• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Into The Sun Reviews

Hello mink,

I wanted to tell you that you did a really good job on directing Into the Sun. Actually, I was pretty skeptical about your work because I've seen your first directing film titled Full Clip. I didn't enjoy that film that much however I did like one specific sequence that you put in for that film where the camera keeps rotating around the characters at the table. It was pretty decent and somewhat reminded me the works of Brian De Palma or Quentin Tarantino. But overall, the movie was not that good but I respected your work. And I was hoping that you were going to do better for Into the Sun and you nailed it. It had wonderful production qualities in it which I was very impressed with despite to a low budget film and I know the location of Japan is very beautiful and exotic.

I'm curious doing Full Clip was what you intended for? And do you enjoy working on that film?

I met Steven Seagal for first time last Wednesday when I went to his concert in Cleveland, Ohio. And he knew that I am a deaf person because my mother kept popping up signs to him while he was singing. I thought it was funny when he noticed the notes that my mom was showing him. She was telling him that I have been his biggest fan since I was 6 years old and stuff. I would love to work with him in a movie one day.

Isn't that true that he wants to do a movie something like "The Karate Kid"? maybe pitch in some ideas such as training a deaf person instead? It'd be interesting to see how things pan out.
 
sydneyalias1325 said:
I met Steven Seagal for first time last Wednesday when I went to his concert in Cleveland, Ohio. And he knew that I am a deaf person because my mother kept popping up signs to him while he was singing. I thought it was funny when he noticed the notes that my mom was showing him. She was telling him that I have been his biggest fan since I was 6 years old and stuff. I would love to work with him in a movie one day.
Hey man I saw you there!
 
sydneyalias1325 said:
Hello mink,

I wanted to tell you that you did a really good job on directing Into the Sun. Actually, I was pretty skeptical about your work because I've seen your first directing film titled Full Clip. I didn't enjoy that film that much however I did like one specific sequence that you put in for that film where the camera keeps rotating around the characters at the table. It was pretty decent and somewhat reminded me the works of Brian De Palma or Quentin Tarantino. But overall, the movie was not that good but I respected your work. And I was hoping that you were going to do better for Into the Sun and you nailed it. It had wonderful production qualities in it which I was very impressed with despite to a low budget film and I know the location of Japan is very beautiful and exotic.

I'm curious doing Full Clip was what you intended for? And do you enjoy working on that film?

I met Steven Seagal for first time last Wednesday when I went to his concert in Cleveland, Ohio. And he knew that I am a deaf person because my mother kept popping up signs to him while he was singing. I thought it was funny when he noticed the notes that my mom was showing him. She was telling him that I have been his biggest fan since I was 6 years old and stuff. I would love to work with him in a movie one day.

Isn't that true that he wants to do a movie something like "The Karate Kid"? maybe pitch in some ideas such as training a deaf person instead? It'd be interesting to see how things pan out.
What's up syd?... Thank you very much I am glad you enjoyed Into the Sun. Again it's so great the true Seagal fans get what I was doing and how much I respect the guy so it's a pleasure to answer your questions.
Let's see FULL CLIP. I did enjoy shooting Full Clip it was a tremendous challenge to do as the budget was well under a million dollars and the cast mostly musicians were all on various tours or recording records so we had scramble with the schedule. I really like the tone of the picture(I write comic books) and there are some great moments amidst the story I mean some shining moments and the cast was so funny(the scene in cementary still kills me). Thanks for noticing that shot in the basement as well. It has played very well both on cable and video so no complaints. I get alot of compliments on it from very unlikely sources. It as well opened alot of doors as getting any movie made in Hollywood is next to impossible and getting one done with Lions Gate is a big Deal for a first timer. So I thank the Producers for giving me the movie and Lions Gate for running with it(Love the box art). Could it have been better? I can always do better. Busta is a dear friend for years and it was a pleasure to work with him. Its cool his new album is number one this week he deserves it(a very talented guy)...
In regards to your biographical picture idea. Steven is a storyteller so if there is a story there I would try to get it on paper(an outline couple of pages at most) at least for yourself to start with and then move forward accordingly. Hope his concert was as good as the LA show.... peace mink
 
