Cheng Cheh vs Lau Kar Leung

[Iron Boat]

Okay, this post wont ask which director is the greatest, but it will ask who's your favorite between the two. I don't mean to compare film output, in that regard Cheng Cheh wins big time, but as far as the way each guy tells a story, uses action, and direct their films.

My opinion on these two gentlemen revolve around the way they cast their films. I think Cheng Cheh understood the importance of a great cast better than Lar Kar Leung did. Cheng Cheh knew how to pair heroes and villains together and get the most out of their on screen persona's. For example, put Ti Lung, David Chiang, and Ku Feng in a film together and you got a masterpiece on your hands nearly everytime. The way he built casts around Fu Sheng, making Chi Kuan Chun big brotherly and Wang Lung Wei his nemesis was brilliant. The way he crafted Chen Kuan Tai as an anti hero tough guy who was somewhat of a loner was equally brilliant. Also the way he made the Venom's clan their own worse enemies was good to.

Lar Kar Leung is obviously great at what he does as well but I don't like the casting of his films all that much. Of course he has Gordon Liu, who, imo, is the best on screen fighter in shaw history but he surrounds him with too many average Joes to me. He's often in films with Wang Yue, Hsiao Ho, Kara Hui,.... okay before you guys jump on me, these three are good/well known actors and actresses but they don't necessarily compliment Gordon Liu's abilities. He never even really has given Gordon Liu any memorable Villians to defeat or challenge him.

The two times Lar Kar Leung got it right he ended up with the masterpieces, 8 Diagram Pole Fighter and Enter the 36 Chambers, everything else is hit or miss, and yes that includes the overrated Legendary Weapons of China. Also, I think Lar Kar Leung cast himself in too many films as well, and not even just cameos, often as a lead character. I know he's the master, the sifu, but I don't particularly enjoy watching him fight in films. He's not all that charismatic on screen to me. He apparently enjoyed being in front of the camera more than behind it. However, I do enjoy watching him as a henchman in The One Armed Swordsman, he seemed to like being evil.

So Executioners was his first Big Film and he brought to life a legendary villain in Pai Mei, but then he never matches that again with any future films. Just shades of gray type characters but no true bad azzez. Cheng Cheh kept the villains rolling throughout his career. I'd love to had seen Gordon Liu go up against the 5 Element Ninjas or something like that.

Cheng Cheh also didn't seem to share Lar Kar Leung's sense of humor. The only time there is comedy in a Cheng Cheh film is when Fu Sheng or Chiang Shiang are being themselves. Lar Kar Leung's insistence on comedy in his films often misses the mark with me. Example: What was the purpose of Hsiao Ho's buck teeth in Return to the 36 Chambers? (I admit I may not be familiar enough with asian comedy to understand that one) This is nit picking but I also never like the way Lar Kar Leung ends many of his films, often with a freeze frame of a light hearted moment or Hsiao Ho doing something silly...freeze....credits.

So ultimately my preference is Cheng Cheh, though the "brotherly bonding" grew tiresome and rather suspicious , he did know how to set up a fight and develop some wonderful villains and heroes on screen.

[shaolindogpaw]

That's a very difficult one. Cheng Cheh wins for me but by a small margin. I really enjoy his movies and I can watch them over and over again.

[Cesare]

I enjoy both CC and LKL movies, but I like CC better. Especially his late 1960s and early 1970s stuff. My choice is of course purely subjective. Themes that CC explored appeal to me more, then there is of course the visual exploitation of well-shaped male figures...;-) And blood. CC's way of bloodletting is one of those things that immediately struck an accord with me.

CC was IMHO more of a storyteller. Or perhaps I just appreciate and understand his stories better. CC can be both very epic and very lyrical - and in general, there's a certain weight to the stories and characters he brings on screen.

His obsession with numbers and structuring of a plot is another intriguing aspect of his work.

And of course, I like anything with high homosocial factor. Ever since watching Winnetou for the first time when I was five or six, I've liked stories of brotherhood and male bonding. :-]

LKL's films are wonderful. But still, it's CC for me.

[BaronK]

They had completely different approaches to structure. CC used themes and used his people a certain way and LKL used his people a certain way.

