Compare news coverage from diverse sources around the world on a transparent platform driven by data. Try Ground News today and get 30% off your subscription: ground.news/likestoriesofold
In reading the original Spider Man comics, I get a pretty good idea of what you're getting at here. It's become about checking the boxes, versus creating an overall good story arc where the action helps to tell the story while still being very engaging. Spider Man seems to be constantly trying to evolve himself and his mental and fighting abilities, and the action feels right, it flows perfectly as a part of the story. These days, it seems as though "lots of cool stuff happening onscreen equals good movie" is the driving mentality, ignoring the fact that part of the very reason it is cool at all is because we already are rooting for that character to win, to overcome the odds. That's also why the Bourne trilogy works. Yes, it does have the tropes mentioned at the beginning of this essay, but the concept is that action is part of telling Jason's story versus seemingly being an end in itself. Honestly, you can even read some of the newer Spider-Man comics to realize that you can still create engaging stories that not only contain both the tried and true action tropes, but also have creative new ideas. Same thing applies with the newer Star Wars stuff. The problem isn't the idea, it's the execution. That's why yet again, we've seen some of the best Star Wars stories comes out of the comics (like the Thrawn story arc, and the Vader comics, as an example).
Fantastic video. I did leave two other comments on here, please have a look at those if you haven't seen those movies you are missing out on something.
Loved the point about viscerality. Compare any of the gun-foo John Wick scenes to the alley scene in Collateral. Cruise only shoots two people and it’s over in a second but man it feels and moreover SOUNDS real. Doesn’t feel like he killed cheap cardboard cutouts with a prop gun.
"An action scene is the high point of a story, therefore it must be a part of it and you need to build towards it" is such a basic lesson, many directors had mastered it decades ago. The fact that modern day Hollywood has collectively decided to just ignore it is insane.
Quite a few movies do that. Collateral is technically an action movie but the real movie happens in the cab during conversation between Fox and Cruise. The action scenes punctuate what you’ve already been told about these characters. John Wick, the moments between the action scenes feel like filler for the runtime. And the universe feels built as a set piece for Wick to kill things and look cool doing it. I’m entire out on Wick or Fast-X type movies. But movies like the first Matrix or Die Hard movie? Or Heat? Casino Royale? Yeah more of that, Hollywood.
I was disappointed by this video .. I feel like action movies have become to unrealistic .. too militaristic etc , I miss the old days of action flicks 1990s early to mid 2000s . I’m talking about the van damme , dolph , Welsru snipes and Segal film
@@kevinc8955 I think you might have missed the point of John Wick. John Wick is at its core a giant love letter to the art and history of filming fight scenes. That's _what the series is about._ The quiet scenes, while well directed/acted in their own right, are ultimately ancillary and I daresay that's by design.
@@radi2986The old days of action movies were full of unrealistic and militaristic movies, actors like Dolph, Segal, Snipes and Van Damme are literally famous because they starred in these types of works. I would even dare to say that modern action movies are getting more realistic than ever in some aspects due to the influence of movies like The Raid.
I used to love action scenes, but I definitely tune out more often than not during action scenes nowadays. I couldn't put my finger on why they bored me so much, but you've revealed it so perfectly.
The first live-action Michael Bay Transformers movie was the lowest point I've ever seen action scenes sink, and I've been enjoying action movies since the '70s.
Captain American 2--Elevator Fight. Great build up. Great character moments. And the fight is important to the story, as it signifies Cap's break from authority, and his transition from the establishment to the hunted.
the fight scene in David Finchers 'The Killer' really caught me off guard. it isn't trying to be anything new or different but it's so well crafted and orchestrated that it felt fresh.
@@normanstansfield1924 I'm surprised how no one talks about Barry in this kinda action conversation. That show easily had some of the most uniquely choreographed action done in the last 10 years
A favorite of mine is Emily blunt and Jon Berenthal in Sicario. Realistic in the sense that Blunt is at a size and strength disadvantage, but is trained. So it's interesting to see how she fights back. She's ultimately saved by a partner, but it doesn't feel unearned.
