• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Foreigner reviews

E

ElBoxyBrown

Banned
UbuatNk.jpg
Click to expand...
Chris Stuckman - B+

Variety
In the movie, multiple Asian teens are killed in an all-too-plausible (albeit dated) act of political terrorism dreamed up and carried out by a faction of the IRA. It's an effective reminder that however scared white Londoners are of foreigners, the foreigners living among them have even more reason to be afraid, living in a country where they could wind up as collateral damage in senseless white-on-white violence. And because this time around Asians are the ones telling the story, it falls to a superstar ”Chinaman" to set things right.
Click to expand...
Forbes
The Foreigner successfully combines both a political drama and a grim revenge thriller with relative aplomb. The violence and action scenes, when they are required, are realistic, brutal and efficiently staged for maximum clarity. The film uses the 19-year gap since the last IRA terrorist attack for dramatic urgency and poignancy, and frankly it was almost refreshing to be able to enjoy a terrorism thriller without feeling guilty (since the bad guys aren't scary brown people). Existing source material notwithstanding, the film's casting of Jackie Chan as an Asian immigrant hunting white European terrorists provides a nice counterpoint to 16 years of often lazy post-9/11 melodrama. That's just one way The Foreigner stands out in familiar territory.
Click to expand...
Rolling Stones - 3/4
Campbell keeps the action cooking and the suspense on a high burner in this compulsively watchable conspiracy thriller, while The Foreigner proves again is that Chan is the Man – now and forever.
Click to expand...
New York Daily News - 3/5
For every ”Rush Hour" there was dreck like ”The Tuxedo" or ”Forbidden Kingdom." Lately, American audiences know him for voicing the odd animated movie or babysitting Jaden Smith in ”The Karate Kid" remake.

We're still waiting for that breakthrough, since ”The Foreigner" doesn't match the punch of his best Hong Kong movies. But this somber turn is still the best the West has given him in a while. That alone should put a smile on fans' faces
Click to expand...
Hollywood Reporter
While Brosnan has quite a few opportunities to show his acting chops, Chan makes do with less: The original novel contained much more about Quoc's motivations and deeds. In any case, it's good to see Chan swapping his happy-go-lucky persona for two hours for some gravitas as a tragic rogue with a marked past.
Click to expand...
Philadelphia Daily News - 2.5/4
What The Foreigner lacks is the lean narrative line of the Taken films — there is a convoluted plot about internal IRA treachery that may leave you baffled. And while the movie initially adheres to the Chan brand — emphasizing athleticism over violence — it turns grisly and vicious in the closing scenes.

That's when it starts to feel more like Taken 4, rather than the Jackie Chan movie it should be.
Click to expand...
New York Times
Mr. Chan is in his early 60s, and he doesn't deliver the action pizazz here that he used to. Nor, frankly, does he summon enough gravitas to be persuasive in the role of a grief-maddened father. For what it's worth, Mr. Brosnan, as Quon's nemesis, sells the angry-all-the-time requirement for his character.
Click to expand...
ScreenCrush - 4/10
Quan may not be the most natural fit for Jackie Chan, but he is convincing as a man pushed too far. His diminutive stature and sad eyes also work well for a character whose outward appearance masks superheroic abilities. If only he got to flex them a little more, in a story that didn't feel like it arrived a quarter century too late. The stuff involving Brosnan and his flimsy political future keeps taking up more and more time, pushing Chan further and further into the background. By the end, he feels like a foreigner in his own movie.
Click to expand...
Den of Geek - 2.5/5
Jackie Chan's Quan dodders around, shoulders slumped, head down, speaking quietly, and he's utterly believable as a broken man with a darker past than his kindly exterior hints at, which makes his proficiency in inflicting pain all the more fun. Even at 63, Chan can still make you believe when he's going to town on someone, even if he's not attempting any of the pure stunt fight insanity that brought him legendary status. And make no mistake, there's definitely some joy in seeing Jackie Chan going head to head with Pierce Brosnan. But the mystery of how you can put two of the most effortlessly charismatic action heroes of a generation on screen together and not manage to conjure up any charm at all, let alone an ounce of sympathy for either of these supposedly layered characters, will haunt audiences far more than the movie itself.
Click to expand...
We Live Entertainment
It will be fine if Jackie Chan wants to make more dramatic movies but they'll have to be good. His comedies can coast on ridiculous plots because they are so entertaining and unique. Hollywood genre movies are a dime a dozen so there's no reason to watch a lousy one. At the very least, if The Foreigner didn't take itself so seriously it could've had fun with this ludicrous premise.
Click to expand...

