Comics, Films, Kung Fu, and Whatever the Hell Else

A video I just put together.

2011-01-20T14:50:00.000-08:00

A lazy editing exercise; done out of a mixture of boredom, interest, and a need to edit something.

Comics I just got (9/16/10)

2010-09-16T15:23:00.000-07:00

"What If? Daredevil VS. Elektra" = A decent little one-shot. The main story is so-so (What if Matt Murdock died saving Elektra and her dad in college? According to these cats: he gets ressurected by the Hand, Elektra becomes a SHIELD agent, the Hand destroys SHIELD, Elektra gets trained by Stick, and then Elektra and the undead Murdock fight.), but the cover (referencing Frank Miller's work) and the funny bits on the last couple pages bring the book home.

"Punisher: Year One" = Pretty good trade. Collecting the mini-series from 94/95, it's a worthwhile book that heavily influenced the 2004 film version (which I think is a highly underrated film). Unfortunately, just about all the action is in the last chapter, but it's still worth reading.

"Batman Beyond" #4 = Ugh. This book isn't exactly getting any better, with a pretty unbeliavable/lousy "twist" ending. Still, I do like seeing more stuff in the Beyond era. Makes me want more of the cartoon.

"Marvel Universe VS. The Punisher" #4 = This is the best issue of the mini-series. The way the conclusion of this story is written is a great improvement over the writing in the previous issues. Parlov's art, though cartoony, still seems befitting of the Punisher to me. I highly recommend this mini for any Punisher fans, if for no other reason than this excellent final issue.

"Batman" #703 = Perhaps the most enjoyable issue of "Batman" I've read in years. Fabian Nicieza and Cliff Richards deliver a well-written, well-drawn issue in which Dick, Damien, and Alfred display just the right amount of skill, heart, and optimism.

"Serenity" #1 = Go out and spend a buck on this reprint of the first issue of "Those Left Behind". Good stuff.

Comics I just got (9/1/2010)

2010-09-02T13:52:00.000-07:00

Marvel Universe vs. The Punisher #1-3 = This is a decent read. It's kinda like "The Punisher" meets "I am Legend" meets any other post-apocalyptic story. The comparisons being made to "Marvel Zombies" are not unfounded. The characterization of The Punisher is not always so great (certainly no Garth Ennis, not even Jason Aaron). He just keeps saying "I'm a shooter. I'm just a shooter. I'm not fighting FOR anything. I'm just a shooter. Padre. Padre. Padre." Goran Parlov's art is enjoyable, though.

Wolverine #1 = meh. The writing's kinda decent, but not as good as most of Jason Aaron's stuff. The whole "Hell" thing is stupid to me. The best part of the comic is the Silver Samurai back-up story.

Shadowland: Elektra = This is a pretty good one-shot. For the most part, I enjoy how Elektra is portrayed, but something is lost in the combination of the art and writing. I can't really describe it.

Shadowland #3 = meh. I'm still not really enjoying the series. The Punisher isn't used enough, even though he's on the cover. The only other thing I can remember reading by Andy Diggle is "Green Arrow: Year One" and I mostly enjoy that story. This comic, though...

Comic I just got (8/25/10)

2010-08-25T16:55:00.000-07:00

Batman #702

Pretty good. I'm enjoying Grant Morrison's writing in "R.I.P. -- The Missing Chapter" a lot more than in "R.I.P." itself. "Return of Bruce Wayne" is frustrating me a bit, but these last couple issues of the monthly "Batman" have been enjoyable. I'm actually getting more and more interested in Bruce's inevitable return.

Comics I just got (8/21/10)

2010-08-21T18:50:00.000-07:00

Batman Beyond #3 = I'm pretty much enjoying this mini-series so far. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing where it may be going.

Green Lantern #29 Secret Origin Part 1 = This one was just given to me by my friend at the comic shop. It's decent.

Deadpool #26 = Also just given to me. It's pretty good; a nice little look at Deadpool's past. Also, certain nerds should be pleased at Ghost Rider and Deadpool fighting.

Wolverine: Weapon X #16 = A pretty good issue. It features Logan mourning for Nightcrawler. Jason Aaron takes a nice little look at their relationship.

New Avengers #3 = Also just given to me. It's okay. I think that the best aspect of Bendis' current Avengers comics is the text "History of Avengers" feature in the back.

Ultimate Comics Spider-Man #13 = A good issue. This series has become hit-or-miss, but this time Bendis hits. The Ultimate Chameleon(s) is/are interesting. Seeing Peter and JJJ taken hostage together is interesting.

Invincible #1= Also given to me. This is great. I definitely want to check out the series now. If you haven't read it, just shell out the $1.00 for it.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 8: Riley = Another freebie for me. Meh. The dialogue is well-written, but since I don't read the series, I have no idea what the fuck is going on.

Aliens vs. Predator #1= Another gimme. This is a fun comic from 1990. It's effective in that it makes me want to read more. Once again, drop a buck to check it out next time you're in a comic shop.

Simpsons Comics #169= A good issue written by Chuck Dixon. It's quite funny, with a funny "Single White Female" reference, a couple of lines that could be on the TV show, and a last-minute appearance by Silent Bob.

Comic Book Guy: The Comic Book #2= This mini-series is great so far. This issue is very funny and very referential. Stan "The Man" Lee makes an appearance. The issue also briefly takes a nice little jab at film directors, particularly Kevin Smith, Quentin Tarantino, Steven Spielberg, and George Lucas.

a quick post about "The Dark Knight"

2010-08-18T16:03:00.000-07:00

Recently, a friend of mine asked me whether or not I thought the ideas presented in "The Dark Knight" could be separated from the source material. In response, I quickly drafted this messy little essay of sorts.
-----------------------------------------------------

Can the ideas presented in a Batman film be divorced from the source material?

Short answer: Yes.
However, the question should be asked and seriously discussed. Batman is a cultural icon that has persisted in the public conscious for seventy years now. Just as any film that depicts Jesus Christ is not interpreted solely in terms of what the film itself presents but also what is written in the Bible and what many centuries’ worth of theologians, any film that depicts Batman is typically interpreted not only in terms of what such a film presents but also what has been depicted in other media.
While the typical filmgoer is not all that knowledgeable about comic books, Batman is one of those characters that have permeated the overall modern popular culture. Because of radio and movie serials, the 1960s TV show, wildly popular movies, countless animated series, action figures, and video games, even someone who has never read a comic book likely knows who Bruce Wayne is and why he is Batman. Because of his popularity and 70-year existence, the premise behind Batman and (at least) some minor details are known by just about every man, woman, and child in the “civilized” world.
Because Batman is such a well-known character, it might be unlikely that a viewer would initially watch a particular Batman movie (for the purposes of this piece, I’ll focus on “The Dark Knight”) without making associations with prior interpretations of Batman. However, it is not necessary that a viewer discuss “The Dark Knight” while associating with previous incarnations of the characters presented therein. It is simply a lot easier to do so, and such associations allow for more discussion.
One can divorce the ideas presented in “The Dark Knight” from the source material/character by simply “emptying his teacup”. However, if that answer is too vague/eastern for you, then it may take some extra effort on your part to watch the film with eyes only for the film itself. I admit that I am unable to logically explain exactly by what method one might go about doing such a thing, but I do think that if I am able to do it, then most anyone else should be able to as well. As a lifelong Batman fanatic, perhaps I will naturally be subconsciously biased and never truly able to interpret “The Dark Knight” freely, but I can do my damndest to at least discuss the film without making reference to other Batman-related media (except for “Batman Begins”, which is excluded from such efforts because it is the progenitor of the filmic masterpiece that is the focus of this writing).

Let us look at how the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman is portrayed in the film:
He is a self-proclaimed man with no limits. He keeps moving. He gets bitten, beaten, stabbed, and even shot, yet he continues to fight and run and do all of those things that physically distinguish Batman from lesser mortal men.
He is supposedly incorruptible. Even the Joker believes as much. He cannot be bought, bullied, or even negotiated with. It is interesting that he should be considered incorruptible when he is, in fact, a corruption – of law, societal ethics, and the sense of goodness as “light”. He works outside the law to enforce a sense of justice that is more in keeping with the law than breaking it. He uses methods that many people would not approve of, especially when used by authority figures (i.e., torture, invasion of privacy, blowing up parked cars, etc.). Most people would associate light with a concept of “good”, but here we have a “good guy” who is garbed in black, works at night, and stays mostly in the shadows. Or is he more like the Bat-Signal? A symbol, a beacon, a “light” in the sky or at the end of the tunnel?
In the film, Bruce Wayne/Batman is perhaps driven by more than a sense of simple revenge. The loss of his parents certainly inspire his actions, but he is not as haunted by their deaths as he is in “Begins”. He may be driven by something broader, deeper, more important, and more inherent. However, it is possible that his love of Gotham and his need to protect and clean the city may simply be the manifestation of his psychological need to please his father.
Whatever the reason for his mission, he certainly demonstrates a sense of “tunnel vision”. Like a horse with blinders on, he knows only to move ahead. He sees little besides the mission at hand. He may be somewhat distracted by Rachel Dawes or the Wayne Enterprises’ goings-on, but he is ultimately moving forward as Batman. For this reason, he may be considered something of a narcissist. The world revolves around Batman. Alfred has no life of his own (even beyond the duties of a normal butler, though this is also his choice). Bruce seems to only ever think of Rachel in terms of her relationship with him. Batman’s ego may very well be out of control. He wants to be a symbol, an embodiment of ideals. He cannot simply be a mere mortal.
Is it Bruce Wayne or Batman that displays this narcissism? Are they the same man? They could be two halves of a whole, or the protagonist’s personalities could be representative of an uneven dichotomy. Is Bruce/Batman representative of the duality of man? Is he more representative of a Freudian construct? Perhaps there is a vengeful, idealistic monster that is the superego; there is a misguided, hedonistic playboy that is the id; and the character we see on screen is the ego, balancing the two sides to live in the real world. There may also be the concept presented by Hermann Hesse in “Steppenwolf”-- that there are thousands, if not infinite, different personalities within one person. We may just see a few different amalgams in the different actions of Batman and Bruce Wayne.
In the film, Batman is supposed to represent the victory of good over bad, order over chaos, and Good over Evil. He does not kill the Joker. Instead, he captures him, choosing to let the authorities (the physical manifestation of order) contain him (the physical manifestation of chaos).

I have done my best to look at the subject strictly in terms of the film and the story presented therein. Were I to mention comics, Batman would actually be much more complex and difficult to figure out because of the many different writers who have handled the character over the last 71 years. Sometimes, Batman would be much kinder, or much worse. So, hopefully this can serve as a sufficient enough demonstration that a Batman film can be discussed without bringing up the comic books.

The Expendables

2010-08-13T05:38:00.000-07:00

When I started reading about this movie (seemingly forever ago), I was super fucking excited about it. Stallone writing and directing a mercenary flick to star a bunch of action stars/lesser action actors? Fuck yeah!

Then, the first trailer hit. Still excited!

Then, all of the TV spots and other such promos. Not as excited.

Then, last night, I saw the flick at midnight. Excitement confirmed!

While the film may not live up to the expectations I had when I first heard about this movie being made, it is better than the promos make it out to be. It's exciting and action-packed and often funny. But you really go to see this movie for the actors.

Sylvester Stallone and Jason Statham are great as competitive best friends who look out for each other, bicker, and crack many a joke. Jet Li is great in what is, for him, a rather small role. Dolph Lundgren isn't as good as expected, but still pretty good as the loose cannon of the group. Terry Crews and Randy Couture are sadly underused, but great when they're on screen. Mickey Rourke is his usual amazing self as an ex-Expendable friend.

David Zayas, Eric Roberts, and "Stone Cold" Steve Austin are all good as the bad guys.

And, of course, the cameos by Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger....... pure greatness.

It is somewhat odd to see some headliners taking a backseat. Stallone and Statham have the biggest roles, but it's kind of strange to see Jet Li as a sidekick and Mickey Rourke as a buddy who's only in a couple of scenes.

The action is pretty good, but Stallone's camera work is often too shaky and tight, and the CGI blood/fire/smoke often looks obviously fake. But the fight scenes and some of the more creative deaths are great. Seeing Stallone getting beaten up by Stone Cold, Jet Li and Dolph Lundgren going mano a mano, and Jet Li and Jason Statham double-teaming a bad guy -- these are all wonderful things to behold.

Of course, the real treats are the references. Stallone and Lundgren together again (Rocky IV), Statham and Li reunited (War), Randy Couture talking about his cauliflower ear. The best scene is probably the interaction between Willis, Schwarzenegger, and Stallone. Schwarzenegger and Stallone just go at it with the insulting jokes, and the audience just erupts. I love that a lot of lines are written specifically because of the actors playing the characters.

In case you can't tell, I definitely recommend seeing this movie.

(As an aside note, in a real fight, Dolph Lundgren would probably kick Jet Li's ass. Jet Li could probably kick a lot of guys' asses, but mostly he does flowery, gymnastic wushu, whereas Dolph Lundgren is a giant man who was in the Swedish army and is an experienced practitioner of kyokushin karate.)

Comic books I just got (8/7/10)

2010-08-07T18:39:00.000-07:00

Irredeemable #16 = Pretty good. Lately I think the series has been lacking, but this issue gives me renewed hope.

Shadowland #2 = The series is kinda decent, I guess. I have to say, I don't really believe the direction everything's going. I don't think Daredevil would kill Bullseye, or set up a ninja castle in the middle of Hell's Kitchen. Then again, I have the same problem with comics in general, nowadays (whether it's DC or Marvel, I just feel like the shit going on shouldn't be going on).

Joker's Asylum II: Harley Quinn = It's a pretty fun little one-shot about Harley Quinn on Valentine's Day. She goes crazy and shoots a lot of people and blows a lot of stuff up in order to spend Valentine's Day with her puddin'. My girlfriend described it as "cute".

Jack of Fables vol. 1 = This trade is pretty good. I actually like it even though I'm not so much a fan of "Fables".

Ex Machina vol. 7 = This trade is pretty excellent, of course. It may not be as good as earlier volumes in the series, but it's still quite good.

Religion and Morality

2010-08-07T09:34:00.001-07:00

For many people – perhaps most people – religion and morality are inseparable. There are a great number of people who think of religion as the most important source of ethics and morals. There are even plenty of people who think that religion is, or should be, the only source of ethics and morals. This is a myopic, and rather unfortunate, line of thinking.

The great deal of importance that people have historically attributed to religions has led many, for millennia, to equate morality with adherence to dogmatic dicta. If not killing or stealing prevents some deity from taking a personal, negative interest in one’s life, then it would make sense to simply avoid such transgressions as much as possible. Seemingly for this reason, societies adopted religious codes such as the Ten Commandments as the basis for secular law. A fear of divine punishment can be a powerful motivating factor.

However, moral and ethical laws arguably do not even have their origins in religion. In terms of logic rather than faith, ancient man could see the harm that needless murder and theft could do to the group as a whole. Seeing that certain actions do more harm than good to the village/tribe/clan/what-have-you does not require divine inspiration, but simply rational thinking. Perhaps rational thinkers sought to tell others of the dangers of what we call criminal actions, but their arguments did not jell with the general populace. Instead of trying to spend much time explaining the sociological impact of certain actions, perhaps it was simply easier to say, “If you do this, God will spank you.”

Religion is not a necessary source of morals, certainly. In an organized society with a legal system, it is unnecessary to derive morality from religion. If it is a matter of punishment, parents and other authority figures can simply use the threat of legal recourse for criminal actions. While divine punishment is on a much grander scale, secular punishment is much more tangible, and therefore relevant.

World Religions -- Islam

2010-08-07T09:32:00.001-07:00

See the other World Religions papers for explanation/"disclaimer".
-----------------------------------------------------

What I find most interesting about the reading regarding Islam is the treatment of women. As far as the religious ideals go, women and men are supposed to be equally respected and fairly treated. However, the actual treatment of women in predominantly Muslim societies has been far from what most people would define as respect or equality.

Women in Muslim societies have historically been treated as anything but equal. Harems, veiled faces, polygamy, institutionalized wife-beating, denial of suffrage, and the execution of adulterers are practices that have been common to Muslim societies. While it can be argued that these are practices that were present before the adoption of Islam by Arabic and Persian societies, and that the legal treatment of women actually improved. While the ideals and dicta of Islam allow women the right to divorce, inheritance, and employment, these sadly remain as little more than ideals in modern Islamic societies.

By modern, western thought, Islam is an inherently sexist religion because it is stated that men are in charge of women. The Koran states that Allah made men to excel over women and bear financial burdens, while women are meant to perform motherly and wifely duties. Any religion that dictates specific roles for men and women is, by our modern, more “enlightened” definitions, sexist. Even if it is the word of some almighty god, it is still sexist.

As with many religions, the more abominable practices in Islam are often claimed by more modern practitioners to be aberrant to the fundamental ideals of the religion. While it can be argued that certain things are up to interpretation, and that extremists interpret the religion incorrectly, I think that it says something about the religion itself when so many Muslims can so easily “misinterpret” the fundamentals so as to institutionalize inequality and mistreatment.

World Religions -- Confucianism

2010-08-07T09:30:00.000-07:00

Another little thing I wrote for my brother for his World Religions class. I apologize for the poor writing in these things, as well as any inaccuracies that result from my lack of research.
------------------------------------------------

The thing I find most interesting about Confucianism, especially as it is regarded in the reading, is the fact that its classification as a religion is somewhat debatable. Confucianism may be regarded as a religion because of the importance placed on ritual and ancestor worship. However, ethics, loyalty, and education could be considered more important, thus making Confucianism less a religion and more a philosophy.

It is true that ritual and ancestor worship are staples of Confucianism. While these are common amongst religions, and though they would support the argument that Confucianism is in fact a religion, their inclusion alone is not enough to define Confucianism as a religion. Ancestor worship was not a novel concept when Confucius gained popularity. Chinese folk religion included ancestor worship long before the birth of the famed philosopher. Also, while ritual is often a defining aspect of religion, it is not solely a religious concept. Ritual is important to secular culture. It has often been especially important to education, which is another aspect stressed in Confucianism.

Confucius put great stress on concepts such as ethics, loyalty, education, and respect. One of the most important aspects of Confucianism is the idea that everyone should strive to be a perfect person. These core concepts of Confucianism, taken together, are similar to --if not the same as-- the Greek concept of Virtue. In this sense, Confucianism is in fact not a religion, but a philosophy. It is a school of thought, or an ethical system.

The root of this problem lies in how one defines “religion”. While Confucianism fails as a religion according to a definition held by many western thinkers, teachers, and students, it may not fail according to eastern definitions. This is because eastern thought rarely makes a distinction between philosophy and religion. There is no reason that Confucianism should be any different.

World Religions -- Christianity

2010-08-07T09:21:00.000-07:00

Both my younger brother and I are college students. We go to different universities, though. A while back, my brother was taking a class on World Religions. Knowing that I typically get high marks on essays/papers, he decided to pay me a nominal fee to write some of his World Religions and Literature papers.
Normally, I would be ethically against this practice. However, my brother is a Finance major. He'll never have a real use for writing skills, so I see no reason why he should be forced to pay for classes that make him write such papers. In fact, it shows how right Finance is for him that he used money to delegate labor.
So, I wrote some papers for him. This one (and some to follow) were simple little one-page reactions to readings from the textbook. I hope no one feels insulted by these little writings, but if you do, oh well.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

The thing that I find most interesting about the reading regarding Christianity is the question of the divinity of Jesus. This is arguably the most important central concept of Christianity. The divinity of Jesus is perhaps the aspect of Christianity that, at least in western terms, defines Christianity as its own independent religion. However, as with most religious concepts posited as fact, the divinity of Jesus is quite debatable.

The status of Christianity as its own religion and not simply a sect of Judaism hinges on the idea that Jesus is in fact a deity, and not simply a prophet. Most sects, or “denominations”, of Christianity exhort the worship of Jesus as a god. To most Christians, Jesus is not simply a prophet, but also the son of the Judaic god Jehovah; not simply the son of God, but also God Himself. While this son-of-self status may not sit well with anyone looking for logic in their god, it is typically explained away with an argument for blind faith. While all “facts” presented by any religion are debatable, perhaps none in Christianity is more debatable than the assertion that Jesus was in fact divine -- whether simply the son of God or also God Himself.

Muslims believe that Jesus was a very important prophet, and many Jews can accept Jesus as a man who once existed and happened to be pretty wise. There are even some people who are typically described as Christians who do not in fact worship Jesus, but simply venerate him as a prophet or the son of God. Even some Hindus recognize Jesus as one of many, many gods. While the divinity of Jesus is dubious at best, what is more recognizable as fact is Jesus’ existence. It is generally accepted (even if there is a lack of HARD evidence) as historical fact that a man known as Jesus traveled and preached a particular philosophy and added seemingly novel insights to his interpretation of Judaism. While there is no logical explanation or genuine evidence for his alleged immaculate conception, various miracles, or rise from the dead, it is reasonable to view his execution as the result of political upheaval in a tumultuous land.

Comic books I just got (8/1/10)

2010-08-01T10:42:00.000-07:00

Return of Bruce Wayne #4 = Meh. It saddens me to think that Grant Morrison CAN write exceptionally well, but lately he's been lousy, nonsensical, and just about impossible to follow.

Widening Gyre #6 = Great. Not sure if I like the "twist" ending (actually, "To be continued..."), but still a good read. I'm a fan of Kevin Smith, but his comics have typically been a little lacking. This mini-series shows that he's improving, though.

Batman Beyond #2 = Good. I'm looking forward to seeing where this is going.

Jack of Fables #1 = Intriguing. I'm not a huge "Fables" fan, but this is worth the buck it costs, and it makes me want to buy the trade.

Wolverine: Weapon X #15= A pretty decent ending to a decent storyline.

Wolverine Origins #50 = Pretty good. End of the series. Now I feel like an ass for dropping the regular "Wolverine" monthly title when it became all about Daken (now they're starting over at #1... if I'd kept up, I would have had every issue of the series).

Futurama #50 = Pretty good. Typical, but cool blacklight poster inside!

Simpsons #168 = Pretty good. Funny little takes on mythology (Norse gods, Greek gods, and Superman).

Batman: Under the Red Hood

2010-08-01T10:28:00.001-07:00

The latest movie from DC Animation/Warner Premiere is one of their best. “Under the Red Hood” really elevates the level of quality that we can expect from these little stand-alone flicks. The story is about as compelling as the comic book saga (“Under the Hood”). And it should be, since Judd Winnick wrote both.

Overall, the animation quality and character design are pretty good. The only complaints I have are that Bruce Wayne and Nightwing have terrible haircuts, the animation goes from good cel animation to crappy CG when there are vehicles involved, and the Joker doesn’t really emote when he laughs.

The voice acting is good stuff. Bruce Greenwood does well as Batman, though I think I still would have preferred Kevin Conroy. Neil Patrick Harris is pretty good with Nightwing, though, once again, the original voice actor probably would have been better. John DiMaggio makes for a good Joker, I think. While I love Mark Hamill, I like to occasionally hear a different take on the Clown Prince of Crime. Jensen Ackles shines as Jason Todd/Red Hood. Unfortunately, a lot of the actors in this movie who mostly do live action stuff are in the flick unnecessarily, I think. Many of them are underused.

The fight scenes are fun to watch; especially a particularly rough-and-tumble bout between Batman and Jason Todd towards the end.

I personally think that most comic book characters who “die” should stay dead (otherwise, their deaths are always meaningless), so I would prefer it if Jason Todd was never resurrected. Still, the “Under the Hood” comics make for good reading, and “Under the Red Hood” makes for good watching.

(The DVD is lacking a commentary, which saddens me, but disc 2 has a pretty good “documentary” about Dick Grayson [I’m not sure why they didn’t go with Jason Todd, or all the Robins]. There’s one of the customary “sneak peeks” at the next movie, and I am looking forward to “Superman/Batman: Apocalypse”, which will feature Supergirl and Darkseid.)

(Also, the “Jonah Hex” short on this DVD is excellent. The caliber of actors doing voices for this ten-minute cartoon is perhaps unnecessary, but it’s good stuff and Thomas Jane is great as the eponymous anti-hero. I never bothered to see the recent live-action movie with Josh Brolin and Megan Fox, but I know it can’t have been as good as this short because then it would have been successful.)