@@jahimuddin2306Then again, the movie exhibited way earlier that he's capable of doing such things to all people connected to his tragedy. Not to mention that his past as a lawful prosecutor in Mexico now a borderline lawless CIA operative signifies the well fitting contrast to Kate, who is a competent operative yet strictly operates by the book.
@@memecliparchives2254, That is true. In most movies they have the guys seeking revenge “see the light” at the end. Not many of them have the balls to have that guys execute two children. It was different, I love this movie.
@@memecliparchives2254a lot of people missed this, but Alejandro IS the Sicario. He’s El Salvadoran cartel. We worked WITH the CIA, not for them. This is why he was so ruthless.
HK action movies and Ong Bak inspired The Raid dude. The Raid just stands out because it is one of the few action films of recent times that doesnt rely on CG and shakey cam. Asian cinema did it long before The Raid.
Doesn't matter who started. Problem is that John Wick 1 was sick. Two was great, 3 was yeah ok and 4 was shit. I mean it is all the same and also the choreoghraphy is the same. This is why todays action films bore me. there seem to be less and less at stake here. I loved extraction 2, but I didn't feel any suspense unlike the first one. Or the raid 2. I want to see something that just makes things different and creative. All those over the top choreographys tend to be a big let down, cause they are all uncreative at best. I dislike nolan films, but I admit that he made something pretty unique with the fight in Tenet. But the movie is unwatchable and even the fight gets pretty unmemorable after watching it twice. Nobody talks about the beautiful choreographies of seven swords. Why? movie was a let down for most. The action was one of a kind. I haven't seen this kind of wu xia since a long time and newly interpreted. Xion XinXing is a masterful choreographer who doesn't get the recognition he deserves. Time and Tide. another movie dislike by many, but the action is unique creative and never seen before. Silly and unrealistic, yeah. But it works fabulously. This is what I would like to see.
In my opinion, one of the single greatest action sequences in all of cinema is the truck chase in Raiders. The story telling, perfect view of action and meaningful story beats, it has it all. And, it's almost impossible to top.
I'm so thrilled that you chose this topic for a video. What you're talking about is literally the theme that I've based my career as a filmmaker around: dramatically elevating the action film genre to create character studies wrapped in an action film. What you talked about in this video encouraged me so much that I'm on the right track.
The commentary about action servicing the story is so good here. Prey is a really good example of this too. They had to make it believable that a smaller native American woman could pose a threat to a predator. To do that, there's nearly a half-dozen fights with the predator in that movie. They serve a purpose of either showing he's a weaker, less advanced predator and/or showing the protagonist learning something about his weapons and tactics.
I'm very glad you agree with story being critical to making action scenes better. That is my approach to my filmmaking. These action directors are my inspirations and I will always use them as my references. Blending both compelling narratives and impressive action gives everyone an amazing experience. We're getting closer to amazing stories blended with amazing action being released more often. We have to keep learning and grinding.
Title is right. That's honestly why I loved JW 4 despite it getting way too crazy in some parts. Also helps that South Asian cinema has been making banger action films.
Fantastic video, Tom. Extremely insightful as ever, and I really enjoyed how you constructed your argument and edited everything together so seamlessly. Great to have you back, though I hope New Zealand was amazing!
this is a subject that I'm really passionate in the sense that I love a good fight in a movie but I wasn't familiar with the behind the scenes. thanks for this amazing video, loved every second of it, I leave with a ton of nuggets of information regarding this beautiful craft and the pioneers that got us there.
A little sad EEAAO didn’t get a mention for _its_ action-which maintained visual clarity, was visceral, was created in service of the story, was directed by the actual directors, and yet still subverted the narrative conventions and cliches of violence glorification in action movies :)
For me, the best fight scene ever is by Donnie Yen and Collin Chou, in a Chinese movie named Flash Point, specifically the last fight they did together. Donnie Yen demonstrated a lot of practical martial arts techniques and blended them together seamlessly in a way I have never seen before or since.
Great video again. To add to the point about visceraltiy: HK movies would often show a blow landing twice, once in a wider shot then in quick close-up. I hadn't noticed how Ridley Scott uses inserts of the hits landing, but it's a similar principle.