LKL didn't use villians a center peices to his movies. FotWL and EfS are exceptions. He tended to introduce the villian to show you who he was, then have him show up to fight at the end(think Wang Lung Wei).

CC used hero/villian direct interaction many times as the center peice. He also knew how to pick villian faces and have them do dastardly things to make you hate them(see Savage 5/Vengeance/5 Shaolin Masters).

CC was probably the most easily digested of the top KF directors. His use of violence and heroism, esp. with the mortally wounded hero, tends to really draw the viewer in. His is man stuff and I think that translated across the globe more than others.

[KyFi]

Kind of a toss-up for me. In my opinion:

LKL:

* Much deeper understanding of the the themes and philosophy of martial arts

* Generally better choreographed fight scenes

* more attention to detail and overall quality control in his films

* more varied plots and themes

CC:

* More visionary in regards to creating different genres within martial arts films

* Stronger sense of visual style

* heavier emotional themes

I think I would probably argue that LKL was a better technical filmmaker, but CC was a bit more of a true "artist", in that he was obsessed with certain themes and images that stuck with him his whole career.

I really have trouble picking one over the other, but I might give a slight nod to CC. They're certainly both true giants of the genre.

[NoNiceTime]

Kind of a toss-up for me. In my opinion:

LKL:

* Much deeper understanding of the the themes and philosophy of martial arts

* Generally better choreographed fight scenes

* more attention to detail and overall quality control in his films

* more varied plots and themes

CC:

* More visionary in regards to creating different genres within martial arts films

* Stronger sense of visual style

* heavier emotional themes

I think I would probably argue that LKL was a better technical filmmaker, but CC was a bit more of a true "artist", in that he was obsessed with certain themes and images that stuck with him his whole career.

I really have trouble picking one over the other, but I might give a slight nod to CC. They're certainly both true giants of the genre.

I think this post nails it on the head.

* Much deeper understanding of the the themes and philosophy of martial arts

That is what make LKL film so good. Being a martial artist gives him a different perspective then CC when making films.

* Generally better choreographed fight scenes

That I do not agree with as a blanket statement. Some of the best fight scenes I have witnesses where chore. by Tony Gai and/or Robert Tai.

All in all I prefer CC films. I am not a huge fan of Kung Fu comdies. I rather have a bloody dark film (5 Element Ninja,The Spearman etc.)

I must say though Hero's of the East may be may favorite film of all time and I think is LKL best all around film.

[SamuraiDana]

Certain individual films by Lau Kar Leung are better than any individual work by Chang Cheh (I'm thinking chiefly of THE 36TH CHAMBER OF SHAOLIN and 8-DIAGRAM POLE FIGHTER), but I think that's because he put more time and effort into them than Chang Cheh put into each of his films. And I think it helps that Ni Kuang wrote the scripts for Lau's best films. (And Chang Cheh's best films at well.) But in terms of overall achievement, Chang Cheh's body of work is the most impressive. In 20 years at Shaw Bros., Chang turned out at least 50 notable works, by my count. I've seen 75 of his films, more than by any other director. And that's out of 93 total, per HKMDB. And I still have a few to go. (In contrast, I've seen 18 by Lau and I believe I've seen all the important ones.)

The things that interested Lau most were fairly narrow and somewhat provincial, whereas Chang had a greater vision and greater versatility. Lau had a certain agenda with his films, in terms of the proper portrayal of martial arts, and that's what he tended to devote himself to. Which is fine for fans like us, but is somewhat limiting to a filmmaker. Could Lau have made a musical? A gangster film? A college-themed comedy-drama? A fantasy? We don't know, because he never tried. Chang did. And I think Chang's films benefited from his ability to incorporate the martial arts sequences into a larger genre framework. He understood the big picture in a way I'm not sure Lau did.

[TibetanWhiteCrane]

I love LKL and his movies... But im gonna go with CC! I love the venoms, and most of CC's mid to late 70's flicks, and some of the early ones, ie VENGEANCE, BOXER FROM SHANTUNG etc...!

