Python Hyena
Mr. Nice Guy (1997): Dir: Samu Hung / Cast: Jackie Chan, Richard Norton, Karen McLymont, Miki Lee, Gabrielle Fitzpatrick: Standard Jackie Chan flick about behaviour when met with conflict. The plot regards a video tape that reveals drug lords in action and how it falls into the wrong hands and eventually Chan's apartment. Chan spends the remainder of the film beating up bad guys and rescuing three women who cannot act. Basically ninety minutes of stunts and action with interesting locations. Directing by Samu Hung is fine but Chan isn't doing anything new. He is amusing in his personality but from a story standpoint he basically kicks the crap out of a lot of less than talented people. The dreadful supporting cast includes Richard Norton, Miki Lee, Gabrielle Fitzpatrick, and Karen McLymont and none of them will likely find work in this field any time soon after being part of this hideous mess. Chan films are pretty much structured the same way and exist for the same reason. We are given an ongoing parade of slapstick violence where any evidence of a plot becomes pointless. He is in great shape and performs impressive stunts but a film needs more than stunts and this one is lacking a key element called plot. The message is suppose to regard anger but the stunts are its true purpose. Viewers should take their anger out on this film and toss it in the nearest dumpster. Score: 3 / 10
elshikh4
This is a chain of highly dangerous action sequences, done excellently without wires, CGI, or stuntmen. The thing is there is nothing else it ! The plot has been done for at least million times; they watched the bad guy while doing bad thing, then "catch them BADLY !!" which always and forever means : a long chase of a movie, with all the hot action and the attempts to killing. There is no comedy, unless we're talking about slight nanoseconds during the fights, mostly with Jackie's reactions. There is no developing romance. There is no drama. And there is no good line either. So it's only "Jackie Chan's Circus Presents", a dry circus for that matter !As you see, even a real, creative, sometimes too dazzling action can't make a perfect movie. So, for a Jackie fan; this could be satisfying, however for the American viewer, who this movie was aimed at, it's not the same at all. It couldn't score big in the American box office. Hence it quickly joined the list of the English-talking movies that Jackie used to do for about 15 years to get into America, with constantly no great success. Actually Jackie, at that phase, was still searching for the code-breaker of the American viewer. He would find it one year ahead with (Rush Hour), namely the buddy action comedy formula, where he hits and Chris Tucker talks !So this is the best of Jackie Chan a la Honk Kong, not Hollywood. That's why the movie couldn't be a hit in America, despite the woman with the black bikini, the other with the white underwear, and that fabulous climactic scene ! Seriously, the sex tone, for a Jackie movie, is a bit loud this time. Enough to remember the sequence of the redheaded woman where she was running in the streets wearing only her undies, which was obviously forced and went for too long (usually Jackie doesn't need "stunts" of that sort !) But nothing was louder than the climax. When Jackie rides that monster of an earthmover (a 120-ton mining truck), and wipes the villa off the ground, it's unforgettable piece of cinema, being a fit grand finale for his circus's show; entitled "Bringing Down The House" !Nevertheless, in that show some points bugged me. There are too many fighting women, all fight as hot as Jackie himself !! Let alone that he, as a fighting machine, is presented as just a cook ?!! The videotape that the reporter taped for the gang looks shot with many cameras, in different angles, with sharp cutting as well (Do I hear LAAAAAAAAME ?!). And most of all that bizarre visual effect which was overused in every action scene ???? I couldn't understand was that for slowing the image or quickening it ? Did they want a silent movie's flavor ?! Whatever the answer might be, I HATED IT SO MUCH, IT'S TOTALLY ANNOYING !It didn't prove itself as a hit in America. However it's genuine Jackie Chan fun. Though, when the 2 married : the American hit & Jackie fun, we – as the fans of the old and magical Jackie – lost many special merits, with for instance abundance of wires, CGI, and stuntmen. Hmmm, it might sound tacky and timeworn, but it is its right place to be said : Nothing is perfect !
mstomaso
Jackie Chan plays a famous TV chef ("Jackie"). One day on his way to dinner at his assistant's (Karen McLymont) house, Jackie runs into a female TV reporter (Gabrielle Fitzpatrick) who is running away from two ruthless gangs who want to take from her a video tape of a murder they have committed. Jackie defends her and becomes a target. Once one of the gangs kidnaps Jackie's girlfriend (Miki Lee), the standard Chan formula kicks in and ... no more Mr. Nice Guy.Chan fans know what to expect out of Samo Hung-directed Jackie Chan films - simple but sympathetic heroes, very unpleasant antagonists, a standard martial arts plot with some new twists and a great deal of amazing action sequences featuring Chan's incredible physical talent. Mr. Nice Guy delivers nicely on this formula and Hung even throws in a very amusing directoral cameo. Filmed in Los Angeles and Australia (in order to allow Chan to do his own stunts), Mr Nice Guy makes great use of setting - Chan's best stunts and some of the wildest action sequences take place on construction sets in Melbourne. Some of the acting is a little below par, but Chan, Lee, Fitzpatrick and Norton contribute quite a lot to the film.Recommended for Chan fans, Martial Arts fans - also a good introduction to Jackie Chan for those who are not familiar.
winner55
Big disappointment from the Chan man. Although the real fault here lies with director Sammo Hung. This film brought Hung and Chan back together after years of a rumored quarrel between them; they collaborated again on the much superior "Medallion".A couple reviewers here remarked that there was too much plot in the movie, which weakened the pace. I suggest they re-watch the film, just for clarification - the reason why there seems to be too much plot is because a very simple plot has been needlessly obscured and muddled - if the film were properly paced, we would have time for a much stronger - and accessible - plot than we find here, which would make the better surviving chases - since some chases would need to go - more realistic and hence more meaningful.In fact the film is really only one chase scene after another - on feet, in cars, across rooftops, etc., etc. There's never any time spent developing these characters enough to make us interested in them. And chase scenes are not fight scenes: true, they do offer plenty of raw material for some undeniably exciting stunts; but the sense of conflict that should be providing the suspense for the film is almost wholly lacking, since the protagonist - Chan - never resolves to confront the gangsters before they find him first.Hard to understand how Chan (at the peak of his popularity) and Hung (about to go to America for the "Martial Law" TV show) could generate such a mess as this. It seems they both became so obsessed with stunt-chasing, they forgot what it was the characters need to chase about - the story.
