Bashers vs Shapes

[Omni Dragon]

Which do people like better Shapes or Bashers?

Personally i like Shape better becaues of a more flowing movement.

[kaleyboy]

Man, that's too cruel to ask someone to choose! I can't physically bring myself to click either the basher/shapes button. It's like someone making you choose between two of your most cherished children. For me, both or none at all.

[ironfistedmonk]

Gotta go with the shapes, thats what attracted me to these films in the first place. I hated the bashers when I first started collecting but I have come to appreciate them much more with time, the brutality in them is astounding at times, If only they had amalgamated the basher stories and themes with the shapes action we could have had tons more classics.

[Kwok Choi]

Don't start this you will divide the forum.Besides,it is part of the evolution of Kung Fu Cinema and it is like asking one to chose the best or worst years of one's existence.It is part and parcel of the same thing making us who we are today ditto bashers and shapes.Both serve their purposes it is unfair to have a poll on this.

[KyFi]

If only they had amalgamated the basher stories and themes with the shapes action we could have had tons more classics.

Yep, I agree with this. I tend to like them both about equally, but it seems to me a good deal of those early 70's bashers were just better movies than a lot of the later shapes ones, even if the fight scenes weren't as polished. Although, on the other hand, maybe it's the simplistic, brutal fight scenes that contributed more to the classier feel of the bashers---hard to say. At any rate, I enjoy both!

[Cesare]

I like both immensely, but I guess bashers are more my thing.

[Tosh]

Can't really choose myself, I love it all, bashers, shapes, wuxia, fantasy.

[The Dragon]

KUNG FU.

[Omni Dragon]

Don't start this you will divide the forum.Besides,it is part of the evolution of Kung Fu Cinema and it is like asking one to chose the best or worst years of one's existence.It is part and parcel of the same thing making us who we are today ditto bashers and shapes.Both serve their purposes it is unfair to have a poll on this.

I'm not trying to "divide the forum" just interested in what people think.

[The Dragon]

... just interested in what people think.

I have been referred to as "oh great oracle! "

... so, my opinions count.

[BaronK]

Who is a basher? What is a shape?

[rdenn]

Who is a basher? What is a shape?

you should know by now lol, shapes is more my thing as i started watching them first as to me the intricate choreagraphy, stances, footwork just does it for me, but bashers have that raw energy in the fight scenes that i find amazing when you have kurata, chen sing , bruce liang, cheung nik, screaming and fighting non stop for 20 mins, then for them to pull out weapons after to me is just pure class but shapes gets the upperhand for me

[Mark Pollard]

It's great that we're collectively bringing greater definition to the genre by discussing these two major categories. I agree with an earlier statement that we're talking about the evolution of the genre. While shapes films can be viewed as possessing more technically proficient screen fighting, basher films were typically grounded in more realism and in the case of films like FIST OF FURY and BOXER SHANTUNG, had more engaging plots than what you would likely find in a shapes film.

During the basher era, martial arts movies were still considered movies with fighting in them. The shapes era transformed the genre so that kung fu movies became little more than 90-minute fighting exhibitions strung together with minimal plots. The training films, such as 36TH CHAMBER and DRUNKEN MASTER, highlight this.

Contributing factors to the dumbing down of kung fu plots and the raising of fighting skill included the rise of action directors like Lau Kar-leung and Sammo Hung as film directors and the popularity of kung fu in the Western world where audiences demanded more action.

I don't see one sub-genre as better than the other. They both have distinct strengths and weaknesses.

The following belongs in another thread but I would interested to see what people consider examples where shapes and bashers successfully merged. Would CHINATOWN KID qualify?

[Omni Dragon]

I have been referred to as "oh great oracle! "

... so, my opinions count.

everyones opinions count that the point of a forum.

[The Dragon]

I was being sarcastic, mate.

Mark, I like your comment, and completely agree.

Chinatown Kid and Way of The Dragon may stand out as two that merged these catagories.

CTK because of the story and display of the action, WOTD beacause of the Europeans, who made fun of their interpretations of "Chinese Boxing".

[odioustrident]

I think a few things should be noted here, if no one has mentioned this already:

Even though shapes action was something of a next step in the kung fu boom, a good amount of bashers came out after 5 Shaolin Masters in 1974 (which seems to be where shapes started). Wang Yu didn't give up on the basher film when he produced Double Double Crossers, nor did Tien Peng when he directed Equals Against Devils.

I don't really consider the Venoms handwork to be straight shapes, at least in Chinatown Kid or even Five Deadly Venoms. I could definitely be wrong, but Lo Mang only started the mantis handwork a little later in his career, and even that was extremely simple stuff. Chan Sing's Hung Gar was often done in the basher format, and I think he and Lo Mang are good people to look at when studying the blurry line between bashers and shapes.

Another important thing is that basher style choreography was part of "modern day" actioner well into the early 80's. If you look at Chan Wai-Man in Jumping Ash, The Club, or even Profile in Anger, I don't think those films are too different from bashers in terms of their choreography.

So. Are we defining bashers as most things pre-1974, or are we talking about a choreographic style that went on for some time (albeit not in the exact same way)?

[Omni Dragon]

I was being sarcastic, mate.

Mark, I like your comment, and completely agree.

Chinatown Kid and Way of The Dragon may stand out as two that merged these catagories.

CTK because of the story and display of the action, WOTD beacause of the Europeans, who made fun of their interpretations of "Chinese Boxing".

hard to tell on a forum because of no voice theres no tone.

[Drunken Monk]

I think if I were to say which aspect of the kung fu genre I prefer, I would say shapes. Why? Because it looks better and that is really the only reason. I prefer the styles, the flare and the intricacies. However, I'm fairly biased because I typically don't watch many bashers and certainly haven't seen the cream of the crop when it comes to non-shape kung fu. I remain fairly in the dark regarding them.