36th Chamber of Shaolin and Batman Begins

2010-04-20T17:17:00.000-07:00

Here's a paper I handed in today for my World Cinema Traditions class. The assignment was to compare a foreign film with an American film. After spending weeks racking my brain about what movies I would compare, after a four-hour conversation I had with someone the other day about "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight", I finally knew what I would compare.

The paper's title is "A Couple of Dudes Who Learn How to Kick Ass and Fight Injustice: The 36th Chamber of Shaolin and Batman Begins".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lau Kar Leung’s The 36th Chamber of Shaolin and Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins each tell a story of a young man who removes himself from general society and enters an organization devoted to training and achieving a particular ideal. In both stories, the young man re-enters society in order to fight what he sees to be injustice. While they are united by some common story elements and themes, the two films differ drastically in style and cultural background.

Lau Kar Leung (also known by his Mandarin name, Liu Chia-Liang) directed the 1978 Shaw Bros. classic The 36th Chamber of Shaolin (also known as 36 Chambers of Shaolin and Master Killer). Lau was raised in a kung fu household. Taught from a young age by his father, Lau grew up to be a skilled martial artist. Schooled in the Hung Gar method, Lau eventually found work as an extra and choreographer on films depicting fictional adventures of the style’s most famous practitioner, Chinese folk hero Wong Fei-Hung. Lau parlayed this work into more and better film work, going on to choreograph such classics as the 1967 One-Armed Swordsman and the 1975 Master of the Flying Guillotine. Perhaps his greatest contribution to the history of chop-socky flicks, however, came in 1978 with The 36th Chamber of Shaolin.[i]

Starring Lau’s “martial brother” Gordon Liu (Liu studied under Lau’s father and the two became life-long friends), the film tells the story of San Te, a young man who rebels against the oppressive Manchu government during the Qing Dynasty era. Wounded in a fight after his family and friends are killed, San Te seeks sanctuary at the Shaolin Temple (actually a monastery). There, he asks to be trained in kung fu so that he might take revenge against the evil Manchurians. Though initially rejected, he begins his training by sweeping floors. After a year, his training begins in earnest and he swiftly progresses through the thirty-five chambers at the monastery. After years of training, he returns to general society and attempts to fight the Manchurian soldiers. After taking revenge on his family’s killer, San Te establishes a thirty-sixth chamber at the monastery, in which lay people are taught kung fu so that they can defend themselves against an unjust government.

The film’s depiction of an oppressive, militaristic government is interesting to note in light of the film’s release in 1978. The war in Vietnam had just officially ended in 1975. Many Hong Kong residents had fled the People’s Republic of China. Hong Kong had also suffered under Japanese occupation in the early 1940s. In 1978, Hong Kong was still under British rule. The then-recent history of Hong Kong and the anti-military sentiments popular in western societies combined to influence many kung fu films, in which lone heroes or small teams would fight against oppressive occupying governments or evil invaders. Though common in Hong Kong kung fu films, the RZA (of Wu-Tang Clan fame) points out that the lone hero’s struggle against oppression is a universal theme. [ii]
While the political climate of Southeast Asia may have influenced the story, it’s unlikely that it had any influence on the style of the film. The style of the film is primarily influenced by two things: Lau’s background in the martial arts, and the method by which most Hong Kong films were made at the time. Lau’s kung fu proficiency and background as a choreographer dictated that the film’s primary focus would be the training and the fights. Hong Kong kung fu films are of a different nature than western action films, and the performers and directors often prefer to showcase skill through lengthy fight scenes rather than make action sequences tenser with tight editing. The fight scenes in The 36th Chamber of Shaolin are long, and Lau shows off his and the performers’ skills. Almost as important as the action is the set design. Though not necessarily an accurate representation of the Shaolin monastery in Dengfeng, or the training apparatus contained therein, the temple setting and the various kung fu training set-ups presented in the film are lovingly imaginative and service the story and San Te’s character development.

Aside from Lau’s martial background, the film’s style is partly determined by the “assembly line” method of production of Hong Kong films at the time. A biographer of Bruce Lee writes of the Hong Kong film industry:
"The Hong Kong-based film industry made films the way Detroit made cars: on an assembly line. They could wrap up a production in three days; a big-budget extravaganza might require a week. The Shaw brothers – Runjy, Runme, and Run Run – had almost singlehandedly set up the Hong Kong film industry. Shaw Brothers Studios was a mixture of purpose-built sets and sound stages where everything from pagodas to concentration camps were perched on a windy hillside overlooking Clearwater Bay. Shaw Brothers was the biggest studio outside of Hollywood and Europe, accounting for two-thirds of the “Chinese” films produced in the world. An average of seven features were always in production, while the sound-dubbing rooms were shared on a tight schedule of three shifts daily.
The secret of Shaw studios’ success was a hard-nosed policy geared to speed and economy. Films were shot without sound and, like Italian-made “spaghetti Westerns”, were later dubbed into whatever language was required. The films were often shot without a written script, more or less made up by the crew as they went along and “edited” directly on camera with few retakes. …"[iii]

This method of filmmaking often resulted in pictures that western audiences might think of as lesser in quality. Like most film studios, Shaw Brothers’ primary concern was profit, and the assembly line method worked just fine to that end. Even if Lau had wanted to make a sweeping epic that would take a lot of time and a lot more money, it probably just would not have happened.

Nearly thirty years after Lau Kar Leung and Gordon Liu made The 36th Chamber of Shaolin for Shaw Brothers, Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale made Batman Begins for Warner Brothers. In the film, Bruce Wayne is a child when he witnesses his parents gunned down in an alley. Unable to cope, he eventually runs away from Gotham, traveling the world and winding up in a Bhutanese prison. He is found and recruited by a secret organization devoted to their master’s concept of justice. Wayne is trained in the martial arts and ways of the ninja, but when asked to be an executioner he betrays his master and flees the organization. Returning to Gotham after seven years of absence, he dons a costume and uses high-tech gadgets to fight crime. While he attempts to take down organized crime and fight against the corruption that permeates the city, his master and the secret organization attack Wayne and attempt to devastate Gotham. He fights off the ninja, defeats his master, and saves the city, establishing himself as a symbol and weapon of justice.

The film is directed by Christopher Nolan. Half-British, half-American, Nolan blends different sensibilities when it comes to writing and directing. Batman Begins is a big-budget action movie that is an adaptation of an iconic American comic book character, while Nolan’s previous studio films could be considered psychological thrillers. He was born in England and received most of his education there, but he also spent time during his youth in the United States. Even as a child, he enjoyed making films, and continued to do so through his college years. His work as an independent filmmaker eventually led to his current status as an A-list Hollywood director.[iv]

Batman Begins was released in 2005. The major events affecting America at the time were the war(s) in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the presidential election of 2004. While Nolan was filming in Iceland, England, and Chicago, American soldiers were fighting in the Middle East. In November of 2004, George W. Bush “won” his re-election. Perhaps the period of war and the political landscape influenced the development and success of the film. In the film, Batman does utilize technology that is specifically intended for use by the military (it’s noted that he essentially drives a tank). A part of what Batman is fighting against is the corruption of the city’s government. While those events may have influenced the film, it should be noted that the source material also provided suitable influence. In Frank Miller and David Mazzuchelli’s Batman: Year One (1987), Batman fights against the corruption that infects Gotham City. In Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns (1986), Batman drives a tank-like vehicle and references are made to Ronald Reagan and American military action. In Miller’s The Dark Knight Strikes Again (2002), the government controls the country through fear and the tactical use of the media, with the evil villain Lex Luthor behind it all.

The style of Nolan’s film is drastically different from that of Lau’s. While Lau’s kung fu classic is shot on a shoestring budget with relatively limited movement, Nolan’s big budget Hollywood production features much more movement and aerial shots of the grimy metropolis that is Gotham City. While Lau’s film is sparsely cut so as to show of the martial arts skills of the performers and Lau himself (as well as save time in post-production), Nolan uses much tighter editing in the fight scenes. This style of fight scene is supposed to have a jarring, confusing effect because Batman fights his enemies quickly and with deceptive tactics. While Lau’s color palette is broad, but typical, Batman Begins seems to be dominated by black and orange. Lau’s film is predominantly devoted to the training of San Te in the Shaolin Temple, but Nolan devotes less than a quarter of his film to Wayne’s training in the ninja camp and does not feature nearly as many training methods or apparatus. Also, while Lau tells a fairly straight-forward story, Nolan attempts to explore the psyche of his film’s protagonist by delving into his childhood and searching for what makes a man devote himself to an ideal (and what could possibly drive one to dress up like a bat).

While the films are very different stylistically, they share a great commonality in that they are stories about angry young men who work hard towards the goal of fighting some sort of injustice. San Te wishes to fight an oppressive government and avenge the death of his friends and family. Bruce Wayne at first wants revenge, but when he is robbed of the opportunity, he travels the world in anonymity, not knowing what he wants; he eventually makes it his mission to fight the evils that plague his city. San Te spends years training in the martial arts at a Buddhist monastery, eventually using his skills to take revenge. Bruce Wayne trains in martial arts and tactics with a secret ninja society, returns to Gotham to take down organized crime, and eventually saves his city from imminent destruction by defeating the organization that trained him. At the end of The 36th Chamber of Shaolin, San Te begins to teach kung fu to lay people so that they might rise up against the oppressive government and defend themselves against tyranny. By the end of Batman Begins, Wayne’s alter-ego has become a symbol for justice and he hopes to inspire Gotham citizens to stand up for themselves and eradicate corruption as he wages war on the criminal underbelly. Their journeys are certainly similar, though their intentions and the details differ.

The differences between the two films could be attributed to a number of different factors. One cause for the differences may be the time periods in which the films were made. Technological developments, as well as an increase in the “sophistication” of filmmakers (over time, people have had more access to a greater variety of films, so it stands to reason that filmmakers have a greater potential to make good films since they have an increasing number of films and filmmakers to learn from) could explain the differences between a film from 1978 and another from 2005. Another cause could be related to the cultural differences. While Hong Kong culture has partially been influenced by British culture and both Lau and Nolan would be used to crowded, polluted cities, the vast differences between Chinese and European-American sensibilities should be taken into account. The educations of the filmmakers should also be considered. Nolan is a college graduate, while Lau’s major skill is the kung fu knowledge passed to him from his father. Perhaps most important to consider is the simple fact that the filmmakers are different people. Different people naturally have different tastes, and when you add different time periods and different cultures, two films with similar story elements and themes are still bound to have many differences.

[i] Commentary/special features on DVD. Lau, Kar Leung. The 36th Chamber of Shaolin. Hong Kong: Shaw Brothers (Dragon Dynasty, DVD), 1978 (2007, DVD).
[ii] Commentary/special features on DVD.
[iii] Thomas, Bruce. Bruce Lee: Fighting Spirit. Berkeley, California: Frog, Ltd., 1994.
[iv] "Christopher Nolan". Wikipedia. April 20, 2009 .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ran

2010-04-19T22:35:00.000-07:00

Here is an essay I recently wrote for a World Cinema Traditions class. It is entitled "Nihilism, Chaos, Warfare, Samurai, and Disobedient Sons: The Joys of Akira Kurosawa’s Ran".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ran is written and directed by Akira Kurosawa. What can be written about Kurosawa that hasn’t been written a million times before? Genius. Visionary. Apologetic for his samurai heritage. Like many artists, he suffered from depression, particularly later in his life. This film was made in a time when Kurosawa had great difficulty securing funding and had to seek foreign investors. 1985’s Ran is worth noting not simply for its artistic merit, but for its connection to Kurosawa’s past and future.

Like most of Kurosawa’s most famous work, Ran is set in feudal Japan, the time when the warrior class known as samurai ruled. The Edo period, when samurai had been fully established as the ruling class, is one of the most well-known and important times in Japanese history. The era’s importance is evidenced by its continued representation in Japanese narrative fiction. Kurosawa’s films are evidence not only of the era’s importance to Japanese history in general, but also of the importance to Kurosawa’s personal history. Akira Kurosawa was descended from samurai. While many would think of samurai ancestry as a point of pride, Kurosawa was well aware of the harsh realities of life for the common people under samurai rule. He was apologetic about his family’s status as members of the class that personified inequality in Japan. While samurai were supposed to embody and exemplify honor, justice, discipline, loyalty, and service, in reality many were just as crude and cruel as any other warriors in human history.

The film Ran, however, is not a commentary on negative aspects of samurai per se. Instead, its primary focus in regards to samurai is that of loyalty. Hidetora, the head of the Ichimonji clan, is betrayed by two of his three sons. The only supportive son is the one Hidetora banished because of his early disapproval of Hidetora’s decision to abdicate responsibility. The disloyalty and conspiracy presented in Ran, as well as the story’s status as a tragedy, bear a striking resemblance to William Shakespeare’s King Lear. While Kurosawa did admit to seeing some inspiration in the play, his film is much more relevant to samurai history. While Lear makes mistakes, Hidetora has a distinctive past as a cruel warlord. The wife of one of his sons is in fact from a family that he had slaughtered in a power struggle.

Kurosawa’s films are rarely about one simple thing, however. Ran is more than a typical samurai film, and much more than a loose adaptation of a Shakespeare play. Aside from conspiracy and disloyalty, themes of the film include chaos, nihilism, and warfare. The very title can be translated in English as “chaos”. This is distinctly exemplified by the eruption of violence following Hidetora’s abdication. The protagonist spent most of his life waging war and slaughtering others, and in his twilight years he desires instead a more peaceful life. Shortly before handing de facto leadership to his oldest son, Hidetora holds a conference with neighboring daimyo (“warlord”, a feudal ruler of a Japanese fief) and uses diplomacy to end conflict and prevent further bloodshed. However, the peace is ephemeral, as the wife of his oldest son fuels the ambitions of her husband and his younger son, pushing them to wage war on their father. Hidetora descends into madness as the result of his Critic Michael Sragow refers to this as Kurosawa’s “trickle-down theory of anarchy”: "Kurosawa's monarch, like the Bard's, overburdens the bonds of family when he places his security on the shoulders of unsuitable and unready offspring. Hidetora's wishful thinking blinds him to the honesty of his third and youngest son, whom he banishes for bad-mouthing his scheme.
For Kurosawa, more than for Shakespeare, the monarch's real erosion of authority has its roots in the way he acquired power in the first place: through systematic pillage and slaughter." [i]

The chaos that Kurosawa demonstrates is perhaps simply a product of a depressing period in his life, and could very well be considered subsidiary to the theme of nihilism. There is nothing resembling happiness in the end. The characters are dead. Violence trumped diplomacy. Even the saintly Lady Sue, devout Buddhist wife to Hidetora’s second son, ends up beheaded. According to Sragow, Kurosawa said in 1986,
"What I was trying to get at in 'Ran,'and this was there from the script stage, was that the gods or God or whoever it is observing human events is feeling sadness about how human beings destroy each other, and powerlessness to affect human beings' behavior.”[ii]

If there are gods watching these characters and events, they either will not or cannot change them. The three possibilities this presents are all depressing in their own ways. The first possibility is that the gods will not intervene and cease the destruction; this can be depressing because it implies that the gods do not even care. The second possibility is that the gods are unable to intervene; this can be depressing because if the gods are powerless then one must wonder what humans could possibly do. The third, and perhaps most depressing, possibility is that the gods don’t exist and that humans are alone and solely responsible for their actions against one another.

This element of nihilism could simply reflect a general world-weariness of Kurosawa’s, or perhaps more specifically his views on his own old age. In his seventies, he could have been described as old-fashioned by audiences and critics looking for more exciting fare and shots that did not linger languorously over fields of dewy grass and immobile bodies. Roger Ebert touches upon this very idea:
"Akira Kurosawa’s Ran is inspired by King Lear but may be as much about Kurosawa's life as Shakespeare's play... Kurosawa has not told the story of a great man whose sin of pride drives him mad, but the story of a man who has waged war all his life, hopes to impose peace in his old age and unleashes even greater turmoil. There are parallels not only with kings but also with filmmakers, who like royalty must enforce their vision in a world seething with jealousy, finance, intrigue, vanity and greed. …
He was preoccupied with mortality in his later years. His eyesight was failing, he attempted suicide…
Ran is set in medieval times, but it is a 20th century film, in which an old man can arrive at the end of his life having won all his battles, and foolishly think he still has the power to settle things for a new generation. But life hurries ahead without any respect for historical continuity; his children have their own lusts and furies. His will is irrelevant, and they will divide his spoils like dogs tearing at a carcass."[iii]

Perhaps the nihilism in Ran is a filmic expression of Kurosawa’s depression and Hidetora is as much Kurosawa as he is Lear. While the inter-connected themes of chaos and nihilism are important and universally understood, the third inter-connected theme of warfare is certainly more tangible and could be considered more relevant to the Japanese. Kurosawa was in his thirties when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were devastated by atomic bombs. He lived for decades afterwards, able to witness and experience the long-term psychological and sociological effects that the loss of the war and ensuing globalization/Americanization had on Japan as a whole. According to critic Michael Wilmington,
"The secret subject of Ran—as Kurosawa explained to me in a 1985 interview—is the threat of nuclear apocalypse. The film is saturated with the anxiety of the post-Hiroshima age."[iv]

The film is actually set during a turning point in Japan’s history, when fairly effective rifles were introduced and their use established in feudal warfare. A matchlock model plays an important part in the destruction in Ran. The people of Japanese know all too well the effects of the newest, deadliest weapon available at the time. Even the fire that besets Hidetora’s retirement castle can be interpreted as a comment on something that can so easily wipe out everything it touches. (However, it should be noted that because Japanese homes have primarily been made of wood and crowded together, fire has been a problem throughout Japan’s history.) After all, the film was made toward the end of the Cold War, and Japan had fought with both the US and Russia before. The only country to have suffered a nuclear attack, the Japanese people were perhaps more susceptible to fear of nuclear warfare than any other nation.

Like most of Kurosawa’s films, Ran is a complex work of art produced by a complex man. The film is about no single thing. No single aspect of humanity is the primary focus. Akira Kurosawa was a master filmmaker, suicidal painter, and an elderly man who had great difficulty getting work and whose wife died during the production of this film. It should come as no surprise that this film portrays some of the worst aspects of humanity. When disloyalty causes a descent into madness and terribly destructive war, the world can seem as nothing but nihilistic and chaotic.

[i] Sragow, Michael. "Lear meets the energy vampire". salon.com. March 1, 2010 .
[ii] Sragow
[iii] Ebert, Roger. "Ran (1985)". rogerebert.suntimes.com. March 1, 2010 .
[iv] Wilmington, Michael. "Ran: Apocalypse Song". criterion.com. March 1, 2010 .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I highly recommend this film. Also, I totally cop to getting plenty of info from Wikipedia.

Kick-Ass

2010-04-13T12:07:00.001-07:00

Last week I was fortunate enough to attend a screening and see "Kick-Ass" early.
I have only read the hardcover collection once, but I would qualify myself as something of a fan of the comic book.

I can say with confidence that the film does a great job. In some ways, it could be considered a bit better than the comic. This is because the director, Matthew Vaugn, does not simply use one method/style of directing. He tries different things for the action scenes throughout the course of the film, and the use of music is always a great bonus that doesn't come along with the comic.

While it isn't a perfect film, it's a damn near perfect movie. It's a lot of fucking fun.

Chloe Grace Moretz definitely steals the show as Hit-Girl. Nic Cage also does a great job as Big Daddy (in fact, his take on a Batman-esque character is his coolest action role since "Con Air"). Aaron Johnson at first seems like a strange choice for Kick-Ass, as the character is a skinny wimp in the comic, while Johnson kinda has a build. Nevertheless, the actor delivers. Mark Strong is pretty good as mob boss Frank D'Amico. Christopher Mintz-Plasse (commonly known as "McLovin") is typical as Red Mist (I'm just not a fan of the guy, he's always the same; also, he has a very distinct voice, so there's no way he could have a secret identity).

Some people might complain that plenty of the details are changed from the comic, but I think it all works out to be an exciting, fun, great movie. Comic fans should love it for all of the references made to comic books and the depiction of the world of fandom.

The jokes are good, the music's good, the violence is good. Just about everything in this flick is good. When it hits theaters, everyone should definitely go see it.

(On a personal note, the only thing that's ever really bugged me about the comic [and now the movie] is the idea of anyone going out to fight crime with NO martial arts training. I don't think even the lowliest of idiots would actually think to survive crimefighting without so much as a single boxing lesson.)

Batman -- Martial Artist - 06.04 - Tien-Hsueh

2010-04-08T22:14:00.000-07:00

Tien-Hsueh is the Chinese martial art that focuses on attacking vital points.

This art can be as simple as striking the obviously vulnerable parts of the body (i.e., groin, throat, kidneys, etc.), but ultimately it entails the ancient and difficult-to-master art of acupressure. Just as in acupuncture, this art relies on certain lines of energy ("meridians") that are alleged to connect a certain point on the body's surface to an internal, vital organ.

The training essentially takes the form of years of training for accuracy of strikes (most often with the index and middle fingers), and intensive study of anatomy as presented in traditional Chinese medicine. Basically, learning where the vital points are, and training to be able to strike them while fighting.
Traditionally, one must learn how to heal in concurrence with learning how to do damage using acupressure.

While one may not put a lot of stock in ancient ideas like meridians and chi, over thousands of years there has been a vast accumulation of anecdotal/empirical evidence for the efficacy of this art. There are modern scientific explanations for these things (i.e., nerves, impulses, etc.), but this is a traditional art/science.

Now, would Batman bother with Tien-Hsueh? Most likely. He would find it beneficial to know at least the basics of a system that has lasted for millennia. Also, if he can take out a perp without needing to exert himself to much, all the better. It would also make sense for Batman to know this art so as to be able to defend himself from its practitioners.
The best way I can answer this question is actually to point out that Batman has learned something similar. In the episode "Day of the Samurai" (BTAS: Season 3), Bruce Wayne travels to Japan at the behest of his old sensei in order to defeat his old rival. The ninja rival has sought out an ancient pressure-point technique that can kill a man with a single, well-placed strike. Batman deduces this very pressure-point in his investigation, and is able to protect himself. Since he knows where this point is, he could therefore use this technique (not that he ever would).

Chinese Boxing: Masters and Methods

2010-04-08T21:46:00.000-07:00

This book, by Robert W. Smith, published by Kodansha in 1974, is a short tome detailing some of the experiences of the author in Taiwan in the 1950s.
Smith writes about several different kung fu instructors he meets and learns from, as well as the methods taught.

The chapters are as follows:
1. The Not-So-Little Elephant
2. The Monkey Boxer
3. The Guerrilla General
4. Master of the Five Excellences
5. Master of Relaxation
6. A Policeman's Pa-kua
7. Bone-Locker Extraordinary
8. The Wrestling Champion
9. Other Teachers
10. Teachers in Southern Taiwan
Appendix A: Chou Chi-chun's Views on the Origins of Tai-chi
Appendix B: Sun Lu-tang's Principles of Tai-chi Chuan
Appendix C: Chi-Kung, Exercise of Internal Energy
Appendix D: Tai-chi in the People's Republic of China
Appendix E: Wu-Shu Forms in Taiwan

The book primarily focuses on the author's three or so main instructors over the course of about three years in Taiwan. The styles covered most are Tai Chi and Pa-kua. These both rely heavily on internal concepts.
Oddly, the author warns the reader against charlatans who make outlandish claims about their chi power and abilities, yet he consistently exalts his own teachers and their (only seemingly outlandish) abilities.

He also offers some descriptions of Chi-Kung (a purely internal discipline), Shuai Chiao (Chinese wrestling), and Chin-na (joint locking). However, these chapters are lacking.

Overall, the book is lacking of substance. It is primarily a listing of masters to be found in Taiwan at the time, with little-to-no worthy elaboration or description of techniques.
This book is ONLY for the traditionalist interested in master's names and lineages.

Snag

2010-03-24T04:56:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I was working on a short film set. I saw a couple of the other guys on set messing around with what I thought were plastic practice knives. Naturally, I inquired about the objects.

