The Karate...I mean, Kung-fu Kid

[Hobbs]

All right, I don't really care that Will Smith's son is the main character. My main peeve is that, you can't call something the Karate Kid and have them not have karate. I think this is a bigger insult (and makes more sense to be upset about) than when Zhang Zi Yi was the main character of Memoirs of a Geisha. The Japanese and Chinese cultures are vastly different, and returning to the motif of "It all looks the same," is a move backwards from what has been largely a biased cinema.

Also, no offense to Jackie Chan, but Pat Morita will always be Sensei.

[BlaqueKatt]

Memoirs of a Geisha.[/I]

well remember Madonna was trying very hard to get that role-at least Zhang was from the same general region(note region being globe cut into smaller parts, four parts per hemisphere basically in my estimation)

[Hobbs]

I don't remember that at all, actually. But she didn't get the role, did she?

It's like casting Ken Watanabe (great actor) as Bruce Lee.

[fireheart17]

well remember Madonna was trying very hard to get that role-at least Zhang was from the same general region(note region being globe cut into smaller parts, four parts per hemisphere basically in my estimation)

That is true. I think that the director tried to argue that Sandra Oh could be cast as being from any asian country and still pull off the role.

[Fryk]

You know what the Pat Morita vs Jackie Chan as Mr Mitagi thing reminds me of?

Muppet Yoda vs CGI Yoda. And, just as Muppet Yoda wins over CGI Yoda, so too Pat Morita Miyagi beats Jackie Chan Miyagi.

[jackfaire]

Anyone who has an issue with Japanese actors playing chinese and vice versa I have to ask what about Australians playing Canadian mutants, English actors playing American Doctors etc.

I wonder about this because I do know some people who treat Japanese, Chinese basically any culture in that region like it is sacred while all others are trash.

[Greenday]

Except Jackie Chan is a bad ass mofo. I'm not a big fan of his comedies but his older action movies are insane. He also does the majority of his own stunts. The guy is absolutely amazing.

And as jack pointed out, you should probably have an issue with Australians playing Canadians, or English playing Americans, etc. etc. Otherwise...I don't see what your beef is.

[Hobbs]

According to who you ask, there are portions of Asian societies that are better than European ones. But that's not my main point. I mean; sure you could pick Jackie Chan to play him, but no one would really think of him as Miyagi-sensei (At least, I hope they wouldn't). My main point is that you can't have something that's a relaunch of a well-known representation of Japanese culture and re-write it as Chinese.

[crashhelmet]

Not to go too geek here, but the style of martial arts Mr. Miyagi taught is Goju-Ryu, an off-shoot of what is commonly referred to as Okinawan Kenpo. Okinawan Kenpo was "created" when Shaolin Monks traveled to Okinawa and taught the farmers their style of martial arts and adapted it to their every day tasks. Chōjun Miyagi later modified it again and called it Goju-Ryu. The "Mr. Miyagi" character is based off of Chōjun Miyagi.

Kenpo, or sometimes called Kempo, is the Japanese translation for the Chinese word Chuan'fa. It means "Chinese Hands"

Kenpo/Kempo. Shaolin Chuan'Fa, and the Korean art of Tang Soo Do (Way of Chinese Hands) are all basically the same Martial Art. The Japanese and Korean styles have been adapted for the region and lifestyles. Chuan'Fa later had its name changed to "Kung Fu" due to government fear of a rebellion. That's an even longer story than I've already typed out.

Back on topic though, I can understand the beef between taking a franchise based off of a Japanese character and making it Chinese. Both cultures pretty much hate and despise each other for various legitimate reasons.

I'm still looking forward to seeing the movie. The trailer shows you the conversion of the wax on wax off training by hanging up and taking down his coat. I'd like to see what more they do.

CH

[AdminAssistant]

Except Jackie Chan is a bad ass mofo. I'm not a big fan of his comedies but his older action movies are insane. He also does the majority of his own stunts. The guy is absolutely amazing.

