This film leaves a sense that it is designed to placate the Communist regime and not to offend its sensabilities. This is a shame, as such a policy is, in effect, the exercise of the re-writing of history.”

Couldn’t have said it better myself. Although the film on its own with no context was fantastic, what you say is unfortunately the sad truth with many masters killed and Shaolin temples burnt down and destroyed.
It’s also sad that many modern Chinese youths have been made to believe in this rewritten history…

The film Ip Man is visually stunning and the fight scenes are both superb and inspiring. Mr Donnie Yen portrays the role of the perceived, traditional gungfu Sifu very well indeed. And the grand house he and his family occupy only serves to make the presentation rich in detail and meaning.

Of course, the film does not protray the historical Ip Man Sigung. Nor would the people of Foshan speak in Manderin, but rather their native dialects of Hakka, Hoklo and Cantonese, with Cantonese being the common language of communication.

There is no historical record that says that Ip Man Sigung fought Japanese Imperialist, Karate practitoners – but apparently, he was asked by Japanese occupation authorities to teach gungfu to the Japanese. Something the real Ip Man would never have done.

The film does not mention Ip Man’s teacher, Chan Wah-shun, or Grand Master Chan’s number one student, Ng Chung-so Sifu, whom took-over the training of Ip Man Sigung, upon the passing of Grand Master Chan. One other notable omission is Mr Leung Pik, who taught Master Ip in Hong Kong, when master Ip was fifteen years old. These omissions also mean that there is no mention of the other lineages of Wing Chun Kuen. The film mistakenly gives the impression that Ip Man lived in a Wing Chun vacuum.

There is also the implied assertion that Ip Man left China due to Japanese oppression. When infact, he actually left China due to Communist Chinese oppression, and their policy of wiping out the past, including traditional gungfu, and its masters, etc. Ip Man was a traditionalist, and a member of the Guomingtang. When China fell to the Communists, Ip and many others fled China for their lives. And in so doing, preserved their arts for future generations.

This film leaves a sense that it is designed to placate the Communist regime and not to offend its sensabilities. This is ashame, as such a policy is, in effect, the exercise of the re-writing of history. This is probably the reason that another version of Ip Man’s biography is being planned for the big screen, starring, I believe, Mr Tony Leung.

And I have heard that a Ip Man 2 is being planned to follow this first offering, presumably also starring Donnie Yen. Dealing with Ip Man’s life in Hong Kong, where he eventually taught Mr Bruce Lee for a time. What is often not known about this time, is that Ip’s other Chinese students refused to train with Ip Man, while Bruce Lee was there, due to the fact that Bruce Lee’s grandfather (on his mother’s side) had been a Westerner from Germany.

I experienced the film on two levels; one was the sheer cinematic scope of the film. Beautiful sets, strong acting and excellent martial arts sequencing, all serve to present a thoroughly entertaining and inspring film. If Ip Man had been a fictional character, the assessment would end here. But of course, he was not fictional, but very real, and has had an impact upon the world at large, and not only in China. The second level assesses the historical accuracy. And this is the biggest let-down. There is too much ‘glossing’ over of events that would offend Communist China, and too many fictional elements inserted to replace fact, that are designed to appeal to modern China’s sense of ’self’, and, to a certain extent, justify the regime.

The danger of very well made films, is that the average viewer might mistake the fiction for fact, and not question the presentation of events as portrayed on the screen. I must say however, that Mr Donnie Yen plays Ip Man excellently.

Thank you.

I have watched this movie a few times now. I have read many articles and books regarding Mr Yip Man’s life.

I was expecting an almost true to fact based movie on the life (biography ?) of the master especially since his two son’s are still alive since they would know more about the master than any body else.

Instead, I see the movie making using his character like an entertainment puppet. This is a master who have been respected even in a movie portraying the master. I believe the directer should have paid more attention to the true events rather than just make this another flick using a person so reverd to as the late grandmaster of Wing Chun Kuen.

Any true Wing Chun practitioner will see this disrectfully.

The movie was entertaining in the sense of a flick which should be given credit.

History is very important and must be preserved which ever way possible. In todays world the only most efective way of doing this is via the silver screen !!!

Enough said. Hope the second one should more faithfull to the person in question.

Regards to all…..

—
http://www.orangecountywingchun.blogspot.com

Beautifully said…true words indeed. My impression of the movie also reminded me of the hidden aspect of that Chinese nationalistic pride displayed in movies like Hero and Fists of Fury (the original one). I for one very much enjoyed this movie irrespective of its authenticity.