The Master (aka The Final Master) (2015)

[kami]

The claim "From the writer of The Grandmaster" is enough to turn the interest of many people down. At least to me it does.

[Drunken Monk]

7 hours ago, kami said:

The claim "From the writer of The Grandmaster" is enough to turn the interest of many people down. At least to me it does.

Am I the only one that thinks “The Grandmaster” is a modern masterpiece?

With that said, “The Final Master” is definitely NOT a masterpiece. Great choreography (which I’ve revisited a few times) but everything else is kind of mundane.

[DragonClaws]

 

[reason108]

I will probably catch some flack for saying this, but, I think that Xu Haofeng is the modern-day Lau Kar-leung. The reason why I compare him to Lau Kar-leung is because he both directs the film and choreographs the fight scenes and focuses on a more true and realistic martial art performance. Though, they really need to stop with the "from the writer of The Grandmaster", as that has been used as the tag line for all the promotional material for each film he has made. My favorite movie of his so far is The Sword Identity. Though, I loved the fights in The Final Master, I felt that the story did not live up to some of his previous films. I would like to see both The Sword Identity and Judge Archer get a US blu-ray release. Very frustrating. But, the dvd`s do look pretty good. Now, will this Cine-Asia release have some decent extras and warrant a double-dip?

[robbie]

On 03/02/2018 at 12:22 AM, Drunken Monk said:

Am I the only one that thinks “The Grandmaster” is a modern masterpiece?

With that said, “The Final Master” is definitely NOT a masterpiece. Great choreography (which I’ve revisited a few times) but everything else is kind of mundane.

Final master  was worst film i saw last year. Grandmaster is a terrible film probably even worse. . Both were dull as dishwater.  I watch  martial arts  films for action  and they both were terrible  types of arty kung fu flick i hate. Both  Very boring .  i could barely keep awake.  it is like they are trying to turn martial arts films  into  some boring oscar drivel like dance with wolves or english patient that no one really likes. These are martial arts films for snobs. Stick with undisputed iii etc as miles better. 

[Drunken Monk]

1 hour ago, robbie said:

Final master  was worst film i saw last year. Grandmaster is a terrible film probably even worse. . Both were dull as dishwater.  I watch  martial arts  films for action  and they both were terrible  types of arty kung fu flick i hate. Both  Very boring .  i could barely keep awake.  it is like they are trying to turn martial arts films  into  some boring oscar drivel like dance with wolves or english patient that no one really likes. These are martial arts films for snobs. Stick with undisputed iii etc as miles better. 

To each his own, I suppose. I thought "The Granmaster" was a true kung fu film, in every way. Not only did I think the action was superb but I loved the soul of the film. I'm perfectly content in saying I'd take "The Grandmaster" over ten "Undisputed" movies and I like the "Undipsuted" movies.
But like I said, different strokes for different folks. I like arthouse kung fu fims if they're done well. "The Final Master" dragged a little too much for me but films like "The Grandmaster", "Hero" and "Crouching Tiger..." blew my socks off.

[One Armed Boxer]

On 2/3/2018 at 11:22 AM, Drunken Monk said:

Am I the only one that thinks “The Grandmaster” is a modern masterpiece?

Nope, I thought it was excellent as well.  Was great to see Tony Leung and Zhang Ziyi back onscreen together after 'Hero' and '2046', and one of the rare films to truly focus on the 'arts' element of martial arts, rather than just the visceral visual element of it.  I loved 'The Final Master' as well.

5 hours ago, robbie said:

I watch  martial arts  films for action  and they both were terrible  types of arty kung fu flick i hate. Both  Very boring .  i could barely keep awake.

It's ironic that the reason you hated it so much is the same reason I enjoyed it.  I watch martial arts films for the action as well....but I also watch them for the story, the characters, and the themes being explored.  To me that's what makes it a film in the first place, and not just an extended showreel.  So while I also enjoy the 'Undisputed' flicks, increasingly they feel like filler between the action scenes, whereas in the likes of 'The Final Master' and more recently 'Accident Man', I didn't feel that once, and I was engaged from start to finish.

5 hours ago, robbie said:

These are martial arts films for snobs.

This is the most ridiculous statement I've read for a while.

[robbie]

On 08/02/2018 at 5:18 PM, One Armed Boxer said:

 

[One Armed Boxer]

19 minutes ago, robbie said:

No not a ridiculous statement at at all. . There  is a genre for these   type of films films for snobs it is called arthouse films as the guy before pointed out.

