Golden Harvest roped in Hark and a bunch of Hollywood effects guys to create this impressive spectacle of a fantasy flick, boasting a great cast and groundbreaking visuals for HK circa 1983. But somewhere between the flying fairies, fireballs, lightsabre duels, and all the other bells and whistles, the story and the characters got lost.

I mean, the actors are fine, and all do a good job--Yuen Biao, Meng Hoi, Moon Lee, etc.--but I feel that they are kinda' pushed into the background by all the special effects stuff, stifling their otherwise fine performances. And the already complicated story drowns in there as well. I've watched this movie a number of times and still have absolutely no idea what it's about. Sure, it keeps throwing crazy, flashy stuff at you, but it doesn't really go anywhere.

For the international version, a whole new plotline, involving Yuen Biao as a modern day fencing champion who goes into a coma and lands in an alternate reality, was shot and tacked on. The original fantasy stuff, being that reality, was recut, and the whole thing was sold as a slightly different movie. The modern day stuff is pretty fun. And I would like to see that full version some day.

I think the movie is a bit of a letdown in the action department as well. It is certainly competent. But I'm just not a big fan of fantastique wire fu. And the fact that there is so much visual effects stuff going on around it also distracts from the physical stuff.

In the end, I can enjoy this film as more of a curiosity than a fully fledged piece of cinema. To me, this is a good example of the dangers of big effects movies: if you lose the story and the characters, then all you are left with is bright lights and big bangs. And that in itself is not filmmaking.

This film deserves a tiny fraction of credibility due to one man who died after the making of this bigoted, unethical piece of Nazi trash, and that is Raul Julia. Damn, his superb acting just consummately overshadows this film's abysmal structure of stupidity. Too bad really, his very existence almost makes up for this...this ASS, but it's not enough.

Where "Street Fighter" ('94) ultimately fails is in just about everything, from its horrible action, its ridiculous pacing, suck ass acting (except Raul Julia and, for some weird reason, the Russian guy called Zangief--dude, he was funny), poor and ignorant casting--for example the casting of a Samoan to play a Japanese sumo wrestler (E. Honda is not a Samoan name, f@#$ers)--and so forth. And the list perpetuates until my head explodes.

The success of this film is the chick who played Chun Li. UGH SHE'S HOT! And that's about it.

I hate this movie and yet I continue to watch it over and over again. KILL ME, NOW!!!!!!! :)

The trailer promised action--more action than I could shake a chopstick at. This film didn't have any though. It was a long, boring police drama based on a true story (supposedly) of a high profile kidnapping in which Chan plays a relentless cop. It's dialog heavy and the acting is terrible.

On one hand, as a Jackie Chan film, it's easily among his worst, and I can't understand why people like it so much. I've come to expect over-the-top action, stunts and fighting with amazing set pieces from his films. This was a bit of a departure from his other films at the time as he played a darker and more serious realistic character. That doesn't mean it's good. He's played a darker character in other films where it totally works. Here it's just a waste of talent.

As a police drama, it fails as well because the story is cliched and dull. It's also mostly a failure as an action film--until the end, that is, where it earns that extra half a star.

I recommend watching this like a porn: just fast forward through all the talking and watch the action. Basically, skip the first 4/5ths of this movie until you get to the end--and even then, it's barely worth your time. The action and set-pieces scattered throughout were weak for the most part and nothing you haven't seen. It's not until the very end that we finally get to see some classic JC--it's pretty clear which scenes he directed.

Even when things were exploding everywhere and the story had reached its ultimate climax, I was catching myself drifting off and just thinking about how Jackie Chan's hair kept changing length throughout the film, as though they had to do a bunch of reshoots or else they shot it out of sequence. That's probably why it felt so uneven.

Ultimately I'd say skip it, but most people out there seem to think this is some quality genius work. I'm a Jackie Chan enthusiast, but his comedic energy isn't what was missing here--what was missing was a good movie. There's literally nothing worth seeing that they don't show in the trailer. I'd suggest picking up "New Police Story" for a better example of a darker side of Chan, or "Thunderbolt" for some of the most fantastic stunts in a Chan film ever (just try to ignore the actual car racing scenes) instead.