mink said:
What's up syd?... Thank you very much I am glad you enjoyed Into the Sun. Again it's so great the true Seagal fans get what I was doing and how much I respect the guy so it's a pleasure to answer your questions.
Let's see FULL CLIP. I did enjoy shooting Full Clip it was a tremendous challenge to do as the budget was well under a million dollars and the cast mostly musicians were all on various tours or recording records so we had scramble with the schedule. I really like the tone of the picture(I write comic books) and there are some great moments amidst the story I mean some shining moments and the cast was so funny(the scene in cementary still kills me). Thanks for noticing that shot in the basement as well. It has played very well both on cable and video so no complaints. I get alot of compliments on it from very unlikely sources. It as well opened alot of doors as getting any movie made in Hollywood is next to impossible and getting one done with Lions Gate is a big Deal for a first timer. So I thank the Producers for giving me the movie and Lions Gate for running with it(Love the box art). Could it have been better? I can always do better. Busta is a dear friend for years and it was a pleasure to work with him. Its cool his new album is number one this week he deserves it(a very talented guy)...
In regards to your biographical picture idea. Steven is a storyteller so if there is a story there I would try to get it on paper(an outline couple of pages at most) at least for yourself to start with and then move forward accordingly. Hope his concert was as good as the LA show.... peace mink

Not too much here, just doing some tour around at a campus for camp abilities in brockport, ny. It's a program for blind, visually impaired and deaf blind children who can do activities to do success.

Other than that, I'm just toying around for more ideas for a new story that I'm working on right now. Actually, I've been working on it for a year and 4 months now. I want to be a writer and director for movies. It'll be interestng to see how I'd pull things off to make it out there to become first deaf writer/director. I am aware that it won't be that easy at all but I'm not giving up my dream of what I want to become. I personally don't hate several movies. I just enjoy every kind but I do make comments of some things that disapproved me but entertainment is what I'm looking for.

That's why I respected your work even though Full Clip wasn't that great. I think I didn't like it because of fast tracking camera movements which turns me off. It actually annoys me from most recent action films including Michael Bay's films.

I believe that every director has a vision to make things more creative but some of them can be a hack by ripping off some movies.

In reality, Steven Seagal inspired me to do action movies when I was very young and I have been pusuading that goal since that time but for past few years, I felt that I'd do better behind the camera and do stuff rather being on the picture.

I truly miss seeing old-school action films such as Lethal Weapon films, Seagal's earlier films, Dirty Harry, Demoltion Man, Die Hard movies and such. I was unpleased with movies until I saw Mission Impossible 3 and it actually blew me away because I haven't had my head spinning in long time probably since 1995's Die Hard With A Vegenance. I love a movie that has lot of fast-paced action like that. Sometimes I have always wonder what people are actually looking for and they just whine and complain...giving harsh comments about how bad a film was. I even enjoyed Wych Kaosayananda's Ballistic: Ecks Vs. Sever. I loved the mood and tone of the film by itself and it actually brought back old-fashioned action which I loved. But of course I hated the writing but I still liked it. I felt that direction was more important than writing because to me, it seems that the director is responsible for interpreting the story and take it to be shown on screen. People keep saying that director was not responsible for doing camera techniques and it was director of photography...same goes with editing for an editor. I tend to not believe in that because I felt that director was actually working closely to them. So I don't know who's right and wrong but what do you think from your experience since you're the director? So what a director is really responsible for?
 
Good question... In my opinion The Director is ultimatly responsible for everything or at least he or she has influenced everything. Granted in todays film making process it is a far more collaborative process and perhaps the amount of total control a director has today is decided on a case by case basis. The writer, editor, DP, Art Director, producers and others play a key and crucial role but they should be part of the overall army under the directors vision not individual soldiers with their own campaigns. Of course it also is directly dependent who is hired in those roles and when you hire talented people to work with you their talent, flair, style, experience and passion will be infused into the movie forever but in the end that person should work to fullfill the vision of the director. I have never heard of DP doing his own thing verses what a director with a vision wants to do. I dont think that work experience would work out for either of the parties. Directing is like captaining a ship or running an army and you are responsible for all of the movies components and staff's well being and everyday you must inform the army of their duties for the day and in your opinion how we will accomplish it. After you have delivered the days orders your crew then will execute those orders to the best of their abilities. You will find that the great filmmakers of today (Singer, Cameron, Scorcesse, Raimi, Nolan, Tarentino, Rodriguez etc... work in this capacity. They also never will let anyone make a decision for them. This is not to say a smart director wont listen to good or bad ideas. So in answer to your question I think a Director is responsible for everything and yes theyre extentuating circumstances in every case but as a whole I think a Director should stand by his or her work regardless of the outcome good or bad and learn, love it and live by it. After the all the goal of any director is to tell the best story they can and then move onto the next story. What is really cool is when they hit the slate(clapboard) and roll the camera the movie from then on is just what the camera lens see's and the sound man hears. All that work from all those talented artists gets widdled down to a beautiful magic moment on celluloid..That moment captured on film is what directing is all about.... peace mink
 
