Choreography vs Violence

[DiP]

After the releases of G. Evans' The Raid films loved by arguably most action film fans (both old and new-gen fans), I have noticed an ongoing trend where gruesome or brutal violence in fight scenes are in high demand in order to produce "good" action films, which is nice for a change. However, it sadly seems that some people will now dismiss other action films willingly depending on the level of violence that are shown. I think trend-setting action films are good for the film industry to take advantage of to keep growing. But at the same time I feel that these kind of films can easily spoil us and make us expect the same criteria of ingredients in other action films, with their own goals and approaches of action film-making. Why only love a particular set of action films by particular people when there's so much out there to appreciate and learn from?

Anyway, having said all that what's your take on this matter? What defines good fight scenes? And what's more important to emphasize when staging fight choreography, violence or choreography in general?

[mpm74]

Good one DiP…. You deserve some balut for this one.

To me, I’d rather have a good, well-paced story, along with some nice ‘n clean choreography. Doesn’t have to be all brutal and bloody. This is one of the reasons I liked Merantau over The Raid. It was paced better. There was a slow burn there. The Raid gave us too much, too soon. By the time it got to its final 1/3rd, I felt like I had enough. The Raid had better action, but Merantau was the better movie.

I keep on bringing this up, but when it comes to any movie, action or not, it’s all about the pacing. The build up. The tension. And of course, the pay off at the end. Bruce Lee’s The Big Boss had this. Jackie Chan’s Police Story had this. Movies like Ong Bak 2 and 3 did not.

Touching more on the brutality and blood: With The Raid 2, it works. Mainly because of the slow build up. And the minute-after-minute re-rewarding experience. Honestly, I couldn’t see it without any blood or gore; however, it would still prevail without it.

This brings us up to Expendables 3 (I know we're talking about choreography, but I think the rating issue fits...) and how it’s Rated PG-13. Expendables 1 and 2 were both R-rated. A Good Day To Die Hard was also Rated R. All three films were some of the worst films I’ve ever seen, yet their action sequences were pretty good. Then you have something like Casino Royale, which is PG-13… and I felt that it was more intense and brutal than all three of those films combined because of the director’s execution. Same goes with the Bullet to the Head, another terrible R-Rated film (not to be confused with the John Woo film).

The movie as a whole is what counts! Unless it's a Bruce Le/Dragon Lee/Godfrey Ho flick, no filmmaker gets a special ticket for making a half ass movie just because it's a action/martial arts flick! If you're gonna make a movie, make it good.

[massa_yoda]

This brings us up to Expendables 3 (I know we're talking about choreography, but I think the rating issue fits...) and how it’s Rated PG-13. Expendables 1 and 2 were both R-rated. A Good Day To Die Hard was also Rated R. All three films were some of the worst action films I’ve ever seen, yet their action scenes were pretty good. Then you have something like Casino Royale, which is PG-13… and I felt that it was more intense and brutal than all three of those films combined because of the director’s execution.

Yeah, people make such a big deal about ratings, as if a film has no merit unless it's at least rated R. Just give me a good film, ratings don't matter.

Personally I'm not really into brutal violence; I just love good, well-choreographed action. I can dig movies like The Raid, but it's not my normal thing.

[slinky]

I think it just brings 2 genres together(so if you like both your getting double your pleasure In other words). I prefer choreography too over brutal violence, although i really like the Raid movies and Merantau. I just enjoy a good martial arts film period. Personally to much story ruins it for me, but i do like a good story, just should have more martial arts then story in my opinion. I think the story thing is what brought martial art movies down, but that is my opinion. Every time you would get less and less MA and more story and then it got less and less good choreo as well, because you didn't need the quality anymore. And just look where we were at. Just my 2 cents..Like the most story i would want be like Mad Monkey Kung Fu(This movie also explains the type of choreography i like to see, see being the key word) Also creativity in the choreography can be important. Don't want to see the same thing all the time, some of the same is ok though. Camera angles, position and distance can be important also to make it enjoyable. .

[TheGrimReaper]

I would always appreciate a nicely choreographed fight, where it shouldn't be violent, but rahter depicting the qualities of both fighters in a way that complements their primary motivation and strive for victory.

The alley fight in SPL was brutal, but executed brilliantly, of course even in the martial arts genre any movie should have at least a basic plot, not just slapping together some big action clips and wait for a positive result.

Ip Man was also good in terms of good choreography and good pacing of a movie itself, while House of fury was just a cartoonish attempt to enhance the fight scenes - it didn't work for me altthough there were some nice moves at the end.

A good choreography requires perfect timing between the performers, and I love long end fights, that's why I consider The Five Superfighters, Magnificent Butcher & Knockabout a great examples for long well staged end fights where I can cheer for the good guy and curse when the bad guy takes the upper hand.