Turns out, a guy's father (and a friend of the father) recently invented/developed a new non-lethal self-defense tool to be called "the snag" (it could be "snagg", I'm not sure yet). Though the guy who demonstrated the use of the tool to me did not enjoy my "simplification" of this item, it is essentially a modified, plastic version of a karambit knife. This weapon/tool can be used to break kunckles (by targeting a counter-punch at an oncoming fisty), hurt the ribs, or simply do more harm to an assailant's face and sternum.

Why it's called a "snag", however, is because you can use the hooked end to dig into the assailant's clavicle and better manipulate him with stand-up grappling techniques.

I was fortunate enough to be given one, and I'm definitely going to be carrying it as my if-necessary weapon of choice. It's quite handy, and I plan to devote quite a bit of time to practicing with it so that in a week or so I will be able to use it efficiently and swiftly.

The guys who developed this are martial arts enthusiasts (of course), and they have been making deals to sell the Snag to military and police departments. While this may never get the same self-defense rep as brass knuckles, or become the next big thing in non-lethal tools used by soldiers and police officers, I think that it deserves that consideration. It's handy for both punching (like brass knuckles) and stand-up grappling. It should be on the market in the next couple of months, and will be getting write-ups in the major martial arts, self-defense, and weapons magazines. I predict that Joe Wagner (Black Belt's resident reality-based self-defense and military expert) will be talking about it within a year.

It is somewhat similar to the Japanese yawara (a small stick used to damage knuckles and strike pressure points ), but I think it is much more effective since it can more easily be used with typical gross motor movements (basic punching is made more devastating by the extension of the plastic ring on the index finger and the "edge" beneath the pinky). I personally think that this tool/weapon should be used in every self-defense class and modern "ninjutsu" school.

[This seems like the kind of thing Batman would develop and use. That is, if he didn't already have batarangs, bat-shuriken, and a complete mastery of empty-hand fighting.]

[I think we'll see this in movies sometime fairly soon. I'm hoping to be the first person to put it in a movie, and I plan to use it in some fight scenes in a feature I plan to shoot this summer.]

[By the way, I do NOT get paid for any of this. I'm just fan.]

MegaCon 2010

2010-03-24T04:30:00.000-07:00

For the seventh year in a row, I attended MegaCon (March 12-14). It was about as great as usual. Wound up spending an inordinate amount of money that I really couldn't afford to part with, but in exchange I got about 40 back issues and 15 trades/graphic novels. I got a bunch of figures, as well.

I was able to complete my collection of "Lone Wolf and Cub", and I made great strides toward completing Denny O'Neil's run on "The Question" and Alan Moore's "Tom Strong". I also got the full series of "Green Hornet" on DVD, as well as the entire 1960s Batman show.

Sorry for my absence...

2010-03-24T04:23:00.000-07:00

My apologies to my few readers for my lengthy absence from this here blog.

Over the last month or so, I've worked on some fellow film students' short films. Also, I am now certified by the American Red Cross in CPR and AED.

I'll be rather busy for the next couple of weeks, but I'll still try to post occasionally.

Wolverine: Weapon X #10

2010-02-09T15:27:00.000-08:00

The latest issue of Wolverine: Weapon X is probably one of the best Wolverine comics I have read in years.

Jason Aaron writes a great issue that helps transition between the last arc (which was a bit strange and not all that enjoyable for me) and whatever is coming next.

Throughout this issue, Logan expresses his feelings for invesigative reporter Melita Garner, while reminiscing about lost loves (a common, but important theme in his life) and considering the danger that his love always puts someone in.

Logan fights ninja in Japan, runs into a seductive Yukio, plays chess with Storm, plays pool with Rogue, hangs out at a shooting range with Black Widow, goes shopping with Jubilee, helps Luke Cage and Jessica Jones calm down their baby daughter, and visits Mariko's grave. All the while, he discusses with his friends and Melita the fatality that seems to be inherent in his relationships. We also get to read about Logan's first time having sex!

Unfortunately, there is an ending that feels somewhat tacked-on in order to provide a "cliffhanger" feeling and make you want to stick around for the next arc. But for the most part this is a great example of a self-contained issue.

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention C.P. Smith's incredible art. His rich shadows and "gritty" colors perfectly accentuate his clean linework. Smith also presents Wolverine in several different versions of his costume, which is a delight to a long-time fan.

The cover by Adam Kubert (with Morry Hollowell) is entertaining enough, but does not do the story justice.

This is a great, poignant issue that reminds you of who Logan is as a lover and reaffirms the idea that he really is more man than animal.

Batman -- Martial Artist - 06.03 - Northern Shaolin

2010-01-28T09:06:00.000-08:00

The word "Shaolin" is probably the most-known phrase worldwide in regards to Kung Fu. This will be a fairly brief overview of the style/school that is typically what people, whether they know it or not, are referring to when they say "Shaolin". (To read my brief summary of the Temple's historical origins, read the first post on Kung Fu.)

The Northern Shaolin Monastery is the monastery that most people refer to as Shaolin Temple. It is where Bodhidharma made his pilgrimage and introduced some yoga and Indian martial arts techniques. These teachings blended with the indigenous martial arts styles already present, and the monks practiced their martial arts as a form of moving meditation, but initially the martial arts practice was primarily done to prepare monks to defend against marauders and bandits. Gradually, the monastery became more secure, and the monks were able to focus on using the arts for more spiritual purposes.
It was not uncommon for retired soldiers to devote themselves to religion, and the Shaolin monastery became the home for many such men. These men brought with them their military training and helped augment the Shaolin martial arts, particularly when it came to weapons. It was also not uncommon for fleeing criminals to seek sanctuary, and many ruffians would eventually become monks, also bringing their own physical skills and training methods.

While a student in the Shaolin monastery could learn several individual, distinct styles weapons methods, over time the various styles also blended into what could be described as the Northern Shaolin style. This style focused on longer-ranged techniques, acrobatic attacks, flexibility, and speed. The high kicks and jumping techniques found in northern schools of Kung Fu are often attributed to the idea of taking an opponent down from their horse. The wide stances are supposed to give the martial artist a lower center of gravity and greater balance.
Most technques were passed down in illustrated manuals and taught in forms. Students would practice most forms, and when becoming ordained monks would typically chooses to master one empty-hand form and one weapon.
Because of the military influence, Northern Shaolin teaching encompassed most weapons available at the time. These include (but are not limited to) the broadsword, straight sword, staff, monk's cudgel, three-section-staff, nunchaku, dart rope, and butterfly knives.
Because students typically lived in the monastery for years, if not most of their lives, there was plenty of time to train by repetition. A student could certainly spend five hours in a stance, simply punching. Techniques would be repeated ad nauseum until they would be strung together as forms. Then, after thousands of repetitions of a single form, students would practice in two-man forms. Eventually, after years of repetitious drilling, students (usually monks) could spar so as to perfect their reflexes and hone their techniques.
Many monks would also practice various "iron body" techniques, usually focusing on a single area (some monks focused their palms, others on their groin, or head, etc.). (Read my post on Iron Fist.)

The monastery featured many training apparatuses, examples (and exaggerations) of which can be seen in kung fu movies (like "36th Chamber of Shaolin") and plenty of documentaries.

Nowadays, the Shaolin Temple is primarily a religious, cultural, and monetary institution in China. To learn "Shaolin Kung Fu", someone (especially a foreigner) would have to go to one of the hundreds of schools surrounding the actual monastery. These schools are typically run by monks or former monks looking to spread martial culture and make a decent living. While some of the older techniques and training methods can certainly still be found in those schools, the schools primarily focus on the much more profitable styles of Wushu (the modern acrobatic, demonstrational style that came about as a result of the Cultural Revolution) and Sanshou (the modern kickboxing style that also was formed and is regulated by the Chinese government).

Unfortunately, Northern Shaolin style does not exist as it once did, really. The influence of it can be seen in the Northern systems of Kung Fu, and somewhat in Wushu and Sanshou, but most teachers claiming to teach "Shaolin Kung Fu" are most likely teaching a different style (that could very well have been influenced by Shaolin, or a descendant of it) and simply capitalizing on a rich cultural tradition and household brand name.

Would Batman learn Northern Shaolin? He would certainly want to be skilled in the elements present in the style, but he could do this by studying multiple Chinese styles. Of course, Bruce Wayne is supposed to be able to find out-of-the-way masters of older, perfected styles, so he could very well find a "true" Shaolin master and study under him.

-I highly suggest the movies "36th Chamber of Shaolin" and "Shaolin Temple". I also suggest the book "American Shaolin".

-I have found it quite easy (and enjoyable) to spend hours on end looking at videos on youtube that portray Shaolin training methods. I could also suggest the "Human Weapon" and "Fight Quest" episodes about Kung Fu.

-The TV show "Kung Fu", while quite enjoyable, was almost entirely errant in its representation of the Shaolin Kung Fu an many Shaolin traditions. Nevertheless, I do love that show. RIP David Carradine, crazy sex fiend that he was.

-Always question whatever history you read or hear in regards to martial arts (including this one). I admit to not having done a truly exhaustive amount of academic research on the subject, but I especially advise you to be wary of things that sound too much like legend and over-hype. (If you meet a "master" who claims to have trained at the Shaolin Temple, either disregard him or ask what school in Dengfeng he ACTUALLY trained at, and what generation of monk his teachers were [they should know, and it should usually be between 30th generation and 33rd].)

Batman -- Martial Artist - 06.02 - Mok Gar

2010-01-21T10:06:00.000-08:00

Mok-Gar (or Sil Lum Mok Gar Kuen) is another Southern Chinese branch of Kung Fu. Like most Southern styles of Kung Fu (including Wing Chun), Mok-Gar stresses in-fighting.

The legend of this particular style’s origin claims that it was developed by a midget monk of the Sil Lum monastery (Southern Shaolin Temple) named Mok Da Si. At the time, Mok was considered the foremost master of the Southern Shaolin Fist (Sil Lum Kuen/Shaolin Chuen). Like many great masters, he made his own adjustments here and there, developing the art into one not unlike what we know as Wing Chun. As a shorter man, it would be a poor decision for him to attempt attacks and defenses better suited for longer limbs. Thus, he taught the principle of getting in close to the opponent, using short blocks and punches, and low kicks.

Three generations later, Mok Gin Kiu learned stronger and more varied kicks from a teacher outside of his family and became a famous fighter. At this time, the style he inherited dropped the long-since erroneous name of Shaolin Fist and began to be called Mok Gar Kuen after the family.

One of the most notable Mok-Gar practitioners was Mok Kwei Lan. As a teenager, she studied under her uncle and eventually married a friend of his: the famous Hung Gar grandmaster and fairly modern Chinese folk hero Wong Fei Hung. Mok Kwei Lan convinced her highly skilled husband to incorporate the kicking skills taught in Mok-Gar, so that the Hung Gar style as passed down from Wong Fei Hung shares many kicking techniques with Mok-Gar.

Mok-Gar makes use of two different wooden dummies. The first type is the same found in Wing Chun. The second is called a darn gee and is typically made up of a hollow bamboo post (about 13’ tall, 4” in diameter, set into the ground by about 3’), filled with washers (or coins). It is used to practice techniques and build power, particularly for kicking. The primary goals are to increase flexibility, speed, and accuracy and to toughen the feet.

Mok-Gar encompasses most traditional Kung Fu weapons, but primarily focuses on wooden pegs (shorter sticks, mostly for jabbing vulnerable points on the body), butterfly knives (same as Wing Chun), and the siu so gee (like a nunchaku, but with one end much shorter than the other).
Would Batman learn Mok-Gar? Maybe. While it is about as effective as any other Southern Chinese style, Batman might not find it necessary to learn this art if he learns both Wing Chun and Karate. The blocks and punches taught in Mok-Gar seem to be half-way between the blocks and punches found in Wing Chun and most styles of Karate. The trapping found in Mok-Gar could also be covered by Wing Chun and Jujitsu. In Bruce’s travels in China, he would certainly come across Mok-Gar, Wing Chun, and Hung Gar, and would find something in each of them. If nothing else, he would likely find the dummies used in Mok-Gar to be effective training tools.

Additional information came from Wikipedia, of course, as well as other internet sources (like http://www.plumpub.com/info/knotebook/boxmokgar.htm ).
Also:
A Handbook of Martial Arts by Fay Goodman

The World of Apu

2010-01-13T04:49:00.000-08:00

I recently had the pleasure of viewing this 1959 Indian film by writer/producer/director Satyajit Ray. It is absolutely wonderful.

The final part of "The Apu Trilogy", this film follows Apu Roy, an unemployed, educated young man who lives in Calcutta. He does his best to live life as freely as possible, but this is is threatened when (through a series of circumstances) he is married to a friend's cousin. He and his wife live happily enough for a time, though they have no money.
Without overtly spoiling anything, the third act of the film is primarily about a depressed, older Apu struggling to connect with his young son.

This is a beautiful black-and-white film that stands high above every other movie I've seen come out of India. I once had a girlfriend who loved Bollywood musicals, and she made me sit through about twenty of those god-awful things. I think it's fine if that's your personal taste, but I personally find most musicals to be terrible, and I really can't get into foreign musicals.
This film, however, is nothing like those. The director actually grew up in a very arts-oriented home, and made his living as an illustrator before going in to films. He despised the happy-go-lucky Indian films of his time (and so would despise more modern ones) and sought to introduce the Indian public to the artistry that could be found in post-war films from France and Italy. He was particularly inspired by Italian neorealism (especially the film "Bicycle Thieves").

While many people would find this film difficult to sit through because of its long, lovingly held shots and lack of action, I think anyone who loves films should take a look at it.

(A note of minor interest: "The Simpsons" and "Futurama" creator Matt Groening has always been a fan of Indian films, and named the stereotypical Indian convenience store clerk character in "The Simpsons" after the main character of "The Apu Trilogy".)

Sherlock Holmes -- Martial Artist

2010-01-01T14:32:00.000-08:00

Having seen "Sherlock Holmes" a second time, I feel more compelled to comment on the martial arts presented in the film.

In the Sherlock Holmes story "The Adventure of the Empty House" (1901), Sir Arthur Conan Doyle writes about Holmes's martial arts knowledge by having him refer to "baritsu, or the Japanese system of wrestling".
However, there is not and never has been any real martial art named "baritsu". The name is in fact based on a British martial system named Bartitsu. This style was developed at the turn of the last century by E.W. Barton-Wright. Barton-Wright had spent some time in Japan and learned a bit of Jujitsu and Judo. He was also an exponent of stick fighting, boxing, and Savate. Because of his wide knowledge base, Barton-Wright is considered to be far ahead of his time in terms of mixing martial arts styles in order to create a more effective fighting system (however, it should be remembered that there was a time before systematization ruled, and the old masters were knowledgeable in all basic martial concepts).

While in the film Downey's character does demonstrate a variety of martial capabilities, the word "baritsu" is never mentioned, and the fighting style the great detective utilizes appears to be much more akin to Wing Chun than anything else (in fact, a Wing Chun wooden dummy can be seen in the apartment at 221b Baker Street). This is most likely due to Robert Downey, Jr.'s real-life practice of the Chinese style. Downey likes to mention and demonstrate his love for the system to many interviewers, and he even gives his martial arts practice some credit for his recovery from drug addiction.

Holmes uses similar poses and the vertical fist espoused in Wing Chun. To be fair, though, he also uses some Jujitsu, boxing, stick fighting, and all-around dirty fighting. His fighting ability comes in quite handy when doing battle with the criminal element. He also likes to blow off steam and practice his technique by participating in bare-knuckle fights at a bar called the Punchbowl.

Jude Law's Dr. John Watson fights rather differently, however. While Holmes takes some time to mentally calculate his strikes and their damages, Watson just goes at it. He just hits anyone and everyone with anything in reach, including but not limited to his sword-cane. This could be because Watson is not such a calculating fellow, and is an ex-soldier (in my personal experience, military men tend to brawl rather than calculate).

The fights are interesting and fun to watch in the film. I think that they demonstrate a great blend of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's writings, director Guy Ritchie's love of Karate and Jujitsu, Robert Downey, Jr.'s love of Wing Chun, and just plain good characterization and visual acumen.

(Most of this stuff was from my own observation/general knowledge, but some additional info came from some interviews on Aint It Cool News and stuff from Kung Fu Magazine [and, of course, Wikipedia].)

Sherlock Holmes

2009-12-27T09:23:00.000-08:00

This is a great movie. The action, acting, dialogue, and plotting are all great. The film looks good and the story holds.

Robert Downey Jr. kills as the great detective, and Jude Law is great in the supporting (but super important) role of Dr. Watson. These two actors together have some of the best on-screen chemistry I've seen in years. [Downey caught some flak from studio execs for kinda saying that the two could be lovers. I, for one, have always thought the friendship between the two partners/roommates should be presented as more than just that.]

Guy Ritchie has been accused of making things move too fast, but I think he's a master of pacing and knows exactly what he's doing. This movie just keeps moving and moving but never feels overly tense or strained. Everything serves the story and characters.

I'm a fan of the character in books, but I've never really enjoyed the movies or TV shows. Even though he's eccentric, Holmes has always been portrayed as a bit too stuffy for my taste. And Watson is always kind of the bumbling, ignorant sidekick. I have to admit that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stories have been pretty accurately adapted in the past, but I'm one of many, it seems, who have always thought that Holmes should be portrayed as an action hero. And he should be. I love seeing Holmes jump out of windows, beat people up, and get in gunfights.

But Holmes is no two-dimensional character. While the cocaine addiction is really shown in this movie, the audience does see that Holmes's amazing talents and eccentric ways do often distance him from other people.

In short, go see it. (I say it's a much better film than "Avatar", but it may be unfair to compare the two since they are meant to serve somewhat different entertainment purposes.)

[I was hoping that the hints at Moriarty would be left at just hints, but I guess you have to spell things out for some audience members. I'm definitely looking forward to a sequel.]

Avatar

2009-12-22T20:12:00.000-08:00

Over the last month or so, as the TV and all other media have been overrun by adverts for James Cameron's "Avatar", the internet buzz and word-of-mouth anticipation just kept building and building (and building and building and building). People everywhere were talking about the flick. My fellow film students, who I normally hear decrying most mainstream films, were always speaking of their anticipation for what has long been declared and promised as Cameron's opus -- a film to change film, a film to transcend all technological limitations.

After the first trailers and TV spots hit, people just couldn't shut up about how the Na'vi and their world Pandora looked. Everyone I knew would ask me if I was excited about the film. All I could say was, "Not really."

To the surprise of many, I had pretty much no interest in seeing this film. "Oh! But it looks so good!"

Not really. It looks COOL, but not REAL.

The story never seemed original. Many early reviews I read said that it isn't a film for people looking for original story or characters. So, even the big fans were admitting that it was all about the super cool CGI.

I kept telling people that I wouldn't pay to go see it, but if my dad or someone wanted to see it, I'd go. Why would I turn down a movie with family or friends (especially if its free)?

So, today I saw it. It was alright. The plot, characters, and dialogue are all very flawed in terms of logic, realism, cheesiness, and general originality. The film is mostly a series of pretty pictures. And that's fine. I don't deride anyone for wanting to see a movie mostly for its visual quality. That's a perfectly viable reason for movie-going. However, I'm a bigger fan of plot, characterization, and dialogue.

Now, while I didn't enjoy the plot, characters, or dialogue, I have to say that I was fascinated by all of the science-type stuff in the flick. I found myself thinking mostly about the anthropology, biology, botany, and etcetera regarding the Na'vi and Pandora. Those aspects were super interesting and I'll enjoy discussing these things with people in the future.

I recommend this movie if for no other reason than that everyone will be seeing it (although I still haven't seen "Transformers 2" or the latest Harry Potter movie, and I have no plans to). Also, it is pretty. And the science stuff is fascinating.

First Anniversary

2009-11-29T07:27:00.000-08:00

Well, it's been a year since I started this blog. I originally began this as a test to see whether or not strangers would ever read anything I write. Turns out, there are a few people out there who would be so kind as to find my words to be of some minute interest. For that, I thank you, readers.

When this began, my reviews and such were written with quite a personal/relaxed tone. Over time, however, I think that I've become a bit more formal (if the reduction of my use of swear words is any indication). I don't know if I'll continue to write more formally, or go back to my original style of saying such things as "Fuck so-and-so" and "Cocksuckers". Most likely, I'll find the healthy middle ground and stick with that.

For the last month or so, I've been much more busy than usual. I've been working on film sets, dealing with plenty of school work (it's exam season!), and often simply being lazy (lounging around, reading, watching DVDs). Once my exams are over for this semester, I'll try to write with more frequency. Also, when I get some money, I'll be able to go to the movies again, and then I'll write reviews.

To start the next year right, I'd really like to know what you guys enjoy most out of this blog, and I'd like to read any ideas you might have for future posts. What do you want to see more of from this blog?

Let me know in the comments.

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY

Batman -- Martial Artist - 06.01 - Wing Chun

2009-11-19T13:50:00.001-08:00

Wing Chun is a style of Kung Fu that originated in Southern China. It primarily focuses on trapping, fast and accurate punching, and direct attacks.

The generally accepted history of Wing Chun goes as follows:
Sometime in the late 17th or early 18th century, the Shaolin monastery was burned to the ground because the Manchurian government feared that the monks (by this point in history well-known for their martial prowess) posed a threat. A small number of masters and disciples managed to escape and went their separate ways.
One of these escapees was the Buddhist nun Ng Mui. Ng Mui was a small, unassuming woman had spent many years training in the Shaolin school of Kung Fu. However, because of her diminutive size, she had gradually phased out her use of high kicks and any attacks or defenses that depended on muscular strength. She instead focused her training on sudden contraction and relaxation (explosive movements), “dirty fighting” like finger jabs to the eyes and elbows to the face, and kicks that were swift and powerful but were never aimed above the waist.
In her travels, Ng Mui came to meet a beautiful, intelligent young woman named Yim Wing Chun. Yim Wing Chun had attracted the attention of a local landowner who wanted her as one of his brides. Yim Wing Chun had no interest in marrying this brutish man, so Ng Mui came up with a plan. Yim Wing Chun told her boorish suitor that she already had a fiancée, but that she would call it off. She told the landowner that she would write to her husband-to-be, but because he was traveling afar the letter would take quite some time to reach him. She asked that the landowner wait the months that it would take. The landowner reluctantly agreed.
That’s when Ng Mui and Yim Wing Chun got to work. Over the months, Ng Mui trained Yim Wing Chun in her particular variation of Shaolin Kung Fu. Since Yim Wing Chun didn’t have the decade or so that it would normally take to “master” a traditional fighting style, Ng Mui and Yim Wing Chun learned to streamline Ng Mui’s variation even further, shedding many things they deemed inefficient and unnecessary. At the end of the training period, the new style hardly even resembled the style taught at Shaolin Temple.
The landowner came to collect his new bride, but he only found himself soundly beaten-up by the young lady. After seeing the success of this new style, Ng Mui named her art “Wing Chun” after her protégé.

Over the centuries, Wing Chun was taught and passed down as many other styles have been, having a grandmaster as the leader of the overall art. Eventually, the mantle was passed to Yip Man. Yip Man was the teacher of many of today’s top Wing Chun masters (such as William Cheung). Yip Man was also the master of Bruce Lee.
Yip Man was born and raised in Southern China and made his living as a police officer and occasional Wing Chun teacher before the Communist revolution. Like many Chinese, he fled the mainland for the British-controlled Hong Kong. There he made his living as the grandmaster of the Wing Chun school of Kung Fu.

Bruce Lee was a hyperactive kid who often got into a lot of trouble. After he came off pretty bad in one fight, he decided to take up a martial art that he could use efficiently as soon as possible. At age 13, he began his Wing Chun training. At first, he learned under Yip Man. However, Yip Man despised non-Chinese and refused to teach foreigners. Some students found out that Bruce Lee was a quarter German, and they pressured Yip Man to drop him as a student (because Bruce frequently beat them at sparring, despite being younger and smaller) or they would all quit and join another school. Because Yip Man really liked Bruce, but because he also had to make a living, he told his secondary instructors to train Bruce. From age 13 to age 18, Bruce spent a great deal of his free time intensely practicing the art of Wing Chun.
Bruce Lee went to America, and very soon began giving instruction in martial arts. He basically began by teaching modified Wing Chun, which gradually developed into Jun Fan Gung Fu, which eventually became Jeet Kune Do.

