Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:01:01 -0700 From: eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net Subject: Eskrima digest, Vol 11 #251 - 8 msgs X-Mailer: Mailman v2.0.13.cisto1 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Errors-To: eskrima-admin@martialartsresource.net X-BeenThere: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13.cisto1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Subscribed-Address: fma@martialartsresource.com List-Id: Eskrima-FMA discussion forum, the premier FMA forum on the Internet. List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: Send Eskrima mailing list submissions to eskrima@martialartsresource.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net You can reach the person managing the list at eskrima-admin@martialartsresource.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Eskrima digest..." <<---- The Sudlud-Inayan Eskrima/Kali/Arnis/FMA mailing list ---->> Serving the Internet since June 1994. Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource The Internet's premier discussion forum devoted to Filipino Martial Arts. 1900 members. Provided in memory of Mangisursuro Michael G. Inay (1944-2000). See the Filipino Martial Arts (FMA) FAQ and the online search engine for back issues of the Eskrima/FMA digest at http://MartialArtsResource.com Mabuhay ang eskrima! Today's Topics: 1. Bill McGrath's Gladiator vs. Troy (jay de leon) 2. Re: Gladiator vs. Troy (A. RANEY) 3. COLD STEEL CHALLENGE (Ron Balicki) 4. Re: Wannabees (steven ledwith) 5. Re: Wannabees (steven ledwith) 6. Troy, Gladiator (Marc Denny) 7. Re: Gladiator vs. Troy (Todd Ellner) 8. Re: Troy, Gladiator (abreton@juno.com) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: "jay de leon" To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Cc: theclassic33@hotmail.com, jennifer.long@experian.com Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 04:49:11 +0000 Subject: [Eskrima] Bill McGrath's Gladiator vs. Troy Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net I enjoyed both movies, but I liked Gladiator much more than Troy. Since you asked, here are my reasons, and I preface this exposition with the words "De gustibus non est disputandum."--There is no accounting for taste. Some of us like Italian food, some of us eat crow all the time. (1) Story line - Gladiator is just more exciting and more suspenseful than Troy. True, Troy had to follow the Homeric plot--Achilles had to win over Hector, the Greeks had to use the Trojan horse ploy, Troy had to fall, etc. Gladiator goes from pitched battles with barbarians, to a gladiatorial school in an exotic Roman province, then on to Rome for a friendly tussle with the Emperor himself, with a few assassinations and decapitations in between.. Jay's fix for Troy - weave a couple of subplots, say about Ajax's journey and battles from Greece to Troy, or even expound on Aeneas's escape from Troy (he eventually founded Rome, and history comes full circle and the Trojans have their revenge on the Greeks), thereby setting up...a sequel. Substitute these subplots for that inane one about Achilles and the Trojan priestess (oh, sorry, that was for the Brad Pitt fans?) (2) Characters - Gladiator was populated by many sympathetic, or at least interesting characters. Sympathetic characters - the black gladiator, the Emperor's daughter, Maximus's man-servant. Interesting characters - the slave master and ex-champion gladiator (played by Oliver Reed, who died during the filming), and Marcellus (Maximus' second in command, whose loyalty flipflopped from Maximus to Commodus, then at the end, back to Maximus). You actually notice and feel for (care for?) some of these characters. Jay's fix for Troy - All the characters seemed to be terribly flawed and unsympathetic, except maybe for Hector. The only attempt at an interesting character was Patroclus, Achilles' cousin who paid the ultimate price for his duplicitous impersonation and short-lived charge with the Myrmidons. How about showing us why the Myrmidons were such vaunted fighters? There were many interesting characters in the Homeric tale--Cassandra, Odysseus, the lesser fighters like Ajax, etc. Ask David Kelley or Joe Esterhaus for a treatment. (3) Main character - Russell Crowe was a more believable Maximus, not to mention his character was a more sympathetic, noble figure. Brad Pitt developed muscles, pecs, abs for this movie, but he was a pretty Achilles, not helped by the fact that his character was an unsympathetic demi-god, sulking at Agamemnon, railing at the gods, condescending to sleep with and slay mortals. It looked like Brad Pitt in a Hollywood movie portraying some ancient warrior. Jay's fix for Troy - Replace Brad Pitt with Russell Crowe; he can sulk with the best of them. (4) The feel good factor - I found myself cheering for Maximus and his gladiators in the arena--weren't they the noble underdogs? There was nobody to cheer for in Troy. The Greeks were rapacious. As for the Trojans, what were they thinking? If I was Priam or Hector, I would have sent Helen back with Paris in chains, with a letter of apology, next year's first draft in the warrior lottery and some cash. And to let that Trojan horse in--even I with my limited computer literacy know that it must contain some horrible virus in it. Jay's fix for Troy - Find me something to cheer for, especially now that the Lakers have fallen ignominously to some underdogs. Jay de Leon _________________________________________________________________ >From ‘will you?’ to ‘I do,’ MSN Life Events is your resource for Getting Married. http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=married --__--__-- Message: 2 From: "A. RANEY" To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Gladiator vs. Troy Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 04:59:02 +0000 Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net When I sawTroy I never really thought about comparing it to Gladiator combat scenes . I did compare it to Braveheart , which I think is a better bench mark of this genre. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Premium helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "Ron Balicki" To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 05:45:30 +0000 Subject: [Eskrima] COLD STEEL CHALLENGE Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Hi Everyone, I and Cold Steel wanted to let you know about the upcoming event that Cold Steel is putting on.  It is going to be a weapons fighting tournament with over $10,000 in prizes. Here is a copy of the press release: Join Cold Steel and its many fans at our first COLD STEEL CHALLENGE. This two day event will be a fun celebration of edged weaponry and the Warrior lifestyle. Come and demonstrate your hard earned skills and compete for some big prizes in our knife and sword fighting tournaments. Test your abilities, your strength, and your eye-hand coordination by participating in one or all of the scheduled throwing events. Bring your family and friends. Even if you aren’t competing, you can still come just to watch the spectacle at hand. We will have lots of demonstrations of martial prowess, and there will be many opportunities for you to try your hand at throwing our edged weapons and tools. Come in period costume if you like! We are hoping to make this an annual event in the coming years as a way of meeting our customers and fans and to show, for those people who are unfamiliar with Cold Steel, just what our legendary standards of quality and performance are all about. Hope to see you there! Ron Balicki http://www.ronbalicki.com/cs_challenge.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! --__--__-- Message: 4 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 04:34:13 -0700 (PDT) From: steven ledwith Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Wannabees To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net --- Michael Koblic wrote: > Hi! > > I am Michael and I am a Wannabee. > 1) Amateurs and Professionals. There are those on > this digest whose primary > (or secondary or tertiary) income comes from MA, > whether it is teaching, > publication, protection services etc.. It is > therefore only proper that > those should be held to a higher standard of > proficiency or hard-coreness. I consider myself a professional amateur wannabe. ;I > Then there are those for whom MA is not the life's > be all and end all, yet > like doing it because they like hitting others, > geting hit by others or just > want to know how to save their ass in the unlikely > event of a confrontation. Never got much out of hitting others, but have always been willing to take a bump to improve and learn. > I never understood the logic of getting injured and > disabled in training if > the main purpose of training is to avoid getting > injured or disabled in a > fight. And please note that I distinguish between > pain and disability, as > others have done here already. Pain is good and > makes one learn more > quickly. Been injured most times while "playing" and not going hard. Injuries hug a root! >There will be always somebody there > who can kick my ass and (I hope!) somebody who can > receive kicking from me. You should be able to recognize the "heavy hitters" and respectfully avoid them. > 2) Social utility. Simply put, I find a 250 yard > drive to have a greater > social utility than a killer right cross. Ideally, > one would like to have > both, but because of the social utility factor one > tends to work more on the > former than on the latter. Being aware and able to fight/protect is of great social utility in IMO, it prevents a lot of stupidity, and predators recognize someone who could cause them problems. Thereby throwing a wrench in their plans so to speak. I have prevented muggings just by stepping in and asking if there is a problem and do you need help to people. > 3) Learning by proxy. Being a wannabee and not > having "been there" one has > no other option but to listen respectfully to those > who have and learn from > their experience without judging them. Unfortunatly I have "been there" and it's not fun! But people have to make an effort to learn from others in this way. God knows I have wasted a lot of time in my life doing things the hard way instead of listening to others. > 4) Eye gouging. Is it really that easy? Kelly McCann > says that it is > actually quite difficult, due to the protective > spasm of the muscles around > the eye. > Michael Koblic > Campbell River, BC I have hit people in the eyes with good effect but not gouged them. But one of my training partners tried on a guy assaulting him through a car window, he said that he really tried to gouge them out but couldn't. Still got the guy off though. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail --__--__-- Message: 5 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 04:43:28 -0700 (PDT) From: steven ledwith Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Wannabees To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net --- Ray Terry wrote: > > I am Michael and I am a Wannabee. > > Actually it sounds like you aren't. A wannabe > usually thinks of himself as > hardcore, not as a wannabe. That is what makes > him/her a wannabe. :) I think it's best to be a wannabe who trains hardcore instead of someone who thinks they are hardcore. > > An example of someone I consider hardcore... Cacoy > Canete. He has been > doing eskrima for just short of 78 years now. He > has accomplished more > in eskrima than most can even dream of... Yet he > still trains his 85 year > old body in eskrima three times a week, because he > wants to get better. > And I suspect he feels badly that he isn't training > more often and with > greater intensity, but age has a way of slowing one > down. I have an instructor friend Sensei Cyrus Treecartin who is 82, only has one lung, and still trains Judo several times a week. One of my other instructors Sensei Bill Harris who is a Vietnam Vet, now has 2 plastic knees, and still trains 7 days a week.Tough old guys. > > Ray Terry > rterry@idiom.com > _______________________________________________ > Eskrima mailing list, 1900 members > Eskrima@martialartsresource.net > Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts > Resource > Standard disclaimers apply > http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo --__--__-- Message: 6 From: "Marc Denny" To: Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 05:30:49 -0700 Subject: [Eskrima] Troy, Gladiator Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Woof All: Bill asked: > > If you saw both Troy and Gladiator and feel Gladiator > was the superior movie, please tell me why. Well, I've seen Gladiator innumerable times, and Troy only once so far. Both my wife and I liked both. Concerning Troy I found it's images staying with me for a couple of days-- usually a good sign that a movie is resonating with the archetypal space. That said, there is usually reason to fear when Hollywood improves on one of the greatest books in history. I can understand the impulse to shorten the 10 years of the war, but (and I would prefer to have more than one viewing under my belt before opining but such is not possible at the moment, not to mention it would be useful to have read the book far more recently than decades ago) I wonder how much the tinkering with the plot subtly undercut the deep essences of the book. (For example, IMO the movie "The Hulk" failed because The Hulk is a Jungian shadow story and the movie confused it with Freudian Oedipal themes-- the father tries to kill the son.) For example, I felt the movie glossed over the arrogance of Troy-- I suspect in an effort to make a liberal political point-- note Agamemnon's character being portrayed as an ancient version of how liberals perceive President Bush. I suspect all this to be a factor in what Andy wrote: The Troy story - of passions ignited by a warrior's pride (the first line of the Illiad) and the "theft" of a woman >(pardon the chauvinistic bent for just a second) don't resonate with us. If a wife goes off with another man, >we think it's a bad thing that she wasn't upfront about a relationship ending, but we we don't think of it as >stolen property and an aggregious slap in the face by the other man. Whereas the Greek story was >chauvinistic in ways we can't relate to. We have a lot of divorce in this country and I just don't think we see >why they're all pissed off. Maybe I'm from another time and place, but this blows my mind. Apart from a substantial gap in our values on the sanctity of marriage, a man can come into your home and go after your wife and its not something to fight over?!? Does your wife know you think this way??? A man comes into my home and makes a pass at my wife has a serious and immediate health problem. But I digress , , , Put this egregious insult in the context of two city-states making peace and this does not resonate in historical context as a cause for war? My initial sense of it is that Troy also muddied this and by doing so, our willingness to care about the characters is similarly muddied-- in the Iliad, IIRC the selfish brat Paris dies badly and the city who thought to indulge his whim at the cost of the death of thousands of its people falls as it abrogates for itself the Greeks seeming sacrfice to the gods, just as it abrogated Helen for its prince because it thought it could. Instead in Troy, Paris reclaims his manhood by killing Achilles?!? (Who died on the plains of Troy in The Iliad instead of entering Troy with Odysseus in the Horse) Indeed, I thought the movie also glossed over the profound moral question that Helen faced and failed-- whether to allow all this dying so that she could be with the man she preferred-- one who was not willing to fight for her. (One also wonders about the changes in the story of Patroclus. And why change from the original concerning Aneas's?