IMDb > The Medallion (2003) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Medallion
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
The Medallion More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 4 of 13: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]
Index 129 reviews in total 

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

OK, but not the best...

5/10
Author: doyler from Virginia, USA
4 September 2003

I like all of Jackie's newer movies (i.e., not crap like Drunken Master) and this one is OK. But it actually is a repeat of "The Tuxedo" which was almost identical, except instead of a Tuxedo giving him the magic powers it is a medallion.

The same duel between him and the bad medallion wearer is at the end just like The Tuxedo. But the Tux was better all around, no romance, which he isn't good at yet.

Also, the leading lady in this one was poor compared to Tux.

I think he needs some new writers and he will come back...can't wait to see "Around the World in 80 Days"!

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Surprisingly Disappointed

5/10
Author: Hoopla from Pittsburgh, PA
29 August 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I expect a lot more from Jackie Chan's movies. The story line seemed to jump around and the editing was poor. Some of the special effects made me feel like I was watching streaming media over a slow connection.

The relationship between Jackie and his girlfriend was not very convincing.

Don't use this movie as a gauge of Jackie's USA productions. The Rush Hour and Shanghai series we much better.

Spoiler:

Why didn't they ever explain why the Librarian's wife had weapons?

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Not that bad.. but not that great either

6/10
Author: David Roduner from Columbus, Ohio
24 August 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I just saw this film last night. Honestly, I wanted to see another film, but I digress. To be honest, I was impressed. I'm not the martial arts freakazoid type. You can read other reviews to see a plot layout. I did notice, as others have said, obvious cuts in the story.

One spoiler: One of the character's wives ends up being a kick butt martial artist. One of the plot points is that he pretends to be a librarian. Nothing more is said. I assume she belongs to the Interpol police as well, but nothing is touched again.

But overall I enjoyed the film. Jackie Chan is really starting to show his age, as others have said. And the probability between him and a 20-something relationship wise is rather unlikely. However, it's escapist fun. If you just want to go out and have fun at the movies with no expectations, watch this film. It's no Matrix, but at least it isn't drek like The Four Feathers or Star Trek 5. Expect nothing and you'll enjoy yourself. Expect great art, and you'll be disappointed.

6/10

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

A sloppy effort best watched on DVD..

6/10
Author: Martyn Drake (martyn@vfx.cx) from London, UK
23 April 2004

Despite going on 50, Jackie Chan is still up to his antics in this action and special effects filled fantasy.

What could have been a fantastic film ends up a complete mess what appears due to studio interference. Silly music cues, unfunny 'comedic' moments and sloppy editing (and blatant continuity mistakes) has resulted in a mish-mash of various sequences thrown together to resemble what looks like a plot.

Good points - the special effects. However, I must admit to being biased. Claire Forlani, Jackie Chan and Lee Evans. Good cast - but not put to good use at all. There are very few laughs in this film (but at least there are some!). The fine action work by Jackie and the stunt team. You can't fault that.

Bad points - just about everything else.

This is a film you'd probably best off renting when drunk or when there really isn't much else on the TV.

On DVD, you get a decent enough audio commentary from the producer and editor and some deleted scenes.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Judge not, lest ye be judged!

8/10
Author: uds3 from Longmont, Colorado
1 November 2003

There is a trick to enjoying a film like this, See it for what it IS! Not for what you WANT it to be or for what you believe it MIGHT have been.

This film is entertaining. It is not meaningful, self-indulgent, complex or even particularly original. There are good guys and bad guys. That's all you need to know! It may well be seen as an under-achiever in the action, plot, direction, sound, romance and even the comedy aspects..HOWEVER it is a quirky, often funny and curiously likeable little flick....infinitely MORE than the sum of its parts admittedly.

Seems to be fashionable to knock Chan's martial artistry these days. "Kwai Chang Caine" (yeah right..."who's that???") is getting a tad long in the tooth too but check out KILL BILL Vol 2 when it comes out! Seems to me Jackie hasn't lost a whole lot....lets see how many rounds his critics might last with him when THEY are his age! This is in essence a fun family movie with no message, no purpose and no hard violence. Sure Lee Evans grates at times - he shares a couple of excruciatingly funny scenes with Chan but for the most part is a complete ass! Forlani more than compensates though. Julian Sands always DID have the charisma of a dead woodpecker. He probably reached the zenith of his career with WARLOCK. Actually he was lucky to still HAVE a career after BOXING HELENA. He must be the first name on every Producer's list when they need a "flying bad guy."