I would really like to know who invented this technique. AFAIK its been around at least since the early 70s. Jackie Chan said by showing the hit twice, the audience perceives it as one stronger hit. This is because it takes 2-3 frames (80-125milliseconds) for the average human brain to register the edit and to reorient to the new framing/perspective of the new shot. If you frame these 2 shots similarly so that the movement of the blow aligns in direction, and you repeat only the 2-3 frames it takes the brain to register the new shot, all of it merges together in the perception and both blow and hit(reaction) appear more emphasized. If you blink you'll miss it, but even with eyes wide open, sometimes it becomes a hidden cut (hidden in plain sight). John Woo uses a similar technique for bullet hits, he sometimes shows the hit 3 times, from 3 slightly different angles with 3 different frame-rates and one of the edits so fast that your brain barely registers it, but in your perception it blurs together into one seamless motion.
Just found your channel, I didn't know I was missing analysis like this. Incredible research and arguments. Amazing. The Taken scene you used was a perfect summation of your thesis. I hope we get more action that is in service of the story because yeah, you're absolutely right.
bill hader’s barry has also got some of the best action scenes of the modern era. particularly that apartment fight in the Ronny/Lily episode or the motorcycle chase scene in the episode 710N has some of the most brilliant, clever staging and ‘viscerality’ (as the video points out) I’ve seen in any visual medium. tv, movies etc
Excellent video. I agree very much with the sentiment that it's all blending into one at this stage. For me, the Extraction films are just boring, predictable junk regardless of how well the fight sequences are choreographed. There's nothing in there you can't get from much better films like the John Wick franchise. I'd also suggest that these types of long-take, meticulously choreographed fight sequences are impressive, but become quickly anemic. There's no sense of consequence or impact any more. When The Bourne Supremacy did that really impressive brawl in the kitchen, it was then copied so often that we ended up with the Taken 3 fence. The same could be said here; innovative at first, but over time and with so much repetition, action sequences need a different approach to become truly gripping again.
That's true. When they go for hallway fight scenes for example, it just comes across as trying to set a record for how long the can create a 'one take fight scene'. It also gets boring bcos the actors themselves usually aren't martial artists and therefore relies on the same fight choreographers that everyone in Hollywood is doing. In Hong Kong Cinema, they always knew how to create great fight scenes that distinguished themselves from their previous. You can for example watch fight scenes from 30 different Jackie Chan movies and be entertained and impressed with how different they are.
Abigail does a neat mix of action and story. A gory thriller slasher vampire film, where the threat of death and pain gets dialed up in each confrontation. Excellent point about the need to mix story and action. An action scene that can be celebrated out of context *and* be enthralling in-context is a beautiful thing.
Like a ton of things have evolved into crabs, action has evolved into Raid. But like crabs, that isn't always the best thing. It's simply something that works often. Awesome video man!
I think you're making a very good point! I am happy we're generally past the point where any time a fight broke out the camera people seems to have a seizure and you can't tell what's going on, but there indeed still is the problem that they feel detached from the movie. No matter how impressive these scenes are, from a story telling standpoint, it just ends up feeling "and then they fight". Even from the standpoint of how impactful the action itself is I feel it's a big loss, it's just going to end up feeling "cool" most of the time but that's not going to help with you being engaged with what's going on.
This video reminds me of what they say about musical theater - if the emotions you need to express have gotten too big for words, it’s time to sing. If the emotions get too big for singing, it’s time to dance. Action scenes are a form of expression, and I rarely see movies give that expression a buildup anymore. Action isn’t earned, it’s given whether you want it or not.
While I love the John Wick series, by the time of the 4th movie there is no tension and it is spectacle for spectacle sake. While there is nothing wrong with that, its cool and all but you're are right, you don't feel that type of movie. The 1st movie had it but the 4th didn't. Another scene that had tension in spades leading up to the action was in Denzel's first Equalizer movie, where he confronts the Russians at the club. Masterful.
