Willis still works in cinemas, why Stallone can do big budget Rocky and Rambo films, why Arnold could probably walk back into the mulitplexes by donning his best robot walk and leathers. Similarly these guys were top of the actio chain for a reason, in Willis and Stallones case they could act, given the chance and so could lways branch out, and they all did family movies to varying degree's of success.

I kind of have this worrying feeling that in about 10 years time when all the 80's crew have called it a day there will be a huge movie shaped void in my life and I will have lost my enthusiasm for the "action star." There is now a big pressure on the Rock, becasue I like the guy, used to follow him a little in wrestling, so I do hope he does some good movies, however until now only the Rundown has impressed me that movie rocked.

I live in the vein hope that an action star will come out and do a good bunch of kick ass movies and that i'll be able to follow them, or that the 80's crew will find the secret of age reversal, knock off 20 years and carry on kicking some butt!

 

[Bobby_Lupo]

Yes, I believe that the action genre is dying. But I'm sure that in a few more years, there will be surge again, much like how the horor genre was pretty much dead prior to the release of Wes Craven's Scream. The problem is that today, audiences want over-the-top action such as in The Matrix and all those Jerry Bruckheimer/Michael Bay actioners, leaving smaller films and their stars (i.e., Seagal, Snipes, Van Damme, Lundgren) doing direct-to-video pics since they are no longer bankable names in the industry. Stallone is getting the opportunity at (another) comeback with Rocky Balboa and Rambo IV, but he seems to be the only one from the 80s clan with something "good" on the plate. Seagal's descent into direct-to-video is only because he is lazy and that is hard for me to say it since I am fan. He needs to focus on choosing scripts with a "story" instead of the incoherent drivel that was Submerged and Today You Die. But then again, that's just my opinion.

 

[latinojazz]

Don´t care...I think you´re right, and you are free to share your opinions.

Seagal needs a wake up call