So how about you all cut this film some slack. Live with the hacked editing and just see if you can't find something decent to say about it. For myself, I figure it makes it to a 5.8.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Pee-yew

6/10
Author: Doug from Fargo, ND
24 August 2003

Poor movie. Even worse than The Tuxedo even though it has a similar plot. I am also growing tired of wire-fu fight scenes. One bright spot is a chase scene where Jackie climbs a 15 gate, squeezes through a grate and climbs back down faster than I can sit down on my couch. All this being said, I would be happy to pay $7 just to watch Claire Forlani drink a cup of coffee.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

The sound effects person for this movie should be FIRED!

1/10
Author: startrekismylife
5 October 2003

Man, this movie is horrible, but the sound effects just lowers the movie enough for it to be one of the worst movies ever!

For example:

They used a RECORD SCRATCH noise (the kind of sound that would come out of the speakers if you took a record off real fast)

There was a scene where 2 girls were going to fight, and out of nowhere, there was a cat sound (reear)

And let's not forget the part where the SAME EXACT scream comes out of Julian Sands mouth AND Jackie Chan's mouth (2 different scenes) This is the SAME scream that can be heard in countless other things (i remember hearing it in those "extreme sports" mountain dew commercials where the guy is skydiving or something) it goes something like "rrrrrrrAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!"

that about sums up the sound part...now let's move on to the acting...

That guy from "There's Something About Mary" has lost every ounce of respect that i had for him. His character in TSAM was silly, but at least he was funny in that. He SUX in this movie.

Jackie Chan didn't do a bad job in this...the writers did.

BOTTOM LINE: Don't see this movie, you will just hate it.

Was the above review useful to you?

Jackie still alive!

5/10
Author: pinkrabbi from Russia
9 July 2014

Once upon a time Quentin Tarantino was asked who he wanted to be as a child, and he did not hesitate to answer: "Jackie Chan!". "Medallion" - a movie for viewers under the age of twelve years, or for adults who have never grow up. Only children forgive director's obvious failures in the not to plot. Only children do not notice the obvious, if not arrogant, borrowing from the "The Golden Child" with Eddie Murphy and frankly weak actor's play. Well, tell me what the boy at that age is a matter about the cast and plot coherence? All this does not matter, because the main thing in the movie with Jackie Chan - Jackie Chan's self! Fortunately for grateful audience here is still intact. There are also his "brand" fights and jumps, and "brand" chase through the city (this time it is Dublin) for the next villain Warlock, who once again plays Julian Sands.

Was the above review useful to you?

A little cinematic time wasting with Jackie Chan, but by no means his best work.

4/10
Author: sunshinebeachcinema from United Kingdom
4 September 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

From the start, you know what page you should be on in Jackie Chan vehicle The Medallion. It exists to entertain, not to make any kind of bold spiritual or meaningful statement, even if the plot is grounded in a delightful magical hokum, which may or may not be inspired by certain elements of Chinese mysticism, which I'm sure it takes many liberties with.

Still, in this kind of film, a MacGuffin is required to get the plot moving. The titular Medallion is thousands of years old, and grants the holder a host of powers, including strength, speed and immortality. Naturally, some unscrupulous individuals are bound to want to get their hands on this wondrous item, and indeed they do, making off with both it and its child guardian Jai, who has been chosen by the fates as the only one who can activate the Medallion, by binding its two halves.

Who's on hand to stop this selfish abuse of ancient power? Hong Kong police officer Eddie Yang, (Jackie Chan). Chan plays his usual role as the dogged nice guy, battling against all the odds, and a seemingly never-ending stream of enemy goons, with only his skill at martial arts to protect him. As ever, it's impossible to dislike Chan, and you end up along for the ride, and rooting for him every time.

Lee Evans appears as Arthur Watson, a somewhat incompetent Interpol agent who is partnered with Jackie and becomes his comic foil. Throughout Jackie Chan's extensive filmography, he has been paired with numerous partners, especially in his Hollywood productions that have tended to exploit the "buddy cop" dynamic to its full potential. Lee Evans, for example, is not Owen Wilson, who performs admirably alongside Chan in Shanghai Noon (2000) and its sequel. Similarly, Chan's partnership with Chris Tucker in the Rush Hour film series is, of course, the stuff of cinematic legend.

