Martial Art films...... need links and info

hey. I know there has been threads before about ppl creating "kung Fu fanfilms" but this is a different question.

Does anyone know of any REALISTIC martial arts films made by amatures and stuff like that. And when i say REALISTIC i mean none of that Matrix/Romeo Must Die crap. I mean real stuff like the fights in Dragon: Bruce Lee story and Enter The Dragon. So none of that block every puch, jump a billiobs metres into the air junk.

Can anyone provide me with some links to pages that have these films.

Thanks to anyone who takes interest in this thread

 

Kwoon looks like it would be good, but it looks like thier download links aren't working.

 

thankz... pitty about the download.... Guys, these are the kinda films i mean [nice and realistic]

BTW: thanks for the hell quick reply

 

Don't right click on the link try just a left click and they download now

 

"none of that Matrix/Romeo Must Die crap"

--THANK YOU!!! Is no one else on Earth insulted by the sheer, shallow, blatently phony stupidity of that CRAP?!? Only in this world could those "martial artists" get away with the weak EDIT they do, and call that fighting.

--However...you put "the bruce lee story" along side "enter the dragon." You'd better rethink that. "dragon: the bruce lee story" was a joke, not only as a biopic, but also in terms of most of the fight scenes. and "enter the dragon," although having some of the best choreography and emotional content fight scenes in any film to date, was NOT realistic in many ways...

--finally, I arrogantly put MY fanfilm up there as having some of the BEST (and in some ways, realistic) choreography in ANY fan film. there's stuff in it that's never been done before (as far as I know) in a fan film ---and we shot it over 3 years ago, after only a few hours of brainstorming!!!!!!!!!!!
(watch and see some of the moves and style appear in the choreography competition taking place on this board)


EDIT: removing one letter from the word is not enough. Refrain from the language or you will be banned. This is the one and only warning.

 

Enter the Dragon is about as oposite of fake as you can get in hollywood brother. And I do not have a single problem with 'this matrix/romeo must die crap'. There is a distinct difference between an ACTUAL fight and a movie fight. In an actual fight you want to kill a person as fast as possible. If you made an actual fight between masters of martial arts, someone would get kicked in the groin, a knee dropped to their face, and their neck broken all in about 5 seconds and I doubt that would be very fun to watch. On the other hand a staged fight has the exact oposite perogatives, to NOT kill anyone and to make it last as long as is intersting.

I have found that the majority of people who whine about these films are intermediate martial artists who have learned the basic philosophies and good technique but lack the complete understanding of the martial ways.

 

It never ceases to amaze me when people get all up in arms over issues like realism in movie fighting. Look, here's the scoop: the fighting in The Matrix or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon wasn't realistic -- because the film-makers were looking to entertain and employed a specific methodology to do so. This isn't crap, and saying that it is is like saying that Mozart is crap because you don't like classical music. Just because you can't appreciate it for what it is doesn't make all of the people who can appreciate it stupid for doing so.

Wanna know the most realistic fight scene I've seen in a film? It's the one where Mark Greene got attacked in the bathroom on ER a number of years ago . He never saw his assailant, who jumped him, beat his head against the sink and the shower stall, stomped on his head and hand, and left him a broken and bleeding mess on the floor. Very realistic, shocking and gory (I've been a martial arts instructor for nearly 16 years now, and have had many students who enrolled in my school after suffering such trauma. Most of the stories they tell are very similar to what happened to the fictional Dr. Greene).

Is there a place for the depiction of violence like that in movies? Absolutely. But do we want that kind of fighting all the time, in our entertainment? Probably not. Either way, it is critical that we realize that fighting in film must not always be confused with realism.