The way you can articulate your thoughts is so well honed; your perspective is considerate of the sum of the subjects parts. Just the idea that you’re not speaking in terms of polarity is much appreciated. Every time I wonder when looking at a title of your video what you will discuss you invariably mention the things I hoped you’d give your thoughts on. I loved Fincher’s movie; especially the action; it’s highly kinetic, I was so impressed with Fassbinder in that film. The first thing I thought about was the hallway seen in Old Boy; my favorite action sequence in any film; Park Chan Wook is a master of his craft. Thanks for everything you make; it’s my favorite criticism on the internet by far. ❤
I've been on a big Shaw Brothers binge in the past four months, and it's also a very interesting and new way to think of action and narrative purposes. Especially the way some like Chang Cheh, or Lau Kar-Leng design the narrative structure of the fights.
Thid remindedd. Me of Dune Part Two's last fight. It's focused, the sound of the knives and grunts pop. My hands began sweating as if I was watching someone climb a hard wall in a competition. It was tuned to thw story and the movie's mood. It was a great, great fight
Great video. Viscerality does make a huge difference to me. It's the breaking and interaction of elements surrounding the action which lends credence and reality to a fight. Likewise a good action film has to find the sweet spot where you just wish the action lasted a bit longer rather than it going on for too long. But ultimately action doesn't mean anything if it isn't grounded in a story and have emotional weight behind it. The airport fight in Civil War is cool but it's nothing compared to the final fight. Or how, in my favourite film, the mech suit at the end of District 9 empowers Wikus to become the hero from the everyman that he was. When he roars "I'm not afraid of you" as his suit allows him to push back against the bullies, I get chills at how emotive the action is. Anyway, a very interesting analysis and nice to see someone attempting to explain why I was so bored by John Wick 4 or Extraction 2.
This is exactly what I felt when watching the Raid for the second time. I loooved the action and the stunt work, but at some point I was just blankly staring at the screen wondering where did the plot go.
I think the better example of viscerality vs non-of-it in a same franchise are the fight scenes in The Matrix 1 and the ones from Matrix Reloaded. You could feel the damage from each punch and kick in the first one. In the second one, its a punch that barely connects and thats it. Many of our favorites action scenes from the 80s and 90s also had a build up and they took its time to show the results but now there´s no room for that moment of awe because everything is rushed to the next fight-netx crash-next destruction. That build up is why we remember (and love) the rooftop explosion in "Die hard", the corridor explosion in "Hardboiled", the bus jump in "Speed".
I swear to god, right at 16:45, when you talked about invoking different or specific responses, I legit thought of South Indian cinema, with their overblown action sequences that exemplify bravado and ubermensch qualities. However, as an Indian I too have begun to have my fill of those scenes, quite similar to the way of which the video essay talks about. And it was a great moment of mind-melding when you showed a clip of RRR at the very moment I was going - he probably just might reference RRR now - in my head.
I think the biggest issue is that we're still in phase 1 of the action revolution. It's like the 90's where there was a slew of "Doom clones". We are in an era of john Wick clones, just waiting for a Half Life to come around. The spectacle of "clear" action hasn't worn off yet so no one has really paved the way for using those tools in a different way yet.
I think action = violence is a narrow view. There are other types of action scenes: chase (car or running or bike), sports, adventures/exploring an environment, creating/building something, etc.
Another example comparable to The Killer fight scene. James Bond Quantum of Solace. A lesser movie than Casino Royale but the fights were amazing. His fight against the assassin in close quarters when he ends it with a knife to the thigh artery. Holding him there as he's dying. You feel it
There is definitely "eras" of action choreography, or at least dominant trends. But you're so right that the setup is what makes the action "hit" (heh). One movie you had in there briefly that I thought was a very interesting take Silent Night. The whole movie is really just a tragedy, and part of that tragedy is Kinnaman turning to violence at all. It's watching the slow self destruction. So using the classic John Woo style but that little bit grimier, little bit uglier, had the action really integrated into the story. If it had been TOO slick, it would lose the melancholic heart of the narrative. But at the same time, you can see stuff like Renfield, which had some truly spectacular action that practically doubled as horror scenes, and pulled from the tropes of both genres in its composition. The swat dude getting his face ripped off STILL sits with me as iconic and HILARIOUS.
The intro sequence perfectly illustrates the point so well: The choreography, the movement, the camera, the threat, the martial arts... It's all the same. It's like everyone is trying to copy each other or it's done by the same 1 guy. But maybe more importantly: It's self-glorifying and separated from the whole. You could almost use the term "pornographic". It's action for the action sake, where there's little room for character and story. "Moments" if you're lucky...