Wing Chun has become quite popular all over the world, due largely in part to efforts made by Yip Man’s students like William Cheung and Bruce Lee. Also because, while it is a style of Kung Fu, it has been demonstrated as quite efficient and more self-defense oriented than other arts.

There are several “famous” aspects of Wing Chun.
1) Chi Sao: “Sticky hands” is a practice in which two individuals make continuous contact of the forearms, trying to subtly move in for a strike, or feel their opponent’s intentions and defend against a possible strike. While this might seem bogus, after years of training, it has been shown to develop the reflexes to a point at which some practitioners may even be able to practice trapping and punching while blindfolded. (Even Bruce Lee attributed a lot of his ability to Chi Sao practice.)
2) Mook Yan Jong: The wooden dummy is used to develop various blocks and strikes. It is a makeshift representation of a human body and helps with practicing footwork and trapping, as well as the toughening of forearms, palms, and fists. (Also heavily utilized by Bruce Lee.)
3) Straight Punch: The primary punch of Wing Chun is done not by starting at the waist, but up by the shoulder. This allows the puncher to move his arm much more in a straight line. Also, the Wing Chun practitioner typically forms a fist vertically, as opposed to the normal horizontal formation. This supposedly provides a better surface area for punching.
4) Butterfly Knives: These are not the balisong typically used in the Philippines or by hoodlums in the US, but instead are broad daggers/short swords, the movements of which can easily fit with the basic principles of punching in Wing Chun.

I could continue to write about Wing Chun seemingly forever, but I figure that I have probably already written too much to keep the interest of the reader. So, I will move on to the most important part:

Would Batman learn Wing Chun? He would certainly find it beneficial. Although Boxing and Wing Chun have some pretty drastically different techniques, the smart martial artist/fighter who blends the two will have some very effective, even deadly, hands. Batman does need effective, even deadly, hands.
Trapping is good to know, but I think Batman shouldn’t rely too much on infighting. It’s best to keep one’s distance from his opponent if he doesn’t want to risk getting stabbed by some unseen knife. Also, it is a good rule of general self-defense to always keep your kicks below the waist (to the shins, knees, groin), but once again this provides only so much power and distance.
I think that Batman would spend some time learning and mastering at least the basics of Wing Chun, and he would blend the trapping, punching, and eye-poking techniques with other striking methods. After all, if it’s good enough for Bruce Lee…

------------------------------------
Some sources:
-"A Handbook of Martial Arts" by Fay Goodman
-"The Tao of Gung Fu" by Bruce Lee (edited by John Little)
-"Chinese Gung Fu: The Philosophical Art of Self-Defense" by Bruce Lee
-"Wing Chun Kung-Fu: A Complete Guide; Volume 1: Basic Forms and Principles" by Dr. Joseph Wayne Smith
-"Bruce Lee: Fighting Spirit" by Bruce Thomas

Batman -- Martial Artist - 06.00 - Kung Fu

2009-11-11T14:33:00.000-08:00

I will be using the phrase "kung fu" to mean Chinese martial art(s). The phrase does not actually mean "martial arts", but rather something like "something achieved by hard work".

The Mandarin phrase that actually means "martial art" is "wushu". However, the use of "wushu" has been complicated in modern times by the much more popular use (at least in the west) of the phrase "kung fu" and the fact that there is a martial art-sport that was developed by the Chinese government called Wushu.

The most widely spread story about the origins of kung fu involves a Buddhist priest/monk named Bodhidharma traveling from India to China in the 5th or 6th century to translate Buddhist scripture.

The story goes that Bodhidharma came to Shaolin Temple, but was barred from entry because he was thought to be barbaric. Bodhidharma then hiked up Mt. Song and meditated in a cave for nine years. When he came back down, he entered the temple and was disappointed to find that the monks would frequently fall asleep while meditating. He taught the monks some exercises to improve their physical fitness, which he deemed necessary for spiritual fitness.

That, supposedly, is the origin of kung fu. Highly dubious, of course.

More realistically, there have always been fighting styles in China (as in all places). Many retired soldiers would become monks in their later years, bringing to the temples various martial techniques that would come in handy when monks might have to defend themselves from bandits. What Bodhidharma really did was bring some yoga exercises, and probably some Indonesian fighting techniques that now make up Pencak Silat. Bodhidharma did not create kung fu, but simply contributed to China's martial traditions, and helped institutionalize the style of fighting practiced at the Shaolin Temple.

(Arguably, Bodhidharma's more important contribution was that he brought with him the teachings of a particular sect of Buddhism that came to be known in China as Ch'an, which would eventually be known in Japan [and all over the world] as Zen.)

There are a LOT of different martial art styles that orignated in China, and I plan to write a little bit about a few of them. (These may include Wing Chun, Baguazhang, Shaolin, Tai Chi, Qi Gong, Praying Mantis, Xingyi, Sanshou, Chin Na, Hung Gar, Mok Gar, Choy Li Fut, Five Ancestors Fist, Tiger-Crane, Wudang, Five Animals Style, and/or Wushu.)

Would Batman learn kung fu? Of course. He wouldn't really know too much in the way of martial arts if he didn't have some sort of training in at least one Chinese style.

Up in the Air

2009-10-23T16:29:00.001-07:00

Jason Reitman's latest film is, simply, wonderful. The director of "Thank You for Smoking" and "Juno" has maybe made his best movie yet.

George Clooney stars as a professional ax-man who spends more than 90% of a year on airplanes, in airports, and in hotels. And he loves it. He is sent all over the country to fire people. He is very good at his job.

The movie is about a lot of things, really. It's about peoplelosing their jobs, a man who hates commitment, a young lady looking to live the perfect life, a woman looking to escape her life, and plenty of other stuff.

While some of the acting is off (because Reitman used plenty of regular, everyday people), George Clooney does an exceptional job. The film isn't as funny, perhaps, as either of Reitman's last two features, and it certainly doesn't have the biting social commentary of "Thank you for Smoking". It does have as much heart as "Juno" (if not more), but the audience doesn't suffer through Diablo Cody's forced quirkiness.

I got to see a test screening, so some things may still change before the movie comes out on December 4th. To me, the only things that would need changing would be to tighten up some lingering shots in editing, and add a bit more music to fill in some gaps. Otherwise, like I said, I think it's Reitman's best work.

(Also highly enjoyable: Reitman's re-use of some actors -- Sam Elliot, J.K. Simmons, and Jason Bateman)

The Stepfather

2009-10-16T05:00:00.000-07:00

This remake of the 1987 "based on a true story" horror film is... Well, it was better than I expected.

I should say that I only wanted to see this movie for Dylan Walsh. I love the show "Nip/Tuck" and I wanted to see how Dr. Sean McNamara fared in something else (though he was the lead in "Congo", way back when).
His acting was definitely the best part of the movie.

While the movie is pretty typical, mundane slasher-thriller stuff, it is still fun. I was at first a bit reticent because it is rated PG-13. All this meant, however, was that there wasn't really any slashing, and there weren't any unnecessarily nude coeds (although practically everytime we see Amber Heard, she is either in a bikini or underwear). Unfortunately, there is at least one bad cut, and some rather obvious digital work.

While the music selection is good on its own, a lot of it is unnecessary. This comes out to be more of an MTV teen flick than a horror film in a lot of ways.

I suggest that if you go see this, you see it when and where and with whom you will have the most participatory experience. The movie is best when you're in a room full of people laughing, screaming, and yelling at the characters together.

Batman -- Martial Artist - 05 - Capoeira

2009-10-12T17:54:00.001-07:00

Capoeira is an art that originated in Brazil, developed by African slaves sometime in the 17th century. It is characterized by its high, sometimes acrobatic kicks, moves that seem similar to modern break dancing, and typically being accompanied by music.

Firstly, it should be said that Capoeira is really less a martial art than a cultural practice. It is, in essence, a dance. Its fighting origins are debatable, but it is generally accepted that the slaves brought to Brazil by the Portuguese (from what is modern day Angola) developed a fighting style that could be used while their hands were shackled, but they disguised it as a dance so the slave masters could not stop its practice.
While African tribes did have fighting styles, and similar techniques could be seen in the fights amongst Afro-Caribbean slaves, the generally accepted origin story of Capoeira is highly dubious. One problem with this origin is that slaves were most typically shackled by their ankles. How much work can a slave really do if his hands are immobile? Another problem is the question of effectiveness: if the slaves really had such a great fighting style, why are there not MORE stories of escape and uprising? While plenty of slaves would have known wrestling, stick fighting, and kicking techniques, the slaves had often been captured in the first place because they were not the best fighters around.

This is not meant to discount Capoeira as a fine cultural tradition. It can even be described as a martial art, but with the emphasis on ART. Capoeira is really a dance or game. It is NOT recommended for anyone looking to learn practical self-defense. But, if one wanted to get in great shape, dance to great rhythmic music, and meet fine Brazilian girls, then by all means he should take up Capoeira.

So, would Batman practice Capoeira? No. He would certainly become familiar with it, maybe even borrow a move or two, but it is not an art that Bruce would have spent time diligently practicing or attempting to master Capoeira. While it would be a good idea to learn some techniques that would allow him to fight while shackled, Batman would be able to use kicks from Karate, Tae Kwon Do, Savate, or any other art more effectively than the break dancing moves of Capoeira. Also, Batman’s Plan A is to simply not get handcuffed in the first place.
Remember, Capoeira is a dance. While Bruce Wayne may do the tango or salsa, or waltz with gorgeous society girls, we know one thing for sure -- Batman does not dance.

-There is a delightful bit in the movie “Never Back Down” in which the main bad guy faces a fighter who shows off with some fancy Capoeira moves. The bad guy dispatches him quickly with a simple, direct punch.
-The villain in “Ocean’s Twelve” uses Capoeira to slip through a security laser field.
-Capoeira is the art used by Eddy Gordo and Christie Monteiro in the Tekken video game series.
-As per usual, check out youtube if you want to see Capoeira in action.

Batman -- Martial Artist - 04 - Eskrima/Kali/Arnis

2009-10-12T07:39:00.000-07:00

Eskrima, Kali, and Arnis are all names for similar styles of Filipino martial arts. They primarily focus on the use of sticks or knives, or the defense against such weapons.

As with many martial arts, the Filipino martial arts’ origins are hard to objectively pin down. Most of the styles were culturally rich and passed from father to son until more recently, when teachers started making money. The cloudiness of the origins is compounded by the fact that stick and knife fighting were not necessarily the practice of scholars, so there are no older written source materials.
Like most martial arts, the origins are likely a mixture of older cultural practices (from places like India, Indonesia, and China) and native developments.

The method by which Eskrima is taught is streamlined and so effective that one can become fairly proficient in a relatively short amount of time. The armed techniques are all very direct and quick, and the unarmed techniques are just as direct and joint locks are heavily utilized. For this reason, Eskrima is taught to various special military forces and intelligence field agencies. The ability to defeat and disarm a knife-wielding opponent is of course a valuable skill to anyone who must defend himself on a regular basis.

Eskrima is practiced with items such as rattan sticks, wooden (now mostly rubber) knife replicas, and various other improvised weapon substitutes. Drills are the most common form of practice, much like forms are used in empty-hand arts. When sparring in Eskrima, the practitioners will don protective gloves and helmet-masks similar to (or the same as) those used in Kendo or fencing.
A lot of the safety features have been added not just as a result of modern thinking, but so as to appeal to people of other cultures. Traditional martial arts as practiced when they come to America or Europe are more watered down, at least in terms of cultural integrity and physical severity. If you go to the Philippines to train in Eskrima, Kali, or Arnis, you will likely suffer many more bruises, lacerations, and even fractures than you would if you went to a school in America.

The popularity of Filipino martial arts in America has been due to both their efficiency and, in large part, the efforts of great martial arts masters like Dan Inosanto (one of Bruce Lee’s top students/training partners).
I incorporate very basic Kali solo drills into my own martial arts practice, and while I’m not so confident as to think that I could face a knife-wielding mugger unarmed, I’m confident in my skills with a stick in my hand.
You can see Filipino martial arts mixed into the fighting styles of fictional characters (using Kali or a similar art adds a realistic proficiency) in such movies as "Daredevil", the Daniel Craig "Bond" films, and the "Bourne" movies.

Would Batman learn and practice Eskrima, Kali, and/or Arnis? Of course he would. Batman would need to be able to effectively disarm knife- and stick-wielding assailants. Bruce traveled the world and spent years in Asia. It’s likely that he would have spent 3 to 12 months in the Philippines learning some of the most efficient fighting /self-defense techniques in the world. Or, at the very least, one Bruce’s many teachers would have covered knife and stick use and defense.

-If you want to learn more about Filipino martial arts, I highly suggest the Kali and Eskrima episodes of Fight Quest and Human Weapon, which you can find on youtube. Also on youtube, you can find plenty of instructional (or at the very least demonstrational) videos from teachers or semi-casual practitioners.

The Simpsons take on MMA!!!

2009-10-11T17:05:00.000-07:00

"The Simpsons" episode 21.03 ("The Great Wife Hope") just aired and it dealt with a subject dear to my heart: Mixed Martial Arts.

Now, it's a few years late, but "The Simpsons" can't always be expected to be truly cutting edge (like the episode they did making fun of "24" -- it aired like three years after the first season of "24" was over). They already kind of took on martial arts in general early on in the series, when Bart wanted to take up Karate, but didn't have the patience or interest in anything besides the violence. Now, they've finally gotten around to MMA.

The Ultimate Fighting Championship is represented (as Ultimate Punching Kicking and Choking Championship) as MMA becomes popular in Springfield, but of course Marge has to protest.

As per usual, all sides are pretty well represented and made fun of. The kids immediately start imitating, Marge feels that she should be able to ban something if she doesn't agree with it, etc. People on both sides are portrayed as stupid and mean, but each argument is given just the right amount of validity.

It's a good episode, overall. Unfortunately, Chuck Liddell is SEVERELY underused as a guest voice actor.

Batman -- Martial Artist - 03 - Savate

2009-10-09T06:37:00.000-07:00

Savate is, essentially, a French form of kickboxing. The martial art takes its name from the French phrase for “old boot” or “old shoe”. This is because Savate is derived from older “kick fighting” styles that originated in the 19th century. In a time in which it was thought that kicking was ungentlemanly (and for sissies), French street fighters threw that false sense of honor to the wind and used their feet for more efficient fighting.
Some claim that it started as a fighting style for French sailors. They would hold on to something like a mast or rigging and would use kicks.

The style uses the basic punches of boxing, but Savateurs tend to prefer kicks. This is most likely ingrained by historical practice. Since your legs are longer and stronger than your arms, you can typically keep a safer distance and do more damage by kicking rather than punching.
There is also the fact that punching tends to look more savage and hostile, so French street fighters would use kicks and even slaps to avoid harsher legal punishments. This way of thinking is actually beneficial to street fighters, or even law abiding citizens who simply have to defend themselves, of modern day America. Police officers and most jurors are rather typical people who primarily see boxing as the fighting mainstay and think kicking is for sissies (I find this odd, as one would think that the proliferation of Asian martial arts would have changed this mindset by now), so they are more likely to believe you were just defending yourself.

Savate kicking is rather interesting because (at least from my observations) the hips are not used much. Kicking with the legs and not the hips (and punching with the arms and not the waist) does not produce the same amount of power, but it is more deceptive. This type of kicking allows you to plant your foot on someone’s face much more quickly because you don’t telegraph your move by twisting.

Would Batman know Savate? You bet. While I don’t know of any specific issue in which Batman uses or learns Savate, Scott Beatty does mention it in “The Batman Handbook”, and we should remember that Bruce did train in France for a time. While he was learning from Henri Ducard, he probably picked up plenty of Savate techniques.Savate would be a good supplement to Bruce’s boxing training, and while the kicks might not be as powerful as those learned in Muay Thai, Karate, Kung Fu, or Tae Kwon Do training, they would be more deceptive, and Batman is big on deception.

Batman -- Martial Artist - 02 - Jujitsu

2009-10-01T18:18:00.001-07:00

In Detective Comics issue 38 (April 1940), the debut issue of Robin, the Boy Wonder, Bruce Wayne is depicted training the young Dick Grayson. For martial arts, he trains the boy in Boxing and Jiu Jitsu. To my knowledge, this was the first real mention (at least by name) of Batman’s martial arts training. Nowadays, we know that Batman knows many (if not all) styles of martial arts, but 1940 was a different time. There were western fighting arts like wrestling, boxing, fencing, and single-stick fighting (which was a lot like fencing, but with wood). Jujitsu and Judo were pretty much the only eastern arts known in the west at the time. At the time, Jujitsu was becoming a leisurely physical activity for those who could find and afford instruction. Also, it had the appeal of being exotic. Because Bruce Wayne is supposed to at least appear to be one of the idle rich, and Jujitsu gives Batman not only fighting skill but an exotic edge that is helpful to the popularity of a pulp character, it makes total sense that Bob Kane and Bill Finger would establish that Batman knows Jujitsu.

Jujitsu is a Japanese art, the name of which translates into English as “gentle art”, or even “science of softness”. Make no mistake, though: it may be called gentle, but it can definitely be deadly.
Jujitsu is a cultural martial art with deep roots in Japanese history, so it is a bit difficult to place its origins exactly. Many experts date the origin back to CE 8th century, with historic roots going as far back as BCE China.
One story claims that in CE 712, Tatemi Kazuchi threw Tatemi Nokami as if he were “throwing a leaf”.
Another story claims that Emperor Shuinjin holding a martial arts tournament in 23 BCE. One fight ended when a sumo wrestler died after being thrown and kicked by Nomino Sukume.
Some say that Jujitsu was developed by a Buddhist monk in CE 13th century. Some say Jujitsu comes from an art called katori-shinto ryu, developed in CE 15th century. Others say that Jujitsu was brought from China by a monk named Chen Yuanein in CE 17th century.

Every culture has some sort of fighting, whether systematized and artistic or not. Japanese Jujitsu does have origins in Chinese fighting systems, but it is also the result of much work on the part of Japanese combatants. There is likely no “true” origin of Jujitsu, but instead, like most martial arts, it developed from cultural needs. Basically, the samurai wore armor. You can’t hurt a guy very much by punching him in the chest when he’s got a chest plate on. So, Jujitsu developed as many different schools (ryu) that focused on throws, joint locks, and strikes to areas that weren’t easily protected by armor (i.e., armpits, back of the knees, elbows, etc.).

Samurai, ninja, and even non-combatants also developed defenses against assailants who might use weapons. While it ultimately comes down to who is the better fighter (not who has the better style), a Jujitsu practitioner should ideally be able to disarm someone who comes after him with a sword, bo staff, jo stick, spear, etc.

There is some confusion about the English spelling of “Jujitsu”. The phrase "Jiu-jitsu" is useable for any variation, really. Interestingly, the phrase "Jiu-jitsu" has become mostly associated with Brazilian Jiu-jitsu here in the west. This is interesting because it is a rather recent development (more so for North America and Europe than South America, of course). BJJ was mostly unknown outside of South America (particularly Brazil, of course) until the Ultimate Fighting Championship came about. Prior to that (particularly from the '30s to the '60s), Jiu-jitsu was well known as a Japanese art alongside its "child" Judo. Nowadays, though, the Japanese have to remind people that Jiu-jitsu is of Japanese origin!
As with many martial arts, and foreign phrases in general, there are variations in English spelling. Ju-jitsu, Jujutsu, Jiu-jiutsu, Jujutsu, Jujitsu, and others are (in my opinion, at least) acceptable spellings. However, I think to avoid such confusions, a general consensus has been reached that the Brazilian variety should be spelled "Jiu-jitsu" and the various ryu of the Japanese variety should be spelled "Jujitsu" or something like that. This has had a lot to do with the insane rise of popularity of BJJ over the last 15 years.

Batman would certainly study at least one ryu of Jujitsu extensively under a highly skilled sensei. Batman definitely spent some time in Japan, and even if he didn’t study Jujitsu specifically, if he studied Aikido or Judo his techniques would have roots in Jujitsu. Batman would use Jujitsu to be able to trap and manipulate the limbs of assailants. While he certainly isn’t averse to punching out a bad guy, it’s always good to have a gentler and more controlling option.
In "Batman Begins", Ducard recognizes that Bruce has studied Jujitsu.
Jujitsu is listed as one of “The Martial Arts Every Superhero Should Master” in Scott Beatty’s “The Batman Handbook”.
In Detective Comics issue 38, Bruce is shown teaching Dick “Jiu Jitsu”.In "Batman: Death Mask" (the manga by Yoshinori Natsume), a young Bruce Wayne trains in Japan in an art that "had roots in Judo and Aikido" (so we can tell that the art had roots in Jujitsu).In the animated series episodes "Night of the Ninja" and "Day of the Samurai" (both in season two), we see a young Bruce Wayne training in a style that seems to be a blend of Jujitsu, Aikido, and Karate, with some Samurai and Ninja stuff thrown in for good measure.And, of course, our most modern idea of Batman includes him having mastered as many styles as possible.

Now, here's the deal with Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. When Jigoro Kano was going around learning different styles of Jujitsu, there was often a preference that each school had for either standing and throwing or rolling around and wrestling. Kano, being an early version of Bruce Lee or any mixed martial artist, combined these styles and streamlined them to his liking to form Judo. Originally Judo was fairly evenly split with a combination of ground and standing techniques. However, as often happens, even Judo started to split up. Different teachers of Judo would have different preferences and in the early '20s, the throwing techniques even started to lose much popularity to wrestling!
Kano couldn't have this (he himself preferred throwing/standing), so he started emphasizing throwing over ground fighting. One of the teachers who had preferred ground fighting, however, was Mitsuyo Maeda (a.k.a. "Count Coma"). Maeda was the victor of many tournaments, so Kano sent him on a "Judo is great" tour that ended in Brazil. He opened a school in Brazil, where he taught his personal blend of Judo, Jujitsu, and striking. In 1925, Brazilian politician Gastao Gracie hired Maeda to teach his sons Carlos and Helio. While Carlos was big and strong already, Helio was tiny but tenacious. He was the more devoted and driven of the two brothers, so he wound being the better fighter. Gradually, the Gracie brothers adapted what they learned to fit their own tastes (and Helio's diminutive stature). They challenged many people, typically won, and ...blah blah blah... Royce Gracie, UFC, Dana White, and so on.

While there has been no mention yet (at least to my knowledge) of Batman having learned Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, our modern story of him should include the idea that a young Bruce would have traveled to Rio de Janeiro with a Portuguese phrasebook and learned Gracie-style Jiu-Jitsu. While Batman’s goal is to never get taken to the ground, he would also be prepared for just such an occurrence.

-Much of the historical information on Jujitsu was adapted from Fay Goodman’s “A Handbook of Martial Arts”.
-A good portion of this was taken from comments I previously made on Building Batman. See http://buildingbatman.blogspot.com/2009/09/jiu-jitsui.html
Also check out http://buildingbatman.blogspot.com/2009/09/oikiryy-jiu-jitsu.html
-The information about BJJ's origins in Judo comes from a great article by Kelly Crigger, "Maximum Efficiency Minimum Effort", in the June 2009 issue of Fight Magazine.

Superman/Batman: Public Enemies

2009-10-01T18:04:00.001-07:00

The sixth DC animated original movie is based on the issues/TPB by Jeph Loeb and Ed McGuinness.
Overall, it’s pretty good, but not as enjoyable as I expected.

The story is based on a great concept, but the plotting leaves a little to be desired, as does the dialogue. The fights are excellent, but the character sketches look like ridiculous action figures (Batman actually looks pretty good, though) (Amanda Waller is so grotesquely, cartoonishly fat that she looks like Helga from "The Oblongs") and the backgrounds and designs look like they belong in cheap Saturday morning cartoons.

The real highlight of the movie is the voice acting. Kevin Conroy is as amazing as usual as Batman, and Tim Daly and Clancy Brown are great as Superman and Lex Luthor, respectively. Allison Mack (known as Chloe on “Smallville”) is pretty good as Power Girl (but it’s hard to take her seriously as the character design has insanely large breasts and a butch haircut).
Sadly, Malcolm McDowell did not return as Metallo and John C. McGinley is not particularly impressive when he does his few lines. Also, the voice acting for Hiro (Toyman) is rather atrocious.

Despite its flaws, it’s still cool to see a bunch of B- and C-list characters go up against the two greatest superheroes ever.