Enter the Dragon has utterly ridiculous fight scenes. There, I said it. There isn't a single fight in that film that would have gone down in reality the way that it happened in the film but one: the "fight" where Bruce convinces the Australian guy to get on the boat, and shows him the "style of fighting without (widdout) fighting." Does that make the movie lame? No. Does that mean that Bruce wasn't a can of whoopass? No. But what he was doing in the film was not what Bruce "the martial artist" Lee advocated. It capitalized on the athleticism that he developed in his pursuit of the martial arts, but that guy in the film, he was Bruce "the entertainer" Lee.

This kind of thing is critical to understand. People get in wrongful mindset that fighting can be noble; that, like the guy in the movie, we can fight and wear the white hat and be the hero. There's no such thing. Fighting is killing. Fighting is dying. Period.

What I think is dangerous is going down a road with fighting as entertainment, and confusing it -- in any form -- as reality. Now, I confess, I like movie fighting -- fight entertainment. But I draw no illusions from it and neither should anyone else. It is something separate from fighting, just as sport fighting (from point karate to boxing to sport jiu-jitsu to Pride) is different from real fighting.

In the end, if you're trying to entertain with your fighting in film (as opposed to trying to shock or educate with it) then don't throw stones. You're just as far off the mark as the wildest wire-fu film ever made.

 

WhisperingDeath


"Enter the Dragon is about as oposite of fake as you can get in hollywood brother."

---agreed... but I said, 'IN MANY WAYS...' there is some (actually, alot) of stuff in the fight scenes that were pure Jeet Kune Do (thus functional), some were exagerations of Jeet Kune Do... and some were pure entertainment.


"I doubt that would be very fun to watch."

---don't totally agree... First, I think IF DONE PROPERLY, it could (and when it's been done) is/has been very entertaining.


"I have found that the majority of people who whine about these films are intermediate martial artists who have learned the basic philosophies and good technique but lack the complete understanding of the martial ways."

--then I'm in the minority...again (i think that's a good thing)



Lord_Rive

--will address the gist of your thread:

--I actually BARELY liked the Matrix fighting because it worked within the framework of the plot. They were 'programed' with textbook kung-fu, AND they were in a virtual world...so they could do that.

--same for Crouching Tiger...it was supposed to be archetypal...this much is obvious, and I was aware of this when I watched it.

--HOWEVER, when I see Charley's Angels (commercial; never wasted 2 hours of life watching it) DOING MATRIX-STYLE ---CRAP---, or LucyLiu in this new ---CRAP--- film, so elegantly wielding her 'kali-stick- batons between the thugs, (yada yada yada)... This I consider gratuitous, phony, crap. If it's not crap, then there is no such thing as crap.

--(the old, "it's someone else's opinion" doesn't negate something from being crap, does it?) (if I like something that is TRULY crap, shallow, meaningless... and LATER grow and become more aware, then I TOO will realize that I once liked crap.) In other words, if Britney Spears music is crap... it's crap, no matter how many teenie-boppers worship her.

--as for the "WHAT A REAL FIGHT LOOKS LIKE," sure it looks sloppy and stupid when it's normal (or drunk, etc) people doing it. (I also consider the average martial artist to be normal.)

--But this isn't the case when skilled people are involved. The last 'brawl' I was involved with at a "sheetz parking lot" went thus:

THUG pulled in with car, got out and held up PIPE in his RIGHT hand.
I LEFT OVERHAND punched him in the face, DUCKED/BOBBED under the horizontal SWING from his RIGHT HAND/PIPE.
I 'peekaboo' RIGHT HOOKED him in the face, then
SUPLEXED HIM ON THE BLACKTOP.
Knee-on-belie, PUNCHES to his barely conscious face, and it was over.

Not sloppy, not crappy, not amateurish. And it was a transcendent, egoless, non-sentimental, (or, if I must, 'Jedi') state of awareness. (note the Gita... It was neither good, nor bad, no killing or dieing; that implies lack of clarity)

--anyhoo, enough windjamming for now.

