• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Lars Andersen: a new level of archery

Status
Not open for further replies.
Opened the topic and thought about Kenshiro , Ashitaka and Irvine. Damn, all posted !!!

Dude is impressive. I'm friends with a great archer (a national champion). Will ask for her opinion about him.
 

Reuenthal

Banned
Heres a more detailed rebuttal to lars anderson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDbqz_07dW4


I found her point about not using ancient pictures to draw conclusions because ancient artists didn't know what they were depicting dodgy and also contradictory with later assertions. But overall she made a convincing case. It does seems Lars cherry picked dodgy evidence to make extraordinary claims.

I guess in everything, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't.

Lars is still greatly skilled though and I am still impressed by him.
 

Wiktor

Member
Impressive skills, but watching him move around is kinda cringe-worthy...almost like watching Star Wars kid.

Isn't that the whole point. Dude's a middle aged academic that doesn't exactly looks like he has great fitness levels. And yet he's able to shoot insanely fast, accuretely and in very difficult position. I think this is more about how impressive the results of techniques are instead of archer himself
 
D

Deleted member 102481

Unconfirmed Member
This is why I want to be like the arrow and fight crime with my recurved bow
 

Faerith

Neo Member
In this thread I learned there's actualy an asian and a western style of archery. Cool.
Made me look up pictures from Robin of Sherwood (the best Robin) and his arrows are indeed on the leftside, funny how I never noticed that.

Even if the guy might be intentionaly inaccurate, the video is fun to watch. Never knew about trickshooting.

I found her point about not using ancient pictures to draw conclusions because ancient artists didn't know what they were depicting dodgy and also contradictory with later assertions. [...] I guess in everything, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't.
Yep, that was rather dishonest argumentwise, otherwise it was a really nice civil rebuttal.
And I guess that's the lesson one should always remind oneself of:
Just because someone sounds really convincing it doesn't mean they are right.

But seriously why even use a sword at all if youre gonna use it like that. Seems like youre fucked if you forgot to bring your gauntlet.
Halfsword demonstration with "how to hold the blade"
Was watching this yesterday (that guy has also a nice Zornhau and counters demonstration, how to carry your Zweihänder and stuff- but he talks too much).

The worst thing about looking up historic/accurate swordfighting is: hollywoodstyle fighting is just not that fun to watch anymore. :(
"lol, ruining their edges", "he only attacks the other guys weapon not the other guy"
 
Halfsword demonstration with "how to hold the blade"
Was watching this yesterday (that guy has also a nice Zornhau and counters demonstration, how to carry your Zweihänder and stuff- but he talks too much).

The worst thing about looking up historic/accurate swordfighting is: hollywoodstyle fighting is just not that fun to watch anymore. :(
"lol, ruining their edges", "he only attacks the other guys weapon not the other guy"

I like watching Skallagrim's videos, they are very informative.

One interesting thing I remember watching in a movie, is that in the Nicholas Cage film of all things, called Season of the Witch, Nicholas Cage gets in a duel with some squire, and they actually perform a mordhau, where they grab the sword by the blade and try to hit the other person with the weighted hilt of the blade. It wasn't a good movie but I was surprised whoever choreographed that probably has some knowledge of historic swordfighting.
 

wildfire

Banned
It absolutely does. But that's all they are, trick shots, not insight into how people actually fought back then.

If he can only pull this off with a 30 lbs bow I would have to agree. While she made some outlandish criticisms, like he wouldn't be able to penetrate platemail (silly since crossbows became popular to deal with them instead of relying on heavy bows); she thoroughly debunks the historical accuracy of his presentation.
 
I don't see how he could've done the splitting arrow thing hundreds of times to get the right take. The arrow was coming at him. If he didn't hit it, it would've hit him.

This shit was mad impressive. And the speed with which he was able to fire accurately is crazy!
 

Faerith

Neo Member
I like watching Skallagrim's videos, they are very informative.

One interesting thing I remember watching in a movie, is that in the Nicholas Cage film of all things, called Season of the Witch, Nicholas Cage gets in a duel with some squire, and they actually perform a mordhau, where they grab the sword by the blade and try to hit the other person with the weighted hilt of the blade. It wasn't a good movie but I was surprised whoever choreographed that probably has some knowledge of historic swordfighting.
Maybe the (growing?) interest in historic fighting-techniques is slowly starting to seep through; after all the historic style looks way more violent and actually deadly (well, at least to me it does).

Maybe getting a bit ot, but personaly I love the first battle in Rome (tv-series), where they tried to interpret how a roman battleformation might have worked (they even had row-changing and stabilizing the frontguys with your hands) and that one (also a guesswork) battle in Vikings were they form a shieldwall (archers inside the wall, opening and closing the wall, enemy trying to hit with their spears from above, and they even pull a guy in using an axe like a hook, nice).
Both are more or less orderly fights instead of two hords running wildly against each other.
 
I guess it's impressive but just looks ridiculous bouncing around and doing those finishing flourishes like the virgin of all virgins though.
 
Maybe the (growing?) interest in historic fighting-techniques is slowly starting to seep through; after all the historic style looks way more violent and actually deadly (well, at least to me it does).