I would suggest the deluxe edition DVD, though, for the special features. There is a cool little exploration (although my Psychology-major girlfriend was unimpressed) of the mentalities of Superman and Batman. There is a dinner conversation between Kevin Conroy and others involved in the production that is pretty cool for a Batman fan. There are two great episodes of “Superman: The Animated Series” that feature Batman and Superman teaming up. There is also a look at the upcoming “Crisis on Two Earths”.

Me, Chi, and Bruce Lee

2009-10-01T16:11:00.001-07:00

Brian Preston’s book – subtitled “Adventures in Martial Arts from the Shaolin Temple to the Ultimate Fighting Championship” – is an enjoyable journal of sorts. It’s comparable to Matthew Polly’s “American Shaolin” in that it’s about a wimpy westerner who trains in the martial arts and provides some insightful writing regarding the history and culture. It’s rather different, though, as Matt Polly was a young man at the time he trained, and he specifically trained in a Shaolin school for about a year. Preston, however, is a mid-lifer who starts learning a style of kung fu in Canada, and does some dabbling in Tai Chi, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, visits China for a couple of weeks, talks to a UCF fighter, and eventually settles on training Bagua in his backyard.

Overall, I think that Preston’s research into the arts he discusses leaves something to be desired. And his status as a pot-smoking, pacifistic journalist (who may be going through some sort of mid-life crisis and really only took up martial arts because his publisher told him that they should capitalize on the kung fu craze caused by films like “Kill Bill” and “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”) does not exactly make him look like an authority on the subject.

Nevertheless, I enjoyed the book because Preston visits some Wudang schools, as well as the actual Shaolin Temple, meets Royce Gracie, and talks to UFC fighter Jeff Monson. He also talks a bit about Bruce Lee, both positively and negatively, so at least his opinion is balanced. Unfortunately, his first master and master’s master seem to be crazy kung fu bullshitters in a lot of ways.

I would suggest it if you’re just looking for an entertaining read and know enough about the subject already to not take Preston at his word. If you’re new to the martial arts, or looking for something definitive, then read something else.

8th

2009-09-29T08:32:00.000-07:00

Hello, dear readers (few though you may be).

I have been rather busy for the last few days. I haven't written the next piece of "Batman -- Martial Artist" because I've been so busy (and in my head I'm thinking it will be rather lengthy).

I have been working as a Production Assistant on a short film being made by some fellow UCF students. As a PA, I've been doing a little of everything (I've dealt with equipment, recorded a small bit of the audio, dealt with some of the food [craft services], and even been an extra). It's been time-consuming and very tiring, but it's been worth it because I've gotten to work with some great people.

I know that none of you will probably ever see the film, but I encourage you to visit the production site at http://8ththefilm.blogspot.com.
The film is called "8th" and it is a nice little coming-of-age piece about friends having to separate. It's written and directed by a cool cat named Marcos, and produced by a cool chick named Rene.

Check it out.

The Unfettered Mind

2009-09-23T17:53:00.000-07:00

I just read "The Unfettered Mind" Writings of the Zen Master to the Sword Master by Takuan Soho.

It is an excellent little book that contains extensive letters to a sword master (or possibly two sword masters). Takuan Soho was a Zen master who was quite famous in his day and recognized as a very wise man. He was a spiritual mentor of sorts to the famed Musashi Miyamoto (considered by many to be the best swordsman to have ever lived). Two of the three pieces were written to Yagyu Munenori (one of the best; instructor to a couple of shogun; author of a book that is comparable to Musashi's). The third piece of writing in the book was written either to Yagyu Munenori or Ono Tadaaki (another great sword master).

The book really doesn't have much to do with martial arts on the superficial level. However, Takuan's writings show a desire to infuse Zen into anything and everything people do. So, just as one should be spiritual in meditation, he should be spiritual in his day-to-day tasks, and be spiritual in his martial arts practice.

I recommend this book to anyone, really, but especially to those interested in philosophy.

Batman -- Martial Artist - 01 - Boxing

2009-09-21T15:52:00.000-07:00

Superman: Last Son

2009-09-19T16:53:00.000-07:00

If you read my review of “Green Lantern: Rebirth” you might be able to pick up on my subtle dislike of the writing of Geoff Johns. This dislike leads me to wonder who had more to do with “Superman: Last Son” – Geoff Johns or Richard Donner.

“Last Son” is quite excellent. Richard Donner and Geoff Johns provide a great story in which a young Kryptonian boy shows up in Metropolis, General Zod and his minions escape the Phantom Zone and wreak havoc, Superman is imprisoned, and Lex Luthor leads a group of villains on a heroic mission.

It’s a great, kind of old-fashioned Superman story, filled with continuity craziness, an unlikely team-up, and a TON of action. Issue 4 is mostly done in “Phantom Zone Vision”, and you get a super cool effect by looking through the 3D glasses provided. This is a great, gimmicky type thing that enhances the feeling that you’re reading a story that is on par with the best Gold and Silver Age Superman stories, as well as the Dick Donner portions of the Superman movies.

I always like Adam Kubert’s art style, even if it kind of looks like it goes straight from rough sketch to the printer.

I can only suggest that you go out and buy this book right now.

1985

2009-09-19T16:48:00.001-07:00

I’m usually a big fan of whatever Mark Millar does. Especially when it comes to superhero comics. That said, “1985” is a bit disappointing.

I thought it would be a nice story that called back to the Marvel comics of the mid-80s. It kind of is, but it’s really more about a young boy who likes Marvel comics in this time period. It’s a rather odd story, in which super villains invade the “real” world. I don’t find the plot “twist”/explanation particularly satisfying. I kind of wish that Millar would have just done another superhero comic, with no “What is reality?” gimmick.

Tommy Lee Edwards has an interesting pencil style. I don’t really feel strongly about it, one way or another.

Plenty of people enjoy this story, but I’m not going to suggest it.

Superman: Kryptonite

2009-09-19T16:41:00.001-07:00

Darwyn Cooke is a genius. Plain and simple. And, like me, he doesn’t like event comics. Event comics are pretty much the reason why he doesn’t write in continuity. Event comics always include retcons or such major changes that whatever a writer does to a character one year may be completely moot or forgotten the next. So, Darwyn Cooke (genius, remember) writes stories that stand outside of continuity so that they can stand the test of time. “New Frontier”, his work on Batman, and his run of Will Eisner’s The Spirit are great examples, and so is “Superman: Kryptonite”.

While Darwyn has a different idea about Kent’s first contact with Kryptonite and introduces a character that may or may not sit well with Superman fans, he still presents a wonderful Superman story that deals with the Big Blue Boy Scout’s origins and mortality. The relationships are great and the plot is good, and Tim Sale’s art is as great as ever. We get to see Superman sip champagne atop the Eiffel Tower, fight a volcano, learn about Krypton, and almost die. Lex Luthor is his usual badness. Lois Lane is her usual spunkiness. Jimmy Olsen is his usual eagerness. It’s all there and it’s all good.

The art of Tim Sale and the timelessness of Darwyn’s story make this seem like a spiritual sequel to “Superman for All Seasons”. I highly recommend this book.

Green Lantern: Rebirth

2009-09-19T16:31:00.000-07:00

I’ve never been a big fan of Green Lantern. Actually, I should clarify: I love the idea of Green Lantern, but there are too few examples of good execution. It’s an idea with so much potential, but the stories almost always fall short for my taste. Alan Moore’s work is excellent, of course. I love Frank Miller’s Hal Jordan in “Dark Knight Strikes Again”. Darwyn Cooke’s “New Frontier” is astonishing. I enjoyed Kyle Rayner in JLA. I liked the Green Lantern episode of “Superman: The Animated Series”. I even liked John Stewart in the animated “Justice League”, Hal Jordan in “Green Lantern: First Flight”, and the “Duck Dodgers” episode in which Kevin Smith has a voice cameo.

These exceptions are few and far between, really. Geoff Johns’s “Green Lantern: Rebirth” is not one of these exceptions. I’ve been hearing great things about “Blackest Night”, so I thought I might actually buy the TPB when it comes out. To prepare myself, I finally bought the TPB of “Rebirth”. I hated the idea of bringing Hal Jordan back to life when I first heard about it years ago. Hell, I hated the fact that he was around as The Spectre! To me, bringing characters back to life simply makes their deaths meaningless. And resurrection is a plot premise that is WAY too overused.

“Rebirth” is a rather poorly paced story, and Geoff Johns fills almost every page with words. A writer’s job is not necessarily to put so many words on each page. The only writers who can really get away with doing that are Frank Miller and Alan Moore, and Geoff Johns is NOWHERE near their level. (Also, Miller and Moore each usually pare their stuff down so the artist can do his job too, as comic books are a visual medium.)

Ethan Van Sciver pencils pretty typical superhero figures. He’s certainly a good artist, but judging by this book alone, he might be better suited for non-sequential things, like ads, covers, or character designs.

Overall, it’s a pretty disappointing read. My local comic book supplier tells that it was Johns in his earlier days, and I should give him a try again, but I do have issue zero (Free Comic Book Day) of “Blackest Night”, and I’m still unimpressed.

Batman -- Martial Artist - Prologue

2009-09-17T18:51:00.000-07:00

(I’m going to preface this by giving some credit to “Bruce” over at Building Batman for inspiration.)

This is the beginning of a series about Batman’s martial arts training. Batman is one of the most fascinating characters in all of fiction, and probably THE most fascinating character in all of comic books (there are lots of characters who would tie for a close second, though).
One of the things that have always interested me most about Batman is his physical capabilities. Foremost among these is his combat proficiency.

This prologue will just lay out some of the arts that Batman has trained in (or that some writers have suggested he’s trained in). In future writings for this series, I will point to a particular story that mentions or depicts Batman training in a martial art, and I will write a bit about that art’s history and why Batman would (or would not) learn that art. I will do my best to go in historical order, but I may jump around a bit because of timelines/continuities.

According to superhero expert Scott Beatty’s entertaining “training manual”, “The Batman Handbook”, there are ten major martial arts that Batman mixes and utilizes:
Aikido
Boxing
Capoeira
Hapkido
Judo
Jujitsu
Karate
Krav Maga
Kung Fu
Savate

In Scott Beatty’s “The Ultimate Guide to the Dark Knight”, he states:
“There are 127 major styles of combat. While abroad, Bruce learned them all, from Aikido to Yaw-Yan. His knowledge of so many varied disciplines has made Bruce an unconventional and unpredictable opponent, quite capable of countering a Savate kick with a Capoeira dodge, then kayoing with a paw-knuckle strike!”

I should be writing about all of the aforementioned arts.

Afro Samurai: Resurrection

2009-09-13T12:12:00.001-07:00

I’ve been wanting to get “Afro Samurai: Resurrection” since it came out. And I finally did it! Yay for me (and for my girlfriend, who also likes Afro Samurai).
This time around, instead of being 5 OVA episodes, it’s an hour-and-a-half feature. The action is just as good as in the first “Afro Samurai”, and the voice work is as excellent as you’d expect (Samuel L. Jackson! Lucy Liu!) (retroactive props to Ron Perlman [!] for his work in the first, and Kelly Hu [!] for hers). And… Oh. My. God. The RZA’s music is as incredible as ever.

I love this movie, even though the story has its logic flaws. Despite the flaws in the logic and characterization of the villains, the movie does a great job of discussing Afro’s motives and methods (he killed so many people just so he could avenge his father, and now it’s only natural that there are family members of his victims who would want [and deserve(?)] revenge against him).

I made sure to spend the extra bit of coin to get the 2-disc special edition director’s cut. Spending that money got me some nudity, sex, and swearing in the actual movie. It also got me “over 100 minutes of special features” that include:
-exclusive insight from creator Takashi “Bob” Okazaki
-GONZO studios interviews about the Japanese side of production
-interviews with people on the American side of production (including the awesome Sam Jackson, and the gorgeous Lucy Liu)
-a cool behind-the-music thing with RZA
-a look at “Afro Samurai: The Game” (which I’ve played and loved)
-a cool feature about the Afro Samurai stuff at Comic-Con 2008
-insightful video commentary with the Japanese side of production
-a little booklet with art and stuff from the creator, director, and RZA

Anime. Hip-hop. Samurai. Sword fighting. Japanese culture. Black American culture. Samuel L. Jackson. Lucy Liu.
If you like ANY of these things or people, go out and buy “Afro Samurai: Resurrection”.

Wolverine: Weapon X

2009-09-13T11:40:00.001-07:00

I should preface this by saying that I (1) dislike event comics (so I’m not enjoying “Dark Reign”) and (2) I have never liked Wolverine’s son Daken (neither as a character nor as a story point).
So, naturally, I’m not really enjoying the main Wolverine monthly title and hate that Marvel decided to create a new Wolverine monthly title.

So, at first I was against Wolverine: Weapon X. However, after really giving the series a chance, I’ve gotta say I’m digging it. I like Jason Aaron’s writing and Ron Garney’s pencils on this series. I like to see Logan being a real bad-ass stealth fighter. It’s so cool to see a black-clothed Wolverine going up against a platoon of soldiers who have pretty much the same powers as him.

If you wanna see some great action, see Maverick being a bad-ass without his powers, and get a pretty much perfect rendition of Wolverine (how he speaks, acts, and looks are all spot on), then you should definitely be picking up Wolverine: Weapon X.

Vagabond, volume 1

2009-09-13T11:28:00.001-07:00

I’ve been in a mood for some manga and anime, as well as martial arts and samurai stuff, so I thought I’d get in on the manga Vagabond. I recently bought the first volume of the Viz Big Edition of the series (it contains essentially the first three volumes of the series).

Takehiko Inoue’s series is loosely based on the novel “Musashi” by Eiji Yoshikawa. Now, I’m a big fan of the legendary swordsman Miyamoto Musashi, which is why I bought the volume of Vagabond. Unfortunately, for my tastes/expectations, this is a manga that is loosely based on a novel that is a fictionalized account of the life of one of my martial arts idols.

The book isn’t that bad. Inoue’s art is good, certainly. The sword fighting is done pretty well and I enjoy the martial arts side of the book, but the story seems lacking. The characterization isn’t all there. Perhaps the problem is that the character of Musashi is a work-in-progress, so maybe I need to read more of the series.
This first volume doesn’t make me want to run out and get the rest of the series, but I figure if I have some extra money (actually, a LOT of extra money; enough money that I feel I can waste some) eventually, I might pick up the next volume and give it an extra chance to engage me.

Dynamic Karate

2009-09-13T11:00:00.000-07:00

It’s not a new book (published originally in 1966), and I’ve had my eye on it for a few years (frequently seeing it in a book store and thinking “Hmmm…”), but I only recently (finally) got around to purchasing M. Nakayama’s "Dynamic Karate".

These are the chapters:
Chapter 1:
Stance and Posture
Chapter 2:
Applying Power in the Hips
Chapter 3:
Balance and Center of Gravity
Chapter 4:
Hands and Feet Can be Weapons
Chapter 5:
Tsuki (Punching) Theory and Practice
Chapter 6:
Uchi (Striking) Theory and Practice
Chapter 7:
Keri (Kicking) Theory and Practice
Chapter 8:
Uke (Blocking) Theory and Practice
Chapter 9:
Defense and Countering Joudan (Upper) Attacks
Chapter 10:
Defense and Countering Chuudan (Mid-Section) Attacks
Chapter 11:
Defense and Countering Gedan (Lower) Attacks
Chapter 12:
Basic Training
Chapter 13:
Calisthenics and Exercises

It’s an excellent book for anyone looking for some insights into the basic movements of Shotokan karate. While it doesn’t outline the kata (so you won’t really learn the system overall), it does provide great pictures that go through basic moves in great detail.

While it doesn’t really teach an experienced practitioner any new moves, it’s good to go through the basics and get some of this master’s insights and training methods.

I suggest it for both casual and serious, beginning and advanced practitioners of martial arts. The $30.00 cover price is worth it.

Ultimate Wolverine VS. Hulk (finally!)

2009-09-13T09:56:00.000-07:00

All the way back in early 2006, Damon Lindelof and Leinil Francis Yu started what was to be a mind-blowing mini-series. The first two issues certainly lived up to the promise, and promised more to come. Unfortunately, the third issue didn’t come out until May 2009.

I bought those first two issues way back in early 2006, and have recently purchased the last four issues of "Ultimate Wolverine VS. Hulk", finally completing the series.

The art is great. I like Yu’s pencil style. Of, course, the story idea is awesome. Wolverine-Hulk fights rarely (if ever) disappoint. And the actual fighting in the mini-series is anything but disappointing. Wolverine’s characterization is super cool, and the Hulk is done well. Unfortunately, the last four issues that we fans had to wait three years for are pretty disappointing story-wise. Why? Betty Banner as She-Hulk, that’s why.

Sorry to Lindelof if I’m giving away the “big twist” that comes mid- late-series, but I don’t think I’m really spoiling anything for would-be readers (especially since She-Hulk is on the cover of issue 4).
For some damn reason, Lindelof decided to ruin an otherwise great story with the one of the most stupid ideas to pop up in the Ultimate universe.

I still suggest it for anyone looking for some cool Wolverine action and dialogue, and some cool Banner/Hulk discussion. If you’re really averse to She-Hulk and dumb ideas though, maybe you should steer clear.

Ultimate Comics Spider-Man

2009-09-07T18:03:00.000-07:00

Okay, so, I didn't read "Ultimatum" (I plan to buy the TPB eventually) and I haven't been able to get my hands on Ultimate Spider-Man: Requiem #2, but I did just pick up the first two issues of Ultimate Comics Spider-Man.

I read Ultimate Spider-Man from about issue 20 to its recent "end". For the most part, it was a highly enjoyable blend of superheroism and teenage angst (I say "for the most part" because, well... Bendis did the clone stuff too...). Now, the new series starts off at issue 1 and it's six months after Magneto's tidal wave attack (which devastated New York and killed many of the heroes). Peter is dating Gwen instead of Mary Jane, the Daily Bugle is out of business (so Spider-Man has to work in fast food, which is hilarious), and things in general are a bit topsy-turvy.

Now, I must admit that I'm very interested and want to see how the series develops. I think the "jump" certainly allows for some accelerated story-telling, but....
While I'm not a professional writer, I do enjoy the craft of writing. Jumping ahead six months is typicaly laziness, I think. It's an attempt to move the story along without actually having to develop the interim stuff.

Still, I look forward to the series (though the re-numbering is dumb, as it usually is in the comics industry). Bendis is still writing fantastically, and even though I'm not sure if I can really like Lafuente's art style, it does bring a new flavor.

2009-09-07T15:14:00.001-07:00

Okay, so, you can probably tell that there are ads on the blog (or at least will be). I'm not going to ask you to click on them or anything (I'm not allowed to, actually), but I do hope that you won't view me harshly.

I hope that you can continue to enjoy this blog and not hold my selling out against me.

The Bad Art Collection

2009-09-07T14:54:00.001-07:00

(I know this was made LONG ago, but I only just now bought and read it.)

Johnen Vasquez’s “Bad Art Collection” is an interesting piece of work. On the inside cover, he claims that the art and jokes are intentionally bad, and I believe him. However, just because you make something bad on purpose doesn’t mean that it winds up being good.

I love “Johnny the Homicidal Maniac”, “Squee!”, “I Feel Sick”, and of course “Invader Zim”. The “B.A.C.” is somewhat akin to the Meanwhiles and Happy Noodle Boy pieces in Vasquez’s past works, but… well, it’s just not there.

Good thing, though, is that it only has a $1.95 cover price.

Dick Grayson as Batman

2009-09-07T14:20:00.000-07:00

I’m now caught up on Batman (the title, not the character overall; this is the only regular Bat-title I bother to read). So, I just read Part Three of “Long Shadows”. This is part of the “Batman: Reborn” line. Right now, Dick Grayson is Batman, Damien Wayne is Robin, and Tim Drake is Red Robin. Also, Two-Face is able to tell that the man in the cowl isn’t the TRUE Batman.

Now, I was initially dead set against Bruce’s death. I still am. I think it’s stupid. I don’t think it brings anything good to the character, readers, or the DCU. Bruce Wayne is an amazing, fantastically rich character (and I’m not just talking about his money). Most other characters, even Dick Grayson, fall short in terms of character depth when compared to Bruce.
Hating the whole “R.I.P” story and his death in “Final Crisis”, of course I hated the idea of Grayson as Batman and the whole Robin/Red Robin thing. As of Batman #690, however, I can kind of get behind Dick Grayson as Batman. Still don’t like the overall idea, hate that Tim Drake is running around as Red Robin while Damien Wayne is Robin, but I am now actually enjoying Grayson behind the iconic mask.

So far, Winick is writing okay and Bagley is drawing alright.

We’ll have to see where this goes.

(Also, I’d like people to note that this ain’t the first time Dick filled in for Bruce)

Ponyo

2009-09-07T14:11:00.001-07:00

“Ponyo” is the latest film by animation genius Hayao Miyazaki. The same cat who brought us “Princess Mononoke” and “Spirited Away” has done a pretty cool movie about an adorable, magical goldfish who turns into a human girl.

Now, as a general rule, I’m not a fan of fantasy. Miyazaki, however, is a master of the genre and usually wins me over. I did enjoy “Ponyo”, but I don’t think it’s the masterpiece that most people are making it out to be. That said, I’m not sure if any of the Studio Ghibli films is better than the next, but personal preference winds up playing a big part in enjoyment of each film. I prefer the R-rated “Princess Mononoke” that contains violence and action and adults driving the plot over the G-rated “Ponyo” (the English version being about the love between the youngest Jonas brother and Hannah Montana’s sister).

I really enjoyed the action-y part in which Ponyo is running on the fish-waves (you’d have to see it to know what the hell I’m talking about). This part actually made me really want to see a Flash movie, and some of the underwater stuff made me want to see at least an animated Aquaman movie.

The other day in Japanese class, I overheard a girl talking about seeing the movie with a friend. Her friend was apparently like “This is dumb. I don’t get it. What the hell?!?” and she responded with “Just go with it. Let go of your expectations. You just have to sit back and watch.” I felt like this friend of my classmate had some fair criticism. There’s nothing wrong with you if you don’t like fantasy and want a movie to make sense.

Now, I was able to “let go” and just enjoy a kiddy fantasy movie, but it certainly wasn’t without its flaws. The number one rule for movies is that they shouldn’t break their own rules. A problem with this movie is that the rules aren’t very clearly established, so by the end I’m not entirely sure whether the rules are strictly followed or not. The end, unfortunately, is a bit anti-climactic.

The English voice cast is pretty good. I was originally a bit ticked that Disney went to such in-house pandering lengths as to cast Frankie Jonas (the little brother to the tween-oriented band the Jonas Brothers) and Noah Cyrus (the little sister of Miley Cyrus) in the lead roles. Surprisingly, the kids did well, though I think Disney should have gone with seasoned (adult) vets like Tress Macneille, Pamela Hayden, and Bumper Robinson (to name only a few). Tina Fey did alright. So did Betty White, Cloris Leachman, and Cate Blanchett. Liam Neeson was excellent as usual. Matt Damon was unnecessarily cast (his character had only a handful of lines! Why cast a big-name for that when you could get Billy West or someone like that for much cheaper?).
A problem was that the original dialogue doesn’t seem to translate well, so some of the actors are stifled by what seems to be bad writing.

Overall, I enjoyed it, but I don’t know if I’ll ever get the DVD. We’ll see. “Spirited Away” had to grow on me over time.

Is anyone out there?

2009-09-05T08:28:00.001-07:00

I know it's been a long time. This has been because of a mixture of laziness and lack of money (if I can't see movies or buy comics, what will I review or talk about?).

However, if I have just ONE reader, I will keep posting!

So, if you're a reader, please post a comment to let me know!!!!

"Futurama" renewal

2009-06-17T20:57:00.000-07:00

Best news ever (even with a near-revolution occurring in Iran):

FUTURAMA IS RENEWED!!!

It's about goddamned time!

Finally, someone has had enough sense to bring back one of the funniest, smartest, best shows ever (sometimes I think it may even be better than "The Simpsons").

Check out the news at Entertainment Weekly:

http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2009/06/its-official-futurama-returns.html

And check out the official site/forum of Billy West (today's Mel Blanc and more):

http://www.billywest.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4862&PN=1

This is truly a glorious day.

