MovieChat Forums > Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story (1993) Discussion > Linda Lee should have put her foot down ...

Linda Lee should have put her foot down on what was allowed in the movie

posted 11 years ago by Twifan1983
16 replies | jump to latest

Linda Lee,I'm sure, was,at least, a consultant on the set of "Dragon: the Bruce Lee Story." In fact, the film was based on her book. Why wasn't she more involved in what was allowed to be put in the movie? Why did she allow so many things to be embellished? Just to name a few-Bruce Lee didn't injure his back fighting to earn the right to teach Martial Arts in the U.S. He really injured it in training. The man he fought(and defeated) did not return to fight him during that Martial Ats Convention and his brother(the brother of the man he defeated) did not fight him on the set of "The Big Boss" to "avenge" his brother. I understand a few things were added for dramatic purposes. But, those were some pretty significant things that never happened.As if Bruce Lee's life wasn't fascinating enough? As one of Lee's greatest admirers, I consider that an insult to his memory.

"In the pursuit of truth there are many doors to deception.Open your mind.But, guard your heart"-me

[–] cyberdynesystems101 11 years ago

From what I can gather, she was actually happy with the final film.

As if Bruce Lee's life wasn't fascinating enough? As one of Lee's greatest admirers, I consider that an insult to his memory.

Apparently, a lot of people here say that just because it was fascinating, doesn't mean it'll be entertaining, so rewriting it is justified. Kind of defeats the purpose of telling someone's life story when most of it is fictional. A good director and writer will know how to make it appealing to the audience. I wouldn't have minded the film as a whole if they only took some liberties, but they took WAY to many here. Even Bruce's younger brother Robert didn't like the film.

I an't afraid of no ghosts!

[–] megafauna005 11 years ago

Obviously Bruce ' s real life wasn't interesting enough otherwise they wouldn't have done this.

Jesus NEVER existed! He is Judeo Christian MYTH!

[–] MovieBuffMarine 11 years ago

Obviously Bruce ' s real life wasn't interesting enough otherwise they wouldn't have done this.

Even if it was as many aficionados claim, it don't mean the movie would have been a hit.

Was his life "interesting?" I believe so.

But many assume an "interesting life" doesn't need to be embellished or tweaked for the small or big screen.

Not so.

[–] charlesdusk 10 years ago

The movie is really meant as a celebration of the Bruce Lee and what he represented. It isn't necessarily meant to be a complete biographical movie.

[–] PopperTheKungFu-Dragon 9 years ago

I agree. The first time I watched it years ago, I took it as a literal biographical movie and as such I hated it, because I was (and still am) a huge Bruce Lee fan.

But I just rewatched it and I think you've put it perfectly. I think they really celebrated his life and what he represented in this movie, but if you're looking for an actual biography of his life, this is the wrong movie to watch.

Poorly Lived and Poorly Died, Poorly Buried and No One Cried

[–] arnebarnard 10 years ago

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, nearly everything gets explained in a logical manner and NOT "explained away", if you listen to Cohens commentary....

[–] phoenixzero 10 years ago

Because the embellishing fed into the Bruce Lee legend/myth which she benefits from.

[–] parbon84 9 years ago

I thought it was obvious, it is "the bruce lee story" and not a biography.

You can read the true story pretty easily, movies don't need to tell a story in the same manner, that would be dull.

I don't understand why you can't just enjoy it, and get into the spirit of Bruce Lee that it obviously represents.

Oh well, I'm sure soon you'll have a very dry and very factual remake.

[–] Kuato_and_George 9 years ago

I'm pretty sure she was in on it.

http://www.hesaidshesaidreviewsite.com/

[–] Sonic_whovian 9 years ago

Why would she care she's been living off his name for years . She was probably just happy to make good money at the end of it

[–] PopperTheKungFu-Dragon 9 years ago



Poorly Lived and Poorly Died, Poorly Buried and No One Cried

[–] MovieBuffMarine 8 years ago

I guess we all knew Bruce better than Linda. [SARCASM]

Name one biopic that is 100% accurate about the source material. Good luck, because I don't know of any. But even if you found one, it still don't mean you "know" the person the material it is based on.

I don't know why people here act like they knew Bruce Lee better than his wife. I've seen all of his movies and read his "Tao of Jeet Kune Do" it doesn't mean I know him intimately.

If you don't like this movie, that's your call. But I've seen others that are really far-fetched like some of the Bruceploitation flicks of the late '70s.

[–] jakethemuss3-579-270853 8 years ago

I was about to post a topic about this. I like this movie, and have seen it many times. That being said, there is a ton of stuff in this film that never actually took place, a ton of stuff. The film itself is wonderfully shot, and Jason Scott Lee does a good job of portraying the legend, but anyone who knows about Bruce Lee's life knows that in this film it's some facts sprinkled in with a bunch of Hollywood BS. I really can't believe his wife was happy with the film, as so much of it is fiction.

[–] Cognoscente (2778) 4 years ago

Especially since the movie doesn't do justice to their financial situation of living in Hong Kong where Bruce's income didn't reflect his popularity. They were struggling financially to the point that they were losing a lot of weight.

[–] Popcorngal (4937) 2 years ago

Has anyone read her book? I might eventually.

[–] Cognoscente (2778) 2 years ago

She has two books - the 1975 one and the 1989 rewrite. Here are some comparisons...

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/bruceleelivestributeforum/viewtopic.php?p=32204#p32204