Have you seen The Forbidden Kingdom? The plot is trash, but - Jackie Chan/Jet Li throwdown. It's AMAZING.

I mean; sure you could pick Jackie Chan to play him, but no one would really think of him as Miyagi-sensei (At least, I hope they wouldn't). My main point is that you can't have something that's a relaunch of a well-known representation of Japanese culture and re-write it as Chinese.

Jackie Chan is simply playing a different incarnation of Miyagi-sensei, and his work won't ever detract from the amazing Pat Morita. Also, I don't know that I'd call The Karate Kid a representation of Japanese culture.

Let's take a different legend - Robin Hood. A character that has been played recently by an American (Costner), a Brit (Elwes), and an Aussie (Crowe). Actors are cast cross-culturally all the time. Frankly, I don't think there's anyone better right now to play Mr. Miyagi than Jackie Chan.

[Hobbs]

I just can't see why people don't have a bigger problem with this. It's the Karate Kid, NOT the Kung-fu Kid!!

[the_std]

I just can't see why people don't have a bigger problem with this.

I truly don't mean to sound condescending here, but it's probably because most people don't care enough to make a big deal out of it. What is that going to do? The movie has already been shot and produced, what's done is done, and getting upset about it isn't going to change anything. It's just a movie.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

I've long since given up on the idea that a remake can hold a candle to the old movie it's remaking. Anything worth the effort is far too often a product of it's time beyond the point where something new can faithfully follow in it's footsteps to say nothing of the fact that nostalgia can't be generated at will. The best bet is to remake something in the spirit of the old movie, along similar lines but nevertheless make it "It's own thing" so to speak. Failure to make a movie that stands on it's own is synonymous with failure anywhere else, why should remakes be any different?

[draggar]

Did Hollywood run out of ideas? It's been a long time since I've seen anything do well that's original.

[the_std]

Uhm, how about every single one of Pixar's creations? They've almost all been massive hits, and they were all originals.

I hate it when people say that Hollywood no longer does anything original. Yes, the remake factory sucks (they've even remade Death At A Funeral, for crying out loud and the original wasn't even five years old!), I hate that they can't just let things go without trying to make money out of them one more time, but that isn't *all* they do. Hollywood still does good things... On occasion.

[Hobbs]

Didn't Pixar do A Bug's Life? That movie, btw is just a re-hash of Magnificent Seven, which is the American adaptation of Seven Samurai by Akira Kurosawa.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

There's a very important difference between inspired by/based on, and derivative remakes/sequels. Also, the basic plot of the 7 Samurai is quite simple in it's makeup to the point where there's probably buckets of films that follow a similar plot without even meaning too.

[Rebel]

Another thing to remember is that producers don't like to to risk their investment on original and untried material. More often than not, they will look at something that has performed well in the past (or in another country) and try to give it a modern American look. That's why there are so many remakes these days. It pisses me off, because it looks like Hollywood has no original thoughts left.

(Though God bless whoever produced Friday the 13th and My Bloody Valentine. I love me some sweaty Padalecki and Ackles in tight shirts)

If you were looking for originality, you should pay more attention to Independent Film Festivals.

As for the Karate Kid, I have no plans on seeing it. Not because I don't agree with the casting choices, but just because it looks really crap.

[Fryk]

The fact that Jackie Chan moves like he does is a detriment to his ability to play Mr. Miyagi. I mean, sure, Morita-Miyagi happened to kick 11 different kinds of ass, but I just can't see the character moving quite like him. Miyagi seemed more conservative in his movements, a smarter fighter, perhaps. Chan's style is more like seat-of-your-pants, improvisational, sray-and-pray fighting.

And don't get me started on the new version of Robin Hood...

[Fire_on_High]

Anyone who has an issue with Japanese actors playing chinese and vice versa I have to ask what about Australians playing Canadian mutants, English actors playing American Doctors etc.

