Fiction/Headscratchers: Difference between revisions

m
Mass update links
m (Mass update links)
m (Mass update links)
Line 95:
** I think because Eastern Martial Arts are just better, Bruce Lee could kill Muhammad Ali, Bruce used his mind and body as opposed to just the body as Eastern Martial Arts teach you to do.
*** You are part of the cancer alluded to by the person who brought this up
*** On the subject of the whole Bruce Lee thing, he was just really good as an individual. The man was [[Badass]]. However, Eastern Martial Arts are not "just better". [http://en.[wikipedia.org/wiki/Sambo_:Sambo (martial_art)martial art)|Sambo]], which originates from Russia, was pretty awesome, and [http://en.[wikipedia.org/wiki/:Kampfringen |Kampfringen]], from the Holy Roman Empire was also awesome. The most awesome Western Martial Art would be [http://en.[wikipedia.org/wiki/Krav_Maga:Krav Maga|Krav Maga]], which originated in Czechoslavakia and was developed in Israel. While it pretty much emphasizes that you fight dirty, it is ''very'' effective, to the point where [[Splinter Cell|Sam Fisher]] uses it.
*** Western martial arts include sambo, savate, krav maga, boxing, catch-wrestling, greco-roman wrestling, Brazilian Jiujitsu (which is admittedly derived from Judo), pankration etc. That's a pretty good score when compared to ''demonstrably effective'' eastern martial arts.
*** It's worth pointing out at this point that many of the Eastern Martial Arts-style moves you see in the movies would in fact be hideously impractical for a relatively realistic fight, not least because many of them aren't actually as damaging as the movies make them appear.
Line 101:
** As was mentioned earlier, there is the aesthetics of eastern martial arts. A lot of them simply look cleaner and better than western ones. But there is also a difference in focus, eastern martial arts tend to focus more on mental discipline with movement while western martial arts are more about beating the crap out of your opponent as quickly as possible.
** I think the biggest problem is that we've forgotten most of our western unarmed/not-very-armed martial arts. So that all we're left with is boxing. All that I can think of that survived was Irish Stick Fighting (its name in Irish sounds much more badass).
** Uh, actually, it's pretty much only because martial-arts flicks as a genre come from Asian countries. Bruce Lee is not going to be shown losing to Chuck Norris because the movie is made for a Chinese audience. And since the genre has been adopted wholesale by Western audiences, including the Eastern-martial-arts fetishism, the tropes involved just get perpetuated. If Errol Flynn type swashbuckler movies were as popular and varied as martial-arts movies, we might be having this discussion about why it was that rapier-wielding poofters were regularly beating up armored knights, soldiers with guns (Zorro!), velociraptors, or whatever. Usual subversions of the "Chinese martial arts are always better" tropes usually involve [[Just Shoot Him]] (Indiana Jones shooting the swordsman), or [[Punch -Punch -Punch Uh -Oh]] (where a small, fancy martial artist may get cold-cocked by a much larger or just plain tougher bruiser).
*** Or the early days of mixed martial arts, when it was still style-vs-style, and you saw the boxers, wrestlers, and Brazilian Jiujutsuka beat/submit the snot out of the taekwondoers and most karateka (Lyoto Machida notwithstanding). IRL, simplicity and alive training wins fights, but in fiction, it's fanciness and raw effort regardless of efficiency.
**** I always thought it was because most western fighting systems were all turned into sports or originated as sports. Boxers expect to be boxed with. When Mr. Kung-fu starts kicking Mr. Boxing in the face and gouging his eyes or whatever he doesn't know how to deal with it. Same with wrestlers. Tournament/sport fighting is different than life or death fighting. Fighting systems based on saving your life/killing the other guy are superior in a life or death situation. Oh, and the protagonist wins, period. Whatever he uses is going to be superior to everyone else, unless the point of the story is him learning from a wise old master, in which case the wise old master is superior.
Line 134:
** Because villains can cheat. Here's what I mean. When a character does something clever, gets over on their opponent and does so stylishly, this creates viewer/reader interest. That's much, ''much'' easier to do with a villain than the hero, because we ''see'' the hero. We ''know'' what the hero has planned and what the hero can do. Case in point: [[The Dark Knight]]. There's ''no way'' the Joker could have snuck that much explosives into a hospital (a building that is operating 24/7). Especially explosives in the form of gasoline (his preferred bomb). But we can ignore that because he's the villain; we don't know what his resources are. The writer can play fast-and-loose with what he does. He cannot do so with the hero because the hero has too much screen time. Also, if the hero starts pulling things out of their ass, the audience is more likely to call them on it. In short, it's easier to make a villain look cleverer, because the villain can cheat.
 
* Is there an unwritten rule somewhere that says each and every pipe organ that appears in a work of fiction ''has'' to play Bach's Toccata and Fugue? Thank God for the climax of ''[[The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (Video Game)|The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time]]''. And maybe the Exorcist tanks that the [[Warhammer 40000|Sisters of Battle]] use.
** No unwritten rule, just the usual [[Small Reference Pools]]!
** The makers of the fiction are aware of how much that melody (particularly its famous opening bars) has haunted popular consciousness ever since first being employed to provide a grim atmosphere in silent movies. They figure that you have to go with what works, and the Toccata really [[Incredibly Lame Pun|strikes the right chord]]. You'll notice, though, that it is neither played on organ nor for any sort of dark atmosphere in [[Fantasia]].