>> ^Payback:

>> ^Ryjkyj:
That wouldn't work in a real street fight.

It didn't work here, either.


I've read that flashy kicks rarely work in fights so what the fuck was he thinking? I wonder how they wrote the result up...

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

That wouldn't work in a real street fight.


It didn't work here, either.

>> ^LarsaruS:

Looks like kickboxing to me and not MMA. They are wearing boxing gloves and not MMA gloves.

Sport of the future.

>> ^Sepacore:

I can't figure out what that guy was thinking, trying to jump out and kick like that without preparing for the landing.. maybe he thought he was going to hover in the air after his mighty kick.


He may have been expecting to connect, and thus get a better landing (lol?)

Oopsy. I'm not a fan of either, clearly.

I just thought this was funny.

I'm going to leave it as is, so that my ignorance can be part of the fun.

Fail fail!


In reply to this comment by LarsaruS:
Looks like kickboxing to me and not MMA. They are wearing boxing gloves and not MMA gloves.

>> ^Jinx:

I did a little Ju Jitsu. I'd expect the throws would be completely useless in a confined space. The knowledge of how to escape a choke hold or how to effectively disarm an opponent would probably be quite useful though, as would arm locks etc. Even comprehensive martial arts training can only do so much and I imagine when you have no room to move then brute force and weight advantage matters more.
The fact they chose Wing Chun seems to me to have more to do with PR than safety. Its a elegant martial art and it fits the image, but I wonder if there are simple more effective techniques that would probably give them better self defence.


Maybe Krav Maga? Bruce Lee did ok with his take on Wing Chun.

I did a little Ju Jitsu. I'd expect the throws would be completely useless in a confined space. The knowledge of how to escape a choke hold or how to effectively disarm an opponent would probably be quite useful though, as would arm locks etc. Even comprehensive martial arts training can only do so much and I imagine when you have no room to move then brute force and weight advantage matters more.

The fact they chose Wing Chun seems to me to have more to do with PR than safety. Its a elegant martial art and it fits the image, but I wonder if there are simple more effective techniques that would probably give them better self defence.

I have a friend who was well trained in Wing Chun (male) and although yes there is some legitimacy in regards to balance, center line etc, the reality was that he was mostly effective due to the distribution of his mass/weight and often only against those who couldn't fight or more specifically didn't know how to defend.

I don't see much mass in these hostesses and given my experience, I don't believe they would be reliably effective against most decent sized untrained male opponents with this style alone, especially when the situation gets to the floor as most aggressive interactions inevitably do.

To provide a comparison, one of my friends has trained in Karate since he was 6 years old, went on to Tae Kwon Do, Boxing, a few others, then heavily into Mixed Martial Arts about 8 years ago and now trains with professional MMA fighters. As far back as a decade ago my Wing Chun (no other martial arts) friend couldn't do shit to him if his life depended on it.

Why?
Wing Chun focuses on blocking and controlling your opponents movements with pressure points and shifting your opponents weight, and this really doesn't cut it in real situations when your opponent isn't trying to hug you into submission, or when a punch just needs to slip though and connect with the base of your chin for a KO, or a lucky hit that simply takes you to the ground.

Now, I'm not saying this idea is completely dangerously delusional, i think it's a good idea in principle to train airline staff including pilots, but feel they are doing it less than effectively as they could.

The point I'm making is that any 1 martial arts is simply not effectively reliable in most confrontational situations due to most/all martial arts having a fair bit of bullshit inter-weaved with legitimate capabilities.

** If airlines are going to train/encourage hostesses to intervene with dangerous individuals they should be teaching the genuinely proven to be effective portions of various martial arts.. to which Wing Chun would play a role imo for upright close combat, but also focusing on some aspects of Judo for take-downs and take-down-defense & Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for when the shit hits the mat, which are all great arts for females and males alike as technique is the key and an individuals power isn't a primary focus for any of these.

Good on them for taking the initiative.

A fair summary, though I should point out that I was trying to claim that you implied there was no craft or artistry to The Raid (with your unfair Ass comparison), not Ebert.

I think we've beaten this dead horse to a pulp at this point, but I'd like to also point out that, though you may not be able to achieve transcendence from a martial arts film, I think it can have other pleasures that are equally as valid. And I'm not saying that all you want is transcendence from a film, but obviously you're placing more value on it with your comparison.

As I said before, I think that a film whose sole objective is pure entertainment can have just as much value as a film whose ambitions are more weighty. A movie like, say, Singin' in the Rain's sole purpose is to put a smile on your face. The characters aren't particularly deep, nor is the romance anything that hasn't been done a million times before. But it's a classic, and rightfully so, because it's really well made, the dance numbers are inventive, the performers are all very charismatic, and the songs are catchy. It's a very fun movie, and there's not much more to it than that, and that's okay.

I personally think that there is a lot of pleasure to be had from a really well-executed, complexly choreographed fight scene. You disagree. But that's fine; art is subjective. It would be pretty boring if we all agreed on everything.

And yes, I think The Raid is art.

Preamble: Much as I hate going through these sorts of exercises, they are sometimes necessary, particularly when a thread has gotten large. People forget what they're responding to; what the topic really is at the time they're responding, leaps of logic, etc. One thing's certain about these summaries: they're always helpful. <- Yes, that's a boast.
1. I posted some quotes from Roger Ebert's review (and blog) that I thought captured my own feelings about The Raid, including a brash comparison to the joke movie Ass featured in Mike Judge's hilarious flick Idiocracy.