The others films he mentioned are also not my cup of tea . I disliked crouching tiger, especially when they flew through trees .Pretty daft.

Hero I have but not bothered watching due to my dislike of wirework.

Fair enough, I respect your opinion and we can agree to disagree.  Personally I enjoy the likes of 'The Final Master' and 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon', just as much as I do the likes of the 'Undisputed' flicks and 'Ong Bak'.  I don't consider myself a snob for finding enjoyment in them, and also don't believe that everyone that watches arthouse films are snobs, I just find that too broader a generalization of a certain type of films audience.

[Drunken Monk]

I think "snobs" implies negativity. I believe people with a keen eye for cinematography, metaphor, themes etc, can enjoy arthouse films with being snobs. It just takes a certain type of movie goer. And even then not all arthouse are enjoyed by those people. I love "The Grandmaster" but despised "Anti-Christ".
I think calling someone that enjoys an arthouse film a snob is like calling someone that enjoys a Farrelly brothers film dumb. True movie snobs are those that look down on other for buying a non-Criterion version of a film.

[robbie]

On 08/02/2018 at 9:24 PM, Drunken Monk said:

 

[One Armed Boxer]

27 minutes ago, robbie said:

As for crouching tiger i could never understand them flying through air in martial arts films..I just thought in Hong Kong they  were struggling to top the moves they had done before or some of actors were notnup to the old standard  so needed wires..  which are probably the reasons for it

 I can not imagine in middle of silence of lambs Anthony Hopkin suddenly taken flight. It would be unacceptable .

'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon' is a wuxia movie, people having been flying around in them since the 1920's, almost a hundred years ago -

 

[TibetanWhiteCrane]

There's a difference of opinion.... and then there's ignorant, uneducated drivel. This thread is descending into the latter.

[robbie]

On 08/02/2018 at 10:17 PM, One Armed Boxer said:

 

[Drunken Monk]

54 minutes ago, robbie said:

I see action films as entertainment  not some intellectual story. I do not even think final master, grandmaster were anygood on any level story, acting , action.

As for crouching tiger i could never understand them flying through air in martial arts films..I just thought in Hong Kong they  were struggling to top the moves they had done before or some of actors were notnup to the old standard  so needed wires..  which are probably the reasons for it

 I can not imagine in middle of silence of lambs Anthony Hopkin suddenly taken flight. It would be unacceptable . I think wirework and popstars etc killed hong Kong action off for me and they are not back yet wolf warriors 2 was step in right direction.

You calling an actor like Tony Leung doing martial arts  genuine art . Is wrong.  He is doing basic amateur  level .  He can't do spectacular If he tried.   If you wanted grounded realistic martial arts. Bruce lee was miles better as proper martial artist.

Martial arts performed by a proper martial artist looks better in the main or snake in eagles shadow would have started Marlon brando

Your definition of “action” is fine by “kung fu film” doesn’t necessarily fit that definition. Kung fu movies - and martial arts movies - are a genre unto themselves. A genre that incorporates aspects of other genres including horror, drama, fantasy and, yes, arthouse. You’ve explained how you like your martial arts films but to dismiss those that aren’t your cup of tea is a bit...well...dismissive.

90% of martial arts films aren’t ACTUAL martial arts films. Jackie Chan himself is hardly a martial artist. It’s all opera...theatrics. So I’m perfectly content with Tony Leung doing on screen Wing Chun. I’ve been watching non-martial artists fight in films since day one. 

As for flying in kung fu films, I don’t see the problem. Suspending my disbelief is part of movie watching. Weird stuff happens in films all the time. When you shoot a car twice, it doesn’t automatically explode and 80’s action films were rife with that trope. People have been using wires in kung fu films for decades. Granted, I’m aware it’s not your thing but it’s by no means less artistic. But right now we’re arguing opinion and taste and all that’s very subjective.

Art is art. “The Grandmaster” has as much artistic merit as any Bruce Lee film. And it looks better. Does that make it a superior film? Again...subjective.

[ShaOW!linDude]

2 hours ago, robbie said:

They were probably trying to deceive people into thinking  they had super powers as maybe thought people were gullible..

It's not about any attempt to deceive gullible people.

