Member DiP Posted October 4, 2011 Member Share Posted October 4, 2011 http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118043435?printerfriendly=true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member masterofoneinchpunch Posted October 4, 2011 Member Share Posted October 4, 2011 A couple of comments on that: "he established Hong Kong film in the global market and rewrote the history of Hong Kong films." While he is quite important HK filmmaker this seems a bit of a hyperbole. "Tsui pioneered the Hong Kong New Wave in the 1980s..." Ignoring the facts that the New Wave started off in the late 1970s and included several directors. Of course every author seems to have a different opinion on the first new wave film (Yim Ho's The Extras, Jumping Ash ...) I've read about his birthplace being in several different places (usually between Saigon Vietnam and China) that I wonder what is the truth. I asked David Bordwell (Planet Hong Kong) and he stated that Vietnam is generally the accepted answer (though in some books like Hong Kong Babylon I think you get both answers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Travis Posted October 7, 2011 Member Share Posted October 7, 2011 I like some of his films, but I think what really made Hong Kong films get noticed around the world is Bruce Lee and the kung fu craze of the 70's, not that I was around then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Killer Meteor Posted October 7, 2011 Member Share Posted October 7, 2011 Given the commerical value of these films had dwindled in the US by the 80s, its probably fairer to say Hark got HK cinema noticed by fancy film critics - although King Hu got there first, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member DiP Posted October 7, 2011 Author Member Share Posted October 7, 2011 I think it has more to do with contribution to the industry than international recognition. King Hu might get a mention but Bruce Lee's 4-year prime period is peanuts compared to those with lengthy careers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Killer Meteor Posted October 12, 2011 Member Share Posted October 12, 2011 I think it has more to do with contribution to the industry than international recognition. King Hu might get a mention but Bruce Lee's 4-year prime period is peanuts compared to those with lengthy careers. A lot of lazy books suggest that HK cinema did nothing but chase after Bruce Lee wannabees for five years, which is blatantly not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member blue_skies Posted October 12, 2011 Member Share Posted October 12, 2011 I think it has more to do with contribution to the industry than international recognition. King Hu might get a mention but Bruce Lee's 4-year prime period is peanuts compared to those with lengthy careers. I don't claim to be anywhere as knowledgeable as most of you guys on the forum and I'm not the biggest Bruce Lee fan. I would however say that Bruce Lee's influence on not just Hong Kong cinema but martial arts cinema and even worldwide cinema is nothing but a massive phenomena.in a brief period he left a legacy that Is incalculable how important his contribution is and how many doors he opened for those that followed. Even now those without any interest in martial arts or Asian cinema know who Bruce Lee is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member DiP Posted October 12, 2011 Author Member Share Posted October 12, 2011 Of course, I'm not taking anything away from Lee's contribution when he was in his prime because he revolutionized the way of how martial arts films (camerawork, editing, acting, storytelling etc) were done and opened doors for others as well. But what he did was merely in martial arts films. And it was during a brief time of period. We can all imagine how great Hong Kong Cinema would be if Bruce Lee would be alive now but that's as far as we can go with that. Contribution and recognition are things I see as two opposite things so I wouldn't confuse them with each other. Contributing to the industry is constantly bringing alot of different and new ideas to the table, regardless of film genre. Recognition is being known for something particular and having the ability to inspire people of what you are known for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Killer Meteor Posted October 12, 2011 Member Share Posted October 12, 2011 Of course, I'm not taking anything away from Lee's contribution when he was in his prime because he revolutionized the way of how martial arts films (camerawork, editing, acting, storytelling etc) were done and open doors for others. But what he did was merely in martial arts films. And it was during a brief time of period. We can all imagine how great Hong Kong Cinema would be if Bruce Lee would be alive now but that's as far as we can go with that. Contribution and recognition are things I see as two opposite things so I wouldn't confuse them with each other. Contributing to the industry is constantly bringing alot of different and new ideas to the table, regardless of film genre. Recognition is being known for something particular and having the ability to inspire people of what you are known for. I think Bruce Lee, who is my favourite kung fu star, brought a legitimacy to HK cinema as it was percieved by the west, but don't forget the kung fu boom internationally can be traced to FIVE FINGERS OF DEATH. I think the main contribution Bruce made was for the studios to look at actual martial artists for talent, rather than take groomed actors and then teach them to do martial arts. A key example - Shaws having Chen Kuan-tai, a bona fide martial arts champion, as their new star, just as Bruce is making his second film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member masterofoneinchpunch Posted October 12, 2011 Member Share Posted October 12, 2011 Given the commerical value of these films had dwindled in the US by the 80s, its probably fairer to say Hark got HK cinema noticed by fancy film critics - although King Hu got there first, too. This got me thinking about some of the first efforts to get more western critics notice. I found it interesting that Run Run pushed these in the early 60s: “Three Shaw films played at the Cannes International Film Festival between 1960 and 1963: The Enchanting Shadow (Qiannu Youhun, 1960) starring Betty Loh Ti, The Magnificent Concubine (Yang Kwei Fei, 1962); and Empress Wu (Wu Tse-tien)…” from the essay: "Bridging the Pacific with Love Eterne by Ramona Curry" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Travis Posted October 12, 2011 Member Share Posted October 12, 2011 I don't claim to be anywhere as knowledgeable as most of you guys on the forum and I'm not the biggest Bruce Lee fan. I would however say that Bruce Lee's influence on not just Hong Kong cinema but martial arts cinema and even worldwide cinema is nothing but a massive phenomena.in a brief period he left a legacy that Is incalculable how important his contribution is and how many doors he opened for those that followed. Even now those without any interest in martial arts or Asian cinema know who Bruce Lee is. I totally agree. Very few people in the USA (and just about every other country) know who King Hu or even Tsui Hark are. Everyone knows Bruce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member DiP Posted October 13, 2011 Author Member Share Posted October 13, 2011 Bruce is a global icon for sure but he didn't have that much significance in changing the entire HK film industry like King Hu, Tsui Hark, Sammo, Jackie and so on. Just because you're the most famous doesn't mean you have done the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.