--But I will paraphrase Sean Penn, again

"Movies are too precious, too important a medium to waste on fluff."


p.s. I RARELY get in fights, and the one above happened 4 years ago... The only place I act like a jerk (I hope) is on these boards. OH, and when I used to fight/compete, I rarely hit people in the face...only to set up other stuff.


p.p.s. OH, YEAH...

"EDIT: removing one letter from the word is not enough. Refrain from the language or you will be banned. This is the one and only warning."

--on the occasions that I visit these boards, I've read outright spelled curses...AND NO RESPONSES FROM ANY MODERATORS!!!

--such a quick and strong response...pretty EDIT interesting!

 

Although I will admit, the word "CRAP" is highly subjective...

...perhaps words/phrases such as "less profound," "uninspiring," "unoriginal," or "distasteful" should be used.

Or maybe just Bono's description of pop music (and to a lesser degree, pop culture.)

---"It's like saccharine."




Grover von Pricktenstein

---QUIT MESSIN' WITH MY ICON!!!

 

well then, can we all agree we hate pop music


*or Pop metal specifically, If I had the chance I would kill Fred Durst for the crap he tries to pass of as 'real' metal. All he is doing is keeping people from seeing the beauty and intricacy of all the excelent musicians that are out there. Have you guys ever heard of 'Opeth'? Oh, but you have heard of 'Limp Biskit'!?! It pains me to this day that the only reason that Durst is able to spread his evil syrin song (allusion to the Iliad and Odyssey) is because the great old band 'Kron' took them under their wings. His music is below the typical 'beginner' metal that I would advise people to start out on (the marajuana to Opeth's Heroin), he gives out 'metal for dummies' and lessens the impact of the great musicians out there... rant over*

 

I think most of us seem to miss the piont of movie "fighting" and realism. It's a movie folks meant to entertain...nothing real about it. Realistic is an illusion when it comes to faking it. Real fighting is not very clean and lacks the rythem seen in movies. It is very unpredictable and not "pretty" to watch. No hero's either. Nothing realistic about Star Wars fights either but it is enertaining....when done properly.

What made Bruce Lee's movies so good was not that they were realistic but that they were highly technical in the choreography dept. What sets Bruce Lee apart from the rest was his ability to pull off feats on camera not ever seen in film even today. Example: 8 consecutive kicks without an edit..unlike "want to be's" like Jean Claude Vandamn and the like. Bruce also had phenomenal speed. This is all "entertaining" but not realistic. Bruce was a martial artist fist and an actor second.

And Grover, what you seen Bruce do on screen was NOT Jeet Kune Do. Kali, Escrima and Arnis were not part of JKD. Neither was acrobatics. JKD is about economy of motion and while Bruce's screen M.A. was pretty it is not what you call economy of motion. Bruce's JKD is not very pretty but highly effective.

BTW "Last of the Mohicans" had some great fight scenes in it.

Peace

 

And Grover, I almost forgot...are you suggesting that "The Power" has realistic fighting? If so we need to um...chat.

 

Grover

-- will address the gist of your post:

-- HOWEVER, when I see Charley's Angels... This I consider gratuitous, phony, crap. If it's not crap, then there is no such thing as crap.

I'd let this go, in light of the fact that you concede that it is your opinion (ie: that you state that it is what you consider to be gratuitous, etc.), except that you follow with this statement:

the old, "it's someone else's opinion" doesn't negate something from being crap, does it?

and...

In other words, if Britney Spears music is crap... it's crap, no matter how many teenie-boppers worship her.

If Mozart's music is crap, it must be crap, no matter how many fogies like him.

You do see the inherent failure of this argument, don't you?

Now, regarding the other side of the coin with respect to the Charlie's Angels thing, I might agree with you were it not blatantly obvious that the movie was not attempting, in any way shape or form, to emulate reality. In fact, throughout the duration of the movie (which I did watch) they made their stance on the whole thing completely clear from the opening scene, where people on board the plane were watching "T.J. Hooker, the Movie". It's a joke, it's eye candy.

The point of all of this is that, when it comes to art, there is no "right" opinion. There are only varying tastes.

--as for the "WHAT A REAL FIGHT LOOKS LIKE," sure it looks sloppy and stupid when it's normal (or drunk, etc) people doing it. (I also consider the average martial artist to be normal.)

--But this isn't the case when skilled people are involved. The last 'brawl' I was involved with at a "sheetz parking lot" went thus...

Not sloppy, not crappy, not amateurish. And it was a transcendent, egoless, non-sentimental, (or, if I must, 'Jedi') state of awareness. (note the Gita... It was neither good, nor bad, no killing or dieing; that implies lack of clarity)

You completely miss my point. I never once said that real fighting had to be sloppy or amateurish. What I said was that real fighting was a far cry from fight entertainment. The situation that you describe above would not, in my opinion, serve well as entertainment -- on film it would be shocking and brutal, particularly the part where you deliver punches to a barely unconscious opponent.

With respect to my comments concerning killing or dying, I also think you're missing the point, to wit: people that approach fighting from the standpoint that it is something that can be engaged in like a movie (where they can be the hero and wear the white hat) put themselves and others in serious jeopardy. For many, a "fight" means black eyes and broken noses, maybe getting knocked out at the extreme end. And they engage in hostile activity because that's all it is to them. It's not killing or dying, it's just fighting. What they fail to understand is that there is always the possibility that things will escalate beyond their intention. That an accident can happen. For example, if a guy butts in front of you in line, and to you fighting is as I've described above, it might be worth getting a black eye to give the guy a piece of your mind about how he's acting -- maybe you get him a little worse, and give him a bloody nose. But the guy, to him fighting is killing. He's willing to take everything to ten at the drop of a hat, and he's carrying a gun to boot. So now, is your position in line worth your life? Or his, if you have to kill him to prevent him from killing you when he reacts to your aggression?

Supposing that when you'd suplexed the guy to the pavement he'd received a skull fracture?

I had a student that was involved in a road rage incident and was attacked by a guy... my student hit him with an open hand on the guy's temple. As it turned out, he'd fractured his skull and caused intracranial bleeding -- emergency surgery had to be preformed to save the guy's life. (My student was then arrested for the incident, but later acquitted when a witness who happened to see the event

 

That is the way I have been taught also Rive. I have learned that restraint is a must in today's world but that it is even much better to end up in prison for 20 years than 6 feet under. But I see myself as a person who is well enough off to get legal counsul with enough experience to let the truth be shown.

Once again I state that I am always willing to kill an agressor in a fight, it is my duty to protect my life and the lives of those that I care about before it is my duty to give mercy to those who would murder me in cold blood. There is no way to tell the guy who wants to bloody you up from the guy who wants to kill you, and frankly I don't give a ____ because if my life is in danger I will do whatever needs to be done.


(since I was talking about a subject that I am very passionate about does ____ work on this board?)

 

WhisperingDeath


---Yes... pop culture and related entertainment... well, that's a HUGE issue in itself, but it is very interesting who is where, and why. Good point.




Junfanman


"Real fighting is not very clean and lacks the rythem seen in movies."

--but it can be/or has been (Musashi's death match on the beach, Takeda defeating the mob of construction workers, Ueshiba defeating the swordman, Bruce whipping butt on the set of Enter the Dragon)...OR...THAT CAN BE THE BEAUTY OF IT (i.e., the 'brutal immediacy' can be very invigorating...

"And Grover, what you seen Bruce do on screen was NOT Jeet Kune Do. Kali, Escrima and Arnis were not part of JKD."

--YES, I KNOW (the Emporer, ROTJ)

--however, there was still alot of JeetKuneDo-ish techniques in many of the sequences... From the jow/jut/ sows (sp?) in the first match, to the simultaneous parry/strike (albiet, exagerated) in the mirror room, broken rhythms, feinting, etc, there were elements of 'traditional' JKD... And yes, the stick fighting wasn't Kali/Arnis, as Inosanto hadn't really showed Bruce alot of it at that time... (or so I've read/heard)


"...are you suggesting that "The Power" has realistic fighting?"

--no (hope I didn't say that), although relatively speaking, perhaps. Headbutts, body bumps and manipulations, yes... The rest, REAL FIGHTING, but applied to star wars style universe (thus, theatrical). Not not what I consider "RIDICULOUSLY PHONEY."


Lord_Rive

--Many good points, too tired to address/respond.

--About 'better' or 'worse,' involves the concept of holoarchy, that while those labels are inacurate, their are 'systems' which are more complex than there basic substrates... thus, 'better' in that respect (can be applied to art)

--also, if something works in a self-defeating (and even more insidious, self-perpetuating) manner, perhaps it could be said to be 'worse.' Does much of modern "art" fall under this category? In other words, is it the work of clear awareness, or of the ego?

--as for the described incident, yes, I was in the right, and got in NO trouble


"However, it does suggest the following: if it's worth fighting for, then it better be worth killing or dying for."

--very interesting statement...wish I could respond appropriately, but nay, the dark side energies eat at my flesh...

 

"--YES, I KNOW (the Emporer, ROTJ)

--however, there was still alot of JeetKuneDo-ish techniques in many of the sequences... From the jow/jut/ sows (sp?) in the first match"

Jut-sao's, Pak-sao's, Jow-sao's are Wing Chun not JKD. Bruce dropped trapping from his training regimine and what he taught durring the L.A. years (his last years). When it is taught today by JKD instuctors it is taught as a Wing Chun element and not JKD. Just as Kali and Escrima is taught by Sifu Inosanto, it is not taught as JKD but as what it is...Kali and Escrima.

", to the simultaneous parry/strike (albiet, exagerated) in the mirror room, broken rhythms, feinting, etc, there were elements of 'traditional' JKD... And yes, the stick fighting wasn't Kali/Arnis, as Inosanto hadn't really showed Bruce alot of it at that time... (or so I've read/heard)"

We have to watch what we READ and HEAR about JKD. JKD has been watered and brutalized by so called JKD instructors and so called JKD authorities. This is why the Bruce Lee Educational Foundation was formed or the "Nucleus" to keep JKD pure and ensure qualified people to carry his art to the next generation. Although the Nucleus has recently shutdown publicly due to reasons I will not share but it is still operating behind closed doors.

I do understand what you are saying in reference to realistic. Maybe you should use the word PRACTICAL. While movie fighting is unrealistic you can keep techniques practical. But...most people are not entertained by practical fighting. Theatrics is the ticket along with effects. While I have been a martial artist (JKD) for most of my life I always carry a side arm (legally) with me all the time. It is my primary weapon and very practical. But most gun fights you see in movies are very unrealistic. "Saving Private Ryan" had some realistic gun fighting to a degree. I have been in many as you say "brawls" over the years when I was very young and stupid. Most could have been avoided by walking away or RUNNING...now thats practical. Playing a tuff guy will get you a ticket with the grave quickly.

Do you remember the scene in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" when Harrison Ford shot the swordsman? Now that was realistic.

Also one man fighting several people with sticks and chains etc. is not REALISTIC. Some of what he does to handle them may be practical but not realistic..lol.

I am sure this is getting way off topic so I will shut up and apologize to the members and the moderators.

Peace

 

/\ similair Sig than mine /\

woops.... i think when i started this thread i forgot to state that The Matrix and Romeo Must Die and Also Crouching Tiger are some of my most loved movies.

I love the action in them movies but i just want to see some amature "REALISTIC" fight scenes...... You know the scene in Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story where Bruce and that Shaolin guy have the first one-on-one in that dark smoky room? Thats the fighting i like.

