Powerful

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

"JCVD" gives homage to the actor Jean-Claude Van Damme, who's career kicked off in 1988 with an action movie called "Bloodsport". The film produced in season 2007/2008 in the actor's originated area Belgium has been given an art-house touch by director Mabrouk El Mechri, who is having fun with the written material, but is unable to make any statement that would stick with the audience after the movie runs out. In that sense the film stays a visual collage of arranged sequences in which the lead takes reminiscence to his past movies and signature action moves. Anything further in the script as sub themes from a custody court drama to a bank hostage situation is forgettable. The cinematographer wants to be innovative as Emmanuel Lubezki's orchestrated urban war sequence in "Children of Men" (2006) but only falls flat with no immersive push ins. So everything whats left of an indecisively directed wanna-be art-house film is the performance of Jean-Claude Van Damme, who uses the loosely connected scenes to show some personal character insides beyond the usual physical action.

The idea of a (once) movie star offering himself up for mockery and self-deprecation is interesting on so many levels, especially when it's a story of said wash-out being swallowed up in a takeover incident. Give Van Damme credit for being a good sport for this. More importantly, he proves himself here as an actor. On that basis alone, "JCVD" deserves your attention.That said, the movie eventually settles into a groove that becomes a rut. That bank scenes are never as good as the sweet opening action extravaganza, or the time-out Van Damme takes late in the game to address the audience. It's during these two scenes that the movie really hits those high notes. But then it's back to the grinding hostage stuff.6/10

It's too bad about ol' John-Claude- all his movies go direct to DVD for release, and when he gets a shot at something edgy, like JCVD, it's so far round the bend that the viewer can't latch on to enjoy the ride.There are more than a few problems with JCVD, starting with a narrative that from the start diverts our attentions and gets us off balance by starting mid-stream in a story involving a post office heist gone bad, and utilizing a Rashomon-like technique, ostensibly to elucidate truth.Other problems involve casting, and story, each of which is sub-par to the extent that the story-telling technique only serves to highlight the problems in the narrative rather than lift it to a higher level.Stories that have no particular depth should not be exposed. Rather than show more of how a bad story functions, it's better to cover up glitches in the narrative with explosions or struggles, or chase scenes. JCVD has little of these to raise the stakes and create tension, and ultimately the dismantling of the narrative into different points of view only serves to show off this deficiency.As far as characters go JCVD stars Jean-Claude Van Damme as a character named Jean-Claude Van Damme, a character with family problems including a custody suit involving his daughter. The problem is that Jean-Claude Van Damme is not as interesting as the characters he plays. Jean-Claude Van Damme the character is not invested in the problems he faces like a bad film-acting career, and custody battle, so the issues involving the heist don't involve us dynamically on an emotional level and this is what the film needs to stay alive.Actors who play themselves are only interesting when they are in interesting stories. Films like Being John Malkovich, or A Hard Day's Night rise above the usual because the persons playing themselves are also interesting people, so their characterization of themselves as iconic figures makes sense as it comments on the cultural aspect of the person. Jean Claude Van Damn has little irony associated with himself.When an interesting dramatic moment arises, ironically as JC himself physically rises to the occasion, we are taken out of the scene and out of the picture, and this breaking of the forth wall leaves us out in the cold. Jean-Claude's big moment is an emotional landmark for the actor, showing him as a performer who can invest himself completely in his craft. The ultimate problem taints his performance however by not allowing the viewer to be swept into the emotional landscape of the actor's craft.The movie leaves a bad feeling in the aftermath of what amounts to the real-life person/character navigating his world, and this fuzziness isn't much of a payoff after 90 minutes of screen time.

Jean Claude Van Damme in brilliant film shock! Who'd have guessed it? Certainly not JC if you have ask him, at least if this semi autobiographical gem is to be believed. JC plays himself, some would so he always plays himself but in this film he really does. Returning to his Belgian home after a custody battle where his films are the object of the court's derision, he quickly finds himself caught up in a 'hostage situation'. There's much banter about his image as the criminals discuss what to do about their celebrity hostage. The film loses its way a little, but comes back strongly with a five minute monologue to camera by JC in which he dissects his his life and career.