Any other Chinese Martial Artists found the final swordfight offensive?

[deleted]

First off, let me establish my background. I'm an American born Chinese. Second, I am a wushu player who's been practicing for at least five years and performs regularly on a competition team. In short, I'm a martial artist as well so I'm not just *beep* For proof, here's a video of me from two years ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGXM6toBqWQ

However, I have some serious objections to your post.

First off, you claim that the climax of the film was an "insulting slander against Asian Warrior Culture." I was unaware of this Asian Warrior Culture and I really doubt that kung fu masters or wushu coaches in China call themselves "Asian Warriors." In fact, apart from the kung fu, all of them lead normal everyday lives. My Sifu really loves carpentry and he built many of the tables and shelves that we have at our kung fu school. He doesn't abide by some secret code, nor does he believe that "Asian Warriors" are the best in the world. I don't know where that came from. If you have a definition and the history of your so-called "Asian Warriors," please let me know.

Second, you make the assumption that Zhang Wen was "an Imperial Guard, one of the FINEST Warriors China, and therefore the WORLD," which is a completely unsubstantiated statement. Normally, when justifying an argument, you need to deliver proof and not just make statements that have no support. Nowhere in either movie does it make a mention that Zhang Wen as an Imperial Guard was one of the finest warriors in China. No where does it say that Imperial Guards are the finest warriors in China either. In fact, the only reason why Zhang Wen was at the US in the first place was because his uncle was the chief diplomat of the mission in the first movie. In fact, the captain of the Imperial Guard expressly forbade him to go. Mayhaps because his lack of skill could endanger the mission of rescuing the princess, but who knows? The captain even hopes that the foreign devils will get rid of Zhang Wen, implying that he was an unnecessary burden to the mission.
About the whole Imperial Guard thing, just because you're an Imperial Guard doesn't make you one of the finest warriors in China. For all your praise of Shaolin and Wudang, shouldn't they be the finest? Imperial Guard is made up of common citizens needing a job, not top nobles who learned wushu from fine masters. They learn some rudimentary form of kung fu, but not enough to make them masters generally. Just enough to do the job. And why is it that the finest warriors in China are the finest warriors in the world? The Chinese lost to the Mongols twice and the Mongols had inferior technology when compared to the Chinese.

Third, you imply that it is impossible for a Chinese Imperial Guard to be "no match for a western fencer whose culture had forsaken the refinement and advancement of its swordsmanship 300 years prior" which I think is unfounded and untrue. While the West did advance and focus on the use of the gun, in no way did they forget how to use the sword. Look at schools around the world which have Western fencing styles as a sport. I doubt that many of the skills have been lost throughout the century. In fact, I think it is the exact opposite. As transportation increased and the world became a smaller place, swordsmanship from around the West probably convalesced and traded techniques, improving the swordsmanship from each culture. Also on that point, Lord Rathborne was mentioned to be the "finest swordsman in England," meaning that unlike Zhang Wen, he IS unique in the world. He does have the capabilities to defeat Zhang Wen because Zhang Wen is not as experienced as him or as skilled.

Fourth, you say that "we are meant to believe the LIE that a Chinese Warrior versed in the 5000 year old heritage of Shaolin Saber and Wudang Swordsmanship cannot match Ratbone." Many things wrong with that statement there. First of all, an Imperial Guard at the time of Zhang Wen would have little to no knowledge of Shaolin or Wudang kung fu. According to legend, Shaolin was burned to the ground in the 1600's and its disciples scattered to the South because of political dissent inside the Temple. For the most part, the disciples became involved in anti-Qing, anti-Imperial movement in which they saw the invading Mongol emperors are occupiers of the state. Kung fu was outlawed in China though it was practiced SECRETLY by rebels. Only when foreigners came to the doorsteps of China was kung fu privately encouraged by the Dowager Empress. However, since both Shanghai Noon and Shanghai Knights make mention of an Emperor, the Dowager Empress hasn't risen to the throne yet and practicing kung fu was still an act of treason. Of course, when these secretive martial arts sects did rise up against the foreigners, they were deemed as Boxers (the bad minions in Shanghai Knights). The culmination of these secretive sects ended up as the Boxer's Rebellion, which was a disaster for the Chinese people because the Boxers believed that they were impervious to bullets due to their kung fu practicing. Being that this is a movie, they could do whatever they want with the actual events though. In relation to your idea that Imperial Guards practiced the Shaolin Saber and Wudang Swordsmanship, I scoff at that notion. Shaolin kung fu rarely (if ever) practiced saber. Most of their weapons were derived from farmer's tools and their chief weapon was the staff/cudgel. A saber was too sophisticated for Shaolin monks to own or practice with. Looking at the derived martial arts in the South that originated from Shaolin Kung Fu, many of the sword forms (broadsword or straightsword) were actually Northern forms added to the repertoire during the last century through cross training. If anything, Shaolin monks used butterfly knives, which became the basis for the double broadsword. On a side note, Wong Fei-Hung was famous for the staff and the butterfly knives. Wudang was a very secretive sect which rarely taught their techniques to outsiders. They're often protrayed as snobby in Jinyong's books (Heavenly Sword and Dragon Sabre, for example). In any case, a straight sword would have been taught to noblemen and officials, not Imperial Guards. Imperial Guards would have used spears for the most part. They would use broadswords however, but the way to use a broadsword is very different from how a straightsword is used, the weapon that Zhang Wen was using to fight Lord Rathbone. A broadsword slashes while a straightsword stabbed. There is no possible way that Zhang Wen would have learned how to use a straight sword in Imperial Guard camp.

The accusation that Rathbone was "a descendant of mere rapists" has no connection to his fighting ability, so I'll disregard this statement. And I hope that when you're saying "just because he was armed with TWO western swords," you're not seriously implying that there's no way that he could have beaten a Chinese guy if he was only wielding one sword.

I think your Sinophile-ness clouded this movie a great deal.

Hey Ronin,
I think you overlooked some very important points, in regards to your statement. The other posters have pointed some of them out, but here are my thoughts: First, even though China does indeed have a much longer martial history than most other countries, doesn't mean that someone else can't be equally or more skilled. After all, it's not like Rathbone was some chump; he was the top fencer in all of England. Also, fencing is the ONLY combat art that Rathbone knew, whereas Jackie's character was trained in hand-to-hand as well as weapon combat, swords being only one of them. So looking at it that way, it would make sense that Rathbone would be better at it, because that's his sole focus of training.

Anyway, I think you got far too worked up over that. It has nothing to do with insulting anyone or any culture.

[deleted]

[deleted]

I agree with the OP, although not from a "He was a Chinese Warrior" perspective. Just as someone who watched the film, I thought it cheapened Jackie Chan's character as well as the main bad guy. You have your "hero" basically get owned over and over, and then you have the bad guy keep giving him more chances until he is outsmarted and defeated? Not exactly a good climax. If you are going to have the bad guy be better, fine. Just do it in a less stupid way that doesn't cheapen both characters. Have Chan almost be killed, only to have Roy take him out.