BTW: i would just like to add that i have experience in martial arts, so i know what im talking about to a certain degree-and im sure many ppl here know what they are on about aswell


PS: i'm sorry for using the word "crap" to those i offended..... now [although this is a great discussion] can more people answere my question

 

Here's my website with some stuff & a trailer for our enter the dragon fanfilm called Rage of the dragon.

Filmed in 1994 & took us 9 months to film.

Mushi

 

Interesting how many Jeet Kune Do philosophies are circling through this board. And I thought I was the only one

 

FORGIVE ME, OFF TOPIC, BUT MUST RESPOND...


Junfanman

"When it is taught today by JKD instuctors it is taught as a Wing Chun element and not JKD."

--Have to disagree... I've trained with Joe Lewis, Ted Wong, and Richard Bustillo... all three trained with Bruce, and all three use(d) varying levels of trapping energy or technique, even if only for a drill... And what I've seen them teach was MODIFIED wingchun... made more functional (mainly body position/footwork/entry on the trap) Maybe they say, yes, this is a wing chun element... but they were still teaching it as JKD.

"Bruce dropped trapping from his training regimine and what he taught durring the L.A. years"

--yeah, he dropped it... AFTER HE'D MASTERED IT... I rarely work on pummeling or neck wrestling anymore... But I've used it in various high-level, high-stress situations and competitions, even on UFC fighters...so I typically 'feel' that I've got it. If someone saw me working out, they may say, "He doesn't pummel, he said it not's necessary!"

--yes, I'm aware that Bruce migrated heavily to boxing in the late years... again, AFTER he'd 'mastered' wing chun. How much of his energy and rhythm and in-fighting was owed to that, EVEN IF HE DISCONTINUED DIRECTLY USING IT?

"Do you remember the scene in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" when Harrison Ford shot the swordsman? Now that was realistic."

--yeah, and Ford actually came up with that response, as opposed to a long, drawn out fight scene!!! lol!


clarity



G

 

Interesting topic.

Some comments..

Bruce Lee - 'realistic' choreagraphy? I don't think so!

Matrix - Great fantasy, fights worked very well. (Even those moves copied from 'Fist of Legend' )

BTW, Fist of Legend is Woo Ping's best work to date imo.

Tiger/Dragon - Beatiful, but it never captured me. The fights destroyed the illusion created by the movie. In the Matrix they worked well in context, in Tiger/Dragon I felt they called too much attention to themselves.

Jackie Chan - the master for 20 years, but I think now past his prime. Still, thats 40 something movies that won't be topped for a long time.

Mark Dacascos - Needs a really good showcase for his talents.

Van Damme - Needs a decent choreographer. I am sure there is more too him than that one kick and the splits.

Rive - Should spend less time moderating and more time doing Bruce Lee impressions.

All my opinions people. Carry on!

Pete

 

No, while I love Jackie's fight scenes and must admit that his brawl with in the lowlife's hangout in 'Rumble in the Bronx' is one of the best fight scenes of all time, my favorite movie fighter is Jet Lee. The wonderful fights in 'Fist of Legend' to his great performance in 'Twin Warriors' and concluding in the EXCELENTLY well done final fight scene in 'The One'. I believe that Jet Lee is the current master of the martial arts fight scene.

 

"Have to disagree... I've trained with Joe Lewis, Ted Wong, and Richard Bustillo... all three trained with Bruce, and all three use(d) varying levels of trapping energy or technique, even if only for a drill... And what I've seen them teach was MODIFIED wingchun... made more functional (mainly body position/footwork/entry on the trap) Maybe they say, yes, this is a wing chun element... but they were still teaching it as JKD."

1st Joe Lewis is NOT a JKD authority. He had a few private lessons from Bruce but was never given any authority to teach JKD. PLEAZE....

