Talk:Heroic bloodshed

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 February 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

300!?!?

I can't think of a better example than 300 as one of these! It has a way higher body count than hard boiled. I guess it's not the traditional shooter but come on!

I hope this is sarcasm. Part of the definition is that it must be at last partially a crime film (300 is clearly a war film and as far as I have read) and should have some form of stylised gunplay (There are probably exceptions to this, but I'd say that at the very least the presence of guns is a factor). As for the bodycount factor it is common in the Woo made films (his lowest HK Bodycount is still almost as high as his Highest U.S. one) but ultimately not a rule for the genre as some of the films made by other directors such as Ringo Lam, Johnny To, Kirk Wong etc. which are considered to be part of the genre have more standard bodycounts of say 10-20 people. As for the themes I'll have to see the film to see whether they compare, but from what I can see they are similiar themes of brotherhood and sacrifice bur seem somewhat diluted by nationalism and war which changes it from personal sacrifices and relationships to something mroe forced, either way I'll have to see. Incidentally from a traditional filmaking point of view HArd Boiled bodycount is still a great filmmaking achievement as the majority of films to have topped the bodycount (300, two LOTR films) use large Computer generated battle scenes rather than choreographed combat with actual actors. AKLR (talk) 02:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do Paycheck and Mission Impossible 2 really belong on the American list? I agree with Face/Off, but the other three have me scratching my head. Especially Paycheck. Sure, John Woo directed it, but it wasn't in the same style as The killer or Face/Off, both of which truly do belong on these lists.

Here is my suggestion:

American

A lot of US movies, like just about every Steven Seagal movie, is pretty similar to heroic bloodshed, but really it's a genre of HK movies and their derivatives, and mainly 80s-90s period. People use the term more or less freely, but I don't think every single heroic movie with bloodshed in it should be mentioned. Neither should every movie John Woo movie or for example Ringo Lam's Jean Claude Van Damme collaborations. That is not to say the genre is limited to John Woo, Ringo Lam, and Chow Yun Fat. Although Woo is the "ballet man", lesser known HK movies should be mentioned, there's no end of those. Kirk Wong, Tsui Hark, Johnny To, Alan Mak made some. Anyway it's not an exact scienece :) -- Ajshm 21:17, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, if it's a genre, some movies should be added to the list, even though they're not directed by mr. Woo. I disagree with Once Upon a Time, though and would add "El Mariachi" and "Desperado" instead.

The only ones that really belong on the american list are Face/Off and The Replacement Killers, not every single movie he directs. John Woo is an unbelievable director and cinemtographer to say the list and it's really more prevelant in his films from Hong Kong. Those are the "true" HKBO. What about Bullet In The Head also? I think for the most part though the film industry here in America really "tied" his hands to say the least, it's either that or he is interested in moving in a new direction. He is a very casual and elogant guy. The checklist was also well though out too ;-D. I am huge fan of HKBO's. -wikilurker 22:34, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC).

Why hell did you revert back to the original version? I would advise you to watch "The Killer" with the directors commentery on. Woo specifically mentions not only what doves symbolize to him, but also how instrumental it was to him growing up in Hong Kong attending a catholic church ;-D. --wikilurker 22:34, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC).

Themes?

The thematic associations of the heroic bloodshed genre are nearly completely ignored in this article. Heroic bloodshed films, as defined by several Hong Kong films like Long Arm of the Law, A Better Tomorrow, etc, also encompass strong themes of loyalty, brotherhood (VERY important), loss of pride and dignity, what manhood means, and the importance of suffering/blood sacrifice (typically, though not always, through gunshot wounds). They're essentially modernized, a bit more polished versions of old school martial arts films, especially those of Chang Cheh.

I agree that 300 is closer in style and themes (though I'm not quite sure it fits) to the template than some of Woo's works, such as Paycheck, Hard-Target, or Blackjack.

I'd update the article myself, but I feel there are others out there better able to on wikipedia - but maybe none willing to write about the genre? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.207.75.17 (talk) 22:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Killer / Die Hard 2

I don't know who wrote this, but I removed for two simple reasons. One, it's entirely unsourced. Two, it's totally illogical because the movies were released less than a year apart, with the American release of The Killer being barely six months ahead of Die Hard 2. And if you'll forgive me for saying so, but I can't recall any similarities between the two films.--Do Not Talk About Feitclub (contributions) 13:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reference here is to one sequence in Die Hard 2 involving scaffolding (the scene in Die Hard 2 with Robert Patrick) which bears a visual similiarity to part of the final gunfight in "The Killer". As for whether it was actually inspired or not you would have to ask the filmmakers since "The Killer" wasn't widespread enough to immediately claim it was taken from, but there is is still a chance that the filmakers saw the film through other means before it's American relaease (it's Hong Kong release being two years before DH2), either way it's still speculation for now without tracking down the director or action director. AKLR (talk) 02:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Blood opera"

So is this a legitimate term for this genre or not? It was part of the original article but was then taken out with zero explanation. I've heard it used, it's a valid link which redirects here and it should not do so without some clarification. 72.200.151.13 (talk) 01:02, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]