Currently 56% on RT.
 
M

mazillion

Member
Hmm..seems like it's not great. Oh well i'm still watching it. I'm really curious to see Jackie Chan's performance.
 
H

Human Resources

Member
This kind of movie is why I think Moviepass is such a novel idea. Normally, I would see a trailer for something like this and say "That looks...decent I guess, will check out on Netflix one day probably." The truth is, I might put it on my queue, but I'll probably never watch it. I certainly wouldn't pay $15.00 to go see it on a Friday night in a theater.

With Moviepass, however, I can swing by a theater after work on a random day if I'm not too tired and check out B tier flicks that I wouldn't have taken a chance on before. Thanks, venture capitalists!
 
E

ElBoxyBrown

Banned
Human Resources said:
This kind of movie is why I think Moviepass is such a novel idea. Normally, I would see a trailer for something like this and say "That looks...decent I guess, will check out on Netflix one day probably." The truth is, I might put it on my queue, but I'll probably never watch it. I certainly wouldn't pay $15.00 to go see it on a Friday night in a theater.

With Moviepass, however, I can swing by a theater after work on a random day if I'm not too tired and check out B tier flicks that I wouldn't have taken a chance on before. Thanks, venture capitalists!
Click to expand...

$15? Go to any small AMC and buy a child ticket for like $7.
 
Sunster

Sunster

Member
saw this today, definitely worth more than its RT score imo. Chan's performance was gripping, loved every minute of his screen time. The only issue is that he doesn't get enough.
 
Q

Qvoth

Member
yeah i agree, when you go see a jackie chan movie you expect plenty of stunts
this movie isn't it, there's only like 1 memorable stunt and it's not even crazy
it's a decent action thriller though, if i have to score this movie it's about 7/10
 
D

D_prOdigy

Member
I watched it in Beijing last week. It was alright. There are a couple of wrinkles towards the end that bothered me. I think it tries to go one step too far at the very end to tie up the plot that it could have done without. Overall I was more interested in the political conspiracy aspect than the Jackie Chan revenge thing.

Solid. Unfussy. Never felt like it was plodding. Better than I expected.
 
S

snake fish

Member
This movie is fantastic but the marketing is hurting this movie.

Feel like reviewers missed the point and focused way to much on Jackie instead of the movie as a whole. Would elaborate but it falls into spoiler territory.
 
S

SRG01

Member
snake fish said:
This movie is fantastic but the marketing is hurting this movie.

Feel like reviewers missed the point and focused way to much on Jackie instead of the movie as a whole. Would elaborate but it falls into spoiler territory.
Click to expand...

How far does it stray from the book?
 
C

CrichtonKicks

Member
Martin Campbell directed it? That's worth at least a rental for me. Man has very questionable choice of material but, damn, can he direct an action scene. Even Vertical Limit and The Legend of Zorro had some good action.
 
P

Price Drop

Member
Saw this today. Thought it was a great vehicle for both Jackie Chan and Pierce Brosnan. The marketing sells it as an action movie but it's entertaining as a drama itself with great performances from the cast including a stoic, still very capable Jackie Chan.

He still performs all the action sequences with flair and power, plus Martin Campbell's direction makes the fights gritty, realistic and easy to follow. Brosnan is surprising as a high-tempered government official. Definitely worth a watch in theaters.
 
C

crisdecuba

Member
Posted my review a few minutes ago: it's a marginal recommendation.

Strong performances by both Jackie Chan and Pierce Brosnan, but Jackie Chan's character ends up feeling like he was shoehorned into a standard political thriller. The action is hard-hitting, but there's nothing here that you haven't seen before.

And in case the OP would like to include it:

Tread Talks - 3/5
A mildly entertaining exercise that chooses complexity at the expense of coherence.
Click to expand...
 
S

Spine_Ripper

Member
I had no idea what the hell this movie was about going in, other than it starred JC in an English language film. The room was packed and I felt like a lot of people were expecting a martial arts film, not a political thriller. I enjoyed it, but towards the end it just feels like it was 2 films stitched together. It's an enjoyable B movie, I just wish the film stayed focus on JC a little more towards the end.
 
Monocle

Monocle

Member
It's perfectly decent. Pierce Brosnan's charisma is bright as ever, and Jackie Chan is entirely convincing as the special forces vet who's no less dangerous or capable for the wrenching tragedy that seems almost to physically bend and harden him. It was neat to watch him add a little chemistry to his standard ass-kicking arsenal.