Culturally, for the most part the Anglosphere doesn't give a shit. Sure, if the accent comes out so badly done it seems a parody, there will be protest, but the countries have been solid allies for a long time now, and more importantly, solid friends.

Call a Japanese person Chinese, and you're in for an ass whoopin'. It's taken as a vicious insult. Same for the other Asian cultures.

You know why? Look at history a bit, how many relatively recent, bloody, utterly savage wars there have been. Much more recent than between any two major Anglosphere cultures.

[jackfaire]

Call a Japanese person Chinese, and you're in for an ass whoopin'. It's taken as a vicious insult. Same for the other Asian cultures.

.

Actually call an Australian English he gets pissed and vice versa, Tell an American with ancestry in England that he looks french man watch out for the fireworks.

[draggar]

Uhm, how about every single one of Pixar's creations? They've almost all been massive hits, and they were all originals.

I can agree with that, Pixar has been quite creative with their movies and the ones I've seen were very good (Up so far has been my favorite).

I hate it when people say that Hollywood no longer does anything original. Yes, the remake factory sucks (they've even remade Death At A Funeral, for crying out loud and the original wasn't even five years old!), I hate that they can't just let things go without trying to make money out of them one more time, but that isn't *all* they do. Hollywood still does good things... On occasion.

Yes but today it seems like there is far more remakes and overly-done storylines / themes than something original.

Heck, even Harry Potter has been rather original (well, the books have been and the movies haven't been done before). I'll also throw sequels in with the "remakes" - it's generally the same movie but with a different bad guy.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Sequels at least deserve a chance. There are plenty that manage to do their own thing while remaining true to the previous installments.

[jackfaire]

Sequels at least deserve a chance. There are plenty that manage to do their own thing while remaining true to the previous installments.

And then you have Highlander

[draggar]

Sequels at least deserve a chance. There are plenty that manage to do their own thing while remaining true to the previous installments.

True but rarely is the sequel as good as the original, most of the times it is worse. The only exception is when there is an actual ongoing story (Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Star Wars, etc..) but not when it's seperate movies (Spiderman, Transformers, etc..).

The best non-storyline sequel was Star Trek II - The Wrath of Khan (but that later turned into a storyline with this as the beginning).

And then you have Highlander

FTW.

[Arcade Man D]

The fact that Jackie Chan moves like he does is a detriment to his ability to play Mr. Miyagi. I mean, sure, Morita-Miyagi happened to kick 11 different kinds of ass, but I just can't see the character moving quite like him. Miyagi seemed more conservative in his movements, a smarter fighter, perhaps. Chan's style is more like seat-of-your-pants, improvisational, sray-and-pray fighting.

And don't get me started on the new version of Robin Hood...

Except that Jackie Chan is pretty clearly not Mr. Miyagi. If you actually watch the trailers, the movie is going to have Jackie Chan be a kung fu master, teaching Jaden Smith kung fu. The only reason they kept the original name of Karate Kid was because of a marketing decision. To attach it to the movies we loved, and probably because "dumb Americans think karate is a synonym for martial arts".

[Fryk]

Ahhhhhhhh, that clears up a lot! The trailer I saw didn't have him named one way or the other. There really needs to be a term for movies that are just there to cash in on previous movies' successes.

[Hobbs]

Except that Jackie Chan is pretty clearly not Mr. Miyagi. If you actually watch the trailers, the movie is going to have Jackie Chan be a kung fu master, teaching Jaden Smith kung fu. The only reason they kept the original name of Karate Kid was because of a marketing decision. To attach it to the movies we loved, and probably because "dumb Americans think karate is a synonym for martial arts".
That's exactly my point. It shouldn't be the Karate Kid or attached to the franchise because Jaden is clearly not learning Karate.

[crashhelmet]

"dumb Americans think karate is a synonym for martial arts".