Love it. Great analysis. Very accurate and I can tell you're a real student of action. Nice job giving praise where it's due but highlighting room for improvement
The action sequences aren't made by perviz companies, they're made by second unit directors. The actual scenes themselves, many times, are even shopped out to the second unit and shot by them apart from the main unit.
First off, this videos is one amazing job of editing! So, I agree mostly with what you are saying here and here’s a couple of my thoughts. First off, I think, sometimes, the fight directors and coordinators are looking to creating something new but the executives are looking to stick with what is tried and true. They don’t want to innovate and potentially lose viewers. If the executives want change then they demand that the change is more crazy and over the top than last time. This doesn’t let the actual fighters tinker and get creative on how they think a fight would turn out. Second is the pre baked actions scenes. I find it crazy that these fight and actions are pre planned and yet so much of the visuals still look to strange when the movie is finished, just like the example of this in this video: Black Widow. The idea of the falling scene was cool but the way they did the cgi was sloppy. Cool but sloppy. Third, it does seem as thought the fights are included to make people show up for the fights and not because there is a good story that leads up to a fight. Taken is a fantastic example of this, Daddy Neeson walks in like he owns the place and us the views are nervous why, how, what is going on until we are slammed into the fight like that bad guys head into the table. Then we realize what is going on. I can barely remember if there’s anything else I wanted to say so I’ll stop at 3 ideas but I’m sure I could think of more. I really enjoy these fight scenes and how they are stitched together. Even the lame ones and outta place ones. Eventually the studio executives gotta understand that the stunt guys who create this stuff are also creatives and need to innovate their craft just like all other the people who are on board making a movie.
I watched the first Rambo film for the first time in over a decade. It made me realize how much we have lost in modern action movies. I guess it was pretty rare in 1982 too, but it really hit me hard, just how crap most films are today.
For a movie that works better with shaky cam - watch the Paul Walker film from 2006 called Running Scared. Trust me, it's a gritty neo-noir crime thriller that wouldn't work had they filmed the movie like John Wick. And in regards to a film with amazing action scenes filmed in wide shots with a steady cam that simultaneously further the narrative of the story and character arcs, watch RRR from India. Both are amazing films. Side note: The Night Comes For Us, a film with a lot of the actors from both The Raid film starring in it is my favourite martial arts action film which is well worth watching too if you want something familiar yet different.
this made me remember to re-listen The Killer's OST and then re-watch The Killer again. loved that movie, it was so meditative & captivating, a pure vibe piece
I think the problem with this statement on its face it Hollywood would sooner go back to Taken and Jason Borne than use any criticism in a positive way.
Its called previz When they shoot the action in like a gym or something and then give it to the Director so they know what it would look like before shooting on the day. Normally second unit tends to take over in this department with the and Stunt coordinator.
Yeah. Not complaining. These kinds of action movies are a big improvement over typical action fare from Hollywood in previous decades, even though some of my favorite action movies are from those decades, they were the exceptions to the rule. I agree that 2nd unit directing can present a disconnect. Sometimes it can work out great, such as with Fury Road which maintains a seamless vision from beginning to end but other movies, like 1987's Predator, you can tell when McTiernan isn't behind the camera. His action setups were taut, cinematic, and narrative, while the 2nd unit's action scenes could've been mistaken for generic A-Team B-roll. Similarly, 1982's Conan the Barbarian is another example of a movie with great action setups but relatively poor action. The anticipation it builds for its fight scenes is epic. Conan posing before the Orgy battle to Basil Poledouris' legendary score...just awesome...which is a real shame as the payoff is generally rather anticlimactic. I think as long as the director and their 2nd units are in sync, it can lead to great results. At worst, it can present a stylistic mismatch, which is still preferable to the alternative - stylistic continuity with subpar action from directors who suck at it. Bottom line: as long as the action is good, I am content lol. I think the ideal is a middle ground between readable action in movies like Wick and Extraction, with the chaotic, more emotive, if less readable action choreography of western movies of yore, framed by a story that effectively builds anticipation for the action. Anyway, I love your breakdowns!
