 The Husker has a heart of gold although he is full of tricks. When he is a trainee at Shaolin Temple, he cuts so many corners and devises so many labor-saving ploys that he earns the open wrath and secret admiration of his holy elders. Monk Shan, the famous kung fu master, never lets his buddhist association stand in the way of wining, whoring and the partaking of dog meat. His student Niu Ching-Liang is in trouble as Niu's sister is raped by the Manchu and has committed suicide. The monk tells Niu to bide for time. (Joy Sales)
 Having starred and appeared in countless films by the time 1977 rolled around, Sammo Hung Kam Bo had yet to make his (inevitable?) transition to directorial duties. It’s true that up until this point, his skilful action direction had made its mark across dozens of films, yet his true invention and artistry was so far un-revealed. Having worked under many directors himself, could the opera school graduate and action star bring something new to the genre? 1977’s Iron-Fisted Monk is a career landmark for Sammo, and a milestone for this genre of film itself.
First, we are met with a disciple at the Shaolin Temple, (and here Casanova Wong makes his brief and only appearance as he spars with Husker (Hung)). Husker himself is the perfect hero-to-be: an able, generous, honest, hard-working but suitably impatient student with that crucial hint of mischievousness. But it’s his restlessness that is the driving force of the film; for his unsettled spirit (shown early on as a cause for his sleepless nights) forces him into action, breaking with friendships, his youth and the strict Shaolin code altogether.
Iron-Fisted Monk, while on the surface is at least a great action film, is also at heart a story of uprising, rebellion and personal vendetta. The Manchus (rulers of China in the Qing Dynasty), are the one enemy in this film, and their cruelty and dominance is demonstrated to the point of disgust. Their acts of violence and exploitation are directed at any Chinese – even children. This injustice is at odds with what Shaolin stand for (and common decency for that matter). Interestingly, this theme is later echoed in Jackie Chan’s Project A II, where the rebellious and true-to-life efforts of Sun Yat-sen are entwined with Jackie’s constabulary.
Husker finds solidarity within Brother Tak, played sturdily by Chan Sing. Here, an interesting mix of perspectives is found in the film – we have Tak as a father figure, experienced, righteous and refined. He is contrasted with the inexperienced and naivety of Husker’s youth. Husker’s impatience is kept in check by the Buddha-praising monk; he talks of exercising tolerance and sound judgement, yet we sense a massive, sleeping and ominous force behind these words. It is only after a humiliating scene where Husker is dishonoured by the Manchus that we discover Brother Tak’s limits. We see that even Shaolin, when faced with no other alternative, will kill for the good of the community.
The action sequences in this film are choreographed with care. We see a mix of playfulness and power in Huskers techniques, and we see a brutal effectiveness in Tak’s. Suitably, the villains in the film are each distinguishable in both their outfits and choice of weapons. Yes, the Manchus play dirty, and their brutality is absurdly enhanced by their eccentric hair-styles and deadly accessories. One specialised cold-hearted killer wears a mane of wild hair and swings a handy ball and chain, called a meteor hammer. But Sammo Hung’s attention to details, while not as formed as in his later films, still comes across clearly for the most part.
Edited with attention to the martial art rhythm, we see in the film controlled phrases of action rather than a drawn-out brawl or tiresome, careless blow-trading. Deliberate, powerful and fluid, the hand-to-hand scenes are memorable. Weapons are used throughout, but only fleetingly and frequent enough to add variety. And the Manchus really do pose a threat in these scenes; henchmen with glass-jaws they are not. Iron Fisted Monk develops the Manchurian characters as ruthless, violent and heartless, so viewers are sure to recall these characteristics when the showdown inevitably comes – the revenge is sweet, and arguably righteous.
Here, blows are traded fairly equally and it’s a spontaneous team-up of Husker and Tak’s techniques that set the finale apart from similarly plotted films. True, the lightning-fast action sequences and invention that appeared later in Hung’s career was yet to be perfected here, but the finale in the film is still a pleasure, and is somewhat of a pre-cursor to Hung’s emerging talents.
For a directorial debut, this film certainly is challenging. The cruelty shown really does come out of nowhere, and this plunges the film into a different class. No longer are we watching bad guys from a distance when they misbehave. We get up close and distressingly personal with scenes of rape and brazen cruelty. Sammo Hung had made two marks here. He showed that action choreography could be art all over again, and that his film direction has a noticeable hard edge (to be explored further later in his career). It’s a satisfying, demanding and worthy film, and the debut of one of Hong Kong’s most important directors.
|
