Member jhayden Posted June 3, 2009 Member Share Posted June 3, 2009 To touch a bit on what Alexandra said... I recently watched the first 3 brave Archer films and Proud Twins back-to-back. Now, I understand that the character that Fu Sheng plays in Brae Archer is supposed to be dim witted... especially in comparison to his girlfriend... but still... his performance in all three films is just SO BLAND and boring. Never really noticed this before. Probably because I was paying more attention to all the other characters (who were great) and story lines. To compare, Fu Sheng in the Proud Twins just shined. You couldn't take your eyes off him. Unlike the Brave Archer films (which I did enjoy), you could tell he was having fun making PT. Not sure how much this had to do with the directors, but I imagine that there was something to it. Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member FrankBolte Posted June 4, 2009 Member Share Posted June 4, 2009 to me it was LKL , i always though that his movies were well rounded,cant agree always the same as someone mentioned, most of his films base on some history facts..or reflecting on his kung fu background,he liked to add the comic and sometimes he kinda lost hold of the horses but hey u cant please everyone.. nobody else could mix action,comedy and at the same time martial virtue like him.. I know LKL was very strict and very stubborn on set he had his ideas and wanted to put them in perfection on the screen. He had his flaws but he had more outstanding movies than anyone else at SB imo.. many didnt like challenge of the masters but to me thats a gem right there,I even give copies to my students ( i teach hung kuen) this movie is a good trainings tool to teach new students about martial virtue... or heroes of the east,when everybody was making movies where the japanese are portraied as monsters LKL did give them face and made them look like humans... 8 diagram pole fighter,no other movie has such intensity,LKL was grieving the death of Fu Sheng and used Kar Fei to reflect that...that movie is pure pressure... mad monkey is shape fest galore Martial Club didnt reach as many people ,I think if you study kung fu you will see it with different eyes similar to challenge of the masters...small things like when kar fei and the other lad talking about how to wear the sash and the meanings if the knot is on the left,right or middle...thats all true kung fu knowledge and ethics... spiritual boxer was his debut as a director and he tried something nobody did before..it already showed his genius 36th chamber of shaolin...do we need any comments? Thats the mother of all shaolin films it cant get any better...this movie stresses on Lin Gung ,lin gung is the part in kung fu that nobody likes..its the conditioning that hard work to make your body able to support the actual martial art.. Return to 36th chamber appears like a parody on 36th chamber but turns out to be another shape fest with crazy kung fu my young auntie and Lady is the boss many couldnt stand the comedy but the kung fu redeemed that..those movies were probably an attest of love to kara hui (they were together around that time)...if you look past the comedy you find LKL how he is in real life...and also some real problems from the martial arts comunity were put in the story... damn..i got carried away..hahah;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member DeathShrike Posted June 4, 2009 Member Share Posted June 4, 2009 Chang Cheh. The man was not over-rated. He had innovative ideas which helped change and head the film industry in a new direction, leaving a legacy which challenged contemporaries to raise their consciences, when it came to movie making. Looking back on his body of work some of it may seem less than others, however, for their time, his contributions cannot be overlooked. I'm not overlooking his contributions, I just don't think his movies are very good. They are obviously very important and influential, but that doesn't translate to quality necessarily. I find most of his movies totally stiff with occasional hints of masters to follow like John Woo. I like his Venom movies, but not because they are directed so well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member spearman lo tat Posted June 4, 2009 Member Share Posted June 4, 2009 as many SB movies as i've, it humbles me to realize that there are just as many that i've yet to delve into, so i won't offer anything generic in response. i do, however, appreciate FrankyLau's reply on Lau Kar Leung's being his favorite SB director. as a younger person in the 80's, i remember watching "Challenge of the Masters" and actually learning about kindness and humility. as much as i loved the MA, the lessons that Chen Kuan Tai's Lu A Tsai imparted to Gordon's Wong Fei Hung was something i've never forgotten. In "Heroes of the East" (i can't remember the Drive In Theater ch.5 NYC title right now lol) it made me think about how racial/ethnic issues are often the result of ignorance and misunderstanding and i remember actually feeling happy when Gordon accepted the sword from the Japanese expert at the movie's end. of course, we live in a real, imperfect world, but it was encouraging to see movies that impressed upon our conscience to try to strive for what is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member crazedjustice888 Posted June 5, 2009 Member Share Posted June 5, 2009 I would have to say mine is LKL. I love the fight scenes and the way each of his movies at least had SOME moral to them. They showed us also