I got exactly what the trailer sold me. Can't complain.
 
C

crisdecuba

Member
WoodWERD said:
It's worth watching just to see Jackie Chan still kicking ass and pulling off cool stunts.
Click to expand...
I was pretty underwhelmed by the action and stunts. There’s the one stunt that’s shown in the trailer where he jumps from the roof to the pole — and that felt unremarkable compared to what I look forward to from Jackie Chan. And the fight scenes were well-performed, but the general choppiness of the editing detracted from those scenes as well (for me).

Unrelated to your post, Pierce Brosnan was great and he goes a long way toward carrying the bulk of the story.
 
S

shaneo632

Member
50+% for a film like this is totally respectable to me. Mixed reviews normally means interesting enough for me to check it out.

<35% is where I start getting worried.
 
Q

Qvoth

Member
from the google interview it seemed like it was all just acting though, he still could do all that if he wanted to, at least that's what was implied i feel
 
dark_chris

dark_chris

Member
Gf and I really enjoyed this movie.
We thought it was good. Not too much action, but it’s still good while it’s there.
 
J

.J.

Banned
Saw this today (M-M-M-MOVIEPASS), and while it was in many ways a generic political action thriller movie, it certainly is not as bad reviews are making it sound.

I think this is largely a situation where marketing, and the very existence of Chan in the movie, led to some inappropriate expectations. It’s not an action movie, folks. Don’t go in expecting one. That rap and action heavy trailer set this thing up as an epic showdown between a couple of old action movie juggernauts, and it was never meant to be that. The movie MOSTLY works, and I think any complaints about it are pretty niggling.

All time classic? Nah. But it’s solid enough to warrant a viewing.

And all of this shit ragging in Jackie Chan for not having the dramatic chops? Get out of here. He isn’t going to show up in a Paul Thomas Anderson film any time soon, but he did his job admirably here, especially for a guy who isn’t typically a dramatic actor.
 
L

Lum1n3s

Member
norm9 said:
If he doesn't break his neck, he's being lazy and a sellout.
Click to expand...
Can someone go back in time and make him young again &#128546;
.J. said:
Saw this today (M-M-M-MOVIEPASS), and while it was in many ways a generic political action thriller movie, it certainly is not as bad reviews are making it sound.

I think this is largely a situation where marketing, and the very existence of Chan in the movie, led to some inappropriate expectations. It’s not an action movie, folks. Don’t go in expecting one. That rap and action heavy trailer set this thing up as an epic showdown between a couple of old action movie juggernauts, and it was never meant to be that. The movie MOSTLY works, and I think any complaints about it are pretty niggling.

All time classic? Nah. But it’s solid enough to warrant a viewing.

And all of this shit ragging in Jackie Chan for not having the dramatic chops? Get out of here. He isn’t going to show up in a Paul Thomas Anderson film any time soon, but he did his job admirably here, especially for a guy who isn’t typically a dramatic actor.
Click to expand...
This is what I was expecting of the film and I’m sure I won’t come out upset viewing it with this mindset.
 
F

FlexMentallo

Member
.J. said:
Saw this today (M-M-M-MOVIEPASS), and while it was in many ways a generic political action thriller movie, it certainly is not as bad reviews are making it sound.

I think this is largely a situation where marketing, and the very existence of Chan in the movie, led to some inappropriate expectations. It’s not an action movie, folks. Don’t go in expecting one. That rap and action heavy trailer set this thing up as an epic showdown between a couple of old action movie juggernauts, and it was never meant to be that. The movie MOSTLY works, and I think any complaints about it are pretty niggling.

All time classic? Nah. But it’s solid enough to warrant a viewing.

And all of this shit ragging in Jackie Chan for not having the dramatic chops? Get out of here. He isn’t going to show up in a Paul Thomas Anderson film any time soon, but he did his job admirably here, especially for a guy who isn’t typically a dramatic actor.
Click to expand...

Yep, saw it today, enjoyed it and my take is pretty much the same.
 
I

ItIsOkBro

Member
let's take a moment to remember that Taken, one of the best action movies of the last decade, has a 58% on rotten tomatoes.
 
O

OrangeAtlas

Member
Re-posting my thoughts from the other thread:

I'll try my best to keep it mostly spoiler-free, I'll put anything sensitive in tags.

This movie is pretty enjoyable and also kind of frustrating.

It looks nice, the action is stage well (though a little too cut-ty onsidering they have Jackie Chan) and the soundtrack is kind of a pseudo-synth deal. Jackie and Brosnan both give pretty good performances, and seeing Jackie change into this hardened man is pretty fun.