Pedicab Driver had some amazing choreography both flawless and violent, where Drunken Master 2 had the chrarisma of old school movies, wihtout getting over the edge of brutality.

The Raid is for me one of the best movies in the past 10 years, for sheer glorification of brutal fights, vombined with electrifying choreography, I seldom see such performances on screen. the same goes for the first Ong Bak and Chocolate - although both of them deliver strong on the fight side and great stunt work, it lacks the story narrative and it fails in character development IMO.

Most of the great movies from late 80's and 90's (until the domination of wuxia pien subgenre) had outstanding choreography, which at some times was in the verge of become a violent display of power - both Tiger Cage movies, In the line of duty 4, Righting Wrongs is also up there.

Sometimes the graphic nature of any fighting scene can put me off somehow, especially when executed poorly or over exposing the emotions and moves in it. I wouldn't mind a bit of blood spilled here and there, but not as the likes of Ninja Assassin where even the smallest cut produced gallons of blood gushing out of everywhere - it just gets too ridiculous at one point.

I always consider a martial arts scene as a clash between two personalities, with their emotions and skills, each of them is fighting for something he believes into, so blindly that he won't stop at anything until the final goal is reach. The impact of two people preparing to fight is even better on screen when I find myself to actually give a damn about fighters as human beings, as two opposing forces ready to collide.

Great topic and I apologize for being a bit detailed in my post, but my love towards martial arts movies is something which I would like to express and here I know I would be understood

Greetings

[Tex Killer]

And what's more important to emphasize when staging fight choreography, violence or choreography in general?

I have not seen raid 2 yet but raid 1 two-against-one fight showed they can be balanced. While it appeared violent, choreography was great too.

[xianzai]

I think some movies are nominally martial arts or action movies, but veer into horror movie territory. The Raid falls into this category for me.

As massa_yoda says: "Personally I'm not really into brutal violence; I just love good, well-choreographed action. I can dig movies like The Raid, but it's not my normal thing."

[DiP]

Good one DiP…. You deserve some balut for this one.

Thanks but some pampanga-style tocino would be more preferable in my part

Personally I'm not really into brutal violence; I just love good, well-choreographed action. I can dig movies like The Raid, but it's not my normal thing.

Same sentiment. Brutal violence can be entertaining but I'm a variety/creativity-seeker so I'm more interested in seeing what ADs/ACs and the players can come up with and how well they can keep their action scenes fresh.

Personally, I find The Raid films overrated (no offense Evans/Uwais fans). Well-choreographed and very violent action in both films but honestly I was bored with the fight set-pieces (save for the earlier group fights in part 1, and Baseball Bat Man/Hammer Girl/The Assassin in part 2) because it started to get repetitive after a while. Pacing, timing, execution, movements... Honestly, if I want to really enjoy the style I would just go back to classic HK action films from the 80s. Someone 5-7 pages back of this thread nailed it with that review of The Raid 2 where the action was broken down into details. Brutal violence in this day of age being a rarity but coming with a package that was already done with pure originality decades ago.

[Drunken Monk]

I typically make the distinction that while violence can benefit from good choreography, good choreography doesn't necessarily benefit from violence.

Give me a crisp, well paced, well shot fight scene with no bloodshed whatsoever and I'll be as happy as can be.

I don't necessarily need brutality in a fight scene but it does help if the overall tone of the movie is grim. For example, I couldn't really envisage "The Raid 2" without brutality. There's a lot at stake for so many characters and the carnage ties directly into that. It's a boiling pot and when that boiling pot overflows all bets are off.

But look at Jackie. The guy's career has been built and making pretty family friendly action. But it works perfectly. A punch is a punch. I don't need to see teeth flying as long as the bad guy goes down.

I suppose brutality for the sake of brutality just doesn't do it for me. Weird, it does in horror films, but not really in action films. That's part of the reason I didn't enjoy "Raze." It just seemed exploitative from the get go.

But if violence is tied to the aesthetic of the film, it usually works for me. I mean, come on, who doesn't like a bit of bone snapping every now and again? I just don't think seeing a knee broken in half word have worked in, say, "The Forbidden Kingdom."

[mpm74]

But look at Jackie. The guy's career has been built and making pretty family friendly action. But it works perfectly. A punch is a punch. I don't need to see teeth flying as long as the bad guy goes down

Same goes for that new BRUTAL movie coming out. I want a good movie, before I see bones breaking in my face. Yeah, it's called BRUTAL, but give me both.

[masterofoneinchpunch]

Brutal also does not necessarily mean bloody which is analagous to the horror film where gore does not necessarily mean scary.

