steve said:
Every films has its mistakes, no film is perfect. Films like The Matrix and Titanic which were amongst the most successful films of all time have more goofs than you could shake a stick at. In one shot of Titanic the entire filming crew is reflected in a glass door, but it doesn't detract from the quality of the film. It's virtually impossible to make a film without mistakes or little things people are going to complain about. I think the makers of Belly of the Beast did a great job of giving it a production sheen and quality which its budget wouldn't suggest was possible, Out For a Kill apparently cost a good deal more to make but ended up looking only a fraction as expensive as Belly. With the exception of Oblowitz' and Pyun's films Seagal's films are always of a high-quality. Belly of the Beast is a great film and anyone who thinks otherwise are precisely those who seem to be falling over themselves to point out as many inconsistencies as they possibly can. Just what is the point? Sit back and enjoy for crying out loud, films are an entertainment not an exam.
I agree that films are for entertainment value; but when one's suspension of disbelief is hung until it is dead, the entertainment value diminishes considerably.
BOTB was not that good, and by no means can it come close to being called 'great'. Granted, it was loads better than OFAK, but it cannot be numbered among Steven's best. It just looks better, comparatively, because of what came before it.
It's not the mistakes people are pointing out; it's the fact that Steven is an action hero with his own distinctive style, and to watch a film that calls itself an action movie with an action movie hero, and to have that action movie hero not do his own fighting - well, then, what's the point of making the film in the first place, unless it's for a wider audience than his core fan base, who don't care that Steven is a first class martial arts expert himself.
I look at BOTB like this: if I went to an Elton John concert, I would expect to see Elton John perform. If someone came out dressed like Elton John and sang his songs, no matter how well or how artfully the stand-in performed, it would still be a cheat - because I came to see Elton John perform, not a stand-in.
Ditto for Steven's films.
Since I'm up to my neck in tight deadlines at the moment, I don't have time to watch BOTB again to point out the scenes he did not do his own fighting in, which were many, but I'll make this comment. The purpose of this film in particular, and most films in general, is to trick you into thinking you're seeing something that's not really there. Some films do a very good job of tricking you, and BOTB is one of them. Just as in a magician's show, you are given the illusion that you are really seeing what you are seeing, and of course, you are going to come away satisfied that you did see what you thought you saw, when in fact, it is not so.
The scene in the market, for example, is a case in point. You are meant to think that it's Steven, and the stunt double they used obviously studied how Steven moved. The problem is, the guy is about 20-30 pounds lighter than Steven, his hair is all wrong, and, in fact, you never see his face. Where in a fight in earlier films, did they not show Steven's face? In the scenes where they used a stunt double, of course. Same here. You see body shots; you see shots from behind; you see shots of hands and feet - but you never see his face. Why? Because it's not Steven, and it's painfully obvious that it is not Steven.
I mean, they even used a stunt double for Steven getting out of the car!
Those kinds of tricks, especially if they are overwhelming in number, diminishes the entertainment value of the film
for me. Obviously, it doesn't for many, if not most here, and that's fine. But for me, yes, it is a cheat. I'm robbed of my entertainment because I wanted to see Steven fight and what I got were stunt men. It's irrelevant if the fights were well choreographed (which, for the most part, were at best mediocre). I would expect stunt doubles in films for actors for whom martial arts is not their thing. But for a movie with a man who has made his mark because of his expertise in martial arts, this is a cheat.
If Steven doesn't want to fight any more, he should stop making action films and using stunt doubles to do his work for him. I have no objection whatsoever to him taking a different direction in the films he makes - but don't try to put one over on me and laugh all the way to the bank because I was stupid enough to buy a film purported to be a "real Steven Seagal" classic and get stunt doubles instead of the man himself. "There's a sucker born every minute", said PT Barnum, and he was right. However, if one is happy being a sucker, then go ye forth and enjoy. I happen not to like being suckered; but each to his own, as ever.
O.K. mister, you are baaaad! Where on earth are you finding such smilies? (or shall we say little birdies!?)
