Thundertijo asked me for some kung fu cinema related documentaries so I thought I’d post some…
All links lead to You Tube…
Red Trousers - A documentary focusing on the Hong Kong stunt industry.
Top Fighter 2 - A great documentary about the women of Asian action cinema.
The Art of Action: Martial Arts in the Movies - A pretty decent look at the history of kung fu cinema. Narrated by Samuel L. Jackson for some reason.
Fists of Fire - A rare 70’s documentary about the Shaw Brothers studios. Some GREAT behind the scenes footage.
Jackie Chan’s My Stunts - A cheesy but genuinely interesting look at Jackie’s style of kung fu cinema and the gimmicks he uses.
Miscellaneous documentary on kung fu cinema - The voice over is in English but, unfortunately, the subtitles aren’t.
The Best of the Martial Arts Films - Narrated by John Saxon and the first ever kung fu cinema documentary I saw. This really influenced my love of the genre. Unfortunately the picture is horrendous the sound only comes from the right channel. Fantastic watch though as it has clips from some of the greatest kung fu films ever…and some rare ones.
I hope this post helps. Enjoy!
reblogging this for future reference by myself…. I’ve seen The Art of Action and it’s alright. I really want to watch Red Trousers and Top Fighter 2 though.
These “free men” say they were inspired by the gangsters in the movies, though they admit they certainly perfected upon their models. They talk of the power they and others see in those films, the “sadistic” (another word they like to repeat) quality that they have always wanted to emulate in their careers, and certainly got a chance to, half a century ago. Their case for linking their fictional models to the massacres is somewhat shaky though: They speak of having looked up to the Godfather trilogy and Scarface when they were young men who individually strangled dozens of alleged reds with wires in dirty, cramped rooms. But of course those films appeared well after 1965. It is clear then that we can’t rely on their claims that film (particularly American film) had any proximate relation on their behavior. What the information that is presented shows is less the causal power of movies to inspire violence than their ability to make usable generalities that, sponge-like, can absorb already existing threatening material within the self, within a society as whole. Inside the boundaries set by the narrative and stylistic conventions of U.S. commercial filmmaking, formed by a counter-revolutionary settler society, there is little natural space for radicalism and subaltern voices, but plenty of room for preening, emotionless displays of violence. The paramilitaries can hide the horrific content of their deeds in this foreign garb, provided by the same empire, so distant yet so intimately close, they did sterling service for in their youth. In the process, the Indonesian gangsters signal to us, and to themselves, their participation in an international society, a borderless community of imagination: The one stuffed with macho, yet capriciously sappy, haute-lumpens, and gun-slingers who manage to be both authoritarian and lawlessly cruel at the same time. The clowning around of the subjects with brutality, their knowing asides about movie storytelling, are the familiar gestures of fan boys anywhere. These old men are not the blood thirsty zealots of some alien creed, but fellow consumers, wired on the same grid as we are.