real applications to many different movements in the forms if you could recognize them. Also, I liked his comedy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Iron Boat Posted June 6, 2009 Member Share Posted June 6, 2009 I think for anyone to attempt to make a case against Cheng Cheh being the best Shaw Brother director is pushing it. Seriously there isn't any Shaw director whose filmography can stand up to Cheh's. CC's films whether you like them are not are thee classics, they are the definition of old school martial art films. Some who like Lar Kar Leung say things like his film taught lessons or stressed moral values, thing is, so did Cheh's, his heroes overcame obstacles, fought for their country, defended their fellow man. Who can argue that there isnt a lesson to be found in films like Boxer From Shantung, Chinatown Kid, and Disciples of Shaolin, all three showed what the desire for fame, power, and wealth does to a person and those around them. Films lile One Armed Swordsman shows a man dealing with his disability and overcoming. Though it wasn't realistic the lesson of inspiration was there. Then you have the Shaolin series which celebrates patriotism, love of country, brotherhood, loyalty to your county and being willing to fight for freedom...literally it gets no better than that. Most Kung Fu films from other directors deal with revenge for your father, teacher, family; CC's films were about revenge for your country, your people, sacrifice not for losing a father or mother, but brotherhood and nation. Even a film like 5 Deadly Venoms has political/social value, the film deals with a corrupt judicial and penal system. It wasn't about Toads and scorpions, it was about corrupt law enforcment. Now I admit Cheh was tough on women, usually portraying them as the root of all evil, but hey, love stories are for Chor Yuen. Now I do consider Sun Chung to be equally as talented as Cheh, but unfortunately his filmography does not stand up to CC's. Sun Chung has some great films but outside of Avenging Eagle and Human Lanterns, none of his films are really matching Cheh. (haven't seen Mastermind, it no longer exists) LKL films are good as long as Gordon Liu is the star and plays a monk, stray from that formula and his films fall flat. Also the humor in his films is hit and miss, usually miss. So as much as I would like to say some other director is my favorite or the best at Shaw, you can't honestly put their films up against Cheh's and not be forced to admit that Cheh comes out on top. He is not considered the Godfather and the top dog of Shaw for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member FrankBolte Posted June 7, 2009 Member Share Posted June 7, 2009 I think for anyone to attempt to make a case against Cheng Cheh being the best Shaw Brother director is pushing it. Seriously there isn't any Shaw director whose filmography can stand up to Cheh's. CC's films whether you like them are not are thee classics, they are the definition of old school martial art films. Some who like Lar Kar Leung say things like his film taught lessons or stressed moral values, thing is, so did Cheh's, his heroes overcame obstacles, fought for their country, defended their fellow man. Who can argue that there isnt a lesson to be found in films like Boxer From Shantung, Chinatown Kid, and Disciples of Shaolin, all three showed what the desire for fame, power, and wealth does to a person and those around them. Films lile One Armed Swordsman shows a man dealing with his disability and overcoming. Though it wasn't realistic the lesson of inspiration was there. Then you have the Shaolin series which celebrates patriotism, love of country, brotherhood, loyalty to your county and being willing to fight for freedom...literally it gets no better than that. Most Kung Fu films from other directors deal with revenge for your father, teacher, family; CC's films were about revenge for your country, your people, sacrifice not for losing a father or mother, but brotherhood and nation. Even a film like 5 Deadly Venoms has political/social value, the film deals with a corrupt judicial and penal system. It wasn't about Toads and scorpions, it was about corrupt law enforcment. Now I admit Cheh was tough on women, usually portraying them as the root of all evil, but hey, love stories are for Chor Yuen. Now I do consider Sun Chung to be equally as talented as Cheh, but unfortunately his filmography does not stand up to CC's. Sun Chung has some great films but outside of Avenging Eagle and Human Lanterns, none of his films are really matching Cheh. (haven't seen Mastermind, it no longer exists) LKL films are good as long as Gordon Liu is the star and plays a monk, stray from that formula and his films fall flat. Also the humor in his films is hit and miss, usually miss. So as much as I would like to say some other director is my favorite or the best at Shaw, you can't honestly put their films up against Cheh's and not be forced to admit that Cheh comes out on top. He is not considered the Godfather and the top dog of Shaw for nothing. blah,thats all personal taste.. before LKL went solo Chang Cheh's movies were choreographed by LKL,and most of the ideas came from LKL too as he had the background knowledge about shaolin..Hung boxing kid is almost a LKL film movies without Gordon Liu were also good and not flat..mad monkey kung fu,spiritual boxer,lady is the boss,my young auntie etc. the highlights were undoubtly with Gordon... Chang Cheh was good in making hero movies but he didnt teach in any of his movies martial