Dealing with martial art movie aesthetics, I tend to view the martial arts film like a musical into two different components: the fight scenes (the musical would be the particular song/dance scene) and of course the composite of the film. You can have an awesome fight scene and a overall ridiculous/crappy film. Ahhh, but you remember what you feel during the fight scene though the overriding factor tends to be the film as a whole.

A good action scene can consist of so many factors (we had a thread on this at this site, but I just could not find it) including from emotional resonance from happened previously to the start of the fight, the camera work, the athletic factor and how it can fit in (the less the ability usually you will need a different type of camera work), the ebb and flow of the connecting scenes (the give and take, does the fight lean one way only to have a moment where it starts to turn), the use of props and/or location, originality (which is quite rare) and the ending. All of these factors triumph over gore/blood in itself -- though they can be a factor as long as they support the end goal of a sublime fight scene.

[DiP]

Another great post there! You're always spot on when analyzing topics whenever you get into it.

[One Armed Boxer]

After the releases of G. Evans' The Raid films loved by arguably most action film fans (both old and new-gen fans), I have noticed an ongoing trend where gruesome or brutal violence in fight scenes are in high demand in order to produce "good" action films, which is nice for a change.

Anyway, having said all that what's your take on this matter? What defines good fight scenes? And what's more important to emphasize when staging fight choreography, violence or choreography in general?

I know I'm a little late to the table on this one, but thought I'd chime in. I agree with the points some other forum members on here have made, in that the level of violence in a fight scene is entirely dependent on the context of the movie which it's taking place in. Sammo is a great example of this, as someone mentioned the finale of 'Pedicab Driver' is suitably violent and well choreographed, however if you take another one of his movies such as 'Encounters of the Spooky Kind', the finale is equally well choreographed, but the level of violence isn't there, because it doesn't suit the overall tone.

I definitely don't think that the whole gruesome or brutal violence trend in MA movies is a new thing though, it's more a case of movies like 'The Raid' and its sequel have reminded people of how much more impact violence can bring to a fight scene if done well. Chang Cheh was delivering the gore as far back as the late 60s, whether it be Jimmy Wang Yu getting strung up by multiple swords being impaled through his body, or an unsuspecting ninja tripping up on his own intestines. It's a fight, so to a degree a level of violence should always be there, it's more about how violent a good fight should be.

[ShaOW!linDude]

It's a fight, so to a degree a level of violence should always be there, it's more about how violent a good fight should be.

I would concur with OAB's final statement. Some attempts at violence in fights is just flat out cheesy because of poor execution. The choreographer must be like a chef, knowing just the right amount to introduce to give a fight a satisfyingly violent flavor. I liken the RAID films to being rather spicy dishes in terms of violence and choreography. "Wow, that's hot...but I can't stop eating this!"

[DiP]

I definitely don't think that the whole gruesome or brutal violence trend in MA movies is a new thing though, it's more a case of movies like 'The Raid' and its sequel have reminded people of how much more impact violence can bring to a fight scene if done well. Chang Cheh was delivering the gore as far back as the late 60s, whether it be Jimmy Wang Yu getting strung up by multiple swords being impaled through his body, or an unsuspecting ninja tripping up on his own intestines. It's a fight, so to a degree a level of violence should always be there, it's more about how violent a good fight should be.

I totally agree but that wasn't my point. Just implying that violence of that level in Evans' films have been away for the most part in recent times and made people aware of just how relevant brutal violence should be in action films, especially when most action filmmakers have been going soft on us for a good while now.

[One Armed Boxer]

I totally agree but that wasn't my point. Just implying that violence of that level in Evans' films have been away for the most part in recent times and made people aware of just how relevant brutal violence should be in action films, especially when most action filmmakers have been going soft on us for a good while now.

Fair enough, my response was mainly aimed at answering the question you posed -

And what's more important to emphasize when staging fight choreography, violence or choreography in general?

I don't think it's a case of one being emphazied over the other, rather the violence should be one of the ingredients of the choreography, just like the moves being performed and the acting of the people performing them.

Take away one of those ingredients and you have a problem. The perfect example of this is in the recent movie 'Pompeii'. People get stabbed through the neck, crushed, and all sorts of other grizzly endings, however there's not a drop of blood to be seen anywhere. It makes the viewer completely disconnect from what's on screen, because logic dictates that there SHOULD be blood if someone is stabbed in the neck. Instead, you're immediately yanked out of the world the movie is supposed to be immersing you in, and instead you're left sat there thinking to yourself, "That's right, this movie is a PG-13."

What I'd be more interested to hear rather than the movies which have turned their focus on showing the more brutal side of violence, is if you think there are movies which have displayed outstanding choreography in recent times, but have got a bad rap because general opinion is that they're not violent enough, as I understand that's what your original post was suggesting.