-- he being the future subject of Virgil's "Aeneid"?) Again, I'm working here across a couple of decades -- but I remember The Iliad as maintaining clarity about the worthiness of the cause, even as it showed great depth in the unworthiness of some of the humans in that cause. Also perhaps worth noting is that the subject of Homer's follow-up, "The Odyssey" is the return of a man home against all odds to the woman who has waited for him against all odds and how that man and the fruit of their marriage (son's name slips my mind-- begins with "T") stand together to defend their home Anyway, Gladiator. Maximus's character respects his German opponents (a theme great importance in The Iliad as well, but perhaps not really understood in Troy) and stands for "Strength and Honor"-- in this story it is clear that he defends-avenges his family as well as the ideal of the original "true" Rome. What does Achilles stand for in this movie? Agamemnon? Bill, I know this isn't very polished but perhaps it is of some help nonetheless? Woof, Crafty Dog --__--__-- Message: 7 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 08:15:50 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: "Todd Ellner" To: Subject: [Eskrima] Re: Gladiator vs. Troy Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net "Troy" by a knockout. A lot of people will prefer "Gladiator" because it's more comfortable. There is a lovable hero and a despicable villain. There's an underdog to cheer for Everything is painted in bright primary colors with thick outlines. There's a single identifiable star. And even though Russel Crowe dies in the end (sob, sob) he kills the bad guy and makes everytyhing more-or-less good. There's even political stroke-off material for the late 20th century audience. The evil effeminate gubbmint (Rome, the Emperor) screws everything up. The day is saved by the family values-loving lantern-jawed soldiers (Crowe and his bros) and the virtuous businessman. I'm only surprised that the start didn't have a funny talking animal companion. The plot is stock. The characters are simplistic. Everything runs on rails A to Z. We'll gloss over the fact that it has nothing whatsoever to do with history. It did everything right to make tons of money. Ho hum. Yawn. Pass the insulin. I feel a diabetic attack coming on. Troy is the Iliad. OK, Petersen took a number of liberties with teh book. He didn't make the war last 10 years. Hector's sister and brother live. Menelaeus and Aiax die early on. Achilleus and Patroclos are cousins, just cousins, honest, REALLY JUST COUSINS (not lovers). And he takes the gods out which has its good and bad points. What the Hell. Homer stretched his poetic license until it almost got revoked. It still rocked. There isn't a single star, a single good guy, a group of angels vs. a group of devils. It's an ensemble piece which is refreshing and rare these days, not a vehicle for a one person. Everyone has interesting motivations, and the movie grows around how they relate. Achilleus is the last of the heroic warriors in a day when wars are beginning to be won by armies, not champions. He is himself, not "good" or bad". He's something alien to us and increasingly out of place in his own time. On some level he realizes that he is the last and greatest of his sort You'll notice that most of the Greek kings look a lot like their men. Achilleus is terribly alone; his myrmidons don't resemble him. He is leader of a gang, not the chief of a people. He knows he's doomed. Odysseus is a clever man, brave and a great leader. But he's forced to fight for an overlord whom he despises because of his duty to his people. In his one interaction with Hector you can see (heartrendingly) how these two men would have been great friends and allies if only things had been slightly different or there had been more time. Priam is a king in an old, old sense which we barely understand any more. He IS Troy. Troy IS him. his health and the land's are mystically the same thing. And Peter O'Toole does a masterful job of acting. Maybe he isn't start quality" here, but damn can he act. I was moved to tears when he went to Achilleus' tent, a great king and an old man, humbling himself to beg the body of his son from his killer. If I ever get a hold of Paul Arendt, the critic who called it "crazy old British hams chewing the tent flaps", I'm liable to do something really bad to him. And it goes on. Manipulative Helen seizing Paris as her only way out of a bad match and only later realizing what she's done. Menelaeus - a great warrior feeling the cold hand of Time and becoming stupid and jealous as a result. Persetia(is that the name?) torn between love of her God, love of her people and family, and passion and love for her enemy. Agamemnon, supremely powerful and good at what he does, but lacking the qualities of a great king. And so on. And then there's Hector. The tragedy is really his. He's almost a fine enough warrior to win the old way, but not quite. He's a great leader, but Priam is still king, so Hector's good counsel loses to superstition and denial. He loves his brother just a little too much, saving him twice when a man with slightly greater love for his kingdom and whole family could have saved his entire people. One is left with the feeling that if he had just had five more years it would have been so different. Achilles would have been past his prime. Priam would have been dead or at least have passed more duties to his oldest surviving son. Hector would have had the perspective to turn his ship around and say "King Menelaeus, I offer you the head of my brother and my own for what has happened. Just let the peace hold between Troy and Sparta and let my men (who are blameless) go home to tell the tale." That's tragedy in the old sense. It has fallen out of fashion, especially with critics, which is a real shame. Tiel and I stepped out of the theater on opening night saying "It's