What do you mean “we”? There’s a difference between arguing that standards don’t apply (i.e. the “don’t nitpick, it’s just an action movie!” argument) and arguing that the incorrect standards are being applied (i.e. judging Street Fighter as a failed serious action movie rather than as a sporadically successful action-comedy).
As I said in the piece I wrote (copy ‘n’ pasted several posts above), there are many comedic moments in Street Fighter that simply cannot be chalked up to a backfired attempt at gravitas. In other words, you may be laughing, but it isn’t because it’s “so bad, it’s good”. The preponderance of deliberate humor is high enough that it is incorrect to judge it by the same metric as movies in which the preponderant brand of humor is unintentional: Manos - The Hand of Fate, Troll 2, The Room*, and so on. Those movies truly are one big backfire after another. They’re totally straight-faced attempts at gravitas that exploded on the launch pad. Street Fighter, with its constant one-liners, tennis ball guns, mustache-tweaking villains and sight gags, is of a different stripe.
I’m not arguing that it’s perfect–not even close. It does have its flaws, and at the end of the day there are other, more engaging movies that deal in the same kind of style and material. But it is not even close to as bad as its reputation suggests. Think about what we mean when we say “bad”–that it cannot be enjoyed except for what it fails to do.
I suspect so many people believe Street Fighter is a failure because they internalized the idea without thinking about it. It’s hard to fairly evaluate something that got stereotyped as a dud from the get-go.
(*Tommy Wiseau has since attempted to recontextualize The Room as black comedy. While this is obviously bullshit, it’s a smart move on his part.)
One, nitpicking is an appropriate colloquialism-- it implies that what you’re doing is akin to performing a white glove inspection on a filthy animal. It’s not that nitpicking a tentpole-type of movie is invalid, but it’s crass, and it impresses no one that you found shit in a zoo.
At the same time I’ll never go so far as to say that MK’s a piece of shit. Disposable? Sure, after it served its purpose of finally treating a video game with some respect. Hardly a bold statement when virtually the last 20 years of summer movie releases are disposable entertainment (scant few exceptions)
And I never said SFTM was a failure just because it’s a comedy, but it’s wearing the dead hide of the SF license on its body for no reason. Hardly any of the comedy relates to the game itself. It’s Judge Dredd 1995, except for clever writing and unremarkable action.
Finally, SFTM is relevant for what it is because this is a Street Fighter site… but at a different venue, I’d pick Verhoeven sci-fi, Demolition Man, etc. before SFTM ever sprung to mind. So when I say “we,” I’m referring to everyone making SFTM into a better movie than what it was. Satire, action, license adaptation-- there are better examples out there.
Its a testament to how big Van Damme was at one time.
“Dude we can get JCVD!”
“Sweet! Hey, will he be good in the role?”
“Who cares? Its Van Damme! Default box office smash”
Eh it was still cool but, he was merely Van damme cosplaying as guile. Entertaining but not exactly the best person for the role. I’d still say it worked as far as what the movie itself turned out to be.
I grant you that it’s not the best use of a license ever, but I’ll remind you to bear in mind the time that this movie was made. In mid-1994, there was not much to the Street Fighter storyline, even by Street Fighter’s relaxed standards. I’m not going to cry about it if Chun Li is a reporter instead of a detective or if Ken is a con man instead of a rich-off-his-ass professional fighter as long as those choices work within the context of the movie. To one degree of faithfulness or another, all the characters make an appearance that has a relatively logical story function, which is no easy task with such a large cast with such thinly sketched backgrounds.
So I point out in my post that this editing technique is common in movies and provide a response to that fact, then you respond that that post stating that it “fails” because the editing technique is common in movies?
Friendly advice: learn reading comprehension. It will go a long way in life.
The big problem with the way MK did the fighting sequences is how each take was just one move, sometimes two. Average movie goers like yourself aren’t going to notice, but for fight scene aficionados, the disconnect is jarring.
I agree.
I equate it to a layman marveling at the performance of a professional figure skater, then calling a judge a “nit-picker” for noting a flaw in the dismount the layman didn’t notice.
No, i’m saying your post fails because you criticize the MK movie for doing the exact same thing every movie fight scene does. Its rarely ever a lengthy take. Always just 1-3 moves, cut, another few moves, cut, etc. With the best takes cherry picked and crafted together for that final product.
You can’t bash MK for it without bashing every other movie too…not if you don’t mind being a hypocrite that is. As for it somehow not flowing good, well thats your perception. I found the fights to be very energetic and consistent.
Another go-to response thats far lamer: Resorting to Extreme examples thinking it somehow fuels your argument, but only results in foolishness. We’re talking about a videogame movie fight scene, not a notorious war criminal lol.
Anyone know if these recent releases contain the awful Tv-style edits that the pitiful “collector’s edition” DVD did?
For example, at the beginning of the movie when Bison breaks the soldiers necks, on the DVD that part is edited out. Instead the soldier’s just sorta fall over once they approach Bison. Like they fainted lol.
There are numerous other edits through-out, but that was all i needed to see to declare that release off-limits.
this is off topic because taito brought up demolition man but i have watched that movie at least 3 times in my life, twice within the last three years, and each viewing it gets even better. they even predicted arnold would become president in that movie, which was not a bad guess.
edit:
anyway mortal kombat greatest video game movie of all time. i even made a thread back in 03 asking this question, and pretty much everyone unanimously voted mortal kombat as winner. and since 03 are the srk illuminati, you cannot question them. the illuminati have spoken, and so it shall be, as it has been, and will be forever more.
First, Mortal Kombat’s takes are 1-2 moves (if there is a 3 move take, point it out to me), and they are mostly just one. The only exception is the Liu Kang/Shang Tsung scene.
Second, not all fight scenes arn’t just 1-3 move takes. Have you watched a good Kung-Fu movie?
Most fight scenes in movies aren’t good (many directors don’t give it the care it deserves), and Mortal Kombat belongs in that group (although in MK’s case, I wouldn’t say that they didn’t care: they just didn’t do a good job).
lol
How many times are you going to say that?
I’m have trouble taking you seriously. Are you a kid or something?
^^ Its clear by those comments that your standards are just too high and you can’t appreciate anything thats not stellar. In the history of fights on film, the MK stuff may not be top tier, but they’re still pretty darn good and above average.
Mortal Kombat had good fight scenes for a Hollywood made movie. Asian Kung Fu films however completely shits over whatever Hollywood can ever hope to put out. Just watch any Shaw Bros. movie with Gordon Liu, or the Venom cast members.
Even for global actors like Jackie Chan/Jet Li, watching the fights in their HK movies vs their Hollywood ones is like comparing night and day. Witnessing Jet lose in Lethal Weapon 4 still pisses me off to this day.