Only three people were certified by Bruce lee to teach JKD..Taky Kimura, Ted Wong and Dan Inosanto..and there is controversy over Dan's certificate (JKD) as we speak. He was certified in JunFan Gung Fu which included trapping but the legitimacy of his JKD certification is under the gun. I trained with Guru Inosanto in the early 80's durring the JKD revival and still do when invited. Even then he called it "Concepts" and still does to this day. He teaches JKD CONCEPTS which includes elements from many many systems..Wing Chun..Kali...Silat...Jujitsu etc. This is not JKD as Bruce taught it. I also trained with Sifu Larry Hartsell in the eighties..same thing. Junfan Gung Fu is where you will find trapping. this is what Bruce called it in the Seattle years..it was not JKD.

I am currently an apprentice under Sifu Ted Wong for the past three years and I have a school here in La. I can assure you that he does NOT TEACH TRAPPING. He will show it only for historical purposes. It is not taught as JKD. I teach trapping in my school but I call it WING CHUN as he does.

Bruce pretty much abandoned trapping durring the Oakland years and totally abandoned it durring the LA years and did not teach it. It was not taught as JKD. Only durring Bruce's early years before he ever coined the word JKD and before the Wong Jack Man fight in Oakland did he teach trapping. Oakland is where JKD was born...trapping died there.

BTW Richard Bustillo was also not certified by Bruce Lee to teach JKD. Richard trained under Sifu Inosanto in LA and that is whom he recieved his ranking. Bruce would drop by every now and then but did not teach very much at all at the LA School. Most of his teaching at that time was done privately at his home where Sifu Ted Wong was a student for six years until Bruce died. Ted was Bruce's last private student. Dan ran the school for Bruce while Bruce taught JKD at home.

There is much you don't know about his saga. Example: the "Tao of Jeet Kune Do" is not the JKD Bible that people think it is..it was just notes that Bruce collected and made over many years but was never meant to be published as a book on JKD..they were just notes right out of other books and thoughts. I have many private home movies, audio tapes and phone conversations between Bruce and his students and it might surprise you as to what Bruce had to say about Guru Inosanto. Again you have to watch what you read and hear.

If you would like to learn the truth about JKD just email me and I can put you in touch with a forum full of Bruce's original students and second generation instuctors...no B.S..no books...no movies...just facts. Warning..the truth hurts.

Though Bruce was a master at trapping he did not drop trapping because he mastered it. Do you want to know why?

Please don't boot me moderators. Star Wars I know nothing about but JKD has been my life. You can only take so much!!

Peace

 

Wow, thanks to the original poster I remember what this thread is about.

There are some pretty good short movies at Kungfou.com. They're in French but that doesn't matter. And the best one of them all has English subtitles : Forest Gun. I highly recommend this one.

 

Very interesting Juanfanman. I must admit that I was under the impression that Dan Inosanto was Bruce's right hand. If my memory serves me correct it was Inosanto that introduced Bruce to many of the training equipment that later became a mainstay of JKD training. I was also under the impression that Inosanto was the only man that Bruce felt was capable to teach JKD before his untimely death.

I had heard of Taky Kimura and Ted Wong before but did not know anything about them. I have also read the book "Jeet Kune Do: Entering to Trapping to Grappling" by Larry Hartsel, so I know his background. I do not understand why you would say that trapping is not a part of JKD.

The basic philosophies of JKD stem from the concept that the system is made to fit the person not the person be made to fit the system. As I see it, Mr. Inosanto teaches many such martial arts systems to his students to give them a well rounded education. JKD teaches that a man should hack away the non-essentials and that there is no such thing as 'The true Bruce Lee' form in JKD, because the system that worked for one man is not the system that will work for another. Bruce Lee also taught his students many different martial arts durring his tenure in this life just as it seems Dan is doing now.

My point in this post is not to question your motives because you indeed seem to be genuine in your thought. Also I do not doubt that you would be able to devestate me in a fight due to your aparent wealth of experience. However, I do question your over-ridding philiosophies and how you view Jeet Kune Do and to a larger extent the martial way.