everything we hoped the Iliad could be and never dreamed it would be. And it probably won't even make its money back, damn it." [demime 0.98e removed an attachment of type Image/jpeg which had a name of BackGrnd.jpg] --__--__-- Message: 8 From: "abreton@juno.com" Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 19:18:07 GMT To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Troy, Gladiator Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net I couldn't quite leave this one alone: -- "Marc Denny" wrote: Andy wrote: The Troy story - of passions ignited by a warrior's pride (the first line of the Illiad) and the "theft" of a woman >(pardon the chauvinistic bent for just a second) don't resonate with us. If a wife goes off with another man, >we think it's a bad thing that she wasn't upfront about a relationship ending, but we we don't think of it as >stolen property and an aggregious slap in the face by the other man. Whereas the Greek story was >chauvinistic in ways we can't relate to. We have a lot of divorce in this country and I just don't think we see >why they're all pissed off. Mark wrote: Maybe I'm from another time and place, but this blows my mind. Apart from a substantial gap in our values on the sanctity of marriage, a man can come into your home and go after your wife and its not something to fight over?!? Does your wife know you think this way??? A man comes into my home and makes a pass at my wife has a serious and immediate health problem. But I digress , , , Put this egregious insult in the context of two city-states making peace and this does not resonate in historical context as a cause for war? I'm writing back: I think we are thinking of two different analogies. I totally agree with yours, let me explain mine: Part of the historical background was "women as property" (reference the argument between Achilles and Agammemnon in book 1). Homer seems to make it clear in the 'Helen walking along the walls of Troy' scene that Helen did not exactly fight strongly against being abducted. In the classical Greek tradition, she made a few active steps in a direction, then fate took over and pushed her much farther than she had ever envisioned or wanted to go, and society as a whole paid the consequences. I think for present day, the 'woman as property' isn't there, while the 'Helen made a choice' is. So my analogy to current day is a woman deciding to divorce her husband, albeit in a messy way. (That is, not a "I'm going to live on my own for a few years before I ever get re-married because I need to find myself" type but the "Honey, I'm seeing someone else and, BTW, your stuff's on the lawn" type). It's making a choice by passively letting yourself be involved in circumstances, but without the historical view of women as property or where divorce is not even a consideration. I don't want to start an argument about whether divorce is right or wrong and family values; I just want to point out the difference between a culture where Achilles can get mad that he didn't get the prettiest slave girl and ours where divorce is common. Your post talked about understanding why the city states went to war. That is, you're putting yourself in the historical perspective. I applaud that, but I tend to think your average person goes to watch something when they can relate the situation/setting to their own lives. If you will, going in the other direction. You may say that a divorce is not an exact analogy to the Illiad, but another thread on this list just got through saying that there's only a certain percent of the population that imagines and prepares for violence such as someone coming into their home and abducting their wife (granted, probably a greater percentage on this list). I would venture to say that most of the adult movie-going audience is familiar with divorce through personal or second-hand experience, whereas only a small percent is familiar with a violent abduction. So - rightly or wrongly - most people would go to the divorce analogy. When you're talking popularity of a movie, you're talking about most people. In that vein, one could say that the whole war - all the city states - would seem an overreaction. It would be like the man stalking his ex-wife years after the divorce. We don't root for the husband, we root for the wife (ie Troy). You made the point that the movie doesn't show the hubris of Troy. Perhaps this is one reason. About the liberalism: interesting viewpoint, and probably a lot more could be said about it. I don't think of myself as a liberal and I don't think that drove what I wrote. However, I do think a lot of Hollywood is, and perhaps that factors in here somewhere. Despite your not having read the book in decades (I haven't either), your recall seems great. As I said, part of the way I saw the movie Troy was through that lens. It's true they hadn't developed the character depth fully. You could see them trying, and it may just be that it's not possible to transfer from poem to screen. BTW: Telemacus is the name. Andy --__--__-- _______________________________________________ Eskrima mailing list Eskrima@martialartsresource.net http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima http://eskrima-fma.net Old digest issues @ ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com/pub/eskrima Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry, MartialArtsResource.com, Sudlud.com Standard disclaimers apply. Remember September 11. End of Eskrima Digest