The State of Comics

2009-06-09T14:34:00.001-07:00

I am afraid.
I am afraid of becoming one of those people who loved comic books for a time but eventually couldn’t take all of the changes and quit reading new stuff.

Every time there are major changes across the board in comic books, there are many people who quit reading, while new readers pick up the slack. There are people who decry the “grittiness” that came about in the 1980s. There are people who stopped reading in the 1990s because of the proliferation of X-titles and the superficial focus one the artists and splash-pages. A lot of people who had quit reading were brought back in with the Ultimate line.

Comics have now come to a point that I almost can’t stand reading most of them. Every year, there is at least one big event that’s supposed to rock the universe of each of the Big Two. One is the minimum. There are usually a few crises or wars that are supposed to change things forever. And it’s not artistic. It’s commercial. Purely commercial. And it ruins things for anyone who doesn’t want to buy 20 titles per company per month just to be able to keep up.

Aside from that, I think many comic writers have run out of good ideas. Or, at least, ideas I enjoy. A while back, I dropped “Ultimate X-Men” and “Ultimates” from my pull because of declining quality and terrible convolution. I’ve only kept “Ultimate Spider-Man” because Bendis has stayed on, though it has declined a bit. I stopped reading “Daredevil” shortly after Bendis stopped writing it. I may soon drop “Punisher” because it seems that no one can compare to Garth Ennis.
It was difficult enough to keep up with what was happening to Batman when I only bought “Batman” and none of the other Bat-titles or miniseries. Now, this whole “death” thing is just pissing me off. Morrison’s “R.I.P.” was terrible. I read some good things about Morrison and Quitely’s “Batman and Robin” over at http://buildingbatman.blogspot.com/ but I don’t really like the idea of anyone but Wayne behind the cowl.

Nothing that I read or hear about in comics really captures my interest anymore. Maybe I’m just being old-fashioned, like the people who miss the Silver Age. Maybe I can’t change with the times. Still, I have to wonder if people are really happy with stories like “R.I.P” and “Brand New Day” or if comic book fans are simply resigned to accept whatever they’re given because they have nowhere else to go for stories featuring their favorite heroes.

If more people feel like I do, I hope that we can come together to demand more from the Big Two. The first step is to stop buying the crap.

Terminator Salvation

2009-06-09T14:33:00.000-07:00

This movie is amazing. It’s a fantastic war movie and a great story about underdogs fighting their oppressors.
I had some reservations about McG directing, but I figured he couldn’t do any worse than “T3”. Luckily, he did a great job and I think this movie stands well with the first two.
It’s filled with delightful little references and the look of it is fantastic.
This is the closest that Christian Bale has ever come to one-note acting, but he is great as John Connor.

I’m definitely looking forward to the DVD.

Star Trek

2009-06-09T14:31:00.001-07:00

The new flick is pretty fantastic. While I’m a casual fan of the old cast, I think that these new guys do a great job.
This movie has great action and decent characterization, but it does lack the scientific and philosophical depth of some of the original episodes/movies.

I’m definitely looking forward to whatever else J.J. Abrams and the new cast and writers bring on.

(P.S. I intended to write a review after seeing it opening night, but I have definitely let the blog slip. So long as somebody’s reading it, though, I’ll keep it up.)

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

2009-05-01T19:59:00.001-07:00

It was alright. Certainly not the worst comic book movie out there, but not the best. There are some stupid, unnecessary shots and some lousy lines, but it’s still good that they made a solo Wolverine flick.

The first scene is rushed and WAY too melodramatic. After that, there’s a pretty kick-ass montage over the credits. Wolverine’s characterization is mostly solid, and most of the characters are presented fairly well. A big complaint I have is that there are about twelve back-flips in every fight. Also, some of the CGI looks really cartoonish. Wolverine’s claws looked great in the first three movies, but for some reason they’re pretty lousy and foolishly used in most of this movie.

While most of the actors do their jobs admirably, Hugh Jackman is certainly the best aspect of this movie. His acting is spot on. There’s a scene in which he gets his heart broken, and it is perfectly played. Hugh Jackman’s physique is impressive as well, though this is nothing new. Weak-ass pussies who never hit the gym should be inspired by this man who trained like an animal.

I read an interview in with the director in an issue of Wizard Magazine, and it was apparent that the director didn’t really care about the character. The movie shows that he doesn’t really do action well, and he should stick with drama/art films. If there is a sequel, I hope the producers go with a better, somewhat subtler action director than Gavin Hood.

If I go see it a second time in theaters, it will be because of Jackman’s great performance. Still, you should see it once. I know I’ll buy the DVD because I love Wolverine. If you do see it, make sure you sit ALL the way through the credits.

Dragonball Evolution

2009-04-16T10:40:00.000-07:00

I was expecting worse.

I’m not gonna say it’s a great movie. Not even gonna say it’s a good movie. But it certainly isn’t the worst thing I’ve ever seen. Most of the acting is pretty lousy, and it’s pretty cheesy at many points. It’s effects-laden as opposed to substantive, and it isn’t clear as to whether it’s aimed at kids or an older crowd. Still, it has its genuinely funny moments, and some of the fights are fairly well done.

I’m a big fan of the series. I have been for years. When I was in elementary and middle school, I bought the toys, cards, comics, and seemingly countless videotapes. Even throughout high school, I enjoyed the comics and some DVDs. Now, even as I’m in college, I still read the comics and buy DVDs. I love the series. So, of course, I’d rather the film stayed more true to the source material. Even though it’s quite different in detail from the series, I think that the spirit is still there.

Justin Chatwin actually isn’t bad as Goku. Goku’s origin story is mucked up a bit, but this would force the filmmakers to go in a rather different direction if there is a sequel (though low box office could prevent this), and that could be interesting to see.
Chow Yun-Fat is great as Roshi. This was to be expected, though. Who doesn’t love Chow Yun-Fat? Idiots. That’s who.
James Marsters is pretty good as Piccolo. Piccolo really doesn’t have much screen time, though. And just how did he break out of the Mafuba?
Randall Duk Kim is pretty good as Grampa Gohan.
The rest of the cast is so-so, and often negligible.

There are many plot holes, unfortunately. How Piccolo got out of his prison is never explained. We never find out the origin of the Dragon Balls. Also, during the final fight, Goku’s (altered) origin is rather hastily explained. The first half of the movie is paced fairly well, and it’s not a half-bad quest/coming-of-age story, but then it starts to feel rushed. Towards the end, it’s feeling REALLY rushed.

Despite its flaws and great difference from the series that I love so much, I still think people should check it out. I’ll be buying the DVD when it comes out.

(I must note that I have no idea why they chose to call it “Evolution”. There doesn’t seem to be any real reason.)

...like unto iron.

2009-04-14T16:02:00.001-07:00

A fellow blogger and proponent of fitness/self-improvement recently wrote about Iron Kung Fu training -- http://the-biomatrix.blogspot.com/2009/04/iron-palm-hurts.html -- and this has inspired me to write about it as well. It’s something that I know a tiny bit about, and I’ll even manage to talk about comic books while I’m at it.

Before talking about what Iron Kung Fu training is, let’s talk about what it ain’t. It ain’t magic, folks. The sight of people breaking staffs and boards over a monk’s forearms or stomach is not the result of supernatural powers. You don’t have to be born with any particular traits (though a higher natural bone density doesn’t hurt in this area) (also, those staffs are usually made of weaker wood than real bo staffs). In fact, anyone can do this with the proper and lengthy training.

Iron Kung Fu training basically consists of hitting a particular part of the body (or hitting objects with a particular part of the body), healing that part, and then continuing. Wash, rinse, repeat. Always repeat. This is the basic method that works for the palms, fists, forearms, shins, and head. The stomach is a bit different. While all of the various focuses of Iron training require some sort of breathing techniques and Qi Gong techniques, the stomach especially focuses on this. Training for Iron Stomach is usually much less about hardening the stomach with multiple blows, and much more about controlling inhalation and exhalation so as to limit the amount of pain a blow to the solar plexus causes. This is also true for Iron Crotch. Though multiple blows (different kind of blows, fellas) are a big part of training the groin area, it’s best for the practitioner to be able to contract certain muscles so as to suck his testicles up into his cavity.

There are various scientific explanations for the effects of Iron Kung Fu training. One is simply desensitization to pain. If you’ve been hurt in the same spot a million times, you kind of get use to getting hurt in that spot. Another is calcium deposit increases. This is why the knuckles of boxers and fighters in general are generally bigger and harder than the average man’s. When you punch something hard enough (but not TOO hard), you can cause tiny, typically insignificant fractures in your knuckles. Your body then does its best to send calcium to where it’s most needed, and gradually the knuckles acquire more and more calcium than is normal. This Iron Fist training isn’t limited to boxers or Kung Fu practitioners, though. Check out the fists on any dedicated practitioner of Kyokushin karate, and you’ll notice that their knuckles are huge, but their fists are basically flat from years of gloveless punching, working the makiwara, and doing knuckle push-ups on hardwood and concrete. A similar thing happens to the shins of Muay Thai fighters and other kickboxers.

Matt Polly wrote about such training in his book American Shaolin. In the book, he talks about an Iron Crotch master he dubs “Monk Dong” (for obvious reasons). This Monk Dong is able to take hits to the groin area, hang cinder blocks from his penis, and pull heavy objects with a rope tied to his dong. Mr. Polly himself takes up Iron Forearm training and is pretty successful at it. He also describes a monk who is able to suction a bowl to his stomach, and no one is able to pull the bowl off of the monk’s body.

Shaolin monks have always been adept at these show-off type things. In fact, another photo of a young student being held up by spears is making the internet rounds. This is possible not only because of hard body training, but also because of proper distribution of weight over a certain surface area, and the fact that demo/training spears have dull tips.

I have advocated gloveless bag punching to all of my students and martial arts-minded friends for years now. If you start out pretty slow and just work your way up to hitting harder, you’ll be doing more realistic training while preventing injury. It’s good to punch and kick a variety of surfaces so as to best prepare your body for many different situations. Before I left my mother’s house for college, I would work the bag gloveless. I would also often punch a bucketful of rocks, trees, the floor, and any other surface I saw fit to hit. When I came to UCF, I had to leave my punching bag behind. I then mostly did shadowboxing, supplemented with hitting my floor (50 punches a day, six days a week), and occasionally punching and shin kicking a tree. Now, I’ve got a punching bag again, and I hope to continue to strengthen my fists (though I may have to take it easy for a while, as my knuckles have already bruised up).

One thing I’ve always been bad about is the healing half of Iron Kung Fu training. The smartest thing I do after bruising my knuckles and hurting my shins is icing them. I should be putting some salve or tiger balm on them, but I’m stupid. Pretty soon, I’ll probably have no other choice but to wise up and start doing some healing after each session.

Now, let’s talk about “Iron Fist”. Danny Rand is a master of all things Kung Fu. Like Richard Dragon, he was created to capitalize on the martial arts and eastern philosophy craze of the 70s. While the comics from the 70s to the 90s are mildly entertaining, the more recent “Immortal Iron Fist” series is brilliant. Ed Brubaker and Matt Fraction brought in new characters and ideas that mixed very well with the old, and the art of David Aja was pure genius. Now, there’s a new writer and artist, but it’s still pretty good. Danny Rand didn’t spend years punching trees and rubbing balm on his knuckles, though. He plunged his hands into the heart of an ever-reborn dragon, and fists became things “like unto iron”. He did spend years training in the martial arts, though. So don’t you youngsters go thinking that all you need to do is jam your hands into a dragon’s heart to become a master.

If you’ve learned nothing else from this much-too-long blog, at least let it be that you should check out The BioMatrix (http://www.the-biomatrix.net/index.htm), read Matt Polly’s book American Shaolin, and check out at least the first six issues of “Immortal Iron Fist”.

Now go punch a tree.

The "Reals" World

2009-03-28T19:33:00.000-07:00

I'm about to break some old news here, but it was new to me when I read about it not ten minutes ago....

There are REAL superheroes in this world.

I frequently visit the BioMatrix website, and I just read the newest article - http://www.the-biomatrix.net/who-are-the-real-life-superheroes.htm - and learned about real-life superheroes, who are often referred to as "Reals".

Apparently there are some concerned citizens out there who have been taking to the streets over the last several years in attempts to better their community and effect change. They wear costumes and go by names like The Dark Guardian, Geist, and Citizen Prime. They do good deeds like pick up litter, give food to homeless, and occasionally try to take care of petty criminals.

While there's something naturally off about someone willing to don a costume and walk the streets at night, I think that anybody who is actually working to make the world a better place seems pretty sane.

Check out the BioMatrix article and all of the links it provides for more info. It's pretty cool.

Is Superman an Ubermensch?

2009-03-25T20:18:00.000-07:00

The Superhero as a Nietzschean Construct

The concept of the superhero is often attributed to mythology. However, the idea owes at least as much to Nietzsche as to the ancient Greeks. In many ways, the idea of the superhero is similar to the idea of the Ubermensch. The superhero is someone who is stronger and generally better than the average man. A superhero typically operates above or outside the law. Like the Ubermensch, the superhero is someone who imposes his will to change the world to fit his desire.

Is Superman an example of Nietzsche’s concept of the Ubermensch? Denotatively, the words “Superman” and “Ubermensch” are the same. “Super” is Latin for “over”. “Uber” is the German equivalent. “Mensch” is simply “man”. Clearly, there was a Nietzschean influence on the creators of Superman, Jerry Siegel and Joe Schuster. The influence extends beyond just the character’s name. Before they had refined their idea in 1938, the two young men had created a character whom they called Superman who was not a super-powered do-gooder, but instead a mad scientist type who sought to rule the world with his great mental strength. While beings with powers beyond those of the average man have been featured in stories since the original tales of gods and goddesses, the creation of Superman in 1938 was the birth of the comic book superhero.

There are various examples that can be used to illustrate the connection between the comic book superhero and the Ubermensch. One that can be rather obvious and deliberate at times is Alan Moore’s 1980s take on the British superhero Miracleman (Marvelman, in England). There are numerous references throughout the Miracleman series to Nietzsche’s works. In the first issue, there is a quote from Thus Spoke Zarathustra. The secret military experiment that led to Miracleman’s creation is even called “Project Zarathustra”. Several characters even refer to Miracleman as the “overman”. Miracleman, like many superheroes, at first has a strong sense of morality and acts accordingly, but he gradually becomes amoral, going beyond such foolish, human ideas as “good” and “evil”, and rules (really just watches and occasionally grants wishes) over a world of neutrality and Perspectivism.

Even the quintessential human superhero Batman can be seen as an example of the Ubermensch idea. Batman is a self-made man, a perfect example of Will to Power. He violently imposes his will, and will even fight against governing bodies or law enforcement in order to achieve his personal goal of justice.

Though perhaps not immediately obvious, the popular Marvel Comics character Wolverine can be considered an Ubermensch. Wolverine is typically portrayed as an outsider with physical and tactical superiority over many of the people around him. He has little to no respect for law or even society in general. Still, like Batman and most other superheroes, he will violently impose his will at a moment’s notice.

Of course, some good arguments can be made against the idea that superheroes are a Nietzschean construct. A rather obvious argument is that superheroes are based on archetypal hero characters that have been present since ancient mythology. One could also point out that many superheroes often work in conjunction with law enforcement agencies. Also, superheroes typically uphold societal standards of morality, whereas Nietzsche wrote against such ideas as “standards” and “morality”.

While it is true that modern comic book superheroes do owe a great deal to the mythologies that came before them, the same can be said of most fictional characters. Archetypes are considered archetypes for a reason, and they will most likely continue to pop up in works of fiction for as long as people tell stories. While most superheroes do seem to be agents of a societal order, it’s important to note that they are considered heroic because they act in ways that are typically not allowable in a lawful civilization. Superheroes are generally violent and operate without license. While they do act according to what they think are the proper set of morals, it must be noted that Nietzsche’s preferred philosophy of Perspectivism is inherently flawed. Perspectivism is logically self-refuting, as you could easily stump a Perspectivist with the question, “Is it absolutely true that there are no absolute truths?”. So, surely superheroes can be forgiven for being imperfect examples of the Ubermensch concept.

While some good arguments can be made to the contrary, it is apparent that superheroes are generally examples of Nietzsche’s idea of the Ubermensch. Though they are imperfect constructs, they are Nietzschean constructs nevertheless.

------------------------------------------------------------------

(For my "Marx and Nietzsche" course this semester, I had to write a paper. I proposed writing a paper on the influence of Nietzsche on comic book superheroes, but my teacher said that comic books had nothing to do with philosophy. Before he denied my proposal, I had already written this short, rough draft. )

Master of Kung Fu

2009-03-17T20:54:00.001-07:00

While at MegaCon a few weeks ago, I was walking by one of the many booths selling $1 back issues. Out of the corner of my eye, I saw someone flipping through the issues in a box beneath a table. That young man was looking at issues of “The Hands of Shang-Chi: Master of Kung Fu”. When the guy was done looking, I took over. I bought twenty issues. They are awesome.

Now, I suggest you homeboys (and possibly homegirls) go check out the wikipedia article on Shang-Chi ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shang-Chi ). It’s an interesting character. Basically, because of Bruce Lee, Gordon Liu (36th Chamber of Shaolin star), and the “Kung Fu” TV series, there was an explosive martial arts craze in the ‘70s. Marvel Comics, of course, wanted to capitalize on this. Thus, Shang-Chi was born, essentially.

The issues I purchased were published between 1978 and 1980.
The series, on the surface, is half Bond movies (also popular at the time, of course) and half kung fu exploitation. Beneath the surface, there is some excellent dramatic exploration, thanks to the skillful and passionate writing of Doug Moench. The art is well done, especially by Paul Gulacy and then Mike Zeck.

The dramatic exploration deals with romantic relationships, fragile friendships, and familial loyalty. There is also the “fish out of water” problem, as Shang-Chi has to deal with this new, western and modern world.

Of course, it was the seventies, so some of it seems very tame and cheesy, but the overall quality is self-evident.

As both a martial artist and comic book fan, I greatly enjoyed the issues I bought and read. This was not my first introduction to the character, as I had known of him in general, and he was featured in a few issues of “Ultimate Spider-Man”. But before he was seen in the pages of “Ultimate Spider-Man”, he was the feature character in a couple of issues of “Ultimate Marvel Team-Up”. These issues are some of the finest martial arts-related comics I have ever read. And, being written by Brian Michael Bendis, they make up a good story in general.

I suggest that anyone with any interest in either comic books or martial arts check out “Master of Kung Fu”. Shang-Chi stands up there with Iron Fist, Richard Dragon, Lady Shiva, and other great comic book martial artists.

(Also, for me, bonuses with these old comics are all of the old ads for muscle building courses, x-ray specs, selling seeds, and assuredly crappy at-home karate courses. I can’t imagine what it must have been like to grow up in that era.)

Watchmen

2009-03-06T05:07:00.001-08:00

It’s pretty good.

The good parts in it are actually fucking astounding, but the bad parts are utterly terrible. But, like with all things relating to superheroes, the good triumphs over the bad.

I typically cringe at the sound of someone saying, “They used the panels from the comic as the storyboard!” I don’t think that making a direct, shot-for-shot recreation of a comic book necessarily makes for a good film. So, I did go into Watchmen with some reservations as to whether it might be TOO faithful.
Luckily, that wasn’t the case.

Snyder and team did a good job of changing, dropping, or adding just the right things, for the most part. There are some parts of the book I would really like to have seen, but the movie does stand well on what it’s got.

While I don’t really agree with all of the bright color choices (which seemed extra odd, as the Watchmen book isn’t really all that brightly colored…), I do think that the film was amazingly beautiful to look at. The cinematography is really top-notch.

The music is perfect. All of the song choices were correct and well-placed, and the original score makes parts of the movie even more stunning (especially the scene in which Osterman is atomized).

The acting is good overall, but some of the performances reeked of ham. Silk Spectre II is portrayed with some one-note acting, and Carla Gugino does a surprisingly bad job at playing Silk Spectre I.
Jeffrey Dean Morgan is fantastic as the Comedian, somehow nailing the simultaneous hatred and pity/love that we must feel for the character.
Jackie Earle Haley does an admirable job as Rorschach, though some of his narration is a little difficult to take seriously.
Matthew Goode is good at making Ozymandias disturbing, and does a commendable job of adding some interesting back-story to his character.
Billy Crudup does an amazing job as the voice/movement/human part of Doctor Manhattan. He carries out the difficult task of delivering some of the most inhumane dialogue ever written in a voice that attempts at comfort.
Probably the best actor of the troupe is Patrick Wilson. His portrayal of Nite-Owl II is absolutely perfect. When he’s in the guise of Dan Dreiberg, he’s a genuine Clark Kent: clumsy, unattractive, and impotent. When he’s wearing his true skin as Nite-Owl, he’s the Overman: graceful, strong, and passionate.

It is a rather violent movie. While some moments of violent are examples of exploitative trash in a film that should be above that, most of the violence is done tastefully. When these guys fight, they REALLY fight. I really only take issue with the popping of bone out of the skin, the shattering of a leg with a bullet, and the far-too-detailed cutting off of someone’s arms. Other than that, I love the action.

It compares well with the book, I think, as they are two very different entities. The book offers much more characterization and philosophy, while the movie offers things that a comic book simply can’t: music and more dynamic action. Everyone should go see it. The 160 minutes go by quickly enough. And you should definitely try it in IMAX.

(Can't wait for this sequel!)

MegaCon 2009

2009-03-02T16:22:00.000-08:00

It was that time of year again...

For the sixth year in a row, I attended Orlando's premier comic book, anime, sci-fi, fantasy, and collectibles convention.

Like every year, there were big smelly guys (and girls), twelve-year-olds doing their best to look like they aren't twelve, and various people in skimpy clothing (girl and guy alike). And, like every year, I tend to miss it when it's over.

I started going to MegaCon with my high school's Anime Club. We'd all take a short road trip from Jacksonville to Orlando, get hotel rooms, and have a ton of unsupervised fun for a weekend. Those weekends could simultaneously the best and the worst of the year, as there was always some sort of drama, romantic or otherwise, within the group (I was usually a participating actor in said dramas), but it was always a great time spent with friends, or people who were merely acquaintances on any other day. I loved those trips. I loved the time spent with friends more than the massive amount of nerdly goodies I'd invariably buy.

But alas, this year proved to be something of an end for that era. Though my second year in college, it was the first year that I didn't spend all or most of my time with friends. Quite a few just couldn't make it, and those that did seemed to be too busy for me... Oh, well. It was still enjoyable, as I got many goodies, got to spend some quality time with my girlfriend (though we live together, so we don't necessarily want for time together), and I live in Orlando, so it's more convenient to go than it was in high school.

The con itself was pretty goood. There seem to be more twelve-year-olds every year, though...

Many big(ish) names were there as guests, including Lou Ferrigno, Peter Mayhew, George Perez, Chris Claremont, Darwyn Cooke, Jimmy Palmiotti, and Steve McNiven (just to name a few). While I planned to get some autographs, I simply didn't want to deal with the lines while carrying around a heavy box filled with comic books I wanted signed. Maybe I'll try harder next year.

I did get to meet Lou Ferrigno. I wanted him to sign my copy of an "Incredible Hulk" DVD and "Pumping Iron". He flatly informed me that he charges $40.00 for each signature. I did not leave with a Lou Ferrigno autograph.

I managed to find some good deals and have some fun, so it was worth it. Cons are definitely something that everyone should try at least once. I know that I'll continue going to MegaCon for at least a few more years. If for no other reason than the sake of nostalgia...

Batman R.I.P.

2009-01-26T08:40:00.000-08:00

Gee whiz, we’re all so impressed by Grant Morrison’s ability to connect everything in Batman’s history. We’re all so impressed that it all turns out to be part of some vast, crazy-ass conspiracy. Please…

I’m (usually) a fan of Morrison’s, and he’s (usually) an amazing writer, but “Batman R.I.P” has been one of the most disappointing great Bat arcs in a long time.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m a fan of a conspiracy, and I love to see a superhero get picked apart (Frank Miller and David Mazzuchelli’s “Born Again” is one of the greatest Daredevil stories, if not one of the greatest comic book stories, of all time), so that I can see him rise up from the ashes. However, I don’t like to see what was hyped as one of the greatest Bat-stories of all time actually come out as the barely coherent masturbatory ramblings of a man who fancies himself a “chaos magician”, and has increasingly allowed that to not only inform but dictate his writing to a popular audience.