And look, I'm no wuxia film fan as many forum members on here can attest to, and I absolutely detest wire-work. I am all about grounded choreography. However, to put it in a rather simple perspective, a lot of wuxia films are based on or inspired by wuxia novels of old. And those characters are kind of super-heroic. Wuxia novels are essentially dramatic Chinese sci-fi/fantasy books, therefore the characters can often do fantastic things like super leaps, running along walls or treetops, fly, fire energy bursts of chi, be skilled in magic or have magical weapons, etc. They would actually be comparable in certain regards to our modern day superheroes, so to speak. So, if you stop to think about it like that, wuxia films might make a little more sense in that context. Doesn't mean you'll start liking them all of a sudden. I don't, and I don't go out of my way to watch them. But I have found some films within that sub-genre of MA movies that have a certain appeal and great segments of well-grounded choreography at times, and one example of those is Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (the only wuxia film I've ever watched more than once).

 

[robbie]

On 09/02/2018 at 12:59 AM, ShaOW!linDude said:

 

 

 

 

 

[One Armed Boxer]

3 hours ago, robbie said:

Wirework origins in film was of course a way to trick people.  They then  just put more in and called wuxia.

Man, this thread is not getting any easier is it.

I think perhaps it'd be clearer if you explain exactly what you mean by wirework 'tricking people'?  Wuxia has existed for more than 2000 years, and has always alluded to tales of chivalrous martial arts heroes with enhanced powers that allowed them to, amongst other things, fly.

If you mean that audiences watching the first cinematic incarnations of wuxia being fooled into believe the characters they're watching really could fly, when it was actually wires being used to achieve the effect, then I find that rather insulting to the audiences intelligence.

I'm sure nobody watched 1978's 'Superman' and thought that Christopher Reeve really could fly.  People know its an illusion, whether it be by wires, superimposing, or modern day CGI.  The idea that the effect could trick people just doesn't make sense to me.

3 hours ago, robbie said:

Watch final master and grandmaster and see if u can find any enjoyment. Just are plain bad films.

It seems like you've already forgotten the previous discussions that have occurred in this very thread, so scroll up and you'll find plenty of people that enjoyed both.

[TibetanWhiteCrane]

I think you're wasting your time.... some people are just too far gone.

[Drunken Monk]

1 hour ago, robbie said:

In final master how good a fighter you are depends on how many loafs of bread you can eat.

And in "Drunken Master 2" (a film that also uses wires), how good a fighter you are depends on how drunk you are. Does that make it a terrible film?

[ShaOW!linDude]

2 hours ago, robbie said:

Wirework origins in film was of course a way to trick people.  They then  just put more in and called wuxia. 

Wrong.

2 hours ago, robbie said:

For me wirework is daft...

Right. That's your opinion (which I share for the most part).

 

2 hours ago, robbie said:

...and you shouldn't be watching them in the  vain hope they may do fight scene were they stay on the ground.

Wrong. There is some fairly grounded choreography that can be found in lightly wired wuxia films.

2 hours ago, robbie said:

Modern day superhero films I  am bored to tears  with also and have boycotted watching them..

Completely understandable. My comparison still stands.

 

2 hours ago, robbie said:

Watch final master and grandmaster and see if u can find any enjoyment. Just are plain bad films.

I did, and I did, and I disagree. And it's cool you don't share that opinion.

 

2 hours ago, robbie said:

In final master how good a fighter you are depends on how many loafs of bread you can eat.

One scene taken out of context is not a basis for an argument.

 

1 hour ago, Drunken Monk said:

And in "Drunken Master 2" (a film that also uses wires), how good a fighter you are depends on how drunk you are. Does that make it a terrible film?

Excellent counterpoint to the previously quoted comment!!!

 

2 hours ago, One Armed Boxer said:

Man, this thread is not getting any easier is it.

Boy howdy!

 

2 hours ago, TibetanWhiteCrane said:

I think you're wasting your time.... some people are just too far gone.

This seems to be the case.

[robbie]

On 09/02/2018 at 2:57 PM, TibetanWhiteCrane said:

I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[KUNG FU BOB]

It's obvious that @robbie has very strong opinions (which he views as flat out facts), and that his opinions include how everyone else should feel the same way as him or they are wrong/daft. Fortunately, he can choose to watch whatever he wants, and just as lovely- his opinions don't change my enjoyment or opinions about how I feel about anything. Not in the least. I usually consider others opinions and views (which is why I'm on a forum... not so that I can impose /insist on my views as "The Facts"), and I often find them very interesting. However, in this case I find his opinions overly judgemental and close-minded, so I simply disregard them. Doesn't bother me. I enjoy THE ENGLISH PATIENT, and I also enjoy BASKET CASE. Movies are a form of art that is primarily meant to be entertainment. These two films (generally speaking) are at opposite ends of the spectrum, one being considered an "art film", and one being considered a "trash film". It doesn't matter to me though. I don't care how they are labeled or viewed by others, because I enjoy them, and therefore they have merit to me personally.

