Review of “The Foreigner”

Quan (Jackie Chan) drives his daughter Fan (Katie Leung) to a dress shop in London to pick up an outfit for an upcoming school dance. Fan runs into the store while Quan waits for a parking space to open when a bomb planted in on a motorcycle explodes. Several people are killed including Fan. His daughter was the last living member of his immediate family and Quan wants to know who is responsible for her death. A group calling itself Authentic IRA claims responsibility. Deputy Minister Liam Hennessy (Pierce Brosnan) is a former IRA operative and calls together a committee of Irish leaders to demand to know who is responsible. They all claim ignorance. Quan visits Belfast and meets with Hennessy asking for the names of the bombers. Hennessy tells him he doesn’t know but Quan thinks he’s lying. Quan, a trained and experienced ex-special forces soldier in the US Army, then begins targeting Hennessy, planting a small bomb in the bathroom of his office and destroying a barn and some cars at his country estate. Hennessy, concerned for his safety, contacts his nephew Sean (Rory Fleck-Byrne), also a former British special forces soldier, to track down and kill Quan. Meanwhile, the bombers are planning another attack targeting British political leaders.

There may be too much going on in “The Foreigner” for its own good. Aside from Jackie Chan’s subtle and effective portrayal of a grieving father out for revenge, we have Pierce Brosnan’s Irish politician trying to play both his former IRA colleagues and the British government for his benefit, a couple of affairs and centuries of hostility between religions and nationalities. All of that plays into the story of “The Foreigner” and some of it feels unnecessary. Had it trimmed some of the more extraneous and fantastical aspects “The Foreigner” might have been one of the fall’s better movies. It doesn’t disappoint but it doesn’t thrill either.

The most impressive part of “The Foreigner” is the performance of Jackie Chan. Quan is a quiet man looking to live a quiet life of hard work and love of his family. That is taken from him by a bomb. He still remains quiet, closed off, stooped over as he shuffles along like a broken old man. But we learn this old dog has some old tricks he thought he had left behind long ago and must now dust them off to exact his revenge. Chan radiates pain as Quan. His face, scarred by his tough and at times dangerous life, never betrays the anger and rage that must lie beneath the surface and yet we still can see and feel it. Chan gives a masterful performance that doesn’t rely on histrionics. A simple single tear rolling down his cheek conveys more anger and pain than a 15-minute monolog about his loss ever could. If you’ve only seen Chan in the “Rush Hour” films or his other lighter work you owe it to yourself to see “The Foreigner” just so you can see what a fine actor he really is.

Chan can also still throw and take a punch. It’s impressive with his many years acting as his own stunt man for most of his career that he can still walk much less do an action scene at age 62. Chan is jumping off roofs, being kicked in the chest, falling down flights of stairs and more in “The Foreigner” and looking good doing it. Chan can still be an action star long after most actors are ready to slow down and play grandpas.

Pierce Brosnan is also good as Liam Hennessy. The Irish politician has to perform a delicate and dangerous balancing act keeping the more radical elements back home under control while also placating the British. Brosnan can lay on the charm when the character needs it (like when romancing his mistress) but doesn’t have any trouble laying down the law when he’s questioned or tested (like when his wife wonders where he’s been all night). Brosnan can play cold-hearted with the best of them and he is ruthless at times in “The Foreigner.” It is an entertaining if not always convincing performance. The few scenes he has with Chan, especially late in the movie, puts his character in the tough position of being out of control and Hennessy clearly isn’t used to that. The choices Brosnan and director Martin Campbell made for the character felt out of character based on what we’ve seen before. Perhaps the bully is really a coward when his buddies aren’t around but the character’s reactions felt almost cartoonish in their extreme.

The biggest weakness in “The Foreigner” is the story. It spends far too long setting up the issues of Northern Ireland and “The Troubles” before moving into the revenge aspect of the story. While the fear of more violence between the IRA and the British is certainly a good point of conflict for a movie, the script by David Marconi invests too much time in scenes of greying or elderly men arguing over the best course of action to deal with more radical elements and the response of the government. Clearly we are barely interested in the politics of Northern Ireland and just want to see Jackie Chan kick some ass. The movie takes far too long to get us to what we want to see.

“The Foreigner” is rated R for violence, language and some sexual material. There are numerous fights, some more bloody than others. We see a person’s foot impaled on some nails. A man is shot in both legs then the head. A woman is shot in a gun battle, tortured for information then killed. Another woman is shot in the head. We see the aftermath of a bombing with injured victims shown. The sexual material is very mild. Foul language is common but not overwhelming.

I enjoyed “The Foreigner” more than I thought I would. Seeing Jackie Chan back in action was a bit of a thrill but his performance is truly the most amazing thing about the movie. It is a subtle and measured performance that is effective and at times heartbreaking. I know it isn’t likely but it would be great if he got a best actor nomination for this part.

“The Foreigner” gets four stars out of five.

This week I’ll review “Only the Brave” for WIMZ.com.

I’ll also be reviewing one of the following here on my page:

Geostorm—

Same Kind of Different as Me—

The Snowman—

Tyler Perry’s Boo 2! A Madea Halloween—

Listen to The Fractured Frame each week, available on your podcast platform of choice. Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman123@gmail.com.

