The trend with recent animated flicks is for them to be cute, with lots of camouflaged adult humor, and to provide an uplifting message for the youngsters to take away. Kung Fu Panda follows that trend. It is adorably uplifting, and so funny in parts that I had to stifle a few snorts. (Yes, I'm dead serious.)
Okay, sure. It's geared at kids. And don't get me wrong - it's a terrific kids movie. And it does teach a great (although a little tired) lesson: We should all believe in ourselves. But the best part of the movie is the journey to that message. It's so much fun. And the animation itself is flawless. Jack Black's terrific voice acting provides much of the humor, but there are also sight gags, situational ironies, and perfectly executed sound effects (especially in the slow motion bits) that add to the comedy.
Set in ancient China, the oddly-titled film concerns Po (Black), a panda bear who is quite obviously adopted by his noodle-making father - a goose. But Po doesn't love noodles...he loves Kung Fu! In the meantime, Oogway (Randall Duk Kim), the wise tortoise of Jade Palace, has had a vision that the powerful and crazy Tia Lung (Ian McShane) will escape from prison and destroy the entire nearby village. He must, therefore, choose the next great Dragon Warrior to defeat Tia Lung. Among the potential title-holders are five students of Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman): Master Monkey (Jackie Chan), Master Tigress (Angelina Jolie), Master Viper (Lucy Liu), Master Mantis (Seth Rogen), and Master Crane (David Cross). In a funny mixup involving fireworks, Po himself is chosen by Oogway.
This leads to Shifu's outrage and the Kung Fu Masters' befuddlement, as Po is too fat to even climb the stairs to the Kung Fu temple. But, as these kinds of movies go, Shifu discovers Po's hidden talents. And so forth goes the film.
It's truly entertaining to watch all the martial arts action in Kung Fu Panda. A friend of mine noticed certain allusions to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, particularly with the fast and loose liberties the film takes with the laws of physics. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the film is one of the better kid-flicks I've seen in a long time, but I would say that it's probably the funniest and most engaging animated movie I've seen in the last year or two.
VERDICT:
I really liked this movie. Sure, it's a kids movie. And yes, it's animated. But it's creatively fun and funny. And it's cool to watch all the awesome martial arts effects. So in a way, it's hard to review this movie. I don't want to just say, "It was cute." But I also don't want to be too tough on it. In the end, I'll just say that I was fairly entertained, and it was a pretty good way to pass a (sober) Friday night.
So, should you spend your money? If you're into animated, kid's, or non-offensive movies that provide enough adult humor to keep you from pulling out your hair, YES. If you're not, SKIP IT. 8.5/10.
Posts
5 hours ago
1 comments:
First, a few criticisms (since you asked).
This quote: "so funny in parts that I had to stifle a few snorts. (Yes, I'm dead serious.)"- I can't tell what to make of this. Are you being sarcastic about it being funny, implying that the humor's extent was merely stifling a few snorts? Or are stifled snorts hard sought gold mines? If the former, I'd remove the "dead serious" part, because that clause makes the statement sound as if you have to prove to your audience that you are, in fact, not being sarcastic. If the latter, I'd use something other than snorts because in terms of norms of humor, I'd say they're middling at best.
Secondly, and this is something that also affects your other reviews, I like the end "verdict" but I think you come on too strong. The bold/capitalization within the summary makes it seem like you're yelling/more enthusiastic than warranted (since you do it every time). Occasionally, for that rare 10/10, it might be warranted, but otherwise lowkey serves as an effective summation, ending with a solid period instead of an offputting exclamation.
I might also define by what you mean by "kids movie." As in, what specifically makes it attractive to kids, and how could this make it unattractive to adult viewers. I do like how you judged it for what it was, though, instead of what it wasn't (ie, a kids' movie, not Citizen Kane).
But I think you hit the high notes for a good, publicized film review. You have a gimick, if not your own style, but once you've written enough you'll get there. Keep up the good work!
Post a Comment