It’s certainly not the worst Bat-tale told, but if you want to read Morrison’s good Batman stuff, read his old run on JLA. Now, there was a Batman! I can even dig on “Gothic”. While I enjoy “Arkham Asylum”, I don’t think it’s the amazing work of art that many others seem to. And “R.I.P.” is even worse in terms of coherence and rationale.

Perhaps it’s to be blamed on the artist(s), but I’ve consistently found the action to be difficult to follow in Morrison’s run. That much, I can get over easily, as that’s almost to be expected on occasion. Sometimes an artist isn’t right for the title, or the artist and writer don’t work particularly well together. What I can’t get over is Morrison’s crazy plot/style, trying to weave transcendental psychology between kung fu and conspiracy. Save that shit for The Invisibles.

Probably my biggest issue with “R.I.P.” isn’t Morrison’s writing, but the whole “Who will be Batman now?!?” thing that D.C. is pushing. It’s such bullshit. No matter who puts on the cape and cowl in the interim, we all know that within year good ol’ Bruce Wayne will be back and better than ever. This is just another one of D.C.’s yearly ploys to get old readers back, and perhaps draw in a few curious “outsiders”. And it doesn’t hurt that TPB sales are going to be through the roof, not to mention all of the crossover shit (i.e. other Bat-books, “Final Crisis”, etc.).

(Earlier, I wrote "Infinite Crisis". See, there have just been too damn many "great, sweeping, epic" stories put out by D.C. [about once a year now] that use the word "crisis" in the title, attempting to still cash in on the success of that one true crisis [the one that was on infinite earths]).

Reading “R.I.P.” just makes me want to read a GOOD Batman story. So, when the hell is issue 11 of All Star coming out anyways, Frank and Jim?

The Wrestler

2009-01-23T20:30:00.000-08:00

Such a great movie. I almost cried at several points. Hell, the trailer almost made me cry.

I’m with Mickey Rourke’s Randy “The Ram” every step of the way. I want nothing but good things to happen to this guy. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. This is a cat upon whom life just keeps shitting. But that makes him more likeable, and a far more compelling character.

Aronofsky’s style is simplified and brilliant. The music is perfectly chosen and placed. The writing is superb all the way. But the acting… Man, the acting…

Mickey Rourke is amazing. There’s no better word to describe him. I loved him in “Sin City”, but damn… If he doesn’t walk away with the Oscar, there should be riots.

Marisa Tomei is excellent as well. She should definitely get an Oscar, too.

I hope everyone sees this movie. While I don’t think it’s better than “The Dark Knight”, I do think that it’s the movie that should win Best Picture over all of the other nominees (fuck “Slumdog”!).

Slumdog Millionaire

2009-01-23T20:26:00.000-08:00

It’s a good flick. The story’s a nice, kinda classic love story. The visuals and the music match really well, and Danny Boyle certainly knows how to direct (not that he needed to prove it anymore). The acting is surprisingly astonishing. Everyone in this movie acts REALLY well, especially the kids! Child actors tend to not be too good, but some of the kids in this movie are amazing.

That said, I am disappointed. I didn’t see one trailer or TV spot before seeing this movie. All of the hyper I got was word-of-mouth. And there was a hell of a lot of hype. I don’t think the movie lives up. It was sold to me as “the little foreign movie that could”.

1) It’s not that little. Sure, 15 million bucks ain’t a lot of dough in Hollywood terms, but it goes a long fucking way when you’re shooting in India, with Indian actors and Indian crewmembers. This is NOT an indie flick. Fox was involved in its production. Sure, it was Fox Searchlight, but it was Fox nonetheless.
2) It’s not that foreign. It was shot in India and the cast was India and they employed plenty of Indian people in the production, but it was made with American money by a British director. It’s NOT and Indian movie.

I think that this movie has had a lot of success because people are being, for lack of a better term, tricked into thinking that they are seeing a foreign movie. They think because it’s got a bunch of brown people in it, they are being smart and sophisticated by watching a movie outside of their typical purview. But they aren’t. This same story could have been set anywhere there is poverty -- which is mostly everywhere. The details would be different if you set it in the slums of L.A. or Chicago, but the story itself could remain the same.

That said, you should still go see it. It just doesn’t deserve its Oscar nominations.

Daredevil and Punisher (Philosophical) Dialogue

2009-01-19T21:21:00.000-08:00

In my junior year of high school, taking IB Philosophy, I had to write a dialogue between two characters (either of my own creation, or previously developed). This dialogue, of course, had to have something to do with philosophy.

I chose to use Daredevil and the Punisher (man, I am obsessed with the funny books). I chose them because they are typically at odds with one another philosophically/ideologically.

Here it is, as it was written something like three years ago. Of course, now I know a little bit more about philosophy.

I believe my point was that Daredevil was arguing for Rule Utilitarianism, while the Punisher is a believer in Act Utilitarianism. Not sure if my aim was all that accurate.

(As you'll be able to tell, this thing is rife with references to specific stories, or has a little humor based on the number of times these two characters have crossed paths and nothing has really gotten done. Not sure if any of this was picked up on by any of the IB Readers/Graders.)

----------------------------------------

DAREDEVIL
You’ve killed almost fifteen hundred murderers, drug dealers, rapists, and Mafioso. What do you call that?

PUNISHER
A work in progress.

DAREDEVIL
You have to let the law handle things, Frank.

PUNISHER
The law is nothing but a bureaucratic system that gives people a false sense of confidence.

DAREDEVIL
The law keeps order in the world.

PUNISHER
Order? You mean like the order imposed by gangs in a ghetto? The order that comes with the mafia’s hierarchy? Order has nothing to do with justice!

DAREDEVIL
Is that what you think you’re doing? Serving justice?

PUNISHER
That’s exactly what I’m doing.

DAREDEVIL
You go about killing people because they’re criminals. That makes you a criminal.

PUNISHER
I know. I know that I’m a criminal. You are, too. We have to be criminals. This world needs vigilantes to pick up the slack.

DAREDEVIL
You and I are nothing alike, Frank.

PUNISHER
Really? We both attack criminals. We don’t even wait for them to attack us, so that it’s self-defense. We go after them, deliberately. The both of us. We hurt them. We punch them, we kick them, we beat them down until they’re black and blue and bleeding. The only difference is that I kill murderers, drug dealers, and rapists, while you let your precious law take care of them. And on those too few occasions when those bastards do get what they deserve, you think your hands are clean because you aren’t directly responsible for their death.

DAREDEVIL
I’m not responsible at all. Those people are punished by the law, not me. They’re responsible for their own deaths.

PUNISHER
Does that mean that I’m not responsible for the deaths of those whom I kill?

DAREDEVIL
That’s… that’s different.

PUNISHER
How so?

DAREDEVIL
There’s an entire system behind the deaths of the convicted capital offenders. A system that represents, serves, and protects two-hundred-and-fifty million people. Yeah, it doesn’t work right away. The system has its flaws; there are some kinks to be worked out. But in the end, it does the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

PUNISHER
My way does the greatest good for the greatest number of people, but in a more immediate fashion.

DAREDEVIL
How can you say that?

PUNISHER
I shouldn’t even have to say it. You can ask the old man who’s not going to be mugged and stabbed while jogging through Central Park. You can ask the kid on the playground who’s not going to be given amphetamines that look like candy by some dealer looking to expand his business. You can ask the little girl who’s not going to be raped. … You can ask the man that doesn’t have to watch his family get gunned down because they accidentally see a Mafia execution while on a family picnic. … I don’t just kill criminals; I prevent innocents from becoming victims.

DAREDEVIL
That’s what the law does, Frank. It protects the innocent.

PUNISHER
But it doesn’t punish the guilty!

DAREDEVIL
It does. It just doesn’t murder them outright.

PUNISHER
So drug dealers and rapist just go to prison, serve their time, and get freed. It’s only a matter of time until they go back to victimizing innocents. Criminals play the system like a fucking violin and you know it.

DAREDEVIL
What about you, Frank?!? You were arrested! You went to Ryker’s! Then, you escaped!

PUNISHER
And?

DAREDEVIL
Three times, Frank! You did it three times!

PUNISHER
Exactly!!! If the people believe that I’m nothing but a murderer, then why have I never been given the death sentence? Why have I always been given the opportunity to escape?

DAREDEVIL
You’re not given the opportunity; you just make it, Frank.

PUNISHER
Wrong, Murdock.

DAREDEVIL
…What?…

PUNISHER
Yeah. I know your “secret” identity.

DAREDEVIL
No, not that. (Everyone knows that). I mean, were you really given the opportunity?

PUNISHER
Yeah. The first time I escaped, I was busted out by some feds. They needed to take down a narcotics run, but they were tied up by the law. They knew the difference between Law and Justice.

DAREDEVIL
I can’t believe it…

PUNISHER
Believe it. The government does plenty of things that you’d consider “extralegal”. Come on, you’ve dealt with S.H.I.E.L.D.

DAREDEVIL
Just because other people do it doesn’t make it okay.

PUNISHER
Don’t you fight so hard for the law because of a bunch of “other people”?

DAREDEVIL
…That’s… Well, what about the two other times? Feds bust you out then?

PUNISHER
No. The second time, I worked with a mob boss and his goons. The--

DAREDEVIL
You worked with a mob boss?!?

PUNISHER
Oh, don’t worry, Murdock. I betrayed them all. They died. Now, the third time, I actually posed as a black convict whose buddies were busting him out (it was his idea).

DAREDEVIL
Black…?

PUNISHER
It’s a funny story involving some big time plastic surgery. I’d tell you, but we aren’t exactly pals and we’re far too busy fighting each other on rooftops and in back alleys.

DAREDEVIL
We wouldn’t have to fight if you’d just see that the law is what’s best. You might see it as a form of mob mentality, but the fewest people get hurt.

PUNISHER
No. A lot of people get hurt. Far too many. It’s on TV, in the papers… it’s right in front of our eyes.

DAREDEVIL
But what makes you think that your alternative produces better results? You take so many lives!

PUNISHER
Only the lives of those who deserve to be killed.

DAREDEVIL
You were once studying to be a priest, Frank. What happened to the man who believed in the judgment of God? Doesn’t taking a life, no matter whose, disobey one of God’s most important laws?

PUNISHER
Ever the good little Catholic, Devil. As far as I’m concerned, God’s too slow. Besides, it’s not exactly like He dishes out the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

DAREDEVIL
You really have lost your faith, haven’t you?

PUNISHER
According to most religions, God only rewards those who serve their interpretation of Him. The rest burn. There are simply too few people who live up to the standards prescribed by any religious text. If God only serves those few, then how does he serve the greatest good for the greatest number of people?

DAREDEVIL
It all depends on how you look at things, I guess.

PUNISHER
The same could be said about our individual M.O.s.

DAREDEVIL
Frank… one day, it’s really all going to come down. Something big will happen. I’ll have to fight you for something bigger than my beliefs. When that day comes, it won’t be pretty, and I might not win, but I’ll die trying.

PUNISHER
Does that mean I live to fight another day?

DAREDEVIL
I’d never kill you, Frank. You’d always live to fight another die.

PUNISHER
That’s too bad, Daredevil. Believe me, if I felt that a vigilante had to go down, I’d kill him. Knowing what I am, I feel like killing myself every day.

DAREDEVIL
Not that I think you should, but why don’t you?

PUNISHER
Because, Matt, there are still people to be protected. And in order to protect them, I’ll always have to punish others. It’s the little bit of good that I do.

A (Philosophical) Critical Analysis of "Johnny the Homicidal Maniac"

2009-01-19T16:54:00.000-08:00

In my junior year of high school, I took Philosophy as my IB Sixth Subject. For the grade from IB headquarters, we had to write a couple of things as well as take a test. One of the things I wrote was a "critical analysis" of a quaint little comic book from some years back called Johnny the Homicidal Maniac. Good book.

Now, seeing as how I haven't posted anything for a while, and a blog with the word "Comics" in the title has been lacking any postings about any comics, I've decided to re-hash that old piece of writing of mine.

Since then, I've learned a few more things about philosophy and such, but I'm just gonna let you read something a younger version of me wrote.

-----------------------------------------------

Johnen Vasquez’s “Johnny the Homicidal Maniac” is Vasquez’s way of being both entertaining and thoughtful. While the reader can find joy in the gore, violence, and foul language, he can also find within the dialogue examples of different philosophies.

In Part 4 of “Johnny the Homicidal Maniac”, the title character is shot in the head (by a gun-holding device of his own suicidal design). At the end of Part 5, Nny (the more affectionate name by which our villainous hero is known) dies. When he dies, the entire universe dissolves into nothingness. Can we say “Solipsism”?

Solipsism, of course, is the metaphysical position “that only I exist and that everything else is just a creation of my subjective consciousness.” This stems from Berkeley’s Idealism, and is in opposition to Locke’s Realism.

Solipsism can be considered somewhat abstract in that it goes against the widely shared belief that “the world exists and that’s that”. However, Solipsism is also a very logical position. It is the result of questioning the existence of anything beyond one’s own perception. If you cannot perceive something, then how do you truly know that it exists?

Solipsism is not the metaphysical position of the author, however. The author is not really trying to preach any philosophical beliefs in an imperative fashion; he is merely expressing his thoughts in his own artistic way. These thoughts just so happen to run the gamut from deep thinking (“You know, the idea that a thing exists solely to be the anchor point for all known things. The old thing about what happens to the world when you close your eyes!!”) to fantasies of violence (“Go find a cheerleader and saw her legs off.”). Johnen Vasquez offers us no philosophical imperatives, just questions and some speculative answers to those questions.

Solipsism cannot be represented without conversely representing Realism. While none of the characters in “Johnny the Homicidal Maniac” ever express anything resembling the metaphysical position of Realism, the position is brought to one’s mind simply because Solipsism is represented. Realism is also represented (and Solipsism possibly challenged) when, at the end of Part 6, Nny, after having literally gone through Hell, returns to Earth. Surprisingly, there is an Earth to return to. This can be seen as a challenge to Solipsism and an affirmation of Realism in that the universe did not really disappear when Nny died; it was there the whole time. One might think to argue that the world could have disappeared but simply returned when Nny did. This argument is not apt, however, because, shortly after he dies, he is the only person in line to enter either Heaven or Hell. Then again, it might be possible that Nny simply did not imagine (after his death) that any other people might have died. On the other hand (one hand of many, it seems), it’s likely that the universe did disappear; Nny’s universe, that is. The last panel of Part 5 shows a dying Nny lying on what’s left of his floor, surrounded by the darkness of a void. As far as Nny knows, the universe has indeed disappeared. After his excursions in Heaven and Hell, however, he no longer brings up the idea of Solipsism. The comic book ceases to hold any philosophical thought that regards the world or perception and only asks questions that hold merit on a personal level.

Since the book deals a lot with philosophy on the personal level, it must be filled at times with something resembling Existentialism. Nny is murderer; there’s no getting around it, that’s just what he is. However, he blames the deaths of his victims on their own actions. (“As for protecting the people, well that’s a bit of a paradox – at least from what I know. I’m sure that if you searched into the lives of some of these victims, you would find out that they, themselves, were the cause of their very deaths. In those cases, the so-called ‘victim’, at some earlier, played some part in the creation of their ‘killer’. I believe that the life ended was ended for the fact that it was wasted on something that would never evolve beyond the childish cruelty so many never cast off.”) He goes about the entire book complaining about people and the wrongs the commit on other people. Whenever he is made fun of by someone on the street or in a store because he dresses funny or has a weird haircut (he looks like someone who spends half of his time at Hot Topic and the other half reading “Sandman” comics and writing in his journal), he kidnaps the opinionated individual and proceeds to inflict upon him a gruesome death (i.e. running a scythe through a cheerleader’s throat because she and some friends giggled at him).

Nny’s Existentialist-like views are not limited to just other people -- Nny hates himself as much as anyone else. He hates the fact that he is human and subject to emotions, needs, and even the basest of bodily functions. If he hates his life so much, why does he simply not kill himself? He actually does “attempt” suicide several times within the first half of the books, he just fails because he is (1) distracted by a funny TV commercial, (2) there are no more bullets in the gun, or (3) he has forgotten to charge the battery of the taser. However, he does “succeed” in Part 4, when his device shoots him in the face, and he dies. His “second chance” is also displeasing to him, but now he does more than just gripe about it. At the end of the book, Nny decides to leave his current life, and eventually checks himself into a mental institution. While things don’t work out perfectly, the reader sees a man who recognizes that he is responsible for his own life, and he does his best to consciously take hold of the reins and better himself. Let it not be said, though, that Vasquez is preaching existentialism here. It must be remembered that Nny still remains a murderer, and his life, as far as the reader can see, is far from perfect.

In the end, Vasquez shows the reader a peek into the world of philosophy, but also remains faithful to the notion that he is more of an artist/entertainer than a philosopher. The reader is not supposed to take from this book a personal philosophy or set of beliefs, he is only supposed to think a little more about things, and, more importantly, laugh.

Yes Man

2009-01-08T19:32:00.000-08:00

Not as stupid as I had assumed, but also not quite as funny as I'd hoped. Very entertaining, despite being riddled with holes of various sorts.

Jim Carrey is as enjoyable as ever, and this movie definitely has a lot of heart. While I've become a bigger fan of him as a dramatic actor (amazing in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), he does make me laugh, and even care, in this return to comedy.

The supporting cast definitely helps pull the whole thing off. Terrence Stamp is a genius and it's great that he's getting more and greater roles lately (also look for him in Valkyrie). It was good to see Danny Masterson (Hyde from "That 70s Show") doing some acting again.

Valkyrie

2009-01-08T19:18:00.000-08:00

Pretty good. Not as visually stunning as the last trailer led me to believe (last trailer made it seem a lot like a Kubrick movie). Even though you know how it ends, it still manages to be quite suspenseful, and that's just good filmmaking.

Tom Cruise was Tom Cruise, and that always works just fine.

It was A-list cast as far as talent goes, even if most moviegoers won't think of those actors as big names.

Bryan Singer's directing was for the most part impeccable, as usual. He went over the top more than once, but some of the shots near the end are so beautiful that his few errors are entirely forgiven.

I recommend seeing it once, but I doubt I'll give it a repeat viewing.

Fit to Fight

2008-12-15T09:20:00.000-08:00

The title: Fit to Fight
The subtitle: An Insanely Effective Strength and Conditioning Program for the Ultimate MMA Warrior
The author: Jason Ferruggia

It’s a good book that effectively outlines and details strength training exercises, speed training methods, workouts to build endurance, and important dietary information.

Ferruggia does a good job of providing and explaining the general characteristics of a successful combat athlete, physical assessment and injury prevention methods, ways to build anaerobic endurance, ways to build raw strength, how to greatly increase speed, and the nutritional information every fighter should know. He even goes into an overview and assessment of supplements, as well as rest/recovery.

I’ve found it to be a very educational/helpful book. The author writes about the importance of anaerobic endurance over aerobic endurance, unique training methods (that have recently come into vogue) like tire flips and working with sandbags, as well as the fact that most supplements are unnecessary or even harmful to athletes.

The book is part of a somewhat recent movement in fitness/training circles that takes people “back” to hardcore training methods designed not to give you a six-pack, but simply make you a better athlete. I’m a big fan of this movement, as I too have grown sick and tired of seeing people exercising for the sake of vanity, or taking up fad diets and workouts.

While the book deals with MMA training, it isn’t about fighting techniques at all. It focuses only on the fitness aspect.
An important note: This book is not for someone who’s just looking to lose weight. In fact, all of the dietary suggestions in the book are meant to help you stay at your current weight. That’s because it’s not necessarily a book for the average person who goes to the gym one to three times a week in order to get or maintain a six-pack. It’s intended for someone who wants to be a better, stronger fighter.

If you’re interested in getting stronger, faster, and generally more powerful, you should definitely check out Fit to Fight. Of course, we live in the internet age and you can easily get all of the information available in the book by doing your own research over several websites. I, of course, will be providing some such information from time to time.

If you don’t want to buy the book, here’s a basic exercise routine you can do with some space and a couple of dumbbells (5 or 8 pounds will do):
25 bodyweight squats
15 lightweight rows
15 pushups
50 jumping jacks
20 mountain climbers
15 lightweight rows
10 close grip pushups

Do it twice. Little to no rest.

If you don’t have dumbbells, then you could just not do the rows, but add a few more push-ups.

Also, here’s some important supplement information:
In general, don’t take them. You don’t need them. Just eat properly and get some sleep.
However, some that are actually useful and not harmful:
Multivitamin (just in case you don’t get your daily values from food)
Omega-3 fish oils (just in case you’re not eating fish like you should)
Basic protein powders (just in case you don’t get enough from food)
Post-workout “shake” (just in case you won’t eat for a while after working out)

The Iron Gym

2008-12-10T18:04:00.001-08:00

I just got the Iron Gym ("As Seen on TV!") as an early Christmas gift from my girlfriend, and I've already put it to good use.

As everyone knows (or at least should know), the chin-up is one of the most effective/important exercises anybody can do. Like the push-up, the chin-up primarily targets the arms, but it is also beneficial for most of the rest of the body. Aside from the biceps, shoulders, trapezius, the deltoids, and the lats (latissimus dorsi, the main thing worked by the chin-up), it also helps develop the abdominals and even lower back muscles. Also, since it's done (or should be done) mostly as a muscular endurance workout, it benefits the cardiovascular system.

Of course, you can find a chin-up bar for cheaper than the ~$45.00 that the Iron Gym costs, but most of those have to be screwed into the wall or door jamb. If you want to not put holes in the wall or door jamb (which was my girlfriend's primary concern), then the Iron Gym is great, as it basically wraps itself around the top of the door frame and can be pulled out and put back in any time.

Another benefit of the Iron Gym is that it can be used for other exercise. One can use it for chin-ups, pull-ups, push-ups, sit-ups, or dips.

I use it almost solely for chin-ups. One can effectively do push-ups and sit-ups without any such device, and dips can be done with a chair, or on the edge of a bathtub or bed. Pull-ups are kind of a weaker version of the chin-up.

Whether you use an Iron Gym, like I will from now on, or a cheaper bar, or even just go outside and find a strong tree branch, you should definitely be doing lots of chin-ups.

Pacquiao vs de la Hoya

2008-12-07T10:15:00.000-08:00

It was brutal. It was beautiful. It was boxing at its finest, I’d say.

It seems like Mexicans and Filipinos wanted to see a battle of cultures. This honky just wanted to see a good boxing match, and he was not disappointed.

The first round, like in most boxing matches, was spent by each fighter trying to feel the other one out. It didn’t take too long for each fighter to gain some confidence, though. Though both Manny and Oscar are astounding talents and great athletes, it was obvious from the start who had more energy. The younger Pacquiao danced and ducked and dodged with more pep and grace than the 35-year-old de la Hoya could hope to have mustered. Though he was slower and less energetic, Oscar still showed experience and skill by not wasting any precious energy trying to keep up with Manny. While it almost looked like Pacquiao was all over the place, he landed some telling shots on de la Hoya’s face before the end of the round.

Both fighters came out strong and fast in the second round. They took a lot more risks, but didn’t deal too much damage. Oscar looked more like a teacher than an opponent as he poked holes in Manny’s defense with only glancing blows, never really hurting Pacquiao. Once again, Manny was all over the place. But hey, it works.

Pacquiao and de la Hoya slowed down for the third round, but it was no less interesting. Both fighters exhibited almost perfect defensive skill for the first minute-and-a-half. Pacquiao ducked and dodged expertly, while de la Hoya used a much more subtle (though no less impressive, to the trained eye) method; while de la Hoya was using technically-perfect-though-inaccurate jabs to keep Manny at bay, you could tell that Pacquiao was dying to get in a good body shot, but Oscar kept slightly adjusting his posture – just enough so that Manny couldn’t get in a good shot. Sadly, though, after the first minute-and-a-half, their defensive skills were much less than perfect, and de la Hoya took another bad punch to the face. The fighting became a bit more frantic as the round came to an end.

In round four, de la Hoya was showing his age again. Pacquiao just danced circles around him for most of the round, and towards the end he was just flat-out out boxing de la Hoya.

