Been Had????

[Hand Sword]

Growing up in the 70's and 80's, I religiously watched all of the "chop socky" Kung Fu movies and Kurosawa Samurai movies. They provided me with the spark and want to take up the arts. Fast forward to recent times, I look up and still watch the movies at work (thanks youtube). While watching, I started thinking of the many threads and conversations on here about lineage, techniques, etc..., and wondered if we have all been had in our instruction. I came to this thought because as I re-watch them again, I see many of the techniques in our styles. In combination, recalling the "old days" for the founders, there was little around as a source of reference due to prejudice, or whatever. Also, many of the styles seem to have blossomed in the 70's as the founders "grew" as artists. Could it be that the source material became more abundant? I know some founders who took things right from books on the market. What else could the old schoolers have besides books and movies, along with limited instruction? After all, they all made themselves grand masters and developed their own styles.

Did the movies, which I'm sure were well attended by that genre of people, provide the styles and techniques as the eyes of each founder would like specific things seen?

Are the styles in those movies legit? I mean, they are in great shape as actors and actresses and provide great fight sequences for the most part. (There are lesser ones too, but overall, seemingly good M.A.) Was that the "Kung Fu" added in reality? The "Shaolin?"

Thinking we're really learning, have we been had? Hoodwinked?
Thoughts?

 

[Transk53]

Growing up in the 70's and 80's, I religiously watched all of the "chop socky" Kung Fu movies and Kurosawa Samurai movies. They provided me with the spark and want to take up the arts. Fast forward to recent times, I look up and still watch the movies at work (thanks youtube). While watching, I started thinking of the many threads and conversations on here about lineage, techniques, etc..., and wondered if we have all been had in our instruction. I came to this thought because as I re-watch them again, I see many of the techniques in our styles. In combination, recalling the "old days" for the founders, there was little around as a source of reference due to prejudice, or whatever. Also, many of the styles seem to have blossomed in the 70's as the founders "grew" as artists. Could it be that the source material became more abundant? I know some founders who took things right from books on the market. What else could the old schoolers have besides books and movies, along with limited instruction? After all, they all made themselves grand masters and developed their own styles.

Did the movies, which I'm sure were well attended by that genre of people, provide the styles and techniques as the eyes of each founder would like specific things seen?

Are the styles in those movies legit? I mean, they are in great shape as actors and actresses and provide great fight sequences for the most part. (There are lesser ones too, but overall, seemingly good M.A.) Was that the "Kung Fu" added in reality? The "Shaolin?"

Thinking we're really learning, have we been had? Hoodwinked?
Thoughts?

You mean for example, a Kung Fu movie staying religious to it's roots? No trickery or Hollywood moves as it were.

 

[Buka]

Unless a film is a Documentary, the actor, or in this case the Martial Artist, isn't going to have a say in which, or how, action scenes are shot. It would be the call of the stunt coordinator and/or the director and/or the technical advisor. (if they have one.) Bottom line goes to the director. The actor might have an input, depending on the relationship of the parties, but it would all be based on how the rushes look. (the daily film scenes shot). In my experience this is true on big budget films as well as straight to video chop sockey movies.

 

[Buka]

P.S.
I think we all get had when we watch movies. At least I do. Probably why I watch them. I love movies! I probably need professional help. I'd go to therapy.....you know, as long as they showed movies.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Movies are movies and the reality of marital arts is not a movie. Although there are charlatans everywhere in everything so it is possible to get hood winked if yu are not careful

After all, they all made themselves grand masters and developed their own styles.

Actually no they didn't. I have trained with a lot of good "teachers" and not a "Grandmaster" among them. Some of the students of my taiji shifu tried to call him Grandmaster and he would not allow it, of course he is old school CMA from China and if you call someone a Grandmaster where he comes from you're being rather sarcastic and possibly challenging him to a fight. But there are more than a few claiming to be a "Grandmaster" but then that is for us westerners because we are impressed by titles. My favorite bastardization of titles was the guy telling everyone his title was Shigong and that is what his students were supposed to call him...... funny thing about that is, by title, that means he taught himself...Shigong is not grandmaster it is my teacher's teacher

Did the movies, which I'm sure were well attended by that genre of people, provide the styles and techniques as the eyes of each founder would like specific things seen?

Its a movie and as already stated, unless it is a documentary, it is for entertainment purposes only. Do not confuse Shaw Brothers Fu with real Wushu

Are the styles in those movies legit? I mean, they are in great shape as actors and actresses and provide great fight sequences for the most part. (There are lesser ones too, but overall, seemingly good M.A.)

They are movies not reality although, like some Stone Movies, loosely based on reality.

Was that the "Kung Fu" added in reality? The "Shaolin?"

First "Kung Fu" is a translation error and it does not mean martial arts, it means hard work. The real word is Wushu for Chinese martial arts.

As for Shaolin, it ain't what it use to be so if you really want to get hoodwinked go train there and believe it is the real deal. As for any movie, they are movies, action adventure flicks of the day. Ever see Arnold Schwarzenegger's Commando.....is that reality? Is the fact that a single guy likely can't defeat an entire division make special forces people any less effective

Thinking we're really learning, have we been had? Hoodwinked?
Thoughts?