Maybe getting a bit ot, but personaly I love the first battle in Rome (tv-series), where they tried to interpret how a roman battleformation might have worked (they even had row-changing and stabilizing the frontguys with your hands) and that one (also a guesswork) battle in Vikings were they form a shieldwall (archers inside the wall, opening and closing the wall, enemy trying to hit with their spears from above, and they even pull a guy in using an axe like a hook, nice).
Both are more or less orderly fights instead of two hords running wildly against each other.

That sounds very interesting, I never watched an episode of Rome, I heard it already ended or something though. I would like to see more accurate portrayals of how armies clash. The whole Roman formation makes more sense to me than the hordes running into each other that is seen in a lot of films with epic battles because it looks absolutely suicidal to whoever is in front of that charge while a proper formation at least keeps the front defended and Vikings using the axe pull to break the formation sounds like a sensible counter to it.

I would also like to see how movies would portray skirmishes with archers, usually in movies they just show the typical line formation of archers do a few volleys before charging in. I always read about how Mongolian skirmishers on horseback were one of the most dominating forces in history but I never saw a representation of that (Mongols usually are just portrayed as bad guys, like Russians in a James Bond film. I heard the Marco Polo series is enjoyable but I haven't gotten around to it). Hollywood does like to show off the whole rain of arrows scene, so in my mind I would think the Mongolian archers did something just as crazy except on horseback and mobile enough to kite armies.
 

Veelk

Banned
"Listen, John... my time on the Island... there's something I didn't tell you about..."

"What a fucking surprise."

"You mean 'Quelle surprise'"

"What!?"

"I studied wine tasting in France."

One day, Diggle is just going to go crazy and torture the information out of Ollie so he can never pull this shit again.
 
One day, Diggle is just going to go crazy and torture the information out of Ollie so he can never pull this shit again.

"John..."

"Oliver, I swear to God, if a single word about the Island or Hong Kong or Moscow or France comes outta your mouth, I will knock you the fuck out."

"..."

"That's what I thought."

"John..."

"What!?"

"There was no Island."
 

Faerith

Neo Member
That sounds very interesting, I never watched an episode of Rome, I heard it already ended or something though. I would like to see more accurate portrayals of how armies clash. The whole Roman formation makes more sense to me than the hordes running into each other that is seen in a lot of films with epic battles because it looks absolutely suicidal to whoever is in front of that charge while a proper formation at least keeps the front defended and Vikings using the axe pull to break the formation sounds like a sensible counter to it.
I think Rome only had that one scene, regretably, and Vikings a few (naturaly axe&shield) by nature of being vikings.
Rome: sadly their whole set burned up - accidently or "accidently"; but the show is really enjoyable even though the second season did get a bit too dark and drama for my tastes (season is still rather dramatic but has its lighter moments). The whole human drama and storylines are done quite well and they really tried to make the whole setting as authentic as possible (for TV), which imo shows (another authentic feeling show that was well researched even though they knowingly used elements from the wrong centuries: the old BBC Robin of Sherwood). Oh I recommend Vikings too.

I think a properly made Alexander the Great series would be quite sweet, especially since it'll go against Parsia, meaning interesting visuals too.


I would also like to see how movies would portray skirmishes with archers, usually in movies they just show the typical line formation of archers do a few volleys before charging in. I always read about how Mongolian skirmishers on horseback were one of the most dominating forces in history but I never saw a representation of that (Mongols usually are just portrayed as bad guys, like Russians in a James Bond film. I heard the Marco Polo series is enjoyable but I haven't gotten around to it). Hollywood does like to show off the whole rain of arrows scene, so in my mind I would think the Mongolian archers did something just as crazy except on horseback and mobile enough to kite armies.
Heh, I tried to watch Marco Polo but realized it's one of the rare series' I need subtitles for. >_< But it did look very non-Hollywood.
Ah, the only "arrows darkening the sky"-scene I remember was in 300.
Btw, wasn't there some older longass movie about Ghengis Khan that's supposed to be good?
When it comes to archers there are quite a few "bad guys" who were good with the bow: Mongolian, Parsian (iirc) and "Arabian" (also on horse).
I think another problem is you need good horse(wo)men for any believable bigger scenes with archers on horseback, otherwise you need to do some(lots of) training of non-maincharacters.

On a random note while researching online(the mistake I guess) greek&medivial warfare: there seems to be a big disagreement on the armourpiercing power of the longbow. (Meh)
 
He does some pretty impressive trick shooting, but the notion of "rediscovering a lost art" is a bit of a stretch.

Firstly, let's see him do it with a 110lb draw weight rather than the one he's using, which looks like about 30lb.

Second, the side the arrow goes on is dramatically affected by grip; the modern, orthodox three finger grip leads to the string rolling slightly off to the left - remember that arrows don't fly straight, they oscillate - particularly at the moment of firing, and and orthodox grip with the arrow on the left means the arrow bends slightly 'around' the bow.

Conversely the right handed grips we've been seeing are thumb grips there the thumb wraps around the string (sometimes assisted by a thumb ring to distribute pressure) and the fingers hold the arrow in place. In this case the string rolls to the right and the arrow bends slightly around the right hand side of the bow (look carefully at the kyudo images and videos).

Anderson's arrows are drawn back in front of his face, so he's not getting maximum draw weight from his bow, and while that's fine for trick shooting it won't provide the range and penetration required for the battlefield.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom