Bruce Lee.. Overrated?

[Josh]

yes, no?

thoughts, ideas?


My personal take on Bruce Lee is that he was a Martial Artist first, then an actor. I don't think he is "the best ever" and I don't think any of his ideas were as revolutionary as some are made to believe. Good martial artist, yes. without a doubt. As good as his hype, probably not.

i'd say he is overrated.

 

[James Kovacich]

yes, no?

thoughts, ideas?


My personal take on Bruce Lee is that he was a Martial Artist first, then an actor. I don't think he is "the best ever" and I don't think any of his ideas were as revolutionary as some are made to believe. Good martial artist, yes. without a doubt. As good as his hype, probably not.

i'd say he is overrated.

And you base this on what...

 

[Touch Of Death]

Yes, he is over rated. You should hear some of his fans in this town. Its really society's "end all be all" mentality that is the problem. People just can't get away from terms like "best" when they speak of an individual. I blame sports in general.
Sean

 

[Robert Lee]

No Bruce was not the best, but no one will ever be the best in M/A or anything. Yes his idea was revolutionary. At the time people trained and believed Very much in what they trained was workable. I think Bruce helped to open a door that a person needs training that helps that person. We have the MMA now that is not really different then what Bruce was saying and working towards. No art has the whole answer What you need to better is not what the person next to you needs. Train the same each take from that train what best fits there needs. Bruce did help in this aspect. Over rated or not he helped.

 

[Andrew Green]

Yes and no.

Legends always get made out to be bigger then they where.

In today's world I don't think he would be anything special, but others have had the opportunity to stand on his shoulders. If someone like him, came before him maybe he would have gone farther.

It's like asking who the better physicist was, Aristotle, Newton or Einstien. No real answer there, Einstien was obviously closer to the truth, but he had the work of the many more before him to go off of.

 

[Infinite]

Yes and no.

Legends always get made out to be bigger then they where.

In today's world I don't think he would be anything special, but others have had the opportunity to stand on his shoulders. If someone like him, came before him maybe he would have gone farther.

It's like asking who the better physicist was, Aristotle, Newton or Einstien. No real answer there, Einstien was obviously closer to the truth, but he had the work of the many more before him to go off of.

Closer to OUR truth. 100 years from now even Einstine's theories will seem quant and probably much like Newton fail at the unified level.

However on the topic of Bruce Lee,

He introduced two concepts one of which was fit the MA to the person. The second was the formless fighting style.

Prior to all this the prevaling MA culture was do as it was done before. You do your kata's and you learn the techniques.

He put into words (others probably had the concepts) how to use an MA with the overiding concept of economy of motion. It cought on thus the legend.

He was obviously intellegent and a quite extra ordinary person/martial artist but he was not a god.

--Infy

 

[James Kovacich]

Yes, he is over rated. You should hear some of his fans in this town. Its really society's "end all be all" mentality that is the problem. People just can't get away from terms like "best" when they speak of an individual. I blame sports in general.
Sean

Look at the "state" of martial arts when Bruce was alive and look at how martial arts were executed "on average" back then.

Your keyword was "fans and fans are wannabes and "not in the know." Why are you listening to them?

 

[exile]

Yes and no.

Legends always get made out to be bigger then they where.

In today's world I don't think he would be anything special, but others have had the opportunity to stand on his shoulders. If someone like him, came before him maybe he would have gone farther.

It's like asking who the better physicist was, Aristotle, Newton or Einstien. No real answer there, Einstien was obviously closer to the truth, but he had the work of the many more before him to go off of.

Andrew's take on this is I think the real crux of the matter—you can't judge the past against the present. It's meaningless, because what comes after incorporates and modifies what went before. People in chess argue sometimes about whether how Morphy, Alexhine, Fisher and Kasparov stack up against each other, but in each case the later player built on and internalized the insights and discoveries of the earlier one. Remember what Newton said? `If I have seen further than others it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants'. Well, not only that, of course... but if you look at the highest level of brilliance at any given time, that brilliance stands on the shoulders of earlier genius. It's the same in every domain of human activity.

In certain important ways, we think of the arts differently because of the way Lee demystified them and the practical approach he demanded of them. He reframed the kinds of questions all martial artists ask about their art. Of how many practitioners in any given generation is that true? The answer to that is the measure of Lee's true stature (as opposed to the superhuman hype that everyone is—correctly—so skeptical of)...

 

[IWishToLearn]

It's been quoted several places that Bruce's forte was in taking something someone else did - doing it just as well the first time he tried it, and better the second go around. He was a phenomenal natural talent - but he ultimately left behind no "system" of teaching - much the same as when Ed Parker died. There were so many different evolutions of Bruce and Ed's work that finding one specific way to do things was no longer viable as a training methodology. Witness the various JKD "seniors" and the various Kenpo "seniors". They all move and teach differently. All of their students move and teach differently. (Generalities for the sake of argument - there are specific lineages that all move the same way. Stay on topic people. )

Bruce was a major force in the martial arts - his greatest legacy was the upheaval of "traditional" ways of thinking - and taking a piece from here, and a piece from there to use for your own. The downside to that methodology is that Bruce was one in a million physically who could do that. I've not yet seen another who was able to put things together across a varied spectrum of styles.

Was Bruce the "greatest" ever - I disagree with that assessment. Bruce left no "system" - but a philosophy. Was he a pioneer - yes. None of Bruce's students move like Bruce did. And the vast majority of people cannot benefit from studying and choosing pieces of style x, y, and z because the vast majority do not conceptualize the How, Why, and Purpose behind the various concepts of style x, y, and z in such a short period of time.

Was he overrated - Who cares?

 

[terryl965]

Do I feel Bruce was over rated NO, at the time of his training and concept of training he was in the forefront and that can never be taken away. Was he the best ever in MA, most likely NO again there are so many people that put people like Bruce above everything else, did TV and the movies make him larrger than life of course so, that is what we a s a society does to people on the big screen make them invencible.

 

[Tames D]

Probably over rated. But I wouldnt have it any other way...

 

[Xue Sheng]

you can't judge the past against the present

nough said

But I will add Bruce Lee was a very good martial artist.

 

[g-bells]

he believed that each individual should express themselves via their art therefore, there will never be another bruce but who cares. he was an excepitional MA with ideas far ahead of his time, if you consider him overrated then you are falling into the commercialised view of him.
do i consider him overrated? i just don't think of him in those terms.

gary

 

[James Kovacich]

It's been quoted several places that Bruce's forte was in taking something someone else did - doing it just as well the first time he tried it, and better the second go around. He was a phenomenal natural talent - but he ultimately left behind no "system" of teaching - much the same as when Ed Parker died. There were so many different evolutions of Bruce and Ed's work that finding one specific way to do things was no longer viable as a training methodology. Witness the various JKD "seniors" and the various Kenpo "seniors". They all move and teach differently. All of their students move and teach differently. (Generalities for the sake of argument - there are specific lineages that all move the same way. Stay on topic people. )

Bruce was a major force in the martial arts - his greatest legacy was the upheaval of "traditional" ways of thinking - and taking a piece from here, and a piece from there to use for your own. The downside to that methodology is that Bruce was one in a million physically who could do that. I've not yet seen another who was able to put things together across a varied spectrum of styles. Was Bruce the "greatest" ever - I disagree with that assessment.

1)Bruce left no "system" - but a philosophy. Was he a pioneer - yes.

2)None of Bruce's students move like Bruce did.

3)And the vast majority of people cannot benefit from studying and choosing pieces of style x, y, and z because the vast majority do not conceptualize the How, Why, and Purpose behind the various concepts of style x, y, and z in such a short period of time.

Was he overrated - Who cares?

