Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

American films on fighting are inaccurate

Truth_seeker
Posts: 1,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 8:05:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

Not all of american films. The actors in the Fast and Furious films are serious about the fighting. In fact most newer films are serious. You're looking at the movies, look at some of the background footage. These people are serious about how they do the movies to get it right.
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2015 11:47:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

Stage Combat 101: Aim for the weapon, not the wielder.
Fuzzed
Posts: 45
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 9:48:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.

Even the fights in Bruce Lee's films are high choreographed and use a lot of moves that you'd never use in a street fight. And Bruce Lee was a serious fighter. He trained a ridiculous amount, and his entire martial art is based on using only moves that are practical in a fight. In a real fight, Bruce admitted that he'd never use most of the moves in his films. He'd either go for a quick strike to the eyes or a fast kick to the groin. But none of those moves would make for a very good movie.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 9:49:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 9:48:47 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.

Even the fights in Bruce Lee's films are high choreographed and use a lot of moves that you'd never use in a street fight. And Bruce Lee was a serious fighter. He trained a ridiculous amount, and his entire martial art is based on using only moves that are practical in a fight. In a real fight, Bruce admitted that he'd never use most of the moves in his films. He'd either go for a quick strike to the eyes or a fast kick to the groin. But none of those moves would make for a very good movie.

Do you like kung fu movies?
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 9:50:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 9:49:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:48:47 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.

Even the fights in Bruce Lee's films are high choreographed and use a lot of moves that you'd never use in a street fight. And Bruce Lee was a serious fighter. He trained a ridiculous amount, and his entire martial art is based on using only moves that are practical in a fight. In a real fight, Bruce admitted that he'd never use most of the moves in his films. He'd either go for a quick strike to the eyes or a fast kick to the groin. But none of those moves would make for a very good movie.

Do you like kung fu movies?

I'm fascinated by the life of Bruce Lee, but ironically haven't seen many of his movies. And no, not really.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 9:51:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 9:50:58 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:49:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:48:47 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.

Even the fights in Bruce Lee's films are high choreographed and use a lot of moves that you'd never use in a street fight. And Bruce Lee was a serious fighter. He trained a ridiculous amount, and his entire martial art is based on using only moves that are practical in a fight. In a real fight, Bruce admitted that he'd never use most of the moves in his films. He'd either go for a quick strike to the eyes or a fast kick to the groin. But none of those moves would make for a very good movie.

Do you like kung fu movies?

I'm fascinated by the life of Bruce Lee, but ironically haven't seen many of his movies. And no, not really.

Bruce Lee is really good, yeah... even if you're not... you should watch Ip Man.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 9:54:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 9:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:50:58 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:49:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:48:47 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.

Even the fights in Bruce Lee's films are high choreographed and use a lot of moves that you'd never use in a street fight. And Bruce Lee was a serious fighter. He trained a ridiculous amount, and his entire martial art is based on using only moves that are practical in a fight. In a real fight, Bruce admitted that he'd never use most of the moves in his films. He'd either go for a quick strike to the eyes or a fast kick to the groin. But none of those moves would make for a very good movie.

Do you like kung fu movies?

I'm fascinated by the life of Bruce Lee, but ironically haven't seen many of his movies. And no, not really.

Bruce Lee is really good, yeah... even if you're not... you should watch Ip Man.

Putting it on my list...

Have you seen Kung Fu Hustle. That was awesome.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 9:55:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 9:54:12 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:51:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:50:58 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:49:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:48:47 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.

Even the fights in Bruce Lee's films are high choreographed and use a lot of moves that you'd never use in a street fight. And Bruce Lee was a serious fighter. He trained a ridiculous amount, and his entire martial art is based on using only moves that are practical in a fight. In a real fight, Bruce admitted that he'd never use most of the moves in his films. He'd either go for a quick strike to the eyes or a fast kick to the groin. But none of those moves would make for a very good movie.

Do you like kung fu movies?

I'm fascinated by the life of Bruce Lee, but ironically haven't seen many of his movies. And no, not really.

Bruce Lee is really good, yeah... even if you're not... you should watch Ip Man.

Putting it on my list...

Have you seen Kung Fu Hustle. That was awesome.

I haven't... is it on Netflix?
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 9:56:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 9:55:22 PM, YYW wrote:

I haven't... is it on Netflix?

Dunno. It's on Youtube cuz we don't care about respecting the IP of Chinese movies.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 9:57:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 9:56:35 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:55:22 PM, YYW wrote:

I haven't... is it on Netflix?

Dunno. It's on Youtube cuz we don't care about respecting the IP of Chinese movies.

lol beautiful
Fuzzed
Posts: 45
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2015 5:33:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 9:48:47 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.