-The Director is not responsible of the Steven chosen doubles, both photography and fight stunts, is Steven himself who impose his viewpoint over that of others.
-The Director is not responsible of the stock footage of a film, are the producers.
-The Director is not responsible of the fast time bad editing post-production and poor CGI effect, are the producers again.

What means that?The DTV Director movie is a puppet of his poor professional life circumstances.
 
latinojazz said:
-The Director is not responsible of the Steven chosen doubles, both photography and fight stunts, is Steven himself who impose his viewpoint over that of others.
-The Director is not responsible of the stock footage of a film, are the producers.
-The Director is not responsible of the fast time bad editing post-production and poor CGI effect, are the producers again.

What means that?The DTV Director movie is a puppet of his poor professional life circumstances.
Latin Jazz(cool name) I see your point. I respectively disagree about the puppet thought from this point though... if as a Director(working in Hollywood) you accept a job then you accept the parameters within that job completey. When your name is on the titles as director you take responsibilty no matter what happens. No one will say wow that was badly produced...so you roll up the sleeves and do your best with what you got. Scripts Ideas start bad they dont get bad...low budgets stay low... Each director makes there own choices and to pass that choice off on someone elses plate or too point fingers at others for lack of effort is a waste of time in the directing process in my opinion... If someone fully understands the process a director goes through then perhaps yes your points are very accurate in certain cases when arbitrary financial decisions effect the film. But you must negotiate through the process pointing the best foot forward in each area of the picture always. You reach for people who will keep your vision in tact and then roll with the punches as those people are either hired or not. In life there are no asterisks only final results so why should it be different in features. Yes all films will have budget, talent, creative and producer constraints until it is your money on the table paying the bills thats the way Hollywood works. Its this process that a career is judged on. Theyre is really is no difference between the approach on a DTV or a Studio picture its just the parameters that are attached which is usely money which translates to more time and better staff. I was well aware of the process before I went in and dealt with each situation both personal and production accordingly. They were battles I won which are on screen and they were battles that were lost and those are not there. But in this day in age when directing a job is a feat in an un of itself and theyre are thousands directors in the DGA all looking for work... You gotta make your own choices! Thanks for the feedback peace ... respect ... mink
 

Administrator

Administrator
Staff member
suziwong said:
Thank you Mr. Mink for your answers.. We tired you sooo much.. :)

Craig its really very expensive if I want with int.courier I am sure it comes 100USD huh ??? May be next month I can buy..Thank you for link..

sincerely

suzi
Suzi, i think you can select 'standard service' which is free.
 
mink said:
Latin Jazz(cool name) I see your point. I respectively disagree about the puppet thought from this point though... if as a Director(working in Hollywood) you accept a job then you accept the parameters within that job completey. When your name is on the titles as director you take responsibilty no matter what happens. No one will say wow that was badly produced...so you roll up the sleeves and do your best with what you got. Scripts Ideas start bad they dont get bad...low budgets stay low... Each director makes there own choices and to pass that choice off on someone elses plate or too point fingers at others for lack of effort is a waste of time in the directing process in my opinion... If someone fully understands the process a director goes through then perhaps yes your points are very accurate in certain cases when arbitrary financial decisions effect the film. But you must negotiate through the process pointing the best foot forward in each area of the picture always. You reach for people who will keep your vision in tact and then roll with the punches as those people are either hired or not. In life there are no asterisks only final results so why should it be different in features. Yes all films will have budget, talent, creative and producer constraints until it is your money on the table paying the bills thats the way Hollywood works. Its this process that a career is judged on. Theyre is really is no difference between the approach on a DTV or a Studio picture its just the parameters that are attached which is usely money which translates to more time and better staff. I was well aware of the process before I went in and dealt with each situation both personal and production accordingly. They were battles I won which are on screen and they were battles that were lost and those are not there. But in this day in age when directing a job is a feat in an un of itself and theyre are thousands directors in the DGA all looking for work... You gotta make your own choices! Thanks for the feedback peace ... respect ... mink
They aren´t Hollywood directors...are DTV B-class guys to be puppets of the producers.