That's exactly my point. It shouldn't be the Karate Kid or attached to the franchise because Jaden is clearly not learning Karate.

What is Karate? Mr. Miyagi did NOT teach Karate. It's probably safe to assume that ~90% of all Dojos in the US that advertise "Karate" are actually teaching Tae Kwan Do. If anything, Karate has about the same meaning as Kung Fu. Neither are "styles" in and of themselves. They're both general terms used for Martial Arts.

The only thing that makes your argument hold any weight is the fact that the it takes place in China.

CH

[Hobbs]

Excuse me? Karate is not the same as Shaolin Kung-fu. The styles are radically different. They may be the closest rooted fighting styles, but they're not the same. It would be the same as saying iaido is the same as taijijian. Yes they both have a sword, but that's pretty much where it ends.

[crashhelmet]

Excuse me? Karate is not the same as Shaolin Kung-fu. The styles are radically different. They may be the closest rooted fighting styles, but they're not the same. It would be the same as saying iaido is the same as taijijian. Yes they both have a sword, but that's pretty much where it ends.

I don't remember saying they were the same. Earlier in this thread I related what Mr. Miyagi taught to the Shaolin style based completely on the fact that it was Shaolin monks that taught the martial arts that grew into that particular style of Te, or what I referred to as Okinawan Kempo.

What I said was that Karate is not a style of martial arts. It is a generalized term to describe Martial Arts. In Japan, the term is Karate. In China the term is Kung Fu. Here in the US, it's quickly becoming "MMA."

Now, if you really want to get technical, there are VERY FEW differences between Shaolin Chuan'Fa and Goju-Ryu. Chuan'Fa and Shotokan? Yeah, huge differences, but Mr. Miyagi didn't teach Shotokan.

CH

[Hobbs]

I'll have to see your certification before I believe you :rolleyes:

[crashhelmet]

I'll have to see your certification before I believe you :rolleyes:

And which certifications will it take for you to believe me? Which certifications do you have to dispute what it is that I've brought forth thus far?

CH

[Hobbs]

And which certifications will it take for you to believe me? Which certifications do you have to dispute what it is that I've brought forth thus far?

CH
I'd like to see what makes you an expert in comparative martial arts.

[crashhelmet]

I've been training in Martial Arts since August of 1981. My father is a retired Marine (if there is such a thing) and my God Father is retired Navy. They had a grand idea to train me to be the "ultimate soldier." Unfortunately for us all, I was classified 4-F at MEPS in Tampa after shattering my ankle.

With the help of their connections and growing up all over the world, I had the distinct privilege of training with some of the best instructors available in multiple styles. I continued that training after I turned 18. I turn 35 in approximately 5 and a half weeks. So if you've done the math so far, that's almost 29 years of training since starting at the age of 6.

The first 19 years of my training had been wrapped around a core training in Shotokan. The 10 years since has been a core of Shaolin Chuan'Fa.

Being a military family, we spent 2 years in Iwakuni, Japan; a little over 18 months in Subic Bay, Phillippines, 6 months in Incheon, South Korea, and 2 years in Bitburg, Germany. In addition to multiple cities across the US.

6 years ago, I had the Honor and Privilege of travelling to China and training at the Shaolin Temple for 2 weeks. I'm hoping to go back again soon.

What styles have I trained in?

Japanese
Shotokan
Iaido / Kendo
Chugoku Kempo
Judo

Filipino
Eskrima

Korean
Tae Kwon Do

Thai
Krabi Krabang
Muay Thai

American
LINE
MCMAP

Chinese
Shaolin Chuan'Fa
Wing Chun

Brasilian
Jiu Jitsu

The greatest thing about training in the Shaolin style is it has helped me blend all of these styles together so much easier due to their roots all coming from some portion of the Shaolin arts.

CH

[Boozy]

6 years ago, I had the Honor and Privilege of travelling to China and training at the Shaolin Temple for 2 weeks.