Even the fights in Bruce Lee's films are high choreographed and use a lot of moves that you'd never use in a street fight. And Bruce Lee was a serious fighter. He trained a ridiculous amount, and his entire martial art is based on using only moves that are practical in a fight. In a real fight, Bruce admitted that he'd never use most of the moves in his films. He'd either go for a quick strike to the eyes or a fast kick to the groin. But none of those moves would make for a very good movie.

I may have little martial fighting experience, but I did get into an awful lot of sometimes quite dangerous fights in my teen years.
I was also surrounded by people who spent years to it, my own brother spending 8 or 9 years between thaiboxing, krav maga, and an early form of MMA.

Training is fine, important, but nothing beats experience.
Experience in battle, from a street fight to a military shoot out, is paramount for learning the difference between what works in theory and what works in real time.
Bruce Lee took part in very few fights, organized or otherwise.
He had the technique, ability, and strength.. but he did not have the actual fighting experience.

Meanwhile Tyson had been gaining experience since he was a teenager. He had been in more fights at his early 20's then Bruce Lee wouldve seen in a full life time had he continued his methods. Tyson knew his body and how it reacted to punishment and pain better.. and size still matters. Bruce Lee may have fought large guys that were tough.. but Tyson is a whole different breed. He was punched by some of the hardest hitting individuals on earth and he never slowed down.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2015 3:34:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/25/2015 5:33:02 AM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/24/2015 9:48:47 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/24/2015 1:52:21 PM, Fuzzed wrote:
At 4/22/2015 6:06:27 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm offended when American films claim to do kung fu and martial arts but have no real techniques. Just cuz you wear a black belt, do a hand sign, and scream at the top of your lungs doesn't make you a martial artist. I wish they'd do their research.

Like IP man is real Wing Chun as you can see. It's all about attacking and counter attacking at the same time. It uses hand to hand combat more than fancy kicks. It's all about speed attacking instead of power.

Same with sword fighting films like LOTR and the Hobbit. Swordfighting isn't about all these fancy moves but about speed and agility. Fights are supposed to end quickly not go about swinging at each other's weapons.

First of all, what is effective isnt always what looks good on screen.

Also some of the most famous asian martial arts actors, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chain, honed their styles so they would specifically look good on camera. That is not to say Bruce Lee was not possibly an amazing fighter, but he never competed and there are no real video's of him actually fighting outside of movies.

Even the fights in Bruce Lee's films are high choreographed and use a lot of moves that you'd never use in a street fight. And Bruce Lee was a serious fighter. He trained a ridiculous amount, and his entire martial art is based on using only moves that are practical in a fight. In a real fight, Bruce admitted that he'd never use most of the moves in his films. He'd either go for a quick strike to the eyes or a fast kick to the groin. But none of those moves would make for a very good movie.

I may have little martial fighting experience, but I did get into an awful lot of sometimes quite dangerous fights in my teen years.
I was also surrounded by people who spent years to it, my own brother spending 8 or 9 years between thaiboxing, krav maga, and an early form of MMA.

Training is fine, important, but nothing beats experience.
Experience in battle, from a street fight to a military shoot out, is paramount for learning the difference between what works in theory and what works in real time.
Bruce Lee took part in very few fights, organized or otherwise.
He had the technique, ability, and strength.. but he did not have the actual fighting experience.

Meanwhile Tyson had been gaining experience since he was a teenager. He had been in more fights at his early 20's then Bruce Lee wouldve seen in a full life time had he continued his methods. Tyson knew his body and how it reacted to punishment and pain better.. and size still matters. Bruce Lee may have fought large guys that were tough.. but Tyson is a whole different breed. He was punched by some of the hardest hitting individuals on earth and he never slowed down.

Bruce Lee was in plenty of street fights. One of the reasons he left Hong Kong for the United States was because he beat a member of the triads so badly. [http://en.wikipedia.org...]

Bruce may be the *fastest* fighter that ever lived. He worked out his fast twitch muscles harder than possibly anyone else who has ever lived. He studied how to take out another fighter's legs and how to grapple.

Tyson was a great fighter and had a huge size advantage on most of the people he would ever fight in a street fight, and he was fast for his size. But if he were still alive, I'd still put my money on Bruce Lee in a fight. Someone who knows how to kick and is that fast would have a huge advantage in a fight. Even the best boxers today wouldn't last against someone trained in MMA. Legs simply give someone too much greater reach than arms. You should know this as someone trained in MMA. Bruce Lee was the first true MMA fighter, having studied grappling techniques and anything else that he could use. At the height of his career, he never fought in the streets... because why would he. And he rarely even fought other martial artists, partially because people were just afraid of him. I don't see how you could conclude that Tyson was a better all around fighter than Bruce Lee.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)