Mink, there´s a great littledragon thread that explains very well all that stuff.
Then you will understand everything.

Search and Read the thread.It´s really interesting.For example, a lot of DTV movies are made all around of stock footage and then make the script based in the stock footage and the new photography filmed is minimal, movies as Second In Command, The Marksman, The Mechanik(The Russian Specialist)and Today You Die are in that way.

It´s a business.The less cost, the more profits.Almost the only important money the producers pay are to the stars(Seagal, Van Damme, Snipes, Lundgren)

See you.Littledragon knows a lot about it
 
latinojazz said:
They aren´t Hollywood directors...are DTV B-class guys to be puppets of the producers.

Mink, there´s a great littledragon thread that explains very well all that stuff.
Then you will understand everything.

Search and Read the thread.It´s really interesting.For example, a lot of DTV movies are made all around of stock footage and then make the script based in the stock footage and the new photography filmed is minimal, movies as Second In Command, The Marksman, The Mechanik(The Russian Specialist)and Today You Die are in that way.

It´s a business.The less cost, the more profits.Almost the only important money the producers pay are to the stars(Seagal, Van Damme, Snipes, Lundgren)

See you.Littledragon knows a lot about it
Like I said these directors except the parameters(even in B movies) and yes I assume that some of these type of movies may even be directed by producers or other third parties. You are talking about an extreme case and specific type of film but if you as a director were told the parameters that you would only shoot a certain percentage of the film or the x amount of the film was stock footage and you agree then you as the director except those terms and you work will be judged accordingly. Buying stock footage or entire action scenes from studio and other movies and then adding new actors in is a common approach in lower budget film making. It was truly pioneered by roger cormon where he just reused the same action scenes or rubber monster over and over. I was approached a few years ago with an under 10 mill heist movie with such an equation and I politely refused as the original movie had been directed by a friend of mine for a major studio(which I found very humerous.) I understand your point fully but I believe all artists in Hollywood no matter what you do must take full responsibility for all their decisions in regards to their careers some are good some are bad. Its the law of batting averages and stop making their decisions other peoples problems. If a producer is a producer who only cares about the bottom line most likely he is not going to have some huge artistic revelation during the middle of your shoot so thats who you are working with going in thats who you are working with coming out.... peace mink ....
 
mink said:
Good question... In my opinion The Director is ultimatly responsible for everything or at least he or she has influenced everything. Granted in todays film making process it is a far more collaborative process and perhaps the amount of total control a director has today is decided on a case by case basis. The writer, editor, DP, Art Director, producers and others play a key and crucial role but they should be part of the overall army under the directors vision not individual soldiers with their own campaigns. Of course it also is directly dependent who is hired in those roles and when you hire talented people to work with you their talent, flair, style, experience and passion will be infused into the movie forever but in the end that person should work to fullfill the vision of the director. I have never heard of DP doing his own thing verses what a director with a vision wants to do. I dont think that work experience would work out for either of the parties. Directing is like captaining a ship or running an army and you are responsible for all of the movies components and staff's well being and everyday you must inform the army of their duties for the day and in your opinion how we will accomplish it. After you have delivered the days orders your crew then will execute those orders to the best of their abilities. You will find that the great filmmakers of today (Singer, Cameron, Scorcesse, Raimi, Nolan, Tarentino, Rodriguez etc... work in this capacity. They also never will let anyone make a decision for them. This is not to say a smart director wont listen to good or bad ideas. So in answer to your question I think a Director is responsible for everything and yes theyre extentuating circumstances in every case but as a whole I think a Director should stand by his or her work regardless of the outcome good or bad and learn, love it and live by it. After the all the goal of any director is to tell the best story they can and then move onto the next story. What is really cool is when they hit the slate(clapboard) and roll the camera the movie from then on is just what the camera lens see's and the sound man hears. All that work from all those talented artists gets widdled down to a beautiful magic moment on celluloid..That moment captured on film is what directing is all about.... peace mink

