Well this was certainly an negative self adorating article. Was it that you hate all things Carridine or were you just having a bad day?
I think that Bruce Lee might have been able to better balance the philosophy/action aspects of the film but, lacking his presence and vision, the film still manages to reach out and present Zen philosophy in a highly entertaining and informative manner.
Arguing about 'what may have been' to what is is a waste of time. It takes away from the merits of the film and presupposes that the author is an 'authority' on Eastern mysticism.
If nothing else, I feel, that this film is a great introduction into Zen philosophy but also shows how a philosophy should be more than words on paper or images on celluloid. It should be something you live each day. It can only be when you reach self actualization that you can truly come into your own. Indeed, one of the lessons Cord needed to learn was that self-fullfilment comes on various levels for various people. There is no one level or one way which is equally acceptable or useable for all people.
Over all, I think that the film was entertaining and educating. Was it what Bruce Lee would have made? I doubt it but so what? It is a fine tribute to Bruce Lee.
I saw the film many years ago. I loved it. The whole Grindhouse chop sockey epic aspect of it. The make up jobs were laughable. What do you expect from that era ?
It was a long time in the making and I purchased the DVD when it came out in 2006. But....I saw David Carridine at the Chiller convention the year the tent fell down on Charles Napier. I asked him what's going on with the movie why is it not out on DVD yet?
He looked up at me from a slumped sitting position while smoking a cigarette and in an almost hung over and defeated voice he said ' I am sure if it was really that good of a movie it will be out soon, If you really nwant it that bad you can always buy a bootleg DVD on ebay.'
Then he put his head back down in a disgusted fashion that he even had to speak. I was going to purchase some stills of him as Zetan but I decided this was a guy whose autograph I really don't want.
So I went upstairs and checked out the Vivid video girls and bought some autographed erotic films. Money well spent.
Hmm, do I hate all things Carradine and/or having a bad day? No on both accounts. I don't see the review as being overly negative either towards the film or to Carradine. I gave Carradine props where justified (his acting) and slighted him where justified (his, ahem, martial-arts skills). Nor do I feel it's a waste of time to mention a what-if scenario considering Bruce Lee's name is plastered all over the DVD case. As far as Zen philosophy in the film being presented in a 'highly entertaining' and 'informative' manner...c'mon, man, this film pales in comparison to the work of King Hu, who no doubt inspired Bruce Lee's script, with films such as 69's 'A Touch of Zen' along with countless other Wu Xia Pian films of this era. For me, 'Circle of Iron' ambitiously but unsuccessfully attempts to package these philosophies into something easily digestable for American audiences - YET, that doesn't take away from the enjoyable cult aspects of the film which are undeniable. Thanks for reading though, man, and I apologize that my article came off as self adoration but after all, it is my job to express an opinion - and God love ya for disagreeing ;)
What gives? The movie is made, done and Bruce Lee is gone. What difference does all of this make now? The movie was good and David Carradine was and still is a good actor. Maybe he's not a great one but, he still did good. Enough of all of this for pete's sake. Let it go!
A young martial artist, Cord the Seeker, competes for and loses the right to go on a quest for the Book of All Knowlege held by a wizard named Zetan, ...more
Circle Of IronMay 30th, 2007 - 17:52:15
Well this was certainly an negative self adorating article. Was it that you hate all things Carridine or were you just having a bad day?
I think that Bruce Lee might have been able to better balance the philosophy/action aspects of the film but, lacking his presence and vision, the film still manages to reach out and present Zen philosophy in a highly entertaining and informative manner.
Arguing about 'what may have been' to what is is a waste of time. It takes away from the merits of the film and presupposes that the author is an 'authority' on Eastern mysticism.
If nothing else, I feel, that this film is a great introduction into Zen philosophy but also shows how a philosophy should be more than words on paper or images on celluloid. It should be something you live each day. It can only be when you reach self actualization that you can truly come into your own. Indeed, one of the lessons Cord needed to learn was that self-fullfilment comes on various levels for various people. There is no one level or one way which is equally acceptable or useable for all people.
Over all, I think that the film was entertaining and educating. Was it what Bruce Lee would have made? I doubt it but so what? It is a fine tribute to Bruce Lee.
Report this comment