Hello; I'm new here. My arrival comes as part of an effort to wite an essay on the work of Godfrey Ho. Ho directed quite a number of films, most of which have been dumped on by critics as hack-work (and most of them are). He received notoriety in the late-1980s for a series of films that patched footage of bad Anglo actors wearing silly "ninja" costumes onto parts of uncompleted or poorly released HK & Phillipino films.
But circumstantial evidence is mounting that Ho
a) was actually of Korean, not Cantonese, descent;
b) was involved in the making of more than 200 films over a 30 year period, which would make him the most prolific filmmaker in history;
c) frequently produced his films"tongue-in-cheek", more as parodies than straight martial arts films;
d) helped develop several careers, including those of Phillip Ko, Hwang Jang Lee, Chang Ling, and the Liu Brothers;
e) lent his name to productions he was not involved in, while occasionally claiming credit for films he was not involved in;
f) directed under many more pseudonyms than he is known for (especially films directed in Korea - which indicates a possible political issue in his decision to move to Hong Kong and claim anscestry there).
These would seem to indicate that "Godfrey Ho" was a shared pseudonym - that is, that the name was also spurious, used by various directors engaged in hackwork - EXCEPT THAT:
1) There really is a Godfrey Ho, currently teaching film at a university in Hong Kong;
2) There are stylistic similarities (especially in the scripting & cinematography) that most of the films credited to him share;
3) Ho is credited as director for a small number of little known but highly impressive GOOD films (which would make no sense were the name used as a hack-pseudonym).
I am looking for any information that might help confirm - or refute - the implications here, so that I can write an essay that eitrher credits Ho as he deserves, or discredits his myth. Opinions are useful, but I also would like info and websites to visit.
Personally I am fascinated by Ho's work which is exciting, laughable, bewildering, and even heroic, by turns; and I suspect that a lot can be learned about how HK films were made in the "Old School" days, in any event.
I can only visit here once a week, so don't be surprised if it takes a while for me to post a thank you - but thank you advance.