Thanks for your opinion, mink. Actually, that's what I was exactly thinking about. The reason I brought this up because of couple of tv shows that I watched. They were Alias and Lost. A lot of people kept saying that the directing doesn't change that much for following in the writing process because the story that was planned out is still there. I kept telling them that it's not just all that because I do notice the difference in the mood and style of an episode by itself especially that goes with camera techniques that were used in each episode. I kept arguing with Alias fans in choosing who is the best director for Alias aside of J.J. Abrams who was the creator of the show. We all know that J.J. Abrams is the best but I don't see in that way because it is his own show and it is his own vision so I don't count that. So people chose Ken Olin as the best director next to J.J. Abrams. They didn't really state their own reasons of why Ken Olin is the best but they just keep saying this "Because he is the top director of the series and he did most of the episodes and did big episodes too." I tend to not believe in that and felt that it was not the answer so obviously they followed by a big reputation. Personally, I chose Jack Bender as the best director because of his style and vision that actually kept me moved and excited by each episode that he directed. That goes with Lost too. It was kinda of funny that I stopped watching Lost 2nd season after I got bored with the show but only came back to watch the episodes that he directed including the big finale which I felt that it was the best-directed episode ever by him.

So, I can't really argue with that and sometimes it gets irratating.

Interesting thought from you about what latinojazz posted about stock footage and stuff. Sometimes can't always be right until someone hears from a right person who experienced through this stuff which proves the point.
 
sydneyalias1325 said:
oh also...aside of that, I notice the similiarities on the directing which came from a trademark or such for the episodes that a same director directs.
Excellent point Syd... Check out the Soprano's to even further your point. Steve Buscemi's work this last season was light years ahead of the rest the episodes. His camera placement, blocking, timing and pacing was hands above the rest. One could assume all those years of being around a-list directors and playing wiseguys helped him tremendously. Most episodic television is shot like a rotating baseball team. They have three to five directors and their teams of people DP, AD, ART, ETC that rotate the episodes and one or two Exec and line producers who keep the shows similar in tone and setup and work on all of them. Directing episodic is art in an of itself. I have a dear friend who shoots alot of CSI,ER, Vegas and others. I have watched him work and its a totaly different ballgame in regards to approach, technical technique, camera placement and the list goes on... Television has come a long way from where it was and respect to the giants who do it week in and week out.. But as far as certain directors hitting a groove or clicking with a creator more than others on certain shows its bound to happen... If you look a directors background it will tell you alot. James Cameron started in art department they fore his attention to detail is noticable. Ridley Scott commercial director - selling a vision or thought in one shot. Quentin was a writer... Kudos to you picking up on all that... peace mink
 
mink said:
Excellent point Syd... Check out the Soprano's to even further your point. Steve Buscemi's work this last season was light years ahead of the rest the episodes. His camera placement, blocking, timing and pacing was hands above the rest. One could assume all those years of being around a-list directors and playing wiseguys helped him tremendously. Most episodic television is shot like a rotating baseball team. They have three to five directors and their teams of people DP, AD, ART, ETC that rotate the episodes and one or two Exec and line producers who keep the shows similar in tone and setup and work on all of them. Directing episodic is art in an of itself. I have a dear friend who shoots alot of CSI,ER, Vegas and others. I have watched him work and its a totaly different ballgame in regards to approach, technical technique, camera placement and the list goes on... Television has come a long way from where it was and respect to the giants who do it week in and week out.. But as far as certain directors hitting a groove or clicking with a creator more than others on certain shows its bound to happen... If you look a directors background it will tell you alot. James Cameron started in art department they fore his attention to detail is noticable. Ridley Scott commercial director - selling a vision or thought in one shot. Quentin was a writer... Kudos to you picking up on all that... peace mink
Thanks for a nice feedback based on what I see things about directing stuff. To myself, I always keep thinking that I might would be wrong due to people's negativity comments and such.

I haven't watched all episodes of The Sopranos however I do own all 5 seasons on dvd. I bought those because I'm planning on watching those sometime when I get a chance and for a particular reason...Jack Bender. He directed few episodes for The Sopranos. He did "Another Toothpick", "...To Save Us All From Satan's Power", "The Weight", and last one that he recently directed for 6th season which was 3rd episode which was why he hasn't been around for Lost in a short while.