There is an great article on Kung Fu Tea that discusses how and why certain styles and types of training changed over the years. But to answer your question, if you find the right teacher then no you are not getting hoodwinked. But you need to do the research and not believe all the hype you hear. There are fakes out there and there are real good knowledgeable teachers too

 

[Tony Dismukes]

many of the styles seem to have blossomed in the 70's as the founders "grew" as artists.

Which styles are those?

Did the movies, which I'm sure were well attended by that genre of people, provide the styles and techniques as the eyes of each founder would like specific things seen?

Depends on what styles you're talking about. If your style was invented in the 70s and contains techniques which are based around flashiness rather than practicality, then it's certainly possible the founder took inspiration from the movies. I haven't trained in any styles like that, myself, but probably other have.

Are the styles in those movies legit?

Movie martial arts scenes are just about always choreographed for visual spectacle rather than realism. Even when the actors train a real martial art, they exaggerate it to make it more flashy.

This didn't originate just in the movies. Much of the theatrical CMA moves originate in Chinese Opera, where performers earned a living with dramatic choreographed fight scenes before the advent of film.

Thinking we're really learning, have we been had? Hoodwinked?

A high percentage of commonly recited martial arts histories are pretty questionable, especially once you go back more than 50 years or so. Still, if you do your research you can get a decent idea of how various arts have developed in the last century. Did you have any particular arts you were curious about?

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Movies are for fun and entertainment. Never confuse them or the people in them with real martial practice.

 

[pgsmith]

Movies are movies and the reality of marital arts is not a movie.

Yes, most movies I've seen involving the marital arts are overacted.

 

[Steve]

Marital arts are subtle and often fraught with danger and traps, but if you persist and work diligently, well worth the effort.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hand Sword]

Which styles are those?

Sorry about that. I was speaking from a Kem/N po perspective and what came out of Hawaii and evolved through the 50's onward. I didn't want to put this thread in that section (probably should have though-- Mod's feel free to move it there if possible)

 

[Xue Sheng]

Yes, most movies I've seen involving the marital arts are overacted.

See Wirefu

 

[lklawson]

Growing up in the 70's and 80's, I religiously watched all of the "chop socky" Kung Fu movies and Kurosawa Samurai movies. They provided me with the spark and want to take up the arts. Fast forward to recent times, I look up and still watch the movies at work (thanks youtube). While watching, I started thinking of the many threads and conversations on here about lineage, techniques, etc..., and wondered if we have all been had in our instruction. I came to this thought because as I re-watch them again, I see many of the techniques in our styles. In combination, recalling the "old days" for the founders, there was little around as a source of reference due to prejudice, or whatever. Also, many of the styles seem to have blossomed in the 70's as the founders "grew" as artists. Could it be that the source material became more abundant? I know some founders who took things right from books on the market. What else could the old schoolers have besides books and movies, along with limited instruction? After all, they all made themselves grand masters and developed their own styles.

Did the movies, which I'm sure were well attended by that genre of people, provide the styles and techniques as the eyes of each founder would like specific things seen?

Are the styles in those movies legit? I mean, they are in great shape as actors and actresses and provide great fight sequences for the most part. (There are lesser ones too, but overall, seemingly good M.A.) Was that the "Kung Fu" added in reality? The "Shaolin?"

Thinking we're really learning, have we been had? Hoodwinked?
Thoughts?

It's Stage Combat.

Stage Combat ain't fight'n. It's only supposed to look like fighting. The primary rule of Stage Combat is that everyone stays safe. The goal of Stage Combat is to tell a story that a audience, not necessarily composed of experts in the field, can follow while being interesting and exciting.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Hand Sword]

So, the real question, from a Kempo/Kenpo view is did these movies provide the technique ideas? A lot is very similar. I know as a youth, what was seen as "cool" by me was tried and incorporated. I'm guessing the same for them, with such limited material. So, in an argument sense, are those systems to be considered "fake?" or just movie/source material influenced? (if it's all stage stuff to begin with)

 

[donald1]

I like a good Kung fu movies like fist of fury with Bruce Lee in it or the recent one the grandmaster. Interesting movies but I like practicing northern shaolin or xing yi a little more

 

[Touch Of Death]

So, the real question, from a Kempo/Kenpo view is did these movies provide the technique ideas? A lot is very similar. I know as a youth, what was seen as "cool" by me was tried and incorporated. I'm guessing the same for them, with such limited material. So, in an argument sense, are those systems to be considered "fake?" or just movie/source material influenced? (if it's all stage stuff to begin with)

Nothing is ever fake. The high kicks, you see in the movies, may be slow, but they still hurt. You would be surprised what happens to normal people when a pro-wrestler slams them into the pavement. There are always better and quicker ways to skin a cat, but what techniques do you feel are fake? Maybe we can prove to you that they aren't.

 

[Cirdan]

The natural evulution of things:

Kung-Fu --> Movie-Fu --> Backyard-Redneck-with-440-Katana-Fu

The end result is all over youtube (with appropriately badass soundtracks) to our collective amusement/horror.