The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Go on.
However, my interest in them is almost purely for choreography, and I think you'll find that no-one is as good as Yuen Woo Ping within the industry.
Crouching Tiger had a good story, fine acting from the whole cast it looked and was directed beautifully and the choreography was amazing! Very intricate details to it, it really blew me away, the running up walls and jumping to and from rooftops wasn't perfect, but it had a very real feel of physics to it in some parts that were v. impressive!
You can keep your
Bruce punch man, man fall over. Bruce kick other man into pile of boxes.
It's dull.
which made the plots poor, yes but the fact is c.t.h.d is not as good as everyone says
anyway i think its the fact im a big kung fu/martial art films fan and have seen more of these type of films than any otherto be the reason i dont like crouching tiger hidden dragon.
prhaps if id have seen only a few bruce lee films that i may have liked crouchin tiger... but ive seen over 100 other kung fu films that r better.
if u dont believe me go and buy any film directed by Tsui Hark
> Crouching Tiger is a supremely choreagraphed and directed >Chinese Fairy tale. It
> does not have a standard kung fu film plot at all. The >themes may have been
> addressed before but this is handled with a little more >thought and
> tenderness.
>Standard Kung fu plot is young boy's family/ master gets >killed.
> Old man teaches boy kung fu, boy avenges family/ master.
>Thats not what
> happens in Crouching Tiger at all.
**thats the plot for a jean claude van dam film or sumthin... im talkin bout the classic kung fu films from the 70's like ghost in the shell (not animated), challenge of the masters, prey death comes quickly and ZU**
>Anyone who didn't enjoy this film off
> clearly didn't understand it! (Or just didn't like it I >suppose?)
**i understood it fully, what i dont understand is how everyone says it brilliant??**
>Bruce Lee -
> OK could actually fight, did all his own stunts etc etc. >But his films are
> ultimately very weak. They have the most standard of kung >fu film plots and are
> no better than any other middle of the road action film, >except for the fact
> that Lee can fight.
>His films are roughly the standard of Steven Segal action
> films. At best they entertain, at worst they are just >plain boring.
**u narrow minded simple man**
Standard Kung fu plot is young boy's family/ master gets killed. Old man teaches boy kung fu, boy avenges family/ master.
Thats not what happens in Crouching Tiger at all.
Anyone who didn't enjoy this film off clearly didn't understand it! (Or just didn't like it I suppose?)
Bruce Lee - OK could actually fight, did all his own stunts etc etc. But his films are ultimately very weak. They have the most standard of kung fu film plots and are no better than any other middle of the road action film, except for the fact that Lee can fight.
His films are roughly the standard of Steven Segal action films. At best they entertain, at worst they are just plain boring.
If you ask me Enter the Dragon is no better than Marked for death (both of which I enjoyed, but they were nothing special)
anyway... this film was number 18 in the all time top 100 films ???? how can this be, bruce lee's enter the dragon was number 86 or sumthin stoopid HELLO PEOPLE...
oh a C.T.H.D was voted better that 19. Citizen Kane and 20. raging bull.... has the british public turned into bungling nincompoops???
and for that comment of it was fighting with flying and swords so it was different... bruce lee also did fights with and against weapons. he uses knunchucks in enter the dragon for a start.
ok maybe the film isnt rubbish as i first said... its just not as good as everyone says it is.