Is Jason Statham the new go-to guy for 'blow shit up' generic action movies? Is he Hollywood's new Seagal/Van Damme? It's okay if he is. I mean, someone has to be, right? It's just...I used to like his movies. He was so great in Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrells! I guess it's just a little dissapointing that he keeps just turning up in every cheesy action movie that comes out any more.
3 comments:
I wouldn't lump Statham in the bottom of the barrel. Consider:
The Bank Job was a solid, adult thriller (with a silly ending, but still)
Crank was either the most ambitious cheesy movie in years, or the cheesiest Tony Scott knockoff in years. Your pick, it was anything but generic.
Death Race may be a remake by the awful Paul Anderson, but it also stars Joan Allen and Ian McShane.
Generic Seagal/Van Damme-type films along the lines of The Transporter and War are becoming the exception in his career, rather than the rule.
That said, he has a long way to go before emulating the career of a great action star like Steve McQueen. Can we call him the Charles Bronson of the '00s instead?
I guess, maybe I'm misspeaking. What I mean is, is he sort of the go-to action star now the same way the Seagal and Van Damme were in the early nineties and Stallone an Schwarzenegger were in the 80's? No one else seems to be aspiring to that particular throne.
Nah, I'm with you rotter. Bank Job was a good movie, but can't we just file that as a mistake?
I only saw part of Crank, but it was clear pretty early on it wasn't going to fulfill any of its promise.
I think In the Name of the King seals this one: this guy makes bad action movies there's no reason to see, except to laugh at. That makes him Segal in my book.
Except, he can act. Weird.
Post a Comment