By Jay Scott Kanes

HONG KONG -- Many things about Hong Kong are highly exaggerated. One vastly over-rated commodity is the acting abilities of “action star” Jackie Chan.

Recently, 55-year-old Chan showed serious off-screen shortcomings too. He drew a backlash, much of it online, after some Communist-flavored remarks that freedom may be a bad thing and that Chinese people need to be “controlled” to prevent “chaos”. He referred to Hong Kong, his birthplace, and to Taiwan, the only Chinese democracy, as too chaotic.

These views drew applause on Hainan Island, China, where Chan expressed them. But on the Internet critics denounced him as “a communist dog” and a misguided celebrity helping to “shackle” the public.

Democratic-minded Hong Kong legislator Leung Kwok-hung accused Chan of “insulting” his own people. “Chinese people aren’t pets,” Leung said. “Chinese society needs a democratic system to protect human rights and the rule of law.”

Albert Ho, another Hong Kong legislator, sensed racism. “People around the world run their own countries. Why can’t Chinese do the same?” he asked.

Too many people try to advance themselves by parroting what the Chinese dictators love to hear, thus doing a huge disservice to the country’s 1.3 billion people. If Chan’s activities and career had been “controlled”, he’d never have reached Hollywood to achieve global success. He gained prosperity as Hong Kong did – under British sovereignty.

Audiences enjoy Chan’s goofy grins and daring stunt work, but has he ever acted well or portrayed a believable character? For years, I’ve assured my overseas friends that Hong Kong has hundreds of better actors.

This isn’t Chan’s first scandal. Last year, for example, he pandered to the Chinese authorities by vigorously promoting the Beijing Olympics and the tainted pre-Games torch run.

Do bad acting, an inflated reputation and faulty judgment go together? In this case, yes, they do.


Should the public pave over Chan's
place on Hong Kong's Avenue of Stars?

ARCHIVES