I'm not sure what got me thinking about this, but let's go.
You're probably familiar with this mess. A gun comes out and all kinds of noises happen. Think of the opening of The Matrix; the cops burst in on the girl(Trinity?) and you hear the clack-clack of slides working and clicks of safeties going off or hammers being cocked. Problem is they're carrying Glocks; no safety or hammer to make noises and nobody is working a slide.
Or somebody draws a revolver and you hear click-clack, but the hammer's not cocked, and that would only make one click anyway. Or someone raises a rifle and you hear a virtual chorus of metal crickets chirping, even though both hands are on the thing.
And of course we can't pass by on the volume levels. Some people have a close-range shootout in an office, firing about, oh, 30 to 50 rounds, and afterward none of them have a problem hearing.
And they have those miraculous shotguns and rifles that can be fired without any recoil or muzzle rise or any effect. Must be either some new way to manipulate physics, or magic.
The big one here is beating swords on each other. There were some swords, late period, made for sword-against-sword use; they generally left the bottom third of the blade- the area used for parrying- blunt. Parrying with a sharp edge will mess it up, nick and chip it, so leave that section thick. But broadswords?
Think about two things. First, a sword is primarily an offensive weapon, and if you're using it to block blows you can't use it to attack. The age-old answer to this is a shield; carry it on one arm and your sword in the other hand, and you can defend and attack at the same time. Second, a decent sword was expensive; we're talking premium battle-rifle price here. Every time you strike two swords together one or both of them is taking damage, often damage that can't be repaired. Small nicks can be polished out, same for a small chip, but a big, deep nick is there permanently, and if very deep weakens the blade; in extreme cases it can cause it to crack or break at the next hard shock. So you tried hard not do do that.
But in Hollywood? You can beat them against each other and everything is nice and shiny afterward. Must be some really special metal. Or magic again.
The firearms crap? They don't care about accuracy for the most part, they just want to throw in noises for dramatic effect.
With swords/axes? It's lots easier to set up a scene where only one piece is involved, as opposed to a weapon in one hand and shield on the other arm; it takes time to learn to work both properly, so to an extent I understand the problem. But it still irritates me that, at least for some things, they can't take the time to work it out properly.
Note: yes, I know there were cultures, Japan for instance, that specifically worked sword-on-sword combat; I'm not talking about them. I will also note that, from what I understand, Japanese styles emphasized deflecting parries, so as to keep the damage to the blade minimal. If other information is available, I'd be glad of it.