That said, Evans is not a bad choice for Chan's partner. If you like him, he can be endearing, and his character here is written with this intention. However, like many stand-up comedians, he succumbs to the Marmite effect – you either love him or you hate him. If you fall in the latter category, he is likely to annoy you all the way though, and his presence in the film could be a deal breaker.

Claire Forlani's character, another agent by the name of Nicole, is an old flame of Eddie/Jackie's. Regrettably, she is not particularly engaging and there is little chemistry between her and Jackie to give credence to their previous relationship. She seems to fill the obligatory role of the love interest to accompany the primary duo into the finale, but I would have preferred to see this role filled by Charlotte Watson (Christy Chung), Arthur's wife, who appears during a fight in the Watson household, revealing herself to be an agent too. Pre-dating Mr. & Mrs. Smith by two years, neither Arthur nor Charlotte have filled each other in on their true professions, but when her family is threatened, Charlotte springs into action. For some reason, nothing is made of this after the scene, and the character does not appear again.

Those who grew up watching the animated series Jackie Chan Adventures might enjoy a nostalgia trip when they recognise a familiar sounding villain in the form of Julian Sands, who proves that the stereotype of the well-spoken British villain is still very much alive in his role as the borderline psychotic crime lord known as "Snakehead". At times, this film can feel like a live action imagining of the aforementioned series, where Sands played Jackie's nemesis, a similar villain with a penchant for the theft of mystical items.

Gordon Chan directs, as an experienced figure in Hong Kong cinema who has worked with Jackie Chan before. Gordon Chan's other notable works include remakes of Bruce Lee's Fist of Fury (1972): Fist of Legend (1994), starring Jet Li, and Legend of the Fist (2010). As ever, the real star is not the plot or characterisation, but the fight scenes with Jackie, who is well known for performing all of his own stunts, to the point that nobody would insure him. Typically, the director is happy to let Jackie do his thing, whilst the soundtrack plays some pop rock with a groovy bass line. During the finale, Forlani's fight with her female counterpart in Snakehead's organisation is set to a rocking blues guitar solo. Perhaps this choice of score is not surprising; the soundtrack was co-written by Steve Porcaro, one of the founding members of Toto.

In a film about a medallion that gives supernatural powers, the most entertaining fights are the most realistic. These are the ones where Jackie fights a number of thugs in an industrial location. Once in the sewers beneath the streets of Hong Kong, and twice on container ships, in Dublin and Victoria Harbour. Once the characters inevitably become juiced up on the medallion's powers, the fights seem somehow less impressive. Whilst events become visually more extreme, and the stakes are technically higher, what with the fate of the world hanging in the balance, conflicts between these newly immortal warriors lack the tension of a fierce urban punch-up. The Medallion's powers do give Jackie the chance to perform near super-human stunts, such as scaling a building, or leaping a large gate in one smooth movement. I'm sure some of these stunts must be his own, unassisted, proving he doesn't really need these powers after all, even if his character wouldn't normally be up to it.

This film, while an hour and a half of entertaining absurdity, does not deserve further analysis, nor does it ask for it. Jackie Chan saves this film, simply by doing what he does best. But it is by no means his best work.

Was the above review useful to you?

it was errrr OK

4/10
Author: masterjclee from United Kingdom
20 April 2006

erm i didn't find it really satisfying, it wasn't a jackie chan movie, i think if he had more control over the film it would be a lot better. jackie is known for his out rages stunts, for exciting viewers, but in this movie he used a lot of wires, for imitating the superpowers is alright but before when he was just human some of the jumps looked really fake and was just boring and took away the excitement. Lee evans was great i love his humor. I think the scene that lost most of my interest was the scene where he was chasing Johann Myers's character and was jumping over those small tables and barriers and you can clearly see that wires were used for such easy jumps. I think jackie should stop being sucked into these Hollywood/English movies and start creating his own, which i believe hes doing now....for example...the myth (brilliant movie) a must see. i don't think its your fault Jackie, just try not to get sucked into those Hollywood movie areas, you deserve better credit for what you've done in the past!!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 4 of 13: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history