"Crime Story" was also Chan's first film based on a true story and one of his first major dramatic roles. The action was also pretty good as Chan took more of a streetfighting approach and showed no sign of his normal lighthearted sense of humor which is probably why some fans do not like this film. There was a lot of intensity in the fighting and Chan and his stunt team took many nasty falls. The explosions and fires were also well done as the old Kowloon walled city was burned and leveled.

The acting throughout the film was very good as Jackie Chan more than proved he can pull off this type of role. Kent Chang was great as always as police inspector/kidnapper Hung. It was also amazing how actor Law Kar Ying and actress Au-Yeung Pooi San looked like the real Teddy and Nina Wang.

I think this is a good film that allowed Jackie Chan to take on a new and challenging role that could be used as an example to critics who think Chan cannot act or take dramatic roles as he progresses in age.

Maybe it's me--maybe I just get sick of new movies being cranked out the butthole to only reveal the same old shit. The stories and conceptions for today's kung fu films are soooooo worn out that this could have been an unintentional remake of a movie from the 70's or 80's; but who knows, really. To be perfectly honest, I think you're just looking for any excuse to give films like this any credibility when in truth you are in a state of denial.

The kung fu action was okay. JUST OKAY! I'll always have issues with wirework unless it fits with a film's level of insanity and/or absurdity, like "Tai Chi Master" or "Iron Monkey". But with a film like "Fearless" that's supposed to be consistent and well told (HA!), no wirework is required. It does not work. As far as the movements of the actors go, it feels a bit sloppy, but overall it's...eh, nice.

Probably the main reason why I didn't like this film is because of Jet Li. He is just not a convincing bad-ass. His martial art skills are 99% consummate but his screen presence is just weak. He's just a sissy Mary. The only films I've ever liked with him were "Tai Chi Master", "Fist Of Legend", "Martial Arts Of Shaolin", and for some odd reason "My Father Is A Hero". And perhaps "Once Upon A Time In China" 1-3, only because I like Tsui Hark films.

If you liked this film, fine. I don't care. But in the words of a great reviewer: "Nothing special here." It's just another everyday ordinary kung fu movie. Whoopee-do. Now I await your inflictions with elation.

AND THE ACTING WAS HORRIBLE!!!!!

While I admit that the "Lucky Stars" brand of comedy, infantile as it may be, does have its moments, I think a little of it goes a long way. And those movies would be kind of a chore to sit through had it not been for the excellent action scenes. That is not the case with this one. I love the comedy here and find it more or less hilarious from start to finish. Sammo injects so much ingenuity, warmth, and great gags here that even without the action, the movie would still work as a straight comedy.

Sammo and the guys have great chemistry and timing. It is genuinely funny watching this gang of dimwitted misfits goofing around and getting into trouble. They are the perfect ensemble of talents, all with a specific role to play, and bringing their own personal touch to the proceedings. It also helps that they are backed by a truly impressive cast here. It is a veritable "who's who" of HK cinema, circa 1983. It is actually hard to think of anyone who wasn't in this movie.

Admittedly, it has less action and fights than the "Lucky Stars" flicks. But what there is is great and dispersed appropriately throughout the movie. Stuff like the roller-skate chase, the thirty car pile-up, and the warehouse fight just never gets old, which I think you can actually say for the movie as a whole. The comedy, as well as the action, holds up well to this day. A classic of the genre, and just a fun ride all together.

Ultimately this is about as "true" as the "Amityville Horror" is, but who says that doesn't make a good movie? Unfortunately neither this nor the two "Amityville Horror" movies (1979 and 2005 versions) make a good movie. The biggest problem with this movie was its inability to create atmosphere. It tried in some spots, but then screwed it up with the need to inject some startle-scares. Almost the first full hour is more of a Lifetime cancer drama about a crusading mother and her sick boy. But finally, an hour in, the other girl plays Nancy Drew and the movie gets good for a bit before screwing it up with more drama and cheap scares.