I can't stand the insipid comedy in LKL's movies.... I really hate it, and it wasn't necessary! But he did have the better choreo. Although he made less films than CC, and the comedy kills it..... Sorry pops!

[CrazyFrog]

I think Pops had less memorable villains because he probably thought there are few true villains in real life but rather people with misguided agendas and twisted perspectives. Plus, he was more concerned about the authenticity of martial arts being displayed than the plot or even general story at hand. Having said that, I though the villain in Mad Monkey Kung Fu was pretty memorable (as Lo tended to be). Pops was not a visionary director, I think he was competent. He was more a torchbearer for real kung fu in the 20th century and realized that action cinema was the best way to promulgate that torch.

Chang Cheh had more thematic views which fit better with cinema in general. Brotherhood, loyalty, betrayal,vengeance, etc. And women were nothing more than treacherous whores- seriously, he had some issues with women! I've only seen maybe about fifteen or so of his films (yeah, I'm pretty low on the kung-fu obsession totem pole) but his hit or miss ratio was lower than Pops, IMO. But he could hit the mark, no doubt. I need to see more of his films before I could make a definitive decision on this one.

[greenfan]

I, personally, don't think this discussion is close.

In terms of pure talent as a director, LKL is the clear winner.

[Killer Meteor]

No, I think LKL is a poor director, and not the most cinematic of action choreographers

Chang Cheh ranged from brilliant to shoddy, I guess he burnt out quickly

[teako170]

I will always stand up for Chang Cheh for some of the very reasons listed above. The man made nearly seven times the amount of films Lau Kar Leung did in his entire career. Who's to say if Chang had the time that Lau did to craft his films, that we would be saying Lau is better. Considering that without Chang's insistence for the Shaws do films with costumes and hair true to the era (pigtails), nearly none of the films we know and love would look anything like they do. Let alone his action scenes, which became the guide book for directors that followed.

To say he didn't deal in themes is a bit ludicrous. The man remade stories, sometimes setting them in different time periods, just because he wanted the keep the same themes and ideas. I mean, most key elements in Chinatown Kid are found in at least six of his films. And nearly all his films (even some of the venom films) deal with one person's efforts to stand against overwhelming odds.

And he didn't mold his style to fit others, they did so to fit him. What's forgotten in this thread is Chang Cheh was the guy that tried to do what other said couldn't be done. And as such, there's going to be far more mistakes made with this sort of director, because he's trying to re-invent the wheel so to speak. Chang drove the Shaw Brothers bandwagon for years. He was the one that determined where the martial arts film went from about 1966-1976. And this is the reason why he was given an independent deal with the Shaws in the first place. While Lau Kar Leung is often given credit for Chang's Shaolin cycle of films, it's often forgotten by these same people that Chang was writing and directing films on Shaolin, or dealing with elements of it, in 1966. This was before he even had started his association with Lau. AND Chang directed quite a few excellent Shaolin films AFTER Lau left. And who put Lau in the position he was in to become a top director? Chang Cheh, much like he did for all his pupils. Lau may never have even worked for the company with Chang stepping in and insisting that the Shaw Brothers hire Lau and Tang Chia. Etc. It's nearly never ending how much he did for the genre.

If you simply go by year, it's nearly impossible to say the man didn't direct at least one (or more) classic a year, which in my book is an excellent record for someone who often made seven films in a single year!

Linn1

Senior Moderator

(3/15/05 2:45 pm)

Thread: "Who here doesn't like Chang Cheh films?"

[FrankBolte]

I find threads like this absolutely unneccessay...

and to say LKL was a poor director ?

movies like

8 diagram pole fighter

challenge of the masters

36th chamber

Heroes of the east

martial club

18 weapons

mad monkey

dirty ho

young auntie/lady is the boss

are poor dirceted ? U gotta be joking....

I like both,but surly favorite LKL any day...

but also enjoy the old Chang Cheh shaolin movies...

[ironfistedmonk]

LKL anyday of the week, the kung fu philosophy really shines through in his films and IMO he is the best action choreographer there has ever been. I'm not sure how people can consider CC a better director, I love some of CC's work but the guy did drag some shit out, all those zooms and the stagey shots of characters standing in a line and the camera going from one face to the next, totally pointless and mind numbingly boring, people standing around while one guy walks into a room and we have to wait while the guy whispers in some guys ear and watch him walk out again! LKL creates character through movement, his films are well crafted and never sluggish and his supporting cast do great jobs IMO.