Weight and impact are what, in my mind, really defines good action. You don't need to see everything, you need to feel it, and the very personal, and brutal, action loses its value if it skips past the impact to keep loading more and more hits. The silliness of the slow motion in 300 may be a joke these days but it highlights why it is so important to let the payoff pay off.
I think movies switching to digital vs film has had a MASSIVE effect on the film industry which is why everything looks the same. And the striving for “realism” which means clearer images is having a bad effect as well. Realism isn’t amazing. I see reality everyday why are we striving for it? Movies are meant to be inagiantive alterations of reality. How it COULD BE. How we imagine it to be. Imagine the first transformers movie for example. It’s not “real” it’s emotionally altered in so many ways that it’s got its own aesthetic. Realism is nothing but a cop out for people who have no imagination and have no ideas
I lwatched The Killer for the first time last night and loved it. That fight scene was awesome in how it operates in stark contrast to almost the whole of the rest of the film. It's "viscerality" really stands out. The cuts allow for there to be... shape? dimension? to the fight, that you don't get with a oner. I was watching Extraction 2 the other day, and found I had a similar response to it as I had with the John Wick films; after an hour or so, the relentlessness of it means it just starts to all wash over you. You stop feeling the hits. You stop feeling any sense of peril for the characters, because they keep taking hits that should put them down. And especially with JW, you start to wonder where this endless procession of faceless thugs is coming from, and why they keep insisting on gettting anywhere near him. Even the most impressive stunt work and fight choreography gets lost when it's part of a non-stop ten minute sequence.
I also feel like there isn't enough consideration for the STYLE of fighting and how that can be shown cinematically. Not all styles are cinematic, so you have to make consessions. Bruce Lee understood this. That's why he adapted his techniques. He knew what looked good on camera and it was more about what was cinematic vs what was real. I think we've gone as far as we can go in the direction of "realism" and need to come back to what works for the kind of action you're shooting. This was very interesting and useful though. As someone who is about to begin shooting an action short featuring a very specific style of cultural combat, I need to consider the HOW and WHY of shooting that way if fighting, and - most importantly - what works best for the STORY.
[The Beekeeper (2024) spoilers in this comment] I'm at 15:00 minute mark right now, and I just wanna say that viscerality is a good word to use here. I've seen The Beekeeper by Statham, I know that it's not the best of the movies out there, but I liked many fight scenes in it, especially the one with the yellowjacket guy, even though the number of cuts that mirror hallway featured was quite high. I've enjoyed the way Statham annihilated those FBI guys, some things like disassembling a shotgun right off the bat -- those included many cuts or shaky cameras to deliver, and yet I still felt those. Ok, maybe the yellowjacket was the most visceral one, but that fight alone, though just 2 minutes long (1 minute really, considering that prosthetic leg), the sound effects were insane: the brass knuckles hit, the glass hits, the spit by Statham, the soundwork there was superb! Heck, even lines delivered by Taylor James -- the simple "YOU FUCKING GIT", "FUCK", "You're just a man", his screams and groans as he's stabbed, -- Statham's face of constant restraint as he concentrates on that knife and his occassional grunts, and yet that fight alone had more cuts than probably the entirety of John Wick 4 did, for all I know. And yet, I felt tension in that 1 minute where James was on equal ground with Statham, that minute alone made up for the entire movie for me. Now, that yellowjacket fight also has enough instances where there're long shots and such, but this isn't on the level that is John Wick or The Raid. What I want to stress here, which is my opinion, is that action scenes can be good with cuts and shaky cameras. Of course, to a considerate extent -- I can't stand Bourne movies at all, personally. It's the reason why I didn't like the notion that The Beekeeper is a carbon copy of John Wick -- neither invented the hidden badass genre, both approach fight scenes differently. And though John delivers nearly 100%, while Beekeeper has many dubious scenes, from my perspective, they still deliver well! The camera, the atmosphere, the speed, the actor work sold John for me back in the day. The Beekeeper resonated with me with the action scenes that I myself consider good (there're plenty that are not), but shit, I'd be lying if I said that I didn't enjoy the yellowjacket fight more than most of what