The very first thing that I ever noticed about camera techniques that came from a director was in 2003 when I was watching Child's Play 3 which was also directed by Jack Bender then I suddenly realized that I actually liked his work after what he did with a HUGE midseason episode that was aired after super bowl in January 2003 for Alias which I fell in love with his direction so that's when I started picking things up about directing.

So I began watching films that is directed by Brian De Palma which is known of using a long single take or a sequence that the camera wouldn't stop moving during an extremely suspenseful scene that came from Carrie during a horrific sequence before the pig blood is being dumped onto Sissy Speack's character and also a train sequence revolving Al Pacino's character in Carlito's Way while he was being chased by a mafia group or whatever the name was. I also began watching Alfonso Cuaron movies too and he's a well known for non-stop camera tracking movements that just keeps going on and on at each frame. I even argued that Harry Potter 3 was the best of all out of 4.

All of directors that you mentioned, all of them were good and every director have ups and downs in their career. Sometimes I began to disapprove of how people praise so much for a director like Quentin Tarantino or David Fincher. Two of them are good directors but I don't quite feel entertained by their work so I felt that both of them were simply just "good". And I just respect them for their work that they've done, that's all. Uwe Boll is even considered as the worst director of all in cinema history but I find his films quite enjoyable at times but still, the direction was terrible and there were few shots that he used which I actually liked which was the camera that keep moving at some certain scenes so I respected him for what he has done.
 
sydneyalias1325 said:
Thanks for a nice feedback based on what I see things about directing stuff. To myself, I always keep thinking that I might would be wrong due to people's negativity comments and such.

I haven't watched all episodes of The Sopranos however I do own all 5 seasons on dvd. I bought those because I'm planning on watching those sometime when I get a chance and for a particular reason...Jack Bender. He directed few episodes for The Sopranos. He did "Another Toothpick", "...To Save Us All From Satan's Power", "The Weight", and last one that he recently directed for 6th season which was 3rd episode which was why he hasn't been around for Lost in a short while.

The very first thing that I ever noticed about camera techniques that came from a director was in 2003 when I was watching Child's Play 3 which was also directed by Jack Bender then I suddenly realized that I actually liked his work after what he did with a HUGE midseason episode that was aired after super bowl in January 2003 for Alias which I fell in love with his direction so that's when I started picking things up about directing.

So I began watching films that is directed by Brian De Palma which is known of using a long single take or a sequence that the camera wouldn't stop moving during an extremely suspenseful scene that came from Carrie during a horrific sequence before the pig blood is being dumped onto Sissy Speack's character and also a train sequence revolving Al Pacino's character in Carlito's Way while he was being chased by a mafia group or whatever the name was. I also began watching Alfonso Cuaron movies too and he's a well known for non-stop camera tracking movements that just keeps going on and on at each frame. I even argued that Harry Potter 3 was the best of all out of 4.

All of directors that you mentioned, all of them were good and every director have ups and downs in their career. Sometimes I began to disapprove of how people praise so much for a director like Quentin Tarantino or David Fincher. Two of them are good directors but I don't quite feel entertained by their work so I felt that both of them were simply just "good". And I just respect them for their work that they've done, that's all. Uwe Boll is even considered as the worst director of all in cinema history but I find his films quite enjoyable at times but still, the direction was terrible and there were few shots that he used which I actually liked which was the camera that keep moving at some certain scenes so I respected him for what he has done.
Opinions are never wrong they are as they sound... opinions. Film is an art as in all art 50% of the audience will love it and 50% of the audience will hate it and thats the way it works... Im glad you enjoy the directors work that you have mentioned and keep enjoying them...You also seem educated in the filmmaking process and thats cool too.. The fans are the ones that keep us all working behind the lends so I thank you for buying those DVD's and caring enough to notice the details in the work and the subtle difference in each director brings to his or her work... best to you and keep enjoying... peace mink

Theres a great book called Directing the Film its AFI curric... If you havent read its a easy read and full of great insight into the process...
 

Donald Lee Wilkey

A Steven Seagal fan
It was comical and enlightening once again

to see Steven Seagal get up from his bar seat upon receiving a flicked pebble to his chest from one of the yakuza gang members and then use his devastatingly fast and powerful aikido flips and throws to protect himself against all those yakuza urchins in this film
Then to hear Steven's charater say to the yakuza, "Go home and learn how to fight!"