Review of “No Escape”

Jack Dwyer (Owen Wilson) is moving his whole family to Southeast Asia to work for a company modernizing the water system there. He’s bring his wife Annie (Lake Bell), oldest daughter Lucy (Sterling Jerins) and youngest daughter Beeze (Claire Geare) with him. On the flight over, they meet a world-weary Englishman named Hammond (Pierce Brosnan) who, once they land, guides them through the trickier side of living in their new country. Once in the hotel, the family notices many of the basic amenities, like cell and wired phones and TV, don’t work. The next morning, Jack goes looking for an English language newspaper amongst the local shops when he notices a group of riot police on one end of the street and a group of rebels on the other. Soon, the shops begin dropping their security doors and the two groups clash leading to death on both sides but the outnumbered police are losing. Jack tries to make his way back to the hotel but the way is blocked by a mob. An American is pulled out of the hotel and shot in the head. Someone in the crowd notices Jack and they begin to chase him. Jack manages to get away and back to the room but finds his oldest child Lucy has snuck off and gone to the pool unaware of the danger. Jack manages to get to her but is trapped in a stairwell when Hammond busts open an emergency door and shoots a couple of Jack’s pursuers. Hammond tells Jack to take his family to the roof. When they get there it’s filled with hotel guests and employees hiding out. Thinking an approaching helicopter is there to rescue them everyone stands and waves but is shocked to see a rebel with a machine gun open fire. Jack and his family manage to hide and the helicopter hits a power line and crashes on the roof. Jack has to get Annie and the kids off the roof and to safety before the rebels break through the barricaded door and kill them all.

“No Escape” is a type of film I call Tension Porn. The characters are placed in a situation that is designed to keep the audience constantly on edge wondering if, against all odds, the heroes of the film will succeed. While many films have a similar structure, what sets “No Escape” apart is the ruthless effort to make the audience worry about the lives of four people who are so completely unprepared for life in this new country even if everything goes well. Here, they are on the ground for about 12 hours when everything hits the fan. They don’t speak the language, they have very little money on them, they don’t have any weapons, they don’t have any fighting skills and they have two children under 10 years old. How could they possible survive in a city where it seems 9 out of 10 people want to kill them? Ugly, bloody death is lurking around every corner. There is no way they should survive and yet (spoilers) they do. This movie is lazy, predictable and ugly from start to finish.

If you’ve seen a trailer you know the very basic and simple story of “No Escape.” The writers, brothers John Erick Dowdle and Drew Dowdle, attempt to slip in a little social commentary in a brief scene between Jack and Hammond but it is mostly a time killer to set up the last act of the movie. From about 10 minutes in, the film is mostly Owen Wilson and his movie family running and hiding. While they move from hiding place to hiding place the movie is moving from unlikely to unbelievable.

One particular scene struck me as so completely dubious as to lose me for the rest of the film. The family is riding a motorbike wearing clothes pulled from corpses with scarves pulled over their faces when they encounter a crowd of celebrating rebels having an impromptu victory parade. Traveling against the flow of people, the family falls off the bike and a rebel helps them get it upright again. The rebel looks into Owen Wilson’s very American eyes with strands of blond hair peeking out from his hat and scarf disguise and, while looking suspicious, lets the family go. Every rebel he’s encountered to that point has quickly tried to kill him. The movie tells us that no foreigner, and many locals, is safe from these bloodthirsty killers yet he just happens to find the one that is either sympathetic or stupid. Either way, that scene turns everything that happens after it into a farce.

The movie wastes the talents of its actors as Wilson, Bell, Brosnan, Jerins and Geare all turn in pretty good performances. Not that anyone is asked to do any award-worthy acting; but given the quality of the script the company manages to put out some affecting work. Wilson and Bell are a convincing couple who go from the marital tension of moving half way around the world to the abject fear of trying to protect their children and save their own lives. The criminally underused Brosnan is the only spot of seeming joy in what is otherwise a dark and depressing world even before the trouble starts. Even when the full extent of his character’s involvement in the events preceding the uprising is exposed, Brosnan is still a likable rogue that appears to have a conscience when he sees innocent victims of his work.

The predictable plot doesn’t help make the movie any more watchable. The characters you think will die don’t make it to the end of the film. It isn’t a surprise the scenes from every action/chase picture are there to find in “No Escape.” What is a bit of a surprise is the level of xenophobia that seems to permeate the movie. The number of locals willing to help the Dwyer family can be counted on one hand. Everyone else is looking to kill whitey. It’s a kind of absolute that only exists in movies. When we finally find out what set the insurgents on their angry, violent rebellion, it doesn’t seem like it rises to the level of mass murder. The movie portrays those that are leading the revolution like pirates with bandanas tied around their heads, many with scars running down the length of their faces and their apparent weapon of choice is the machete. It plays into a stereotype that sees “the other” as being not much more than an animal that is out to get Americans. It’s a narrow worldview that offers simple answers to complex questions much like an attention-seeking politician.

“No Escape” is rated R for strong violence throughout and for language. There are numerous shooting, hackings and beatings. Many are bloody. There is a scene of attempted rape including the woman being beaten up. Foul language is common but not overwhelming.

After watching the trailer I dreaded seeing “No Escape” because I knew I would constantly feel uneasy as this family feared for their lives. I wasn’t wrong. I never considered the film would also be filled with a predictable plot and a fair amount of xenophobia but sadly, that was part of the movie as well. I feel sorry for the cast that did good work in what is a losing effort.

“No Escape” gets one star out of five.

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman.com.

Next week, an action franchise gets a reboot and two old geezers get on each others nerves.  I’ll see and review one of these films.

The Transporter Refueled–

A Walk in the Woods–