One-Armed Boxer vs. The One-Armed Swordsman



Swordsman sans an arm is really beautiful, it looks like a play. Like a lot of the best Shaws stuff, it's like a proverb in motion. Really a great work of art. Boxer sans an arm is a dumb basher, pretty much Bruce Lee era. Stupid. Campy. But that stuff's more nostalgic to me, in a way.

Puhlease... The pre-Lee Shaw-foothold on HK Cinema was all tedious nonsense and no choreography, yo. I don't wanna live in a world where people don't think about lines, sequences an angles every time someone gets decked in the face by a flying foot. Granted I haven't seen Swordsman '67 in a while, but I recall it being pretty damn campy too. Chang Cheh is no hero of mine, but his later stuff has way more energy.

"no choreography, yo." Because it wasn't about martial arts prowess or idol-worship, it had a more theatrical angle. And yes, Swordsman was campy too, but what isn't campy in this genre? It's a matter of degrees. What a ridiculous nitpick

This should be good. I haven't seen either, so I'm just gonna watch.

Realtalk though, this is Cheh's best movie. The swordy one.

Hey, I'm not nitpicking, but from your first comment it seemed you were holding campiness as synonymous with dumb/low-quality, and in a bad way. That's a little odd given Swordsman's own camp factor. If it's one order of magnitude less campy than the Lee/post-Lee stuff, it's still six orders more campy and melodramatic than everything that isn't affiliated with either Bollywood or adam West (assuming my memory of it holds up).

All I was saying is the Boxy one is way more campy than the Swordy one. Ever seen it? It's way campier. Wang Yu walks around on his fingers & shit. But camp/dumbness isn't inherently "bad" in this sense (or if it is, not a "bad" bad--let's kill potential semantic silliness here). Old Shaws stuff is campy, but a totally different, more dated kind of camp. Higher artistic ambitions, less obvious exploitation factor. You don't see the latter movie to see a fanged Japanese guy get his arms ripped off.

I'm not sure if I've seen it. I just recall a bunch of gang fights with dudes in black bitch-slapping dudes in blue with sickles and possibly rolling pins. Of course ,that's such a common trope in HK film that it could probably be a memory lifted from any number of VHSs. "Higher artistic ambitions..." & "...more theatrical angle." If you're looking for art, theater and grandstanding stories, Shaw (old, new or anything in between) doesn't seem like the company to follow. Retro HK was only good for dancing limbs and larger than life ass-kickers. Following Shaw Bros for drama is like following rap for socio-political commentary; you'll find a little of what you're looking for, but it'll be limited in quality and quantity.

Yeah, that's the movie. I tend to remember the inflatable lamas and other goofiness before the gang fight at the beginning. --- I'm not the biggest Shaws guy in general so it's not like I disagree for the most part, but I do really like the poetic vibe some of their more "serious" attempts have, without feeling overdone. Painfully artificial, but in a cool intentionally stagey way. Also, I'm literally typing this with one arm. .... wait

Hmmmph. I was hoping to cut my teeth a little more, but there's not enough disagreement here. "Also, I'm literally typing this with one arm." I'm flattered!

At first, I wanted more disagreement too. Now I just wanna know if Fok was beating his meat whilst discussing old-school Fu movies.

I was making a really bad unfunny joke about the premise of one armed heroes that was clearly scurrilously misinterpreted by flickchart's various perverts

I've heard a similar line of denial before, Fok ( Admit to it and release your burden (again).