Flicking! There's a fun move. Very niche though, especially depending on the director. It was HUGE when it first was discovered, but then they changed the timing years ago and you saw use of it drop dramatically (I assume this was intentional).
Anyway, back on topic. Novastar makes a great point that is often forgotten (even among fencers): the highest levels of fencing are... I hate to say it... boring to the average person. It's a funny dynamic because you learn the basics starting out, get more advanced and learn some fancy stuff, then once you get to Olympic level you're back to basics. You don't see tricks like jumping and flicking and dodging too much in international tournaments, just great timing and perfect technique. Cut out all the bs, and keep it simple.
Of course this is basically the OPPOSITE of what you want in stage combat and whatnot - if your audience is bored then you've failed lol. This is why fancy moves and flourishes and fighting one on thirty is done, you move away from practical and towards flashy. This is not a bad thing, unless you intend to try these tactics in a real fight - but then again, who gets into swordfights nowadays? Apart from us Star Wars dorks
I could not have really said it better, Nero. The ART of martial combat... is much different from the "actual" martial combat. It would not be "art" if it also didn't have some inherent beauty and "visual interest" to some extent. It's funny, too... for as long as I can remember... people get EVERYTHING regarding martial sciences *WRONG*... they:
* Confuse the sport of boxing with "the reality" of a streetfight
* Confuse staged/filmed combat martial arts with the sport of fencing
* Confuse martial art forms and actions with swords... with the combative actions with swords
* Seem to always mention how certain things "can't be used in a real fight"... usually commenting in a very non-sequitur way, such as saying that while watching a Wu-Shu form on video
I mean... for me... it's sheer madness sometimes, lol! I mean, I don't want to be on a soap box TOO long here, but... you RARELY see, for example:
* Someone makes some kind of painted art. Let's say it's a mural.
* Another person comes up and says "Yeah, but would you get HIRED to put that on a VIDEO GAME box?!? Huh? Meh--what's the use of your mural..."
In this case, one is art FOR ART'S SAKE + EXPRESSION... and the other is art AS A MEANS TO AN END (in this case, payoff + prestige + whatever video game).
So... I don't mean to get the topic all bent out of shape, but... it's simply about UNDERSTANDING "what piece of the puzzle goes where".
* You don't (solely) teach staged combat to someone if they mean to spar another person...
* You don't (solely) teach sport boxing to someone if they mean to do a "solo" martial arts exhibition...
* and you don't (solely) teach sport fencing to someone if they (god forbid!) are looking for a more "traditional" outlook on "what a duel REALLY felt like"!
That all being said... ALL MARTIAL ARTS ARE VALUABLE.
Some in "less" or "more" important ways though to the INDIVIDUAL...
YOU may not enjoy ________, but I do.
I may not enjoy ____, but YOU do.
The important thing is... to understand
where each art fits in! Don't use a display sword for a fencing match, right?
Alright, enough of all that...