I do think THE GRANDMASTER is a masterpiece.

I think THE FINAL MASTER is a good film, occasionally brilliant, but also with some confusing plot/story elements.

I prefer grounded martial arts filming, but I also enjoy some wire-work filled films. In my opinion, within both of these categories are films that I think range from terrible to excellent.

I also don't mind STAR WARS "tricking me" despite the fact that there aren't really wookies or spaceships having dogfights. Film IS a trick. Every film anyone has ever seen is a trick. Film is made up of individual frames- photos- which when played one after another, at 24 frames per second, "trick" our eyes into believing we are seeing motion. We are not. So Robbie, for me your theory/opinion holds less water than a grain of sand in the Sahara desert. But in contrast to you, I feel that you are welcome to your opinion.

[Drunken Monk]

10 minutes ago, robbie said:

I was in top set out school. So pretty intelligent  . . .  I think it is crazy that I have to explain why kungfu stars  flying through air is daft .. It stretches believability to far for me.

I did not take loafs story out of context.  I understood both stories just standard kung full stories 

When they originally made  normal action films  at some point  they started using wires to enhance and in some cases trick people with  a few impossible moves.   I feel they just got carried away with wirework.  If I am wrong  and came from novels big deal it is still stupid for a character to take off into air with no explanation.

Wolf warriors 2 was first film hong Kong  in a long time were wires were not so noticeable .That contributed  greatly to its success in my opinion. No flying nonsense.

In response to Superman. at least they try to explain is flying through air .eg he  Comes from a different planet. 

Drunken master 2 does use wires but they tried to hide it  and the moves all are possible. He does not fly 40 foot through air. Jackie Chan in an interview said  he would only use wirework to enhance some moves and not fly through air as even he thought it was daft.

Huge difference between Drunken master 2 and  grandmaster/final master. Is it was entertaining and not meant as serious film. Alcohol in Drunken master 2 was meant to.make him.oblivious to pain . Grandmaster and final master are intended as  serious and  how many loafs u can eat story is silly and weather it is a metaphor or not still bad. I understood the stories of both  . u told me these were great stories. Final master  and grandmaster definately ain't great stories.

You seem to randomly pick and choose how you narrow things down. All of a sudden, "Drunken Master 2" is just meant to be entertainment while "The Grandmaster" is trying to be...what, exactly? Dull as rocks? I'm pretty sure "The Grandmaster" was made to entertain. And to go back to your previous mentions, I'm positive "Crouching Tiger..." was made to entertain. Artsy, they might be but they're not actively attempting to bore their audience. That would be weird. 
I'm not sure why you separate entertainment and "serious". Let's see...you talked about "The Silence of the Lambs" earlier. Great film, right? Well, call me silly but isn't that film both serious and entertaining? Why are you so desperate to force films into some bizarre niche of being one thing and not the other? 

As for the bread thing, you're being very nit-picky. Again, to use your film of choice, that's like saying "The Silence of the Lambs" suggests you can only be a good serial killer if you enjoy fava beans and a nice chianti. It's a part of a much bigger picture.

Regarding wuxia, I don't think wires were ever used to "trick". Exaggerate, sure. Cause audiences to suspend disbelief, absolutely. But trick? That's a stretch. 

[Ah_Tao]

Funny thing is, is that coincidentally I'm wtaching the Grandmaster which was in my player for the past two days. I mean yes, your opinion is your opinion, I'm not really going to fight with you about it or read every little detail of this whole discussion. Please don't get mad at me, but I as well don't think that the Final Master is the greatest film, maybe I just have to grow into it, or maybe I have watch it some more. Please excuse my language, but for a lack of a better term imo, I thought Master Chen was an asshole for half the movie. Granted, even the way they portrayed Ip Man was for parts of The Grandmaster (maybe that's Xu Haofeng's style), he was that way, but not as much as the Master Chen character. Either way I know that these guys aren't all actual martial artists, it's just a movie. Even during the Shaw Brothers days you see that many of their top stars didn't start their careers already knowing styles. And yes, I do think there were things about The Master that I wasn't the biggest fan of. I was hoping for more hand-to-hand Wing Chun choreography, and less of the whole knife-fighting scenes. But it is what it is, and I thought it was alright.