However, what would the quicker, less shapely but still stylized forms of fighting from, say, "Dragons Forever," "Project A" and "Mr. Vampire" be classed as?

[AbeRudder]

Going to go with Shapes, i love the variety of the techniques and the rhythm. For me it doesn't get any better than stuff like Dirty Ho, 7 Grandmasters, Ninja Hunter, Martial Club, Martial Arts of Shaolin etc. Though i have to say i havent seen that many Bashers. Could anyone reccomend some bashers with fighting similar to 'Call Me Dragon'? Im not really into stuff like Five Fingers of Death or The Chinese Boxer.

[shukocarl]

IMHO Bashers are more representive of REAL fighting in terms of how you would apply an art in combat (an elbow or knee strike is the same whatever style it comes from). Of course fighting dozens of guys for 30 minutes IS unrealistic.You could not do shapes in REAL situations. Sonny Chiba's Karate films are authentic to the styles they portray because the various Karate styles are similar when it comes to application. Yes, shapes are great to look at but don't turn me on because I have to suspend a LOT more belief when viewing them.

[Mark Pollard]

Are we defining bashers as most things pre-1974, or are we talking about a choreographic style that went on for some time (albeit not in the exact same way)?

To answer simply, yes. I think most would agree that the bulk of the basher films were released from 1970-75 and that when we refer to that style/sub-genre we're generally talking about that era when they were most popular.

It's also true that films with basher-style combat continued to be made after 1974-75 but to a lesser degree.

Chinese action directors portrayed basher styles as screen fighting for a modern (20th century) setting and shapes for a period (pre-20th century) setting. If you look back at pre-1970s kung fu movies, most notably the WONG FEI HUNG films, there is shapes action in those movies but it it was slower and less powerful than the shapes action of the late '70s.

I would also suggest that bashers are closely related to karate films. Chinese martial arts action in 1970 was heavily influenced by Japanese culture. Chinese swordplay borrowed from Japanese swordplay and kung fu borrowed from karate. Villains were often Japanese karate practitioners and you had karate-trained stars like Chen Sing and Yasuaki Kurata dominating the genre for that reason. Even the Chinese heroes used moves derived from Japanese and/or Okinawan martial arts instead of kung fu. Consider that Wang Yu, who was largely trained in screen fighting, held no allegiance to traditional kung fu when he filmed THE CHINESE BOXER and Bruce Lee was already developing his own MMA style in FIST OF FURY. These two movies, along with BOXER FROM SHANTUNG basically define the basher. Thereafter, filmmakers either ripped them off or gradually steered in other directions.

I'm guessing that somewhere along the way Lau Kar-leung said, "to hell with with this poorly-defined kung fu and karate sh*t, I'm going to show audiences real kung fu." And thus, shapes screen fighting was reborn. Maybe FrankyLau can confirm this for me but I suspect this is why Lau made sure many of his shapes movies led off with an exhibition of detailed forms. It looks like he was making a statement about what was the state of so-called Chinese kung fu movies at the time.

[butcher wing]

shapes when they are done fluently are beautiful to watch. thats what really got me into these types of movies.

[odioustrident]

I'm guessing that somewhere along the way Lau Kar-leung said, "to hell with with this poorly-defined kung fu and karate sh*t, I'm going to show audiences real kung fu." And thus, shapes screen fighting was reborn. Maybe FrankyLau can confirm this for me but I suspect this is why Lau made sure many of his shapes movies led off with an exhibition of detailed forms. It looks like he was making a statement about what was the state of so-called Chinese kung fu movies at the time.

In some documentary, either Chop Socky or Cinema of Vengeance, Lau Kar-leung says that Runme Shaw asked what other kung fu styles could be shown on film (after JKD with Bruce Lee?). Lau Kar-leung suggested Hung Gar Tiger and Crane, and thus 5 Shaolin Masters started up as a project. Its interesting that the film shows off many styles beyond Tiger and Crane, although I'm sure its the most screen friendly stuff. Was Bruce Lee the first true Chinese style to be shown in 70's Hong Kong film? It would be pretty badass if that was the case, as it does seem like karate got more press (and real HK screen attention) in the beginning of the kung fu boom.

[kungfusamurai]

I begrudgingly voted shapes, not because I don't like the pre'74 stuff. It's just like comparing gangster flicks from the 30s versus gangster flicks from the 80s. One was an evolution of the other, they didn't compete for audiences at the same time, although some could argue that Jimmy Wang Yu was the one basher hold-out in the mid to late 70s.

The think I like about basher/chop-sockeys is the speed and brutality. Unfortunately, many of them are so dark and bleak without much humour that they're hard to enjoy. And they all seem to be based on the exact same plot line. At least by the late 70s, not just because of the 'shapes' styles, but just the tastes in cinema required the kung fu film to evolve into more areas so the films would stand out more. But like during the basher era, the shapes period had a lot of bad films. You have to boil it down to trends and producers trying to cash in on what is current. If a particular style of film is big, quantity vs quality seems to rule the day in any movie industry.

Someone did raise a good point about the 80s modern actioners being more like bashers than shapes. I guess the best comparison would have been modern actioners vs shapes. BTW, I'm not a fan of the word 'shapes' but it seems to be the easiest way of describing the kung fu forms films.

KFS

[kungfusamurai]

I want also point out that while 'shapes' were big in the mid to late 70s, there were films that predated that period that would fall into that category from the early 70s. Namely, the Angela Mao flicks Hapkido and When Tae Kwan Do Strikes. They focus on specific styles of combat, rather than some non-descript, swinging arm, karate-fu approach to fighting on screen.

KFS