Buried underneath the movie's quest for mediocrity and safe scares is a really cool idea--an idea that if they had fleshed it out a bit and shed some of the unnecessary family drama could have made this a really great movie. All in all it's technically competent, cheap, disposable Hollywood Muzak.

I've read this was the scariest Japanese movie ever made, and I'm inclined to believe it is a cultural thing, though not entirely. The most effective horror plays off the human fear of things that could actually happen to you. Make a movie about people being killed in movie theater parking lots, and theatergoers are going to be running to their cars after seeing it. Thus, a film about an evil begrudged spirit is going to resonate with Asian audiences, whose cultures are permeated with animist beliefs -- for the Japanese specifically through their Shinto and Buddhist religions. The fact that it has done so well in the West may prove this is an inate human fear and not just superstition, but the beliefs are so up front and center in Japanese life and day to day ritual that they probably have more than a little to do with the "scariest movie ever" label. The shot of two ghosts staring out from behind a Buddhist altar, trapped in limbo after being savagely ripped from the circle of life, further cements the connection. Playing off cultural fears seems to be why a lot of Asian horror movies involve the supernatural world and restless ghosts, while most American horror involves being hog-tied in the back of a van or being corraled by inbred mountain men.

Cultural pondering aside, this is a horror movie, and it just wants to scare you whoever you are. For me, it failed. I'm actually kind of perplexed as to how this is almost uniformly revered. It's a well done movie, and the little blue boy is sure to be an instantly recognizable image for years to come, but the scares just weren't there. Not even the jumps. Alas, back to the list.

"Big Boss". Okay, first of all, why oh why would you choose to shoot a martial arts movie in Thailand, and not pay homage to, or at least include the native style of, Muay Thai in any way? The Thai badguys just flail their arms about and fall down when Bruce hits them. Chang Cheh shot the Shaw flick "Duel Of Fists" in Thailand that same year, using Muay Thai to great effect, and as part of the storyline. He also made great use of the beautiful Thai locations. This movie could really have been shot anywhere. It wouldn't affect the story one bit.

Bruce has charisma and screen presence up the ying yang. There is no getting around that. He is also a great martial artist. Is he a great screen fighter? Sure. But sadly he is the only one who gets to show his stuff here. It's a one man show. And this self serving approach to fight choreography is my main problem with him and his films. On the other hand, without Bruce, this would just have been another mediocre basher flick, which is evident from the fight scenes done by Hang Ying Chieh. And when you finally see the two men square off in the final showdown, you see an obvious clash of choreo styles, with Bruce, no doubt, coming off the best.

The movie as a whole is a pretty uneven affair. There are numerous instances of flawed logic, poor continuity, choppy editing, sloppy camerawork, and some of the most naive characters you'll ever come across. But these things are nothing that most movies of the genre weren't guilty of at this time. It's just that this movie is held in much higher regard than its contemporaries. And aside from Bruce Lee himself, there isn't really much here that warrants that kind of overhyped adulation. To be honest, I'd take "One Armed Boxer" or "Lady Whirlwind" over this one any day. But hey, that's just me.

Why did I wait? This turned out to be one of the best martial arts movies I've ever seen. Yeah, sure, it's not realistic that this little chick could kick all this ass; but let's call a spade a spade: we don't watch martial arts movies for realism. Uma Thurman got to do it in "Kill Bill", and Jeeja Yanin deserves the same kind of props for the incredibly acrobatic, intricate, and downright dangerous screen fighting she unleashed in "Chocolate".

I know that giving a film 5 stars is a loud statement, and I'm not trying to state that this film is perfect. It's not. Definitely not. But despite its imperfections, the action was just so fun, the choreography so exciting and often unexpected, that I'm willing to err on the side of generosity for this little film that could.

I, for one, can't wait to see more of Jeeja Yanin. If this is just her starting point, I can't imagine what else she could achieve onscreen in the coming years.