That's really cool.

Pardon my ignorance, but what martial art do the Shaolin monks practice? I've seen them perform on TV before, and thought it looked very beautiful. And possibly deadly. But mostly beautiful.

[crashhelmet]

That's really cool.

Pardon my ignorance, but what martial art do the Shaolin monks practice? I've seen them perform on TV before, and thought it looked very beautiful. And possibly deadly. But mostly beautiful.

They practice Shaolin Chuan Fa, or what is commonly referred to as Shaolin Kung Fu or Shaolin Kempo depending on who you're talking to.

You're right it is very beautiful to watch and can be very deadly as well. The style itself is a combination of techniques largely based on various animals and insects. This is where the "Tiger," "Monkey," "Crane, " and "Praying Mantis" styles come from. Watching disciples spar each other is like an epic "Rock, Paper, Scissors" game as they adjust and change to counter their opponent.

CH

[Hobbs]

My brother's Tang Soo Do instructor loathed Chinese martial arts, mentioning that, "You're fighting someone, not dancing."

[BlaqueKatt]

from what I've seen in interviews with Jackie Chan-J Smith moves to China with his mother and gets harassed/beat up, he already KNOWS karate(so he IS the karate kid-it's what the bullies call him), but since the kids in China know kung-fu it's ineffective, so Jackie Chan, his school janitor steps in to help him.

It's like the "remake" of Dawn of the dead-enough similarities in the stories that people would bitch "oh this just ripped off the other movie" so it's not called a direct remake it's a "re-imagining"

Heck the only similarities between the two "dawn of the dead" movies are zombies(after a fashion-I personally don't consider running zombies as zombies), and a shopping mall, but because of those two things, the directors asked and were given permission by Romero to use the title-they were not going to, until fans started complaining about "the blatant rip off of Romero" even though Romero had read the script and didn't think it was even close(they didn't even ask until they were in post production IIRC)-so they can't really win.

Make a movie similar to older movie=fans screaming rip off of old movie!
Make a movie with same title different storyline=fans screaming OMG it's not the same!

They can't win :rolleyes:

[crashhelmet]

My brother's Tang Soo Do instructor loathed Chinese martial arts, mentioning that, "You're fighting someone, not dancing."

Tang Soo Do is the Korean version of the Shaolin style. It literally means "Way of Chinese Hands." However, similar to the Japanese adaptations, it stresses more linear and rigid movements.

However, the Chinese styles are not all dance. As I mentioned earlier, it's like a rock, paper, scissors game.

Tiger Style uses straight ahead attacks, ripping and tearing as it moves, always pressing and NEVER retreats. It's very linear, rigid, and powerful. Examples of Tiger styles are Shotokan and Muay Thai.

Dragon Style teaches you to "Ride The Wind." it uses rising and falling motions as well as twisting and turning movements to overcome its adversaries. The Dragon Style uses a lot of spinning moves to overcome the Tiger's linear moves. This is why you always see the Tiger fighting the Dragon in artwork. To be honest, I can't think of a foreign art that matches the Dragon Style. Tae Kwon Do, Aikido, and Judo come close, but lack enough in different areas.

Leopard Style is all about timing and agility. The Leopard is patient and will move in, get its shots in, and move out. It also uses some of the spinning and stepping moves of the Dragon to dodge attacks. it also uses traps and breaks. it's a "standing grappling" art. It doesn't have the size or strength to fight like a Tiger, so it hits vital soft spots and works on taking the opponent down while it remains standing. They say that if a Leopard was the same size as a Tiger, it would be the deadliest of them all. Krav Maga could be considered a Leopard Style.

Crane Style is all about balance, gracefulness, agility, and explosiveness. Its movements are soft, relaxed, and circular until the time comes for the kill shot. You could say it's another defense style, concentrating more on getting out of the way or at least deflecting or trapping the attacks. Looks dance-like with all of the jumping around and arm movements. Tae Kwon Do is a Crane Style.