Not a bad post BUT

1) That would mean that Bruce never taught a system. There are many "known and unknown" practioners that practice it.
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3408

2) To move like Bruce is not what JKD is about but if you want to see someone who moves like Bruce, google Tommy Caruthers.

3) JKD isn't a mix and match system, not even close. Thats where the confusion sets in. Everyone wants to "think" that Bruces "final" stages of development is the stage to "start" out at.

How can one expect to achieve the results of "self expression" that Bruce expected while skipping the important training methodologies (without the natural abilities that Bruce posessed). Bruce dropped this and that BUT he still possessed all that he dropped and if needed it would still use it.

 

[charyuop]

Was he the best Martial Artist in the world? No (I don't think there is really one). Was he the greatest? Yes, in my head he surely was!

Over rated? Well considering that people still talks alot about him (there are forums like this every other month lol), his style still taught, his movies always on the top of Martial Art movies...well, if he was over rated he was for sure over rated by the most of us.

 

[jdinca]

For the time, no. For today? Who knows. It's an interesting question that probably needs to go beyond Bruce Lee. I was watching Drunken Master a couple of weeks ago and was thoroughly impressed with the skills shown. What was interesting was how poor the choreography was in the fight scenes as compared to today. I don't know that today's MA scions are any better than Jackie Chan was in that movie, nor do I know that they are any better than Bruce Lee was. But the scenes are done much better and more time is put into preparation for them. Jet Li in fearless blew me away but some of his earlier work, as with the others mentioned, looks a little stilted also.

MA in general in this country's entertainment media was also rare in those day, which made Bruce Lee stand out even more.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Bruce was special in that he had that charisma that very few people have. He also was a philosopher and an intellectual from the martial arts standpoint. Physically he was pretty gifted with decent attributes except for size. He also brought the chinese martial arts to life with his films. Was he the best martial artist ever. (not even close and how could you really ever judge that anyways) However he was very special for all of the above reasons. Heck watching his films certainly inspired me to start training and for that I am forever grateful!

 

[Kenpodoc]

yes, no?

thoughts, ideas?


My personal take on Bruce Lee is that he was a Martial Artist first, then an actor. I don't think he is "the best ever" and I don't think any of his ideas were as revolutionary as some are made to believe. Good martial artist, yes. without a doubt. As good as his hype, probably not.

i'd say he is overrated.

The very fact that this post was created more than 30 years after his death demonstrates his power over the martial arts community. This site might not exist without his charismatic effect on Martial arts in the united states.

Jeff

 

[still learning]

Hello, Mr Bruce Lee was a great martial artist. He train harder than most people. He had great speed and power. He was very flexable. He was always looking to improving his martial art knowledge. He had great skills!

He was also a pretty good actor! OK..better than (still learning)?

Martial arts has been around for hundreds of years....today nothing is NEW! ....even the things that BRUCE LEE found...has been around for along time...(It was new to him). The things he said and did was already found by someone else. Yet today lots of followers thought it was orginal.

Today the fads on BJJ or MMA....Do you think people did not do those things before? Man has been looking and fighting each other for hundreds, and hundreds of years.

Just one more comment: Watch all the different systems,arts....foot work,stance,.....one thing is common....everyone ends up fighting the same way? Why? Man was not design to fight in a wide stance, narrow stance,long or short, or deep.....?

Mr Bruce Lee will always be known as a GREAT Martial artist....he will not be last one too. (still learning is not great? nor fast? but,still learning is trying to run FASTER! ...............Aloha)

 

[searcher]

The very fact that this post was created more than 30 years after his death demonstrates his power over the martial arts community. This site might not exist without his charismatic effect on Martial arts in the united states.

Jeff

Very well put.

He made an impact that very few have ever made on the MAs. I can't go one way or the other, but I am not sure we can be comparing apples to apples no matter how hard we try. I wonder how many of us would be on this board talking today if it were not for his contribution to the popularity of what we have come to love. He was a celeb. and for that there will always be the debate. To each, his own.