Do I need to be Like Really Strong to Climb?

I saw Sylvester Stallone in Cliffhanger and I know I'll never be strong enough to climb like that.

That's good. Because what Stallone was doing was heaving himself up a rock face, not climbing. (I was actually grateful that the portrayal of climbing in the movie sucked so hard, because it took my mind off of how bad it was in every other respect.)

Being strong helps climbing, certainly, but some very good climbers can't do a single pull-up. What is far more important is balance and technique.

I'm not sure what you mean by technique
Technique is a body of learned maneuvers to help you climb. I'll use as an example, the flag. If you are off-balance in a certain position, extending your leg out to the side, without resting the foot on a hold, will change the balance, and may make the difference between falling or making the move. This is called a 'flag'.

Some techniques you will learn through experimentation and some through instruction, some through watching other climbers climb. When watching other climbers, pay attention to those of similar builld, who are not too much better than you are. It's a treat to watch the best climbers in the gym, but when it comes to learning from them, it's like they were speaking another language.

Is Climbing Good Cardio-Vascular Excercise?
Sadly, it isn't. While it is certainly strenuous, climbing doesn't maintain the target heart rate for long enough to do you much good. Some climbers build endurance by going up and down a climb several times in succession. If muscle fatigue doesn't get you first, this might help with CV fitness. It should also help work off any sins you may accumulated.

I'm overweight and not very active. I'd like to get involved with climbing, because it sounnds cool, but I'm afraid I'll suck and everyone will openly scoff.
You probably will suck, but if you're interested, try it out. Know that it takes some time to build strength and endurance and technique, but it's fun to climb at the limit of your ability, even if that ability isn't very much.

And generally climbers are very encouraging. But if they are scornful of your lack of ability, fuck 'em. You aren't there to prove anything to them. You're there to have a good time.

In terms of overall retarded presentation of climbing, how would you rate Cliffhanger, Mission Impossible: 2 and Vertical Limit?
That's a tough one, but here goes.

• Vertical Limit is mainly about mountaineering, and I don't know much about it. But those I've talked to who do hated it more than I did. Just the premise of mountaineering with nitro-glycerin strapped to your back is pretty retarded. Plus they sacrificed five lives to save one, and seemed to think it a bargain. Talk about needing team-building excercises.
• Mission Impossible: 2 had two advantages: it didn't pretend to be realistic, and they had Tom Cruise do some actual climbing moves. But I don't know what Ethan Hunt was thinking when he made that idiot leap. Maybe he'd just realised that there was no way down from that tower of rock and decided to end it there, then changed his mind. (And speaking of falling from great heights, what the hell happened to John Woo? If you strained out all the goodness of MI: 2 you wouldn't have as much as the opening scene of Hardboiled. He's been getting too much fatty food or something.)
• Stallone took himself as seriously as usual in making Cliffhanger, "auditioning" cliffs to use before deciding on the Dolomites in Italy. Too bad he didn't watch what climbers actually did. Why is he driving bolts into the cliff face when he's not clipping a rope into them? And why does he even where a harness if he's not tied in? Sadly, the climbing wasn't the worst part of the movie. I think Cliffhanger takes the retarded climbing movie award. And don't worry: harnesses never just unravel like that.

Email Rockhopper