Taikudo-ka Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 C'mon Don, everyone knows you should hold a gun sideways, don't bother aiming, and that recoil only affects little old ladies... Sword fights are even worse. It all looks good until you realize that they are obviously just whacking at each others swords. How many movies have you seen where the hero blocks a blow holding the sword rigid with the sharp edge out, clashing with the opponents blade. Great way to ruin your blade... not good for much else. But Don has a point. Movies are all fake anyway. Why do we expect each martial action hero to be a "real" master? What other actor, apart from the "martial arts hero" is actually expected to be as good (if not better) off screen than on? Yet no-one cares that Pamela Anderson couldn't even complete the fitness requirement to be a surf lifeguard, let alone really save a drowning swimmer. (well, perhaps as a plastic life-raft ) KarateForums.com - Sempai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eye of the Tiger Posted July 9, 2002 Author Share Posted July 9, 2002 Don't forget Jean Claude Van Damme will be on tonight on channel 5 at 9pm in 'No where to run' looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitseach Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Yeah but isn't it a pity he's such a bloody awful actor? Beaten into second place by the execrable acting skills of Steven Seagal. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~My karma will run over your dogma~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eye of the Tiger Posted July 10, 2002 Author Share Posted July 10, 2002 I've always noticed something in Van Damme films and Seagul's. Van Damme always has to get beaten up real bad at the end of every film, and almost always has to train to beat someone up, and then gets beat up and then suddenly beats the hell out of the other guy and always finishes with a bad ending. I don't think I have ever seen seagul take one hit in the movies. he is always in control of every singke fight so theres no surprises and you know nothing is going to happen to him. If they mixed the 2 films up they would have a perfect film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Gwinn Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 True. Van Damme could do with getting his butt kicked a little less. Most of his characters would be victorious but dain bramaged in real life. I hope I didn't come off as insulting above. I didn't mean I think people on this board are being unreasonable to ask the question. I've just heard too many gunshop commandos in my time. Too many people figure that if a famous actor who claims to be a black belt gets beaten up (like when a biker lit Van Damme up in a bar that time) then the art is worthless and fake. Well, DUH. It's an actor. He might not know anything about the art he claims to be a master in. ____________________________________* Ignorant Taekwondo beginner.http://www.thefiringline.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eye of the Tiger Posted July 10, 2002 Author Share Posted July 10, 2002 Whats this about Jean Claude in a bar? Is this related to this thing someone on this forum was saying about van Damme doing something in this bar and think it was Chuck Zito that punched him or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Gwinn Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Yeah, I think it was Zito. He was president of a bike gang--Hell's Angels? Of course, he was also a very good boxer and kickboxer in his own right. There's also the story of Gene Lebell chocking him out (or was that Seagal? I can't keep them all straight.) That never quite made sense to me either--how many martial artists at any level could have kept Gene Lebell from sneaking up and applying a choke from behind? ____________________________________* Ignorant Taekwondo beginner.http://www.thefiringline.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts