Quoted from Heretic I thought Jack Reacher was an interesting example of the good and bad when modern US action films try to do real action scenes instead of shoving a handheld camera up the actors' nostrils.

Wait a minute. Are you saying Jack Reacher is a good OR bad example? Or both. I've read that several times and can't work it out.

I think it's pretty good. Sure, it's not Raid good, but The Raid (original title, I hate the tacky addition of 'Redemption' so refuse to use it) is exceptional. Clearly the benchmark going forward.

But it's silly, Ray, to blanket compare everything against that standard and blanket rubbish "most" Hollywood action scenes/fight choreography.

Okay.  

Well I think there are two sides to it. I thought Jack Reacher was great, but was an example of both the benefits and the downsides of such an approach. The benefit is that it feels like you're actually watching an action movie. The downside is that, in more recent years, the US has cast action stars as actors first, athletes second -- so even though Tom Cruise is a pretty amazing dude, the fights are never really gonna feel like they should. The climactic fight scene in Jack Reacher, for example, just wasn't up to snuff. And for the record, Tom Cruise is more or less the best of the American action stars, in my opinion, so maybe he's not the perfect example -- I might be thinking more of like, Zoe Saldana, Channing Tatum, Ryan Reynolds, Gerard Butler, Angelina Jolie, Colin Farrell, Jeremy Renner, etc.

Not that I think every action movie needs to have a great fighter as its star. But I do think that we've gotten a little too accepting with our "action" stars. And it's a shame that great fighters like Scott Adkins languish in films that are otherwise unwatchably bad, while clowns like Channing Tatum star in big summer action movies:



But that's just a shift in cultural tastes, too. Our aesthetic interest in intensity is much too "evolved" to appreciate something as basic as painstakingly choreographed displays of stunning athleticism...

Quoted from Heretic Well I think there are two sides to it. I thought Jack Reacher was great, but was an example of both the benefits and the downsides of such an approach. The benefit is that it feels like you're actually watching an action movie. The downside is that, in more recent years, the US has cast action stars as actors first, athletes second -- so even though Tom Cruise is a pretty amazing dude, the fights are never really gonna feel like they should. The climactic fight scene in Jack Reacher, for example, just wasn't up to snuff. And for the record, Tom Cruise is more or less the best of the American action stars, in my opinion, so maybe he's not the perfect example -- I might be thinking more of like, Zoe Saldana, Channing Tatum, Ryan Reynolds, Gerard Butler, Angelina Jolie, Colin Farrell, Jeremy Renner, etc. Not that I think every action movie needs to have a great fighter as its star. But I do think that we've gotten a little too accepting with our "action" stars. And it's a shame that great fighters like Scott Adkins languish in films that are otherwise unwatchably bad, while clowns like Channing Tatum star in big summer action movies: But that's just a shift in cultural tastes, too. Our aesthetic interest in intensity is much too "evolved" to appreciate something as basic as painstakingly choreographed displays of stunning athleticism...

I get ya.

Well, even still, there's an awful lot of work that goes in to choreographing these scenes. From experience on Guardians, the actors do a lot of work with highly skilled stunt crew, and an awful lot of the reason the camera jumps around so much is to bring the realism in with stunt doubles, but still creating the impression the actor is delivering the blows.

Good point re: proper stunt/action guys, but yeah, agreed, it's largely down to the commercial side. It's hard for those types of guys to get box office cred when there's little chance to showcase when in low budget, poorly written films. The Raid, of course, benefits from being low key, low budget but directed by an extremely talented director with a no doubt fantastic crew to bring it alive.

I definitely think Cruise is a great embodiment of trying to do it the right way and as his escapades in Dubai show, he's prepared to go the extra mile.

Bourne Ultimatume had some great action/fight scenes - but again, that's with a very talented director, who I understand is very precise in what he wants.

I was very impressed with Cruise in Jack Reacher.  His fighting skills looked great.

I was also very impressed with Gerard Butler in Olympus has Fallen.  He totally rocked his part and totally looked the part.

I too cannot stand watching super fast edited garbage fights.  The first Bourne was so good in the hand to hand combat that Matt Damon did, but for me, the rest have been unwatchable, as they completely changed the look and editing.

Other that The Raid: Redemption (sorry Andrew, but I have to call the movie by it's actual name), I think the very best hand to hand combat displayed in any movie would be Safe with Jason Stathom - the attention to detail there was fantastic!

Decided to check this out after the rave tweets circulating around the internet for the sequel. http://i.imgur.com/cTV5OXF.jpg

And yeah, basically agree with everything said here. Some fantastic choreography. It actually felt like these dudes were beating the living shit out of each other. There's this one specific 10 second sequence when Mad Dog fights the brothers where I could've swore a back was broken. Solid stuff, can't wait for the sequel.