Quote:
Originally Posted by jcal
In all his movies I dont think anybody ever takes him down? He fights like ten guys and they all come at him one at a time. What if two people just grabbed him took him to the ground that would be the end. But this is hollywood.
|
More like instead of fighting him on the offiensive, they should just hit him from both sides, or just grab his arm or leg and "make a wish--" like even DOGS will do, because it's so obvious.
But Seagal's films are all just immature, self-indulgent fantasy, like a little whiny kid who lives in his own world, and pretends he can beat everyone-- so then he choreographs everything to fulfill his egocentric fantasy, abusing the characters... just like he does with the people in his life. That's why he ended up such a loer: instead of getting help, he took out his problems on his family, friends, co-workers... and audience, until he had none left but the dregs who were the same way.
I think "On Deadly Ground" was most telling, since that's where he had the most creative control over the events, as well as the choreography-- and as a result, it BOMBED worse than anything he ever did.
For example, in the bar-fight (stolen straight from "Billy Jack" for the setup, i.e. the hero gets mad at rednecks pouring stuff on an indian), a guy comes up behind Seagal and puts a choke-hold on him-- and so be beats the guy by grabbing his nut-sack.
Obviously, this was Seagal re-writing his incident with GENE LE BELL, from when Gene choked him out! But in THIS version, instead of him passing out and crapping his pants, it works out the way he WANTED it to against Gene-- since he had TRIED to go for Gene's nut-sack, but IT DIDN'T WORK IN REAL LIFE.
So he re-wrote history, in this little self-indulgent revenge-scene-- and thus USED the studio, stuntmen, audience and everyone else to mend HIS OWN fragile little ego, so that the PUBLIC OFFICIAL version of a chokehold on Seagal, eclipsed the private ACTUAL version, in which Gene Le Bell did it!
Seriously-- since WHEN is it a show of great martial-arts skill to grab someone's nut-sack, anyway? More like smething a litte kid would do-- appropriately, because Seagal HAS no real martial-arts skills; and likewise, the only reason for including such a movie in a martial-arts movie, would be to re-write the REAL event, and soothe his little ego-bruise by forcing it on the public, taking advantage of their public trust and goodwill for his own psychotic purposes.
Next, he faces a guy named "Big Mike," and totally destroys him in the most sadistic-- and egotistical-- fight-scene ever filmed-- and then LECTURING him!
Obviously scene mentally represents SEAGAL TAKING REVENGE ON HIS FATHER, who was also named "Mike," and who abused Seagal as a child-- wnd who was "big," because that's how Seagal always remembered him from then. So basically it was about him getting revenge on his psychotic image of his dad, in a character named "Big Mike" in a classic display of "Oedipus Complex!"
Obviously, Seagal's dad did the same thing to Seagal when he was a kid-- and so now he passes on the abuse to his audience. Way to go, Stevie! Keep that ol' cycle-of-abusing going-- to millions of your adoring fans!
So basically, Seagal's movies are all just a bunch of egotistical wank-fests where he expresses and lives out his mental problems as a legend in his own mind. I could tell he was a pathological narcissist (and complete a-hole) in about the first minute of his first movie, "Above the Law--" which he obviously thinks he is, since that phrase describes how a narcissist thinks about himself, i.e. that the same laws don't apply to them that apply to others.
Everything in Seagal's movies is an open book about his psychosis...
that's why they're so damned disturbing to watch-- i.e. HE THINKS IT'S REALITY, and he doesn't care how offensive it is to normal decent people who RESPECT others the same way they want to be respected. He belongs BEHIND a screen, not ONE one.
in your opinion how would Steven Segal do in MMA?
Linear Mode
