I don’t think the quality of Jason Statham’s output has really trended downwards over the years. Even at the beginning of his career he followed up a Snatch with a Ghosts of Mars, so it’s always been hit and miss…
Well sure, but you could just as well apply that to every film he’s in. The man doesn’t write or direct, after all, so the most that he can be responsible for a film is in saying “yes” to his agent.
I agree. As you mentioned, the quality of Statham’s filmography varies wildly, but I don’t think his performances are ever the determining factor in what the final result is. Idk, if someone wanted to call the 6th consecutive movie where he plays a gruff guy with a checkered past mixed up eith some baddies on someone else’s behalf a ‘slop movie’, I guess I couldn’t fight them on that. However, given that genre is a perennial favorite of mine, I’m not looking for a wide emotive range from that experience. I want cool fight choreography, inventive cinematography, and badass stunts. If I get that, but Statham gives a wooden performance, I’m still going to think well of the movie (not least of all because it’s largely the same performance as what he gives in his ‘good’ movies too lol).
I guess when I think of the prompt, the actor that comes to mind is like a Ben Kingsley type. Someone who won awards for their acting prowess, but who wound up shoveling out direct to video crap in the twilight of their career.
Yeah, I think Statham generally always delivers on what he’s asked (some wobbly accent work aside). I think he’s just a Michael Caine type who’ll basically be in anything so long as he’s getting work.
I don’t think the quality of Jason Statham’s output has really trended downwards over the years. Even at the beginning of his career he followed up a Snatch with a Ghosts of Mars, so it’s always been hit and miss…
I take it you haven’t seen his incredible backup dancer work, then?
I don’t know. Blaming Statham for Ghosts of Mars feels like blaming a waiter for the Titanic: he was just along fir the ride.
Well sure, but you could just as well apply that to every film he’s in. The man doesn’t write or direct, after all, so the most that he can be responsible for a film is in saying “yes” to his agent.
I agree. As you mentioned, the quality of Statham’s filmography varies wildly, but I don’t think his performances are ever the determining factor in what the final result is. Idk, if someone wanted to call the 6th consecutive movie where he plays a gruff guy with a checkered past mixed up eith some baddies on someone else’s behalf a ‘slop movie’, I guess I couldn’t fight them on that. However, given that genre is a perennial favorite of mine, I’m not looking for a wide emotive range from that experience. I want cool fight choreography, inventive cinematography, and badass stunts. If I get that, but Statham gives a wooden performance, I’m still going to think well of the movie (not least of all because it’s largely the same performance as what he gives in his ‘good’ movies too lol).
I guess when I think of the prompt, the actor that comes to mind is like a Ben Kingsley type. Someone who won awards for their acting prowess, but who wound up shoveling out direct to video crap in the twilight of their career.
Yeah, I think Statham generally always delivers on what he’s asked (some wobbly accent work aside). I think he’s just a Michael Caine type who’ll basically be in anything so long as he’s getting work.