Postby Craig Peters » Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:25 pm
I think the answer to your question is that there are several problems. First of all, there's still quite a bit of general ignorance on this subject. There's quite a lot of people who would still be very surprised to learn that the supposedly lost knightly arts were actually recorded down in many instances by late medieval and Renaissance masters.
The second is apathy. One of the biggest problems is that the average movie-goer just doesn't care about the realism of a sword fight. Certainly, I know that the rest of my family doesn't particularly take notice to it, but after reading the ARMA's essays, watching some of the videos and trying out the strikes and movements myself, one cannot help but flinch at a lot of the stuff in movies. However, most movie-goers are entertained by flashy movies that "look cool" and thus they really like the spins, the suicidal press, the sword easily hacking through plate, etc, because aesthetically it looks exciting. The problem, of course, is that to anyone with some experience, the things that are supposed to look cool end up looking really fake and unimpressive. But this is still a minority part of the audience.
The third reason is ease of filming. The ARMA techniques, when used properly, are inherently dangerous and require excellent timing, distance and perception to be well executed. In many cases, people making movies probably don't want to spend months trying to train a person in Western martial arts. There is the difficulty in finding someone competent to teach it, and there's also the difficulty that it takes quite a long time before the actor becomes skilled enough that they could pass for a period swordsman. And, as I mentioned, the dangerous nature of many techniques, such as trying to void a Zornhau that is executed with intensity, means that Hollywood will have a much easier time if it just stays within the bounds of established swordsfighting.
The other thing that John points out in the Appendix B of Medieval Swordsmanship: Illustrated Methods and Techniques, is that by its very nature, fighting is about being cautious so one is not struck, trying to feint or deceive the opponent and then strike them with force, while stage combat is coreographed, routine, and above all else, tries to avoid actual injury occurring. Because of this, as John further notes, the vast majority of strikes and techniques must be excluded due to the danger of injury or inexperience of the actors.
There are no doubt other reasons why this occurs in films, but I think these are the three principle reasons.
