MovieChat Forums > The Foreigner (2017) Discussion > Could have removed Chan

Could have removed Chan

posted 7 years ago by hootiehome (462)
14 replies | jump to latest

and had almost the exact same film. Very strange. His revenge plot line would not have changed much if removed. I really enjoyed the political tension thriller more than the Jackie Chan story line.

[–] mattjoes (53) 7 years ago

Could have removed Chan and had almost the exact same film.

Do you think this hurts the film? If so, how much?

I think from a story construction standpoint, it would've definitely been better if Quan (Chan) did have a larger effect on the story. I wonder how the story unfolds in the novel. Anyway, it's a weakness, but somehow, in the large scheme of things it doesn't matter all that much. Quan is the emotional anchor of the film, as his grief and personal need for revenge provide the main dramatic impetus, and it is on top of his story that the other plotlines emerge and can be sustained. From that point of view, his presence is justified. Apart from that, Quan's actions, while not changing the course of events of the story too much --except for the fact he destroys Hennessy's public image in the end--, are still narratively valid since are contribute to representing how the terrorist act at the beginning kicks off a series of parallel efforts to catch those responsible, by Quan, by Hennessy and by the police. And in the end that's the story of the film, the chase of the terrorists by a number of different parties that come into conflict with each other.

Anyway, apart from the weakness you mention, I found the film to be very good. Rock-solid, interesting plot; engaging characters with complex morality; visceral action scenes.

[–] joegerardi (383) 7 years ago

Don't really see how. Without his need for vengeance, it would be nothing more than a police procedural as they track down the bombers, with the political implications little more than a subplot.

..Joe

[–] DracTarashV2 (4493) 7 years ago

Maybe a special edition with no Jackie will be released someday... specifically made just for you. :)

Regardless, this is one of Jackie’s greatest to date. All his scenes are gripping and very exciting. Now I can enjoy a political thriller as much as the next guy, but I wouldn’t see much of a reason for this film to exist without Chan. It for sure wouldn’t be as intense and captivating... to me anyway.

[–] funkychicken (613) 6 years ago

Certainly his best in a very long time.

[–] whatwazdat (415) 7 years ago

It's like removing Bond, or Bourne. You need that protagonist to pull for. Otherwise, it's a CSI episode, and even that, you need important central agents to follow and pull for.

[–] ArmadilloKnight (456) 7 years ago

Agreed. Besides, this was one of Chan's best action to date. He was brutal on this one, I can take him more seriously now, it was great to see this side of him.

[–] thulyadalas (2) 6 years ago

Not necessarily in my opinion. Even though I really like Jackie Chan movies, in this one his actions doesn't seem to affect anything.

Brosnan would be the protagonist which the movies more focuses on. Later, we would get the twist that he's involved. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy comes to my mind as an example of this kind of movie. The movie would have been less action more espionage but it could have worked just fine.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 5 years ago

This, coming from a nonentity with 2 posts to his credit, and then the silence.

[–] Ace_Spade (9548) 7 years ago

I disagree. Quan's actions forced Hennessey's hand in a lot of circumstances and put a tonne of additional pressure on him. He was beset from all sides, and adding Quan into the mix really helped with his character arc.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Although I really enjoyed seeing Chan in 'Rambo' mode here, I do agree that he was more of a side plot to the main story of Hennessy.

I recall some reviews of this movie saying much the same thing... that Brosnan's character's story was more interesting than Chan's.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 5 years ago

Yes, you could have removed Jackie—and then you would have a movie that was never made, because who the fuck in China would have funded it? “Hey, it’s a procedural starring the old guy from James Bond.” Do you assholes even think?

Kudos to all of you who pointed out the need for a magnetic AND BANKABLE protagonist to distinguish this from a CBS cop procedural.

Sheesh!

[–] fooman (300) 2 years ago

Lol it does feel like a gritty IRA drama with Chan dropped in but without him the film would be forgettable he has all the best moments, and some visceral fight scenes. I had to check the novel synopsis (The Chinaman written by Stephen Leather) and it does seem a faithful adaptation, and let's face it without Chan attached it probably wouldn't have been made.