[greenfan]

The intro/fight scene with the brothers in Eight Diagram Pole Fighter is a great example of LKL's talents.

[Iron Boat]

I find threads like this absolutely unneccessay...

and to say LKL was a poor director ?

I like both,but surly favorite LKL any day...

but also enjoy the old Chang Cheh shaolin movies...

I disagree, there's nothing wrong with "fans" expressing their opinions, I think there are enough unique aspects of the way each of these gentleman direct and craft their films to warrant debate. Each director has his own style right? Come now, We'll see whose style is the best!!!!

[shaolin drunkard]

CC was superior.LKL is good director and great choreographer but there are few factors which makes this writer will not enjoy his movies as much as CCs.1st kung-fu is deadly art still in many his movies nobody is killed or seriously injured.That is important thing for kf movie,carnage in final reel of CC movies leave me with warm feeling.2nd is often unnecessary comedy.3rd are supporting actors;Gordon Liu gave great performance almost always but Wong Yu,Hsaio Ho and Liu Chia Liang(someone already said he put himself into front of camera too often) did not.

[FrankBolte]

LKL put him self in front of the cam to often ???

I wish he did....

[ching li]

I think they were both good directors, but I tend to lean a bit over to Chang cheh's side. I think chang cheh's films were films most westerners could relate to. Chang cheh's gangster movies, are just like ours. For instance in the singing killer, david chiang's character was nothing short of james bond type. I do agree that chang cheh was a lot more versatile than lau kar leung. With lau kar leung you pretty much got the same theme, a huge family, all know kung fu and usually an impetuous female (most of the time hui ying hung, the actress in heroes of the east, yeung jing jing from eight diagram pole fighter). As for the comedy lau kar leung didn't have a choice, by the time he came into his own with directing, comedy was in and he had to go with the flow. Both chang cheh and lau kar leung have my respect!

[kungfusamurai]

I can't really decide between the two because it's almost like apples and oranges, and I love eating both fruits! (okay, that came out sounding really stupid).

Anyway, I seem to recall saying this a long time ago when this topic came up on the old EZBoard version of the group:

Chang Cheh was the Entertainer, while Lau Kar Leung was the Educator.

That's why it's difficult to pit the two against each other, because they're approaches film were so different. You probably would be better off comparing LKL to Sammo, or Chang Cheh against Sun Chung.

KFS

[The Dragon]

LKL's films haven't totally explored darkness in the story... Most have uprightiousness elements without complexity. It's not too late though; there are great actors out there and he can still provide some great choreography, and there's nothing wrong with spraying the screen with blood sometimes, audiences like that also... so let's see.

[Chinatown Kid]

I appreciate the uniqueness each one brings to the table and glad we have films from both to enjoy. They are both great in their own way and I don't want to say one is better than the other.

[Drunken Cat]

I appreciate the uniqueness each one brings to the table and glad we have films from both to enjoy. They are both great in their own way and I don't want to say one is better than the other.

I'm with you on this one. Both have extremely distinct directing styles that are more or less, polar opposite. I'd rather enjoy the films they made than waste time dissecting the strengths and weaknesses of their craft.

[Tosh]

I appreciate the uniqueness each one brings to the table and glad we have films from both to enjoy. They are both great in their own way and I don't want to say one is better than the other.

I'm going with this answer myself with much respect to both.

And who said LKL put himself in his movies to many times???? The man was brillant onscreen, not to mention he started in the biz at around age 13, always a pleasure to watch him.

[Iron Boat]

But isn't it nice that Cheng Cheh didn't put himself in his films often, (I can only think of one) Okay he wasn't a martial arts star like LKL but there were plenty of opportunities for him to cameo. I think its good he let his actors do the acting. Overall, I hope I haven't come off as a Lar Kar Leung basher though, I agree his craft is excellent as well...I do think a Cheng Cheh vs Sun Chung comparison would be interesting though.