The story's pretty messy and it gets hard to follow who each of the characters are, what their motivations are, what they're hiding, and how they all connect to one another. It wraps it all up pretty neatly by the end but you'll hurt your brain trying to put it all together beforehand.

My biggest issue with the movie is that Jackie
isn't in the movie all that much, and when he is he just gets in the way. It's kind of like in a Batman comic where the police are accusing him of doing more harm than good and instead just letting them do their job. He harasses Brosnan and the police to give him the names when they genuinely don't know and are working their hardest to figure it out. Jackie also disappears for good chunks of the movie while it focuses on Brosnan's IRA politics, then he'll pop up to get in the way when they're sorting things out.

All in all pretty enjoyable and it's cool seeing these actors take a different direction, but don't go into it expecting a bombastic Jackie Chan flick.
 
J

.J.

Banned
OrangeAtlas said:
Re-posting my thoughts from the other thread:

I'll try my best to keep it mostly spoiler-free, I'll put anything sensitive in tags.

This movie is pretty enjoyable and also kind of frustrating.

It looks nice, the action is stage well (though a little too cut-ty onsidering they have Jackie Chan) and the soundtrack is kind of a pseudo-synth deal. Jackie and Brosnan both give pretty good performances, and seeing Jackie change into this hardened man is pretty fun.

The story's pretty messy and it gets hard to follow who each of the characters are, what their motivations are, what they're hiding, and how they all connect to one another. It wraps it all up pretty neatly by the end but you'll hurt your brain trying to put it all together beforehand.

My biggest issue with the movie is that Jackie
isn't in the movie all that much, and when he is he just gets in the way. It's kind of like in a Batman comic where the police are accusing him of doing more harm than good and instead just letting them do their job. He harasses Brosnan and the police to give him the names when they genuinely don't know and are working their hardest to figure it out. Jackie also disappears for good chunks of the movie while it focuses on Brosnan's IRA politics, then he'll pop up to get in the way when they're sorting things out.

All in all pretty enjoyable and it's cool seeing these actors take a different direction, but don't go into it expecting a bombastic Jackie Chan flick.
Click to expand...

This will probably be of interest to you: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1PCtIaM_GQ

Budget and action direction preferences mean we’ll just never get the Jackie that we used to love in modern movies.
 
S

SixMachine

Member
I saw it. I enjoyed it, even though it isn't necessarily ground breaking. Don't go in expecting a typical Jackie Chan film but he played his part well enough as a someone who basically is depressed and lost it all. As others have mentioned it is more of a political thriller and Pierce Brosnan's role is very prominent.
 
A

Arttemis

Member
I enjoyed it a lot. I think the movie needed MORE Jackie, if anything.

Also, I was surprised that the theater was 100% booked Friday night when I saw it. I had to sit in the front row, which is something I'll never do again, but I'm glad to see dramatic Chan get so much attention!
 
O

OrangeAtlas

Member
.J. said:
This will probably be of interest to you: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1PCtIaM_GQ

Budget and action direction preferences mean we’ll just never get the Jackie that we used to love in modern movies.
Click to expand...

Oh trust me I've seen that video a dozen times (still upset he seems to have disappeared).

I get why we'll never get classic Jackie Chan in a modern American film, but that won't stop me from criticizing it at every turn. My favorite American Jackie Chan film is still Shanghai Knights simply because it just lets Jackie be Jackie.
 
M

More_Badass

Member
This was really enjoyable. Don’t go into this expecting a Jackie beat-em-up or a fight heavy action movie

It’s a political thriller that happens to have a small revenge story occurring in the middle of the large-scale pieces and events. While Jackie may not be in this as much as people want, I felt he was utilized well; the movie was well paced, the action was brutal and well-choreographed, and Brosnan’s story/the larger plot was as engrossing as Jackie’s smaller story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Andor and House of Cards writer to write Dawn of the Jedi with James Mangold
44
1K
DetectiveBananas replied
Tarantino went downhill since Django Unchained
Opinion 2 3
102
5K
BadBurger replied
is there an argument that Tom Cruise is the greatest action star of all time?
2
83
3K
Punished Miku replied
Oppenheimer debuts in Japan ༼ ༎ຶ ᆺ ༎ຶ༽
Science
41
3K
Winter John replied
[IndieWire] As Francis Ford Coppola Seeks ‘Megalopolis’ Distribution, ‘Everything Is on the Table’
21
1K
Jinzo Prime replied
Top Bottom