I've seen in the past year. I've been replaying that scene particularly so much, I just can't ahahaha So, your essay resonates with me a lot! Fight scenes can be good with long shots, which is why I love John and Rama, and they can be good in the Bourne-like way, which is why I have appraised The Beekeeper highly enough (though again, there're many scenes that are just not good). It's so long as said fight scenes don't utilize an element that brings action as the sole thing behind it. 15:45 update by me: YOU'VE SAID IT AHAHAHAH. DAMN IT, I should learn to be patient!! I'm going to go out on a potential limb here and insert an over-analytical bit, but I think that the yellowjacket fight in The Beekeeper is also elevated by the story by a fair degree. Yellowjacket is the only person in the entire movie who has had the experience of fighting beekeepers, even more so -- he came out victorious, from a fight against someone who, as far as assumptions could go, is just as capable of dispatching a group of FBI agents in vests like Statham did. Throughout the movie nobody lets as much as a touch on Statham, and yet we see here this dude land a knuckle punch in the face that would IRL knock out anyone on the Earth, many hits against the glass walls, a shoulder slice, and a whole-ass abdomen penetrating wound -- something that would kill anyone on the Earth. I am all ready to suspend disbelief for any action movie, and this isn't the point I'm making here. My point here is that the narrative of Statham being an invincible Beekeeper that nobody can touch goes hard with the idea of a South African mercenary, who had killed a beekeeper at the cost of his own appendage, being the only person capable of damaging Statham. And as I remind myself of my initial thoughts over the movie, after that fight, I had one thing in my mind: "This guy was probably one of the few who could beat Clay, and that's because he has the experience of fighting beekeepers... But to get such experience, one has to either die or lose their leg- But if you've lost your leg, how can you hope to battle Clay? Wth is going on bro lmaoo" So, I think the narrative works in this case too. Though I may be overanalysing here way too much, mayhaps even reading into what isn't the case at all. Great video, certainly provides a lot of room for thought!
wow. the way you broke down that taken scene. I have never seen it in that clarity. Another point: I know everyone loves the John Wick movies. But especially the later ones are a prime example of how the story does not carry the load of action that is infleced on the viewer.
I find it annoying that they all feel heavily choreographed almost turn based dance instead of messy like an actual fight. One character is almost always in control and reacts way faster than everyone else despite often stumbling into the situation. In a real fight, you can't always see everything that's going on, you trip, you miss, you struggle to get a clean grab, you miss judge distance, you hesitate. The Raid isn't as bad compared to how perfect everything plays out in most modern movies.
The Raid, John Wick, and Extractions movies are the top tier action sequences. Everyone else are just bad imitation trying to copy those movies and fail at it. an example is Monkey Man.
An action sequence doesn't require fighting, fast cars, fire and explosions - that's the cliché. Watching a set-up resolved in action, a visual representation of a thought process, a sudden realization and reaction - all can push the viewer into a state of hyper awareness. It's the writing. Not the choreography. Not the flash. Who eats a cake made only of icing?
They dont all look the same, we have the "Fast and Furious" school of action movies, where the combat action is interspersed with other types of action (racing, drifting) dialogue, and "the crew just having fun in locations most people dont get to ever see" And the John Wick school of action movies, where it is nonstop combat action, broken up only by one liners, tragedy and "getting cool gear" scenes.
Hi - i directed “action” movies like “Behind Enemy Lines”. “Max Payne” and “A Good Day to Die Hard”…you are 100% correct - Hollywood started this love affair with 2nd units in about 2012…it is a bad thing….
I want to see a long action scene with all the modern techniques but the people fight like regular people. Just seven John Belushis breaking their knuckles on some guy's knee.
also, same principle applies to large scale spectacle, if its conencted ot a grounded story it feels meaningful and real if its just part of a quippy superhero story or is disconnected from the story the spectacle itself is cheapened
EVERYONE PLEASE WATCH KILL FROM INDIA THIS YEAR PLEASE! It really reminded me of what solid editing can do for the pace of these beat downs and is also a great gore fest!
It's true... Actions scenes have to make you feel something not just awe for the beauty of the action but the consequences and stakes thw characters have if they win or lose