2. I get dressed down by Sarzy for said comparison. Sarzy also claims Ebert said there was no craft or artistry to The Raid (which he never actually said, but never mind) and that The Raid is a martial arts milestone.

3. ChaosEngine makes an amusing ad populum argument and later makes a strong case for the merit of terse storytelling and inference of story elements.

4. I ask Sarzy why The Raid is a milestone.

5. Sarzy responds with many heartfelt testimonials by sympathetic reviewers, personal opinions, and lauds its choreography and direction.

6. I excise all the subjective-slanted testimony and focus on what is demonstrably true about The Raid: it was choreographed and directed with great care. I point out that without context (story), conflict is without meaning.

7. ChaosEngine gives it one last try with another amusing post about inference of story elements on the part of the viewer and indirectly calls me a prick. Classy!

8. I respond to ChaosEngine by inferring a wonderful storyline to Ass, instantly making it one of the best joke movies I'd ever watched.

9. Sarzy points out that plenty of other genres of film are short on story. The best examples are the "meditative" styles featured in art houses and the like.

10. I respond to Sarzy's excellent point by citing other possible gains (transcendence) by watching these "meditative" style pictures, gains that are not possible (in my opinion) with martial arts pictures. I remind him that I am responding to his point with, and I quote, "...I am merely responding to your point about the role of story."

11. Despite my reminder, Sarzy erroneously concludes that every film I see must transcend me to another plane even though all I was doing was attempting to shoot a hole in Sarzy's point about other films that are loose on story.

And that pretty much brings us up to date.

But do you see how helpful these summaries can be? They're my little innovation. You internet kids and your short attention spans made its creation a necessity.

Well, your complaint in this quote seemed to solely be that The Raid wasn't transcendental enough. I wasn't trying to be hyperbolic. Sorry if I misunderstood. I do know people for whom mere entertainment isn't enough when watching a film; from the way you were talking, I thought you were one of those people.

"Those slow-paced films can be downright transcendental if you're in the right frame of mind. I honestly can't ever see myself transcending anything while watching a martial arts flick. The story may be just as threadbare in each type of film but to my way of thinking, the meditative style brings more to the table by not only asking more of the audience but creating a setting where you can think about what you're watching while you watch. The Raid didn't involve me in that way. It didn't ask a thing of me. It just said, "here I am, no apologies, enjoy." Again, I am merely responding to your point about the role of story."

>> ^shuac:

>> ^Sarzy:
Well, look, if you're hoping for a transcendental experience with every film you see, then I can see why The Raid (and martial arts films in general) wouldn't exactly be your cup of tea.


Is that really what you think? Hmm, I kinda felt hyperbole was beneath you, Sarz. We were doing so well too. I'm disappointed.

This movie was great. Fight scenes were fast, very well choreographed and often very brutal; the heroes are definitely not afraid to use weapons. I was also surprised that the story and acting were quite good, well above average for your typical martial arts movie. Great movie, there

>> ^Sarzy:

Well, look, if you're hoping for a transcendental experience with every film you see, then I can see why The Raid (and martial arts films in general) wouldn't exactly be your cup of tea.



Is that really what you think? Hmm, I kinda felt hyperbole was beneath you, Sarz. We were doing so well too. I'm disappointed.

Well, look, if you're hoping for a transcendental experience with every film you see, then I can see why The Raid (and martial arts films in general) wouldn't exactly be your cup of tea. Personally, I loved The Raid because it was an awesome piece of kickassery, and having watched enough awful action films, I know how hard this can be to pull off, and to pull off well. But then, I don't think there's anything wrong with a film that says "here I am, no apologies, enjoy." I like cerebral films as much as the next guy, but every now and then you just want to watch people get punched and kicked in the head. There's something admirable about a genre film that knows exactly what it is, and succeeds almost entirely on a visceral level.

>> ^shuac:

Yes, films can work for many different reasons. The number of reasons they can fail make the scales balance out nicely.
In case you haven't pinned it down yet, martial arts is not a favorite genre of mine. It's down there with animation and musicals. Despite this, I have seen films from each of these genres and enjoyed some of them.
I've never heard of the directors you mentioned but I can appreciate a meditative style. I didn't dislike Gus Van Sant's Gerry from years back, although I can't say I enjoyed it exactly. That was shot in the style you mentioned, I believe. So yes, I'm with you.
But if you expect me to meditate during the Raid, then I'm going to need more hard drugs. <- relax, this was a joke, I understand what you're saying about the role of story in the two kinds of films.
Jokes aside, however, I would respond to that point with this: which type of limited-story film allows for real-time reflection? The wall-to-wall actioner? Or an Andrey Tarkovskiy flick? Those slow-paced films can be downright transcendental if you're in the right frame of mind. I honestly can't ever see myself transcending anything while watching a martial arts flick. The story may be just as threadbare in each type of film but to my way of thinking, the meditative style brings more to the table by not only asking more of the audience but creating a setting where you can think about what you're watching while you watch. The Raid didn't involve me in that way. It didn't ask a thing of me. It just said, "here I am, no apologies, enjoy." Again, I am merely responding to your point about the role of story.
As far as my judgement of directors go, I wasn't really going there in my comments about The Raid. I was taking about the film only. If Bela Tarr or Apichatpong Weerasethakul (gesundheit!) made this film or that film, I'll only be able to say if the film was successful after I've watched it. If a director makes a film and it says what (s)he wants it to say and people see it and have a reaction...then that director is successful.
Despite what you may think, I do not have a checklist of things all good films must have before I declare them a success. Film is far too complex to attempt to codify all the things that make it good or bad.