Guest number1bruceleefan Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 are these films any good just picked them up: Legendary wepons of china the treasure hunters crazy shaolin disciples invincible shaolin clean of the white lotus heroes of the east Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drunkenmantis13 Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 No, they all blows. Seriously these are all MUST haves. Except for Crazy which i haven't seen and most seem to dislike. "clean" of the white lotus? :\ ...:lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest number1bruceleefan Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 lol sorry vert tired when im posting all this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldeschool17 Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Legendary weapons of china= I liked this. Good mix of magic and kung fu. I wish the ending was slightly different but otherwise ok invincible shaolin= Im prolly one of the few that didnt care too much for this movie. The training sequences were good but i did not like the finale battle and ending. clean of the white lotus. Dont you mean Clan of the White Lotus? Im also another person in the minority that didnt care for this movie. It was a bit repetitive and homosexual in certain parts. I liked the needles though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vengeanceofhumanlanterns Posted September 12, 2007 Share Posted September 12, 2007 Invincible Shaolin would be the best of the lot IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peringaten Posted September 12, 2007 Share Posted September 12, 2007 bit repetitiveI think that's a strength of the film, focused upon the trial and understanding it takes to develop knowledge and skill to overcome an adversaryand homosexual in certain partsDude... how is this a criticism, did the film offend your straight sensibilities? There's no gay subtext to this film. Did the fact Gordon has to learn a delicacy of touch and movement threaten the old manliness; make the enjoyment a little less easy? A focus presented that the film's balance of martial concept draws from more than just straight force, but also precisely balanced elegance and form. I thought it was a brilliant, unique take. Which to be honest, I garnered more enjoyment from, once the expects were cooled, upon second viewing. Was it the crotch strikes and ball-sucking thing? How about Lo Lieh's butt? Anyway - for me, a brilliant movie, once I saw past the hype and delved it for what it actually is. A masterful motherfucker of a martial film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member KyFi Posted September 12, 2007 Member Share Posted September 12, 2007 "A focus presented that the film's balance of martial concept draws from more than just straight force, but also precisely balanced elegance and form." Yep, and actually what's being presented in this film and Executioners from Shaolin was a Chinese martial philosophy that was inherent in Liu Chia Liang's real-life style. It's the philosophy of yin and yang applied to the martial arts, where yin represents soft, defensive, yielding or feminine, and yang represents strong, agressive, attacking or masculine. The highest level of Chinese martial arts will balance the soft styles and techniques with the hard ones, and will use whichever one is more appropriate to the situation. Meeting hard force with hard force is considered low-level skill. And that's the point of Executioners from Shaolin---Hung Sze Kwan can train his hard style for 10, 20 years, but he's just banging his head against a wall because he's trying to use more force against force---against the hard style of Pai Mei. It doesn't work. Then his son, who hasn't learned his father's hard tiger style very well, is still able to defeat Pai Mei, because instead of just training hard style he adopted his mother's soft style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldeschool17 Posted September 12, 2007 Share Posted September 12, 2007 Dude... how is this a criticism, did the film offend your straight sensibilities? There's no gay subtext to this film. Did the fact Gordon has to learn a delicacy of touch and movement threaten the old manliness; make the enjoyment a little less easy? A focus presented that the film's balance of martial concept draws from more than just straight force, but also precisely balanced elegance and form. I thought it was a brilliant, unique take. Which to be honest, I garnered more enjoyment from, once the expects were cooled, upon second viewing. Was it the crotch strikes and ball-sucking thing? How about Lo Lieh's butt? Anyway - for me, a brilliant movie, once I saw past the hype and delved it for what it actually is. A masterful @#%$ of a martial film. it didnt affect my straight sensibilites. but thanks for getting defensive over it. want an internet hug? oh wait? will that affect my straight sensibilities? The trial and error portion of his training and confrontations with Lo got boring for me real quick. If you enjoy that, great for you. Me I dont care for it. Didnt he go back and forth like 3 of 4 times? I dont really need you to break down the movie for me, for I understand the "logic" going behind the feminist styles quite clearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peringaten Posted September 12, 2007 Share Posted September 12, 2007 Look, just because they teach Gordon to fight like a lady, before going after a naked old man's crotch area, doesn't mean there's a homosexual subtext. Gawd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member KyFi Posted September 12, 2007 Member Share Posted September 12, 2007 :lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.