For the most part, round five was more of the same as Pacquiao just continued to out box his older opponent. Towards the end, however, Oscar seemed to summon up some strength from what must have been pure ferocity. Unfortunately for him, Manny was showing no signs of slowing down and met him blow for blow.

The sixth round was a lot like the fifth, as Pacquiao was still going strong and de la Hoya was still looking like he was waiting for his turn.

The seventh round was fairly dull up until the second half, when Pacquiao got de la Hoya in a corner and kept him there for a while, just throwing punches effortlessly and masterfully. Even after Oscar got out of the corner, Manny just kept hitting him, never letting up, and never losing his pace.

The eighth round wasn’t as exciting as the seventh, but Manny kept working on Oscar. In the last ten seconds of the round, Pacquiao just went nuts and looked like he was beating the crap out of de la Hoya.

Oscar threw in the towel after the eight round, knowing he didn’t really have a chance. Pacquiao got a TKO win, and de la Hoya had a busted eye.

It was a great fight, and both fighters showed more skill and athleticism than most of us could ever hope to achieve. I wasn’t really rooting for either fighter, but in the end I think I’m more glad that Pacquiao won than I would have been had de la Hoya won. Oscar’s had a great run in his career, and now it’s time for a younger man to go further.

In the best way possible, Pacquiao reminds me of Bruce Lee. Even though he’s a real lightweight, he could still beat the living hell out of just about anybody. Even when he’s not throwing great punches, he’s always bouncing on his toes, moving around, ready to defend or attack, whatever the situation calls for. They’re both great examples of pure efficiency in motion.

While most people find fights boring unless there are two heavyweights in the ring, I generally prefer to watch fights like this. These guys have much better stamina, and they fight in a much more technical manner. While two heavyweights will beat the crap out of each other, they’ll also repeatedly hug each other or hang on the ropes to take a breather. The beautiful thing about lighter weight fights is that the fighters can keep going, and that’s much more impressive to me than just using your weight as a weapon.

Some quick facts:
Pacquiao was credited with landing 224 of 585 punches to just 83 of 402 for De La Hoya.
At the time of the stoppage, the Philippine Daily Inquirer, had Pacquiao ahead, 80-72, winning all the rounds.
Ringside statistics showed Pacquiao landed 45 power punches in the seventh round to just four for De La Hoya.

Check out http://sports.inquirer.net/breakingnews/breakingnews/view/20081207-176612/PACQUIAO-WINS for a better account.

I wasn’t lucky enough to watch it Pay-Per-View. Instead I had to watch it on youtube.
Here’s the first round, navigate from there:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5396g9OrGx8&feature=channel

Unfortunately, if you leave the sound on, you’ll mostly hear some Filipinos laughing and generally being excited for Pacquiao.

Punisher: War Zone

2008-12-05T08:46:00.001-08:00

Man, what a shitty movie.

It’s a very comic book-type movie. It’s played for laughs a lot of the time. And if there is one comic book character that you just don’t play for laughs – that you just don’t treat like a comic book character – then it’s the Punisher.
But no, the writers and director don’t see it that way, I guess. Which is unfortunate, because the Punisher has a lot of cinematic potential (as evidenced by the 2004 version starring Thomas Jane).

Like any relatively new director, Lexi Alexander does try new things. There are a few shots in the movie that blew me away. Some of the framing was just so new and refreshing, and other shots made me think of Stanley Kubrick as far as just sheer beauty and control of the frame go. Unfortunately, that only accounts for 1% of the movie. The other 99% pretty much amounts to shit.

The action is over the top, which is usually fine by me, but the camera barely holds on any shot in which someone isn’t blowing up. I’m normally a fan of gore, but only when it’s used correctly. “War Zone” fails in that respect.

If there were a saving grace for this movie, it would be Ray Stevenson’s performance. The guy’s got chops. I completely believe that his heart is being torn up every time he talks to the little girl in the movie, being reminded of his own daughter. The brief, wonderful moments between Frank Castle and the little girl are heart wrenching and pretty much pitch perfect.

I won’t be seeing it in theaters again, even though I am usually a repeat viewer.

I am a huge Punisher fan, but when the DVD comes out, I’ll have to take a good, hard look at the special features before I decide to shell out any money for it.

Beginner's Solo Martial Arts Workout

2008-12-04T13:32:00.000-08:00

Here's a martial arts workout that will benefit a practitioner of any style, and can even be done by a beginner (so long as they know basic kicks and how to punch; instructions for which can be found many places online or in books).
----

50 air punches
12 right front kicks
12 left front kicks
6 right roundhouse kicks
6 left roundhouse kicks
6 right side kicks
6 left side kicks
6 right stretch kicks
6 left stretch kicks
20 high blocks
20 low blocks
20 middle blocks
Hold a horse-riding stance for as long as you can (at least 2 minutes)
25 push-ups
100 jumping jacks

---
You should do this at least once a day. It doesn't take long, and it will help either build the basics for more advanced training later, or serve as good practice/refresher for even an advanced practitioner.

My Solo Martial Arts Workout

2008-12-04T13:25:00.000-08:00

This is the martial arts exercise I do when I'm not sparring/training with someone else or in a class.

-------

Punching pyramid (right)
Front kicks (12 right, 12 left)
Roundhouse kicks (12 right, 12 left)
Side kicks (12 right, 12 left)
Stretch kicks (6 right, 6 left)
High blocks (10 right, 10 left)
Low blocks (10 right, 10 left)
Mid blocks (10 right, 10 left)
Backfists (10 right, 10 left)
Hammer fists
Elbows
Knees
Punching the floor (50 punches)
Running in place (1 minute)
Brief rest (1 minute)

Punching pyramid (left)
Combo 1 (Jab, Cross, Front kick) (6 right, 6 left)
Combo 2 (Jab, Cross, Roundhouse kick) (6 right, 6 left)
Combo 3 (Jab, Cross, Side kick) (6 right, 6 left)
Combo 4 (Jab, Cross, Uppercut) (6 right, 6 left)
Combo 5 (Jab, Cross, Knee, Elbow) (6 right, 6 left)
Running in place (1 minute)
Brief rest (1 minute)

Punching pyramid (right)
Songahm Form One
First two sections of Sil Lum Tao (wing chun)
Self-Defense practice routines
Songahm Form One
Stick practice (12 lines) (right, then left)
Knife practice (12 lines) (right, then left)
Running place (1 minute)
Brief rest (1 minute)

Do the whole thing twice.
Should take about an hour.

Push-Ups

2008-12-04T12:51:00.000-08:00

There is a routine that can greatly enhance one's strength and stamina, and it is absolutely free.
It consists of nothing but push-ups.
It was taught to me by my philosophy teacher, who was ex-SpecOps and ex-NSA, so this guy knows how to quickly build a strong, powerful individual. I believe that it was taught to him by another special forces-type person.

How many push-ups you do is determined by how many (maxing out) you can already do. When I first did it, I was only able to do about 40 at any given time. When I was done, I could do 60 at any given time. I've since done it many times to increase my strength, and now I can do at least 80 push-ups at any given time. I started out doing 250 each day, but now when I do it I do at least 400. The version I'm putting here will start someone out gently, at 100, but I suggest pushing it the first time to see if you can at least do 200.

Here you go:
For 10 straight days, alternate between A and B.

A Day: do 100 push-ups in an hour
B Day: do 100 push-ups over the course of the day

For those 10 days, you should do other exercises, but DO NOT work out your arms in any other way. Just run, do sit-ups, practice martial arts, etc.
After 10 days, rest your arms for 2 days.
After 2 days of rest, drop and try to max out. You should find yourself much stronger and able to do many more push-ups.

You can experiment with what way is best for you, but here's mine:
Do 10 or 12 sets in the hour on A day. Do a set every 5 minutes. (i.e. 25o push-ups: Do 25 every 5 minutes, 10 sets; 400 push-ups: Do 35 every 5 minutes, 12 sets [that actually gives you 420 push-ups], or 40 every 5 minutes, 10 sets)
Do 10 or 12 sets over the day on B day. Do a set every 30 minutes.

There you have it. Try it out. It really is amazing.
I suggest this to all my friends and martial arts students/training partners, and those who have done it have not been disappointed.

Quantum of Solace

2008-12-03T12:59:00.000-08:00

I'm not going to compare it too much to "Casino Royale", simply because they are two very different movies.

The plot is a little convoluted, and Forster isn't the greatest action director (please, sir, hold on an action shot for more than one second; I don't care about the old broad dropping her tomatoes, but I would like to see more than 24 frames of Bond shooting a bad guy). But this movie is certainly action-packed (love the knife fight with the "geologist", love the plane/free fall sequence, love the explosions in the end).

Though it is action-packed, don't think for a second that the action carries the movie. No, no, no. It's Craig. With little more than a glance, the man provides all the insight an audience needs.

Zack and Miri Make a Porno

2008-12-03T12:53:00.000-08:00

I am a Kevin Smith fan, so I'm biased. I admit it.

Still, this movie is one of those rare and beautiful and very special examples of a movie being a comedy in premise, and much, much more at its heart. There is a trend in this Apatow-run Hollywood of the past few years to attempt at a mixture of soul and filth, but only so many can cut the mustard.

Here comes another movie from a guy who started making heart-filled raunch fests when Apatow, Rogen, and their like were doing very, very little (if anything at all). I've been surprised in the past that it took so long for someone to make a movie like "40-Year-Old Virgin" when Smith made movies like "Clerks" and "Chasing Amy" way back when (and with no goddamn money!).

While I am a big fan of the View Askewniverse and all of its loveable rascals yelling "Snootch!" and "I'm not supposed to be here today!", I do think that Smith has done a lot better without those cats and that whole world. I wouldn't necessarily say that he's a better writer or storyteller now, but he's certainly a much better director, in a conventional sense.

I'm rambling, but I guess this movie really resonates with me because, essentially, it's a movie about love and also a movie about a group of people making their first movie. And, being a guy who fairly recently made his first movie -- which was kind of a movie about love -- that hits home in a very, very good way.

Go see it, cocksuckers!

Importance of Physical Conditioning in Fighting

2008-11-30T13:38:00.000-08:00

Here's a martial arts-related essay for you. I wrote it when I was younger and a bit newer to the martial arts. Please forgive any errors or demonstrations of naivete.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Importance of Physical Conditioning in Fighting
12/31/2004 (2/15/05)
Word Count: 2,211

In the exquisite art of fighting, it is important to note that that the majority of the fighting sports' practitioners and, most especially, the champions are considered to be in top physical condition. Next to technical skill, physical condition is the most important aspect of the martial arts.

By this, I do not mean that a particular martial art should serve as a means of achieving fitness, though many instructors would list that as a primary reason for studying their art. Throughout the history of martial arts, physical, mental, and spiritual well-being have often been the goals of particular arts. Some of the more prominent examples are Qi Gong (stressing spiritual well-being), Taijiquan (stressing both spiritual and physical fitness), and Aikido (making physical, spiritual, and mental well-being goals of every practitioner).

Qi Gong is an internal style of Gong Fu (or Kung Fu, a broad term for all fighting arts originating in China) that puts stress on the cultivation of energy and the growth of one's personal chi (internal energy). There are certain rules for living that a practitioner of Qi Gong is supposed to follow and particular ways to breathe that must be practiced. This is all in the hope that the practitioner may develop a healthier chi and grow spiritually stronger.

Taijiquan ("Grand Ultimate Fist", also know as Tai Chi) is a very well-known internal style of Gong Fu, being the most popular art in China and certainly the most-practiced Chinese art outside of China. Its most important aspects are often described as physical and spiritual health. Taijiquan uses breathing techniques to cleanse the body and soul. It also uses smooth, flowing positions that, when done in Taijiquan's typically slow nature, put stress on certain muscles. The stress put on these muscles does not make them larger, but tones them and makes them stronger and healthier.

Aikido ("the Way of Harmony") is a Japanese art that, like the aforementioned two Chinese arts, attempts to strengthen the spirit. Like Taijiquan, it also puts emphasis on making the body stronger. An aspect of Aikido that sets it apart from Taijiquan and Qi Gong is its incorporation of the idea that a practitioner must also exercise the mind. This is a concept taken from an ancestor of many Japanese arts, Bushido ("the Way of the Warrior"). Bushido was the art that the samurai lived by, which included a common idea of Zen Buddhism that all parts of a person must be strengthened and developed to the greatest potential of that person.

Each of these arts has something to offer and helps its practitioners to become a better person. Each art helps the practitioners to be more spiritual and brings them closer to whatever deity or force they worship. Taijiquan and Aikido both help their practitioners to become physically stronger and healthier. Aikido fills the triangle by having its practitioners strengthen their mind through learning and other forms of art.

Qi Gong, like many of the arts focusing on one's spirit, tends to lack far too much in the physical department to truly be beneficial to a fighter. Many spirit-focused practitioners, instructors, and masters are often heard defending similar "accusations" with "This martial art is not meant for fighting, merely to help one become a better person." This can be accepted, but not when such an art is considered a martial art. To say that it is a "martial" art would imply that the art is meant for "martial" reasons. The very word "martial" means "of warfare", which means that any martial art is meant for fighting.

Another aspect of Qi Gong, and other internal arts that use breathing techniques as a primary cleanser of the soul, which makes it unfit for fighting or physical conditioning, is the use of certain breathing techniques. Most of the breathing techniques incorporated within the art of Qi Gong are techniques that diminish the abdominal muscles. A well-toned abdomen is a trait found in all of the greatest fighters. The necessity for the abdomen to be muscular and defined has been preached since the beginnings of Karate, Tae Kwon Do, and even by that hero of China-Bruce Lee. The abdomen is a prime target for attacks in most fights and should therefore be exercised routinely and intensely in order to properly defend oneself from a larger risk of internal injury. The breathing techniques of Qi Gong and similar spiritual arts make the stomachs of their practitioners distended and round. This, of course, is "because their chi has settled and they've developed a chi build".

Taijiquan is considered an internal art, like Qi Gong, and even uses breathing techniques to cleanse the soul. However, this particular internal art also uses breathing for physical health (as most martial arts do). The breathing in Taijiquan does not create a "chi build", but also does not necessarily promote abdominal muscles like a sit-up does. The art of Taijiquan does promote physical fitness through muscle exercise that stresses particular muscles during certain positions of a form. This promotes health, but does not push a person towards physical superiority, which is sought by every serious combatant.

Aikido is most certainly not an internal art, but it is also not an art that excludes spiritual development. It is a way of living that requires one to grow physically, spiritually, and mentally. A practitioner of Aikido exercises whenever he practices a form or attends a class. He meditates, connecting himself to the deity or force he worships, strengthening him spiritually. He also reads and writes, draws, paints, sings, or plays an instrument, depending on his artistic preference and the way he wishes to express his ever-growing mind.

Even though Taijiquan and Aikido each provide for better physical fitness, they tend to make that a focus of the art. This is not necessarily a bad idea. In fact, it's quite good that an art of fighting promotes fitness, which is essential for every fighter to have. However, it should be explained by every instructor of each art promoting physical fitness that the art itself should never be considered a replacement for routine exercise and physical conditioning such as weight training, abdominal workouts, and cardiovascular exercises. That is the very point of this piece of writing: arts that aid in physical fitness should never be considered a complete path towards physical achievement.

It's been heard often: "I've gotten over the effects of old age by studying Tai Chi!" or "I lost fifty pounds in just three months by taking up Tae Kwon Do!" Though simply practicing certain martial arts might aid the elderly, overweight, or sickly, they should never be taken by one who wishes to be a serious fighter as the only means necessary to achieve physical superiority. In order to truly become a great fighter, one must have a physique that can stand up to the most powerful blows, just in case one is unable to dodge, block, parry, or counter quickly enough.

As previously stated, it is a very good idea for a martial art to help its practitioners gain better physical health and become a stronger person, but more so it should be the instructor of an art's responsibility to encourage his students to exercise and train rigorously outside of the dojo, kwoon, or other type of martial art school. Sadly, most instructors believe themselves that the art in which they practice is the only means one needs to achieve the physical level of a great or even moderate fighter. Luckily, however, there are a few martial arts in existence that stress to their students the importance of outside training and exercise. Three that deserve special merit are Muay Thai, Sanshou, and, of course, Jeet Kune Do.

Muay Thai (also known as Thai Kickboxing) is not an art that typically incorporates exercise into a normal class curriculum. In training facilities and schools for Muay Thai, the students will often have various machines and training devices at their disposal, much like in a gym, but when they are being trained to use their techniques, their teacher most often will not devote the first ten minutes of class to exercising. While practicing Muay Thai will certainly help one gain physical fitness, when two fighters actually step into the ring, it soon becomes clear who actually trains on their own time and who doesn't. The Muay Thai practitioner who does not exercise and work out regularly and rigorously soon learns his lesson.

Sanshou can best be described as China's answer to Muay Thai. Sanshou is not necessarily a particular style in that it incorporates techniques from all Chinese styles. As in Muay Thai, there are hardly any kinds of techniques not used in Sanshou. Throws, kicks, punches, knees, elbows, and even groin, knee, and throat shots are allowed (except in North America and a few other areas). It's full-contact and completely and undeniably barbaric. But therein lies the realism. Just as in Muay Thai, the Sanshou practitioner who simply does not put in the needed energy and time will often have to learn his lesson the hard way.

The third of these most notable arts that require outside work is the art of unlimited, unregulated, and ultimately real fighting: Jeet Kune Do. Jeet Kune Do is an art that was developed by Bruce Lee in an effort to break through the rigid structure of stylistic martial arts. It is not a style, nor is it necessarily a way. It is more of a philosophy that one should always strive to express not his instructor's ideas, but his own through the martial arts, because that is what "art" is all about: self-expression. When taught the art of Jeet Kune Do, one learns to not merely learn, but absorb what one needs and what works best from what he is taught, while tossing aside that which he does not need or is not able to use as effectively as the other concepts and techniques. While learning Jeet Kune Do, as the case is with many arts, one may become more physically fit, but Jeet Kune Do, like Muay Thai and Sanshou, requires its students to commit time and energy to training outside of class. Bruce Lee spoke and wrote often on the subject of physical achievement, and his body towards the end of his life continues to inspire many fighters, bodybuilders, and health nuts thirty years later.

As stated before, the greatest fighters of our time have all had incredible bodies and were often at the peak of human condition. Muhammad Ali is often considered the best boxer ever, his technique being studied by even Bruce Lee (Lee often reviewed footage of Ali's fights so that he could refine his own personal footwork and boxing techniques), and he was in magnificent shape. Like Ali, as he was also a legendary boxer and admired by Bruce Lee, Sugar Ray Robinson can not only be praised for his technique and skill, but also for his physique. During the last year of his life, Bruce Lee was down to less than 1% body fat and was eating and drinking nothing but protein shakes and tea (while this is not considered the most healthy of choices by doctors, looking at Lee's body during this time, one cannot help but feel an odd and confusing mixture of awe, inspiration, and just a little shame).

To take a look at more modern fighters, one should immediately look to the new generation of champions: Marcus Reed, Steven Lopez, and Cung Le. Marcus "the Hammer" Reed was a Canadian kickboxing champion in the early and mid-90's whose physique once prompted an announcer to say, "If looks could kill, he'd be a serial murderer." Steven Lopez is an Olympic gold-medalist in Tae Kwon Do and works out in a manner that is both consistent and intense. Probably the best of these fighters, Cung Le is both a Sanshou champion and K-1 champion, and he has a body not unlike a young Muhammad Ali's (his abs are not as well-defined as Bruce Lee's, but his arms are beyond what many once thought the Vietnamese were genetically capable of).
When seeing that the greatest fighters are most often the most well-sculpted, it raises the question of why more martial arts instructors do not warn their students that the art they practice will not ensure their survival against blows from fighters with bodies like Ali or Le's. Sadly, the answer may never be known. Most instructors really do believe that practicing their art is the only exercise necessary. Hopefully, this piece will open the eyes of those who wish to go beyond merely executing techniques and are serious about fighting.

It is the responsibility of every martial artist to help educate their fellow practitioners and an aspect that sorely needs to be touched upon is the lack of personal training that anyone can observe among many of those who know how to fight. Sadly, though these people may know how to fight, their belief that they have a chance against those who workout is both wrong and popular. Let's hope they will learn their lesson the easy way, and not have to suffer on the streets or in a ring.

martial art

2008-11-30T13:20:00.000-08:00

From time to time, I'll probably write about various styles of martial arts and things related to the subject. For now, here's the simplest way I can put my thoughts:

Martial art is one of the greatest ways for one to express their abilities and self-attained skills.

The abilities that one attains through martial arts practice are ultimately attained only through individual training, and thus martial ability is an expression of the self -- the drive and ambition that one possesses.

Martial arts are not for everyone -- they are not for the lazy. Dedication is of absolute necessity. Beyond that, anyone can do it, and everyone should.

Beyond any of the supposed spiritual aspects of the martial arts, self-defense and fighting ability are of utmost importance. It is necessary for a true martial art to not only be a fun activity or spiritual/mental exercise, but first and foremost a physical/fighting exercise, leading to the goals of ultimate self-expression and efficiency in combat.

Human Sciences and Natural Sciences

2008-11-30T12:46:00.001-08:00

Let me hit you with a little something I wrote way back when, either for Theory of Knowledge or Philosophy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In answering the question of whether or not Human Sciences and Natural Sciences are fundamentally different, one must explore the methods used in either category and the applications of each category’s results. The first view would be that Human Sciences and Natural Sciences are fundamentally the same. The basis for this view lies in the methods used for collecting data in both the Human Sciences and the Natural Sciences. The foundation of knowledge in both groups of sciences is the theory. Both Human Scientists and Natural Scientists start their quest for knowledge with a theory, and then experiments are used in an attempt to either prove or disprove that theory. Consider B.F. Skinner and Gregor Mendel: B.F. Skinner theorized that behavior could be controlled and then used operant conditioning on pigeons placed in the “Skinner Box” to control their actions, and Mendel theorized that selective breeding would produce desired results and selectively cross-bred certain species of peas to get breeds with specific attributes. Skinner was a Human Scientist (a psychologist) and Mendel was a Natural Scientist (an early geneticist). Though they worked in completely different fields, they both used the same methods to gather information. Repeated experimentation leads to the “facts” in both Human Sciences and Natural Sciences.

There is also the view that the Human Sciences and the Natural Sciences are fundamentally different from one another. This view is based on the difference between the applications of the results reached in either type of Science. The results reached by Natural Sciences have various applications in fields such as biology, chemistry, and physics, which apply to medicine, technology, and transportation, all important aspects of the material world. The results reached by Human Sciences have various applications in fields such as psychology, philosophy, and anthropology, which apply to relationships, culture, and mental activity, important aspects but not in an overtly tangible sense. Many Human Scientists biasedly believe that the subjects of psychology, philosophy, and anthropology are more important because they directly relate to people. However, many Natural Scientists believe that the subjects of medicine, technology, and transportation are more important because there are practical facts in Natural Sciences whereas there is too much uncertainty in the Human Sciences. The uncertainty of the Human Sciences lies in the differentiation in personalities (psychology) and unanswerable questions (philosophy). Those who believe the Sciences are different also feel that the applications of each are severely limited; Natural Sciences do not expand beyond cold, hard facts and Human Sciences do not contribute to the material world.

The only conclusion that can be reached is that Human and Natural Sciences are not wholly the same, but are indeed fundamentally the same. Both rely on the “scientific method” to gain knowledge (consider the questions of philosophy to be its “theories” and the meticulous assessment of supplied answers to be its “experiments”). They differ, however, in the fact that their results are not applied to the same fields. Since the basis of all science is the method(s) by which knowledge is acquired, and the Human Sciences use the same method(s) as the Natural Sciences, the two are, therefore, fundamentally the same.

First Things First

2008-11-29T21:05:00.000-08:00

Hello, Dear Readers!

So, since this is the first post, let's just go around the room and introduce ourselves.

They call me M.C. Elroy. Actually, that's not true. I call me M.C. Elroy. And I only do that when I'm joking around about being a rapper, or when I'm concealing my true identity from intermesh strangers.

I generally like movies, comic books, martial arts, and philosophy. I like to read and I like to write. I also like to make movies, though I've only got one feaure-length film under my belt so far.

I'll be back intermittently to give any and all wandering strangers my opinions and such on stuff and such.

Peace!