Rush Hour 3, the junky, clunky, grimly unfunny follow-up to the marginally better Rush Hour 2, and the significantly finer Rush Hour, isn't the worst movie of the summer. But it's an enervating bummer nonetheless, largely because it shows so little respect for its two likable stars and its audience. Once again Jackie Chan (成龍) and Chris Tucker, playing seriously unlikely detectives, bumble and slog through muddled setups, graceless action, crude jokes and even cruder stereotypes, sacrificing themselves on the altar of the director Brett Ratner's vulgar success.
The arc of Ratner's career can be summed up entirely with numbers, namely the US$247,538,093 that Rush Hour raked into theaters worldwide; the US$328,883,178 that Rush Hour 2, made across the globe; and the mind-boggling (especially if you saw the movie) US$453,796,824 earned, again worldwide, by X Men: The Last Stand. These figures, from Variety, don't include DVD revenue, cable sales and the like, but you get the big tautological picture: Ratner has a gift for making products that companies can sell to the public, which is why he makes products. Even so, given the anonymity of these products, the credit "A Brett Ratner Film" seems largely ceremonial.
There's nothing new about any of this, yet it does bear repeating every so often, even in a movie review. Like a lot of big-ticket productions Rush Hour 3 flooded into US theater in August (gobbling up more than 3,700 of the nation's approximately 38,000 screens) and, because of its ubiquity and its brawny advertising muscle, pulled in a sizable chunk of change. Bad reviews won't make a lick of difference to its box office, though franchise fatigue might. Chan's and Tucker's star power has waned in the six years since Rush Hour 2.
PHOTO: COURTESY OF WARNER BROTHERS
Part of the reason I've strayed from discussing Rush Hour 3 is that there's not much to say about the actual movie. It's a generically crummy action flick. It's ugly. It's noisy. It's stupid. And unlike, say, Transformers, which sells militarism alongside children's toys, it doesn't raise hackles, much less blood pressure. Thus, as an object, Rush Hour 3 offers precious little of interest, although it does take a special kind of talent to make Paris, where some of the story takes place, look this uninviting. There, rather depressingly, Roman Polanski shows up wearing a mustache and a smirk to harass Chan's and Tucker's characters, who are globetrotting after some villains. Max von Sydow also pops up for a few scenes, a reminder that Ingmar Bergman really is dead.
Chan and Tucker don't get to wiggle off the hook entirely. But people have to make a living, even movie stars, and there are limited opportunities for an aging Hong Kong martial-arts giant and an eccentrically talented black comic actor. Given how much pleasure both have provided over the years, especially Chan, here's hoping they were paid by the truckload.
May 6 to May 12 Those who follow the Chinese-language news may have noticed the usage of the term zhuge (豬哥, literally ‘pig brother,’ a male pig raised for breeding purposes) in reports concerning the ongoing #Metoo scandal in the entertainment industry. The term’s modern connotations can range from womanizer or lecher to sexual predator, but it once referred to an important rural trade. Until the 1970s, it was a common sight to see a breeder herding a single “zhuge” down a rustic path with a bamboo whip, often traveling large distances over rugged terrain to service local families. Not only
Ahead of incoming president William Lai’s (賴清德) inauguration on May 20 there appear to be signs that he is signaling to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and that the Chinese side is also signaling to the Taiwan side. This raises a lot of questions, including what is the CCP up to, who are they signaling to, what are they signaling, how with the various actors in Taiwan respond and where this could ultimately go. In the last column, published on May 2, we examined the curious case of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) heavyweight Tseng Wen-tsan (鄭文燦) — currently vice premier
The last time Mrs Hsieh came to Cihu Park in Taoyuan was almost 50 years ago, on a school trip to the grave of Taiwan’s recently deceased dictator. Busloads of children were brought in to pay their respects to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣中正), known as Generalissimo, who had died at 87, after decades ruling Taiwan under brutal martial law. “There were a lot of buses, and there was a long queue,” Hsieh recalled. “It was a school rule. We had to bow, and then we went home.” Chiang’s body is still there, under guard in a mausoleum at the end of a path
Last week the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) released a set of very strange numbers on Taiwan’s wealth distribution. Duly quoted in the Taipei Times, the report said that “The Gini coefficient for Taiwanese households… was 0.606 at the end of 2021, lower than Australia’s 0.611, the UK’s 0.620, Japan’s 0.678, France’s 0.676 and Germany’s 0.727, the agency said in a report.” The Gini coefficient is a measure of relative inequality, usually of wealth or income, though it can be used to evaluate other forms of inequality. However, for most nations it is a number from .25 to .50