The same way people compare Ghibli to Disney (it’s more Pixar though, come on), I feel like some compare Shaw Brothers to Warner Brothers. They’re both one of the biggest studios in their countries, have a heavy reliance on action, and, probably reluctantly on the behalf of WB, share a logo.
I would argue against that, but - I don’t know a lot about Shaw Brothers. I really don’t, most of these lists come from me choosing an area of cinema I’m already passionate about. I’m not passionate about Shaw Brothers. So, why them? Three reasons.
One - I love Daiei Films, and you may be asking “why not go through Daiei Films” (check the Ikehiro list, and I do watch Daiei classics like Zatoichi and Gamera, just… not for this list) or even “why not Toho”, which is like asking a Blur fan why don’t they like Oasis.
Two - Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair is my favourite movie of all time, and it starts off with a Shaw Brothers logo.
Three - Most of the Asian cinema I consume is either from Japan or Taiwan. Why not check out Hong Kong, for a change of pace?
So, with those three reasons, with varying quality, I decided to set out on this brand new adventure. Join me!
NOTE: There is no way on Earth I am reviewing every single Shaw Brothers film. Because there is an ungodly amount. Instead, I will be using the list created by Arrow Video in their collection, to go down a curated Shaw Brothers filmography.
Okay, so Kill Bill stole a lot from this. The eye plucking, the sound effect, and even the titular Five Finger Death Punch.
But do you know who else? Fucking Karate Kid. This is like Karate Kid, except with grown ups, and fights to the death. And crazy flips into the air.
And probably tons of other movies, but those two were the first to come to mind. And Kill Bill really did steal a shocking amount, because nobody steals like Tarantino.
I liked this one a lot. It began a bit slow, and as I had seen both Kill Bill and Karate Kid, it wasn’t blowing my mind as much as it maybe deserved too (finders keepers, losers weepers, I guess), but by the time we reached the second act, I was hooked. It was fight scene after fight scene after fight scene, and it didn’t try to cram the plot into too short a runtime, or even cut out large sections of the plot, and replace it with exposition.
Knowing that it’s a 90 minute film with 45 minutes of fight scenes, it… it was written with a 45 minute plot. Crazy, I know, and that part DID blow my mind.
I don’t want to count my chickens before my eggs, but… I’m really excited to see the next Shawscope movie. Yes, it wasn’t their first film, and I’m sure that it’s not going to be only up from here, but Arrow Video knew what they were doing when they put this first.
I don’t want for this entire list to just be a Tarantino comparison BUT…
The scene of the hero with the cigarette holder riding a horse, reminded me of the scene in Django, where Jamie Foxx rides alongside Leonardo DiCaprio’s men, also on a horse, also with a cigarette holder.
Let me be clear before this review goes further - this is an easy 5/5. Hell, a 10/10.
If you want to combine the two, a 15/15.
The fight scenes are there, and they are electric. But saying that a Shaws Brother film has good fight scenes is like complimenting a Harry Potter movie for the wide amount of merchandise available for it. So, I’m going to move on, but not because the fight scenes aren’t great, but just because you probably could have guessed that they were this good.
The tendons of the film - to take advantage of a totally gross metaphor, as these are the links between the fight scenes (the muscles of the body) - makes it almost a hang-out movie. The plot is incredibly barebones - a guy so good at fighting manages to take on two gangs, and instead of overcomplicating it, they just let us breathe and chill.
Due to it being in the last film as well, I’m tempted to call this the Shawscope Plot Structure - for when films are predominately made for showing off spectacle, plot takes a purposeful back seat and is in a basic, quick and easy to understand form.
Eh.
Should I just leave the review like that? “Eh”? Will people want to know more? And if so, why?
Look, I think I may take a break from this sort of genre movie for a bit. It’s very repetitive. It's like if you eat too much pizza in a row. You just want a burger, but that doesn't say anything wrong with pizza! It's definitely not the worst thing the Italians have done (that being Mussolini).
Something very annoying about this film is how it sets up a mystery - which of the five masters set the other four up, and led to the destruction of the palace - but, it doesn't actually follow it up? Maybe I missed it, but it should have been so fucking clear I shouldn't have missed it.
I know this is a piss poor review, but it's all I have in me.
There's no point in me critiquing the 20 minute fight scene finale, because well - it's perfect. But is it too much?
There's no… no passion. It's like a modern car compared to a classic. Undoubtedly it's better, and there's no question if it has everything or not, but… where's the soul? And soul's important. That's why when I say the word Cadillac, you picture a red or pink convertible. You picture Elvis music. You picture a pretty girl and a tough guy.That's a soul.
What do you picture when I say Kia? A car, or a car brand?
That's the difference between Five Shaolin Masters and The Boxer From Shantung.
Okay, so the joy of genre films isn't seeing the same things happening again and again and again. If it was so, then I'd watch fucking Cocomelon.
The joy is, due to genre films not having to set up things as rigorously that non-genre films need to e.g. the character archetypes, the story beats, the setting, they get more time and space to fuck around with. They get to excel at a certain element of cinema.
Kazuo Ikehiro films excel at direction.
The Blade, from the 90’s, excels at WTFuckery black magic (they attach swords to chains and use them like nunchucks - I'm not doing it justice, it's magnificent).
The Boxer From Shantung excels at cool-ness (no, I'll never get over that cigarette holder scene).
Even outside of the martial arts genre, we can see this. Red River, a Western, excels at the score. Deadpool, a Superhero flick, excels at comedy (Kick-Ass is funnier but not a better example because it was a building block of the 21st century superhero film while Deadpool, due to being later in the genre's evolution, was allowed to rest upon the conventions created in earlier films like Kick-Ass).
Tarantino, arguably the most important modern genre director, know this - that's why his films rely upon the “but if” principle. A gangster film but if we followed the gangsters after the job. A Western but if the cowboy was black. Targets but if Boris Karloff was the main character.
Shaolin Temple excels at nothing. It does nothing. It's the type of martial arts movie that would be playing in the background of a scene in Office Space when the main character and Jennifer Aniston are hanging out at his place, watching Kung-Fu movies.
It is a genre movie with no flair. And, in ‘76, it's not like it was an important film that established much of the conventions that created the genre. Look at something like Zatoichi, a decade and change earlier and better and more confident of its execution of the same fucking shit.