Snake Style uses coils, zig zags, and rapid twisting motions to compensate for his lack of limbs. Like the Crane, it's very explosive hitting "soft" targets to incapacitate their enemy. The art of Wing Chun is a Snake Style.

Those are the 5 core styles. There are countless others.

The White Spider and Snow Leopard Styles are ground grappling styles. The White Spider concentrates more on locks while the Snow Leopard concentrates more on pinning and striking.

Eagle Style is like the Crane, but "flies" more. Bear is like the Tiger but stands its ground rather than pressing in. Monkey is like a cross between the Snake and the Leopard. Don't ask about the Frog style. I don't know enough about it and can only say that it's different :p

Forgive me. I'm geeking out again ;p But anyway, for the styles that look dance-like, don't underestimate them. The movements you see are designed to move out of the way, block, deflect, or trap strikes, or counter-strike.

True practitioners study at least all of the 5 core, if not more, to learn the balance between them all. If your opponent is fighting like a Tiger, you fight like a Dragon and vice-versa. Every style has advantages and disadvantages against the others. it all comes down to how you use it and how your mental training has been.

CH

[Fryk]

Crash, that was so cool, I bookmarked it.

[dendawg]

it's not called a direct remake it's a "re-imagining"

You mean like "Dragon Ball" is pretty much a re-imagining of "Journey to the West?"

[BlaqueKatt]

You mean like "Dragon Ball" is pretty much a re-imagining of "Journey to the West?"

well the author of Dragonball has said that he was attempting to get it into a more "kid accepted" version-it is in the same manner as "o brother where art thou" is the Oddesy-so more of an "update" a re-imagining is more of rewriting parts-see "tim burton's planet of the apes" vs the original or halloween vs "rob zombies Hallowen"

[jackfaire]

a re-imagining is more of rewriting parts-see "tim burton's planet of the apes"

LMAO Actually the newer planet of the Apes movie was closer to the book than the original one was in my opinion.

[Racket_Man]

LMAO Actually the newer planet of the Apes movie was closer to the book than the original one was in my opinion.

I did like Tim Burtons "re-make" as it did stick a little closer to the original book. BUT having said that I did LIKE the Rod Serling script for the original Planet of the Apes movie. he at least used the basic premise of the book but shifted the focus to a future Earth rather than a distant planet. The book was kinda boring and slow for me but a great premise for a story. I did like how Serling "Sci-Fi'ed" it up a bit more than the book and kept certain details hidden until the very last minute.

Rod Serling did create a great foundation for the squeals/prequeals

[smileyeagle1021]

LMAO Actually the newer planet of the Apes movie was closer to the book than the original one was in my opinion.

Not to derail the thread, but I always laugh at the people who have never read the book that something is based on, then get pissed that a remake didn't stay true to the original without realizing that it was actually closer to the book than the original.
Look at the remake of Dune, that is incredibly close to the book, but nothing like the movie, so everyone hates it.

On the topic of the Karate Kid, the studio isn't stupid... they know that there will be the people who will see it for no other reason than it's called the Karate Kid and there will be people who will refuse to see it for the exact same reason... they are right now better that there will be more people in the first group than the latter... simple economics and marketing.

[Racket_Man]

Not to derail the thread, but I always laugh at the people who have never read the book that something is based on, then get pissed that a remake didn't stay true to the original without realizing that it was actually closer to the book than the original.

Look at the remake of Dune, that is incredibly close to the book, but nothing like the movie, so everyone hates it.



I loved the remake of Dune. and YES 4 or 5 hours did do the book justice. ABSOLUTILY HATED the 1984 movie. but then again I read most of the original Frank Herbert series and about half of the "prequel" series his son wrote from his father's background notes/history so I am a bit biased.

the books do get bogged down a bit in certain places but the entire story line (from prequel to end) itself is a great political thriller set to Sci-Fi.