virtue like LKL did...so in my book it is LKL also after LKL left Chang Cheh his movies became flat..or looked like chinese circus movies with a couple of exceptions... So LKL is not considered the "Pops" for nothing ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Alexandra Posted June 7, 2009 Member Share Posted June 7, 2009 To touch a bit on what Alexandra said... I recently watched the first 3 brave Archer films and Proud Twins back-to-back. Now, I understand that the character that Fu Sheng plays in Brae Archer is supposed to be dim witted... especially in comparison to his girlfriend... but still... his performance in all three films is just SO BLAND and boring. Never really noticed this before. Probably because I was paying more attention to all the other characters (who were great) and story lines. To compare, Fu Sheng in the Proud Twins just shined. You couldn't take your eyes off him. Unlike the Brave Archer films (which I did enjoy), you could tell he was having fun making PT. Not sure how much this had to do with the directors, but I imagine that there was something to it. Any thoughts? The only explanation I can found, is because the accidents he suffered, the called "Two Black Septembers". In September 1º of 1978 when he was shooting Deadly Breaking Sword, he broke his right leg, and take off him of the scene for a while. If you think that the accident happens when he finished to shot "Brave Archer 2" (1978) he must belayed other projects like "Brave Archer 3", who was released in 1981. Inbetween, was released "Proud Twins" (1979, before mentioned the accident) and "Life Gamble" (1979) after the second accident who happened when he was shooting "Heroes Shed No Tears": he fell down to the floor because a failure of a wire, strikig his head very bad against some ceramics pieces. He suffered serious damages in the neck and almost he lost the vision. He must left several project and rest because had not good balance (all the time felt teasy) and no good vision. That limited of course his performances. He had contract with the SB and must finish "Brave Archer 3" (the reason because we don't see a great splendorous screenplay is because his health limitations) and most visible in "Life Gamble" where he only throws knives, without too much movements. Later, was released "Brave Archer 4" (1982)... I read that was at this time in troubles with Chang Cheh and for contractual and legal reasons, finish with the saga, in the mentioned movie, Alexander is vanished into the cast, without fight moments, without any impressive acting. I don't know if the troubles with Chang Cheh or others put a limit in his performance or was medical prescriptions whom limited his actions, but in some way, you see Alexander after two years of health disasters, an actor could not play very well a character with those heavy pains. In "Brave Archer 4" we see not too much, is real, boring? maybe because no action, the cast took the main parts. Remember the scene when he sat with his girlfriend and the minutes run and run in the movie and he remain without doing nothing. And pay attention to his last line in the movie: "Oh, I think this is the end". I think is a line with double sense. The end of the movie and the end with his relationships with Chang Cheh, but just my opinion. If somebody have more precise information, tell us. Alexandra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member MarsHarmony Posted June 7, 2009 Member Share Posted June 7, 2009 From what I have read, the Shaw Brothers contracts were ironclad. They made the old Hollywood system look like a cake walk. There must have been more than one type of contract, many supporting actors worked freelance for themselves and smaller companies, they probably had a time off clauses. But for the "stars", they are exclusive property, can't think of a single film that Ti Lung or David Chaing made for anyone but Shaw during their peak period at the studio. Sure, break your contract if you do not want to work for a few years, or ever again. That being said, Fu Sheng did re sign, what, once or twice, with Shaw Bros., but there is another reason other than money that he resigned, LOYALTY. A key word in many of Cheh's films, Fu Sheng remained loyal to the man who helped him get his start, so to speak. Fu Sheng never said a bad word about him, I don't think he said a bad word about any body now that I think of it. There is a sense of duty and loyalty that is greatly underestimated as a quality in a human being, and far less in an actor. Physical pain can be difficult to "act" through. Pain numbed through medications, it's a miracle you are "acting" at all (I am not saying that he was medicated here, I am not saying that, don't say I said that. "I'm not saying anything, I'm just saying".[seinfeld]). "Brave Archer" starts out with a bang, and the next three just kind of smolder. (I accuse the director and the writer, hahahahhahahahhaahahah) I think it is a testament to Fu Shengs acting ability, that he just did not curl up on the set and sleep through his performance. Which he did not, and that is what I am saying. Acting while kicking ass and being in the moment and true is a major load to carry. Acting with nothing to do for hours and feeling crappy is even harder. Kudos to Fu Sheng for sticking with the audience throughout this sea storm of a series, if nothing else it is still beautiful screen time with him. He gave every performance everything he had, everything! To the point of serious injury. So, I appreciate a performance that might only be ninety per cent or so from him, because his ninety per cent still outshines any one around him. Let's not forget the writing. Look at how delightful Philip Kwok Chun-Fung, aka Kuo Chue, is as the mad monk in "Brave Archer". He is almost taciturn when he takes over as Kuo Tsing in "Brave Archer and His Mate". Whereas Fu Sheng's new character has a fascinating view of what unfolds around him, his growth as an actor is quite evident I would say, as he discovers his characters surroundings as we do, through fresh eyes. Maybe the "Brave Archer" series is not the greatest in Fu Sheng's cannon of work, but it is his light that shines through the soggy saga. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member jhayden Posted June 8, 2009 Member Share Posted June 8, 2009 I would have to say, I think Kuo Chui is a FAR better actor than most of us give him credit for (a fact even acknowledged by Chang Cheh himself in his autobiography). His range and versatility is evident throughout his canon of Shaw films (and beyond). I mean, as mentioned, just look at his role in Brave Archer as the crazy Pai Cho Tung, then contrast that with his work as Mad Dog in something like Hard Boiled - easily holding his own against someone like Tony Leung or Chow Yun Fat, both world class actors. I think his talent as an actor gets overlooked primarily on account of his abilities as a stuntman and action man. Re: Fu Sheng, I don't want to give the wrong impression (though it looks as though I did) and come across as implying that he was "boring". It's just that he seemed incredibly "blah" in those Brave Archer films in particular. Isuppose the injuries may have had something to do with it, although I tend to doubt it. Only because as I mentioned before, he had made other films during that same period and came across as much more vibrant. I guess his relationship with Chang Cheh - if strained as Alexandra suggests - may have been it, though I would guess that the Kuo Tsing character may have simply been written that way? Who knows? Anyway, in comparison (which I normally don't care to do) I think Kuo Chui pulls off the serious parts a bit better and more interesting than our beloved Fu Sheng did. Just an opinion though. Please don't kill me for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member MarsHarmony Posted June 8, 2009 Member Share Posted June 8, 2009 Won't kill you at all. hahahaha Respect your opinion, and your right to voice it. I think the series suffers from a lack of a cohesive script. I totally agree Kuo Chue is very under rated. He is wonderful, and does a great job in BA4. There just isn't much to work with for any of them. But I say this, Fu Sheng is a great actor, despite The Brave Archer series. hahahahhahahahahahha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Alexandra Posted June 10, 2009 Member Share Posted June 10, 2009 Re: Fu Sheng, I don't want to give the wrong impression (though it looks as though I did) and come across as implying that he was "boring". It's just that he seemed incredibly "blah" in those Brave Archer films in particular. Isuppose the injuries may have had something to do with it, although I tend to doubt it. Only because as I mentioned before, he had made other films during that same period and came across as much more vibrant. I guess his relationship with Chang Cheh - if strained as Alexandra suggests - may have been it, though I would guess that the Kuo Tsing character may have simply been written that way? Who knows? Anyway, in comparison (which I normally don't care to do) I think Kuo Chui pulls off the serious parts a bit better and more interesting than our beloved Fu Sheng did. Just an opinion though. Please don't kill me for it. Easy! We wont kill you at all! I rethink the subject and maybe the injuries and the script was the reasons for some "noise" when you see him acting in the saga Brave Archer. He was more comfortable in two kind of characters, extremely opposite each other: comedy and crazy situations, or dramatic with deep emotional impact and out of mind fighting. In the middle, he got some "grey tones". And now, somebody goes to kill me! Alexandra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Alexandra Posted June 10, 2009 Member Share Posted June 10, 2009 I am currently watching all of Sun Chungs flics. I love his long shots during the action sequences. Oh Sun Chung, one of my favorites! You loves the long shots because he settled the steadycam. And changed the normal angles of the camera, playing with three or four, took shots in tild up and tild down very well done. He put in the right moment the slowmotion, others directors abused of this cinematographic source. He runs with the actors several times, with a handy camera, that is fantastic. Alexandra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member BaronK Posted June 10, 2009 Member Share Posted June 10, 2009 "also after LKL left Chang Cheh his movies became flat..or looked like chinese circus movies with a couple of exceptions" Interesting. I myself have never been drawn to the Shaolin Cycle of CC's career. Those pictures chor. by LKL. Nothing against them, they just don't do it for me. Give me Invincible Shaolin, 5V, 5EN, Magnificent Ruffians, KwtGA, etc any day of the week over the Shaolin Cycle. As movies and esp as action. I'm completely drawn to the Venom era and find the Shaolin Cycle movies flat. To borrow your line, "thats all personal taste". "Chang Cheh was good in making hero movies but he didnt teach in any of his movies martial virtue like LKL did...so in my