I am by no means a cutty stabby person, but after this I looked around a bit. This is basically kendo: ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMxlqayAwG8&feature=related ) and you are right, it doesn't look like this at all.
What these guys are doing is called kenjutsu ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIxt3Zd6K0k ) which seems to be a whole other thing (kinda like comparing judo to karate). When you check out more of that kenjutsu stuff it all of a sudden looks a lot more "realistic".

Also, I am pretty sure that standing with your guard completely down and just moving your shoulders is probably not a valid sword fighting technique, but maybe this guy is just so bad-ass he doesn't care.

The stances employed according to far more geeky interweb friends is something like "Tamiya-ryu" or "Jigen-ryu" (somewhere between the late 15th and 16th century) and it actually involves mostly diagonal/vertical slices to the torso to try and kill your opponent in one blow. The goal was pretty much always to hit the enemy's throat and failing that slice the opponent in an up to down diagonal motion while denying your opponent to do the same.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

I have the solution to the US's gun problems: ban guns.
BUT BUT BUT the 2nd amendment! Ah, but the second amendment say people are allowed to keep their arms. No-one is proposing mass amputations (as if the health system could manage it!).
Oh, that's not what "arms" means?
Fine, solution 2.0: still banning guns but everyone gets a sword.
Seriously, this is not as crazy as it sounds.
1. It's hard to use a sword well. People will have to train with it for years. This kind of training builds character and discipline.
2. Swords are awesome.
3. It's possible to defend yourself using a sword, but pretty hard to hold up a bank with one.
4. Gun fights are boring, sword fights are epic.


ChaosEngine | Free Trenchcoats 2016!!!

Nah, it would never work. You know, openly carrying a sword is illegal!

>> ^ChaosEngine:

(...)Fine, solution 2.0: still banning guns but everyone gets a sword.
Seriously, this is not as crazy as it sounds.
1. It's hard to use a sword well. People will have to train with it for years. This kind of training builds character and discipline.
2. Swords are awesome.
3. It's possible to defend yourself using a sword, but pretty hard to hold up a bank with one.
4. Gun fights are boring, sword fights are epic.

I saw this as an ad while looking for some other video... and forgot what I was looking for. First skippable ad I didn't skip.


I'm a little confused by the guy going all Neo with the swords (on the marble staircase, no less), but hey, who doesn't love a good 1 on 10 sword fight?

Sword fight.

^ I do 3 point landings because my right leg is fucked up. Unfortunately I always look cliche when I jump off shit. Also, although parkour does the proper distribution, 3 point landings are more natural without the training to do so. Therefore, although the 3 point landing isn't the best method, it's the most natural so I can't see this as any more cliche than having a parry in a sword fight.

Criticism of this is pretty *shrug* worthy.

>> ^daxgaz:

i would like to see the sword fighting choreography that could hold up to this level of scrutiny.

Any choreography that would involve the defender to actually have to block/dodge the attacking sword would do.

Anyway - the Jedi, with lousy lightsabre skills, are still more dangerous than the chronically myopic stormtroopers.

i would like to see the sword fighting choreography that could hold up to this level of scrutiny.

I remember in the theater watching that fight and my jaw dropped. Such horrid choreography, all about flair and swinging a sword around like jackasses. None of the finesse, the emotional impact in every swing or the shear intensity of the original trilogy.

On that subject, RIP Bob Anderson. We'll never see good sword fighting in movies ever again now that you're gone.

>> ^kronosposeidon:

Tim Roth was such an excellent baddie in this film. You SO wanted Rob Roy to dice him up like Hannibal Lecter.


This might be the best sword-fight ever captured on film. Certainly is my favorite.

Interesting you bring up Hannibal Lecter. Brian Cox (who was in Rob Roy) was the original, and still the best actor to play the role in "Manhunter" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091474/. His Hannibal Lecktor was menacing and chilling- much more so than Anthony Hopkins in my opinion. Tom Noonan as the serial killer "The Tooth Fairy" was positively terrifying and utterly convincing.

Now, as for Videosift's very own crazed killer, I wonder how @choggie is doing these days?

*promote

awesome, I would 'sword fight' with Elijah any day.

I miss the guttural nature of Schwarzeneggers accent. I underestimated how much it lent to the feeling of being in a different world in the original film.

This is also not that gritty. It's polished and well-produced, with flashy sword fighting and martial arts techniques, which feel out of place. Blood and sex does not make a gritty film.

A gritty film would capture the raw nature of a real-life struggle. Not some artful dance of blades or skill in a swordfight, as much as two out-of-breath, near death men, both covered in their own blood, one missing his sword arm and only holding a shield to defend from the man in front of him, who's scalp and shoulder muscles he exposed a moment earlier with a near-missed strike, and still he manages to be victorious by spitting a mouthful of dirt into his opponents eyes, and stomping him to death on the neck.

I'm still interested to see what this will be like, but this actually reduced my interest level.

>> ^Shepppard:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Xaielao" title="member since March 13th, 2009" class="profilelink">Xaielao
Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're the only one who thinks the old battles were better. The old battles were slow.. and that MADE them unrealistic.
In a typical swordfight, I'm pretty sure you're not gonna hit 3 times in 5 seconds and stop. And I can probably back the rest of that up with Lore.
Despite being "The Chosen One", Luke was only trained when he was older. Yoda came close to showing off a jedi's true potential by lifting the X-wing out of the marsh, but at that point he was old, and likely hadn't used the force for ages since Luke had appeared.
The Jedi we see in the prequel trilogy had been raised since they were insanely young (Younger then the 9 year old Anakin, because someone even says "He's too old.") and whenever you see someone fighting they're not just a run-of-the-mill jedi, it's typically someone from the council, essentially, the cream of the crop.
And.. just on a last little rant about the swordplay.. they're Jedi. Again, people trained since they were extremely young to use the force as a guide. Qui gon Jin at one point even says something about "He can see glimpses of the future, it's a jedi trait." which again, is something that happens in battle making the fights faster and more epic. Jedi are essentially a partial ripoff of samurai anyway.. and if you don't think sword fighting can be that fast and action packed, watch a couple good Kendo matches.



I may be the only one (though I sometimes doubt that hehe, but I must disagree about the saber battles in the original. They were choreographed by Bob Anderson, one of the greatest holywood sword trainers ever. The guy is behind literally every major action movie with sword fighting in them from Star Wars to The Lord of the Rings, and Pirates of the Caribbean to Highlander. The saber fights are slow I'll give you that, but they were slow for a reason. As I said they were choreographed in such a way that you could almost feel the battle of wills behind the sabers themselves.