why bruce lee?
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:13 pm
why not Bruce?Page 1 of 2
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:22 pm
Why Bruce?.....well Rick never made any movies...and he's still alive.... why not Bruce?
why not Bruce?Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 5:32 am
Because he was too cool for school
dont you be bad mothin the bruce now !!!!
dont you be bad mothin the bruce now !!!!
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:28 am
Thats an awesome article!
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:20 am
Why do i find this rather random?
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 5:24 am
because life is rather random ?
Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 12:23 am
It does seem out of left field, yet Bruce was a shining example of so many positive human attributes.. Bruce has inspired many, many folks including myself, with his incredible drive, dedication, determination, intelligence, charisma and ability...
He lived only 32 years, yet look at what a remarkable contribution he made <read about it>. Bruce was, and is, a shining example of some of the very best of what humanity has to offer.
He lived only 32 years, yet look at what a remarkable contribution he made <read about it>. Bruce was, and is, a shining example of some of the very best of what humanity has to offer.
Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 3:58 am
Besides you got to like Bruce, he visted Uechi guys and gave them a cool new drill to play with.
He had some courage too. Not everyone is keen to spar with Jimmy
Actually those must have be been great days when martial artists visted one another to share. Most dojo don't get many guests from other styles these days. What changed?
He had some courage too. Not everyone is keen to spar with Jimmy
Actually those must have be been great days when martial artists visted one another to share. Most dojo don't get many guests from other styles these days. What changed?
Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 4:48 am
Bruce was open minded, hell, he is far more open minded then his students in my opinion.
I have not read his whole book, only portions, but i read something along the lines of this "Everything in this book is what WORKED FOR ME" He not once stated this is the best of each style, its good...for him.
I have rarly met anyone who thinks like this anymore in martial arts.
I have not read his whole book, only portions, but i read something along the lines of this "Everything in this book is what WORKED FOR ME" He not once stated this is the best of each style, its good...for him.
I have rarly met anyone who thinks like this anymore in martial arts.
Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 4:54 am
Which book?
Lots of sources out there on him.
And don't think for a minute he didn't have a cocky side....
But I agree his kung-fu /jkd would finally become *his* personal experience but from familiar roots..
Lots of sources out there on him.
And don't think for a minute he didn't have a cocky side....
But I agree his kung-fu /jkd would finally become *his* personal experience but from familiar roots..
Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:00 am
Yeah, i heard of his cocky side i heard he used to fight alot or something like that. But in 'tao of jeet kune do' he said something along the lines of how the principles in that book are what work for him.
Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:13 am
A great book with great insight into the man and the MA...
He said that because he did not want it to become "doctrine." It was merely his path at that stage at that time... This was his last "jkd stage" before he died.
Lots of other sources out there as well worth reading..
He said that because he did not want it to become "doctrine." It was merely his path at that stage at that time... This was his last "jkd stage" before he died.
Lots of other sources out there as well worth reading..
Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:23 am
I like Artist of Life
not a technical book , but insight into his thoughts , very interesting read for the philisophically inclined ....
not a technical book , but insight into his thoughts , very interesting read for the philisophically inclined ....
The Legendary...
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:27 am
Not that my own opinion matters all that much, but the more I hear about Bruce from people that had personal interactions with him, the less impressive he seems.
His "cockiness" would better be described as over-bearing arrogance. I've heard of a couple ocasions, during martial arts events, where he became so unbearably full of himself it was a joke. Not really the humble and wise persona some folks would ascribe to Bruce.
Additionally, although a solid Kung-Fu practitioner, the "movie Bruce" was so supreme a fighter as to exaggerate his real abilities. Even though he was reputed to visit various Bay Area M.A. schools and "challenge" them to some kind of contest, he didn't win every time. Its impressive that he was good enough and confident enough to at least try to beat all those guys, but I have heard a personal account of him slying away after just watching two senior students at a San Francisco dojo engage in a little free-fighting.
Bruce's greatness lies in his films; and they are great martial arts movies. About the only camera trick he used was speeding up the film (and yes, he did use it), no "wire tricks" in those days as digital wire removing technology was simply not a reality.
And the inspiration he gave people to discover the depth and beauty of traditional as well as evolving martial arts is commendable as well.
Its just that when I tell someone that I practice karate, I'm sick and tired of them asking "So, was Bruce Lee really the greatest of all time?"
nb
His "cockiness" would better be described as over-bearing arrogance. I've heard of a couple ocasions, during martial arts events, where he became so unbearably full of himself it was a joke. Not really the humble and wise persona some folks would ascribe to Bruce.
Additionally, although a solid Kung-Fu practitioner, the "movie Bruce" was so supreme a fighter as to exaggerate his real abilities. Even though he was reputed to visit various Bay Area M.A. schools and "challenge" them to some kind of contest, he didn't win every time. Its impressive that he was good enough and confident enough to at least try to beat all those guys, but I have heard a personal account of him slying away after just watching two senior students at a San Francisco dojo engage in a little free-fighting.
Bruce's greatness lies in his films; and they are great martial arts movies. About the only camera trick he used was speeding up the film (and yes, he did use it), no "wire tricks" in those days as digital wire removing technology was simply not a reality.
And the inspiration he gave people to discover the depth and beauty of traditional as well as evolving martial arts is commendable as well.
Its just that when I tell someone that I practice karate, I'm sick and tired of them asking "So, was Bruce Lee really the greatest of all time?"
nb
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:36 am
His book is pretty good, from what little i read, and he promoted cross training and individualism of a person in martial arts, which is commendable.
Has he ever lost against a uechi guy?
Has he ever lost against a uechi guy?