book it is LKL" It wasn't his thing. If that's what you're drawn to, cool. You seem to mention it like it's a strike. Pictures were not nec. released in order. Life Gamble was done by '77 at the latest. It was released much later. That was during the time when CC was using Fu Sheng to get his new crew over. If you look back to the early 70s, you'll notice CC would give his new people(Ti Lung, Wang Chung, Chen Kuan Tai, Fu Sheng) some undercard screen time in the pictures of his established stars, then gave them starring roles. Ten Tigers was another, stars plus new team(Venoms) picture. Finished 2 years later using undercard players from his Venom team. Sun Chung was a bloody artist. I won't even get into that right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Alexandra Posted June 19, 2009 Member Share Posted June 19, 2009 Sun Chung was a bloody artist. I won't even get into that right now. Hello friend, may I ask why you think that? Alexandra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member gravedigger666 Posted June 20, 2009 Member Share Posted June 20, 2009 *also after LKL left Chang Cheh his movies became flat..or looked like chinese circus movies with a couple of exceptions...* Speaking of circus,there is far too much clowning around in lkl movies.return to 36th,disciples,treasure hunters+some other "pops" movies are almost unwatchable because of that.if your cup of tea is llk showing&preaching martial virtue&history of hung kuen fine then.I watch films for martial craziness and CC is heads and shoulder above lkl in that area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member peringaten Posted June 20, 2009 Member Share Posted June 20, 2009 Interesting. I myself have never been drawn to the Shaolin Cycle of CC's career. Those pictures chor. by LKL. Nothing against them, they just don't do it for me. Give me Invincible Shaolin, 5V, 5EN, Magnificent Ruffians, KwtGA, etc any day of the week over the Shaolin Cycle. As movies and esp as action. I'm completely drawn to the Venom era and find the Shaolin Cycle movies flat. To borrow your line, "thats all personal taste".Did you see Disciples Of Shaolin yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Iron Boat Posted June 22, 2009 Member Share Posted June 22, 2009 I like many of Sun Chung's films but I think the praise is overboard. I mean the slow mo, wideshots really didn't add much to the films to me, IMO, his films pretty much follow the Cheng Cheh mold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Alexandra Posted June 25, 2009 Member Share Posted June 25, 2009 Speaking of circus,there is far too much clowning around in lkl movies.return to 36th,disciples,treasure hunters+some other "pops" movies are almost unwatchable because of that.if your cup of tea is llk showing&preaching martial virtue&history of hung kuen fine then.I watch films for martial craziness and CC is heads and shoulder above lkl in that area. Well in the world of hk cinema there are many genres: drama, epic, wuxia, fantasy, comedy. If you enjoy to see wuxia, or the "martial virtue and history of hung kuen" good for you. But I never think in "circus" when I see comedy made by Lau Kar Leung. Is most difficult to make comedy than drama or wuxia. I guess you will be in totally disagree with me, but I rispect too much the comedy work, is the hard work ever. If you dislike Lau Kar Leung for his conception of movie making or screenplay or whatever, I understand you, if you like the "craziness" in CC films, good. I can't chop in pieces "comedy" in "clowning", "circus" and "craziness" (using your words). Comedy is one, but with many tints. Different people, different styles, different in all the ways. We must to be open mind. Sorry because I can't explain very well in english, but the cinema, which is part of the culture of a nation, have many faces, like a prisma. Alexandra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member gravedigger666 Posted June 25, 2009 Member Share Posted June 25, 2009 Is most difficult to make comedy than drama or wuxia. Good comedy maybe.Wong Yu and Hsaio Ho do not have abilities of Jackie Chan or Stephen Chow f.e.And most slapstick in LKL movies is drop dead dire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member MarsHarmony Posted June 27, 2009 Member Share Posted June 27, 2009 Hello friend, may I ask why you think that? Alexandra I could be wrong, but I think when he said "bloody artist" I think that means good, like bloody hell would be hell to the max, bloody artist could mean artist to the max. I think is good opinion of Sun Chung, but please correct me if I am wrong BaronK!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member BaronK Posted June 28, 2009 Member Share Posted June 28, 2009 "Different people, different styles, different in all the ways. We must to be open mind. Sorry because I can't explain very well in english, but the cinema, which is part of the culture of a nation, have many faces, like a prisma." Funny. You say you can't explain well in english and perfectly explained yourself. The first two sentences are completely where my thinking has been for years. It's why I don't think, "this vs that", or top ten, 15, 3 whatever, or who's better. Yes that is what I meant by bloody artist. I will explain why but it will be longwinded and I'm not ready to type that much yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Venoms Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 absolutely Chang Cheh, the greatest director Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.