Kung Fu Panda is a terrible movie and teaches us all about the failings of modern man

[Ex-User (9086)]

Brief score:
Background art 9/10
Character art 2/10, snake was ok
Story 1/10

The story fails to introduce the characters as individuals and instead relies on proven stereotypes of their animal forms which is lazy and doesn't make any of the characters likeable or realistic. Similarly the Chinese kung fu world is a generic template that doesn't get its mythos or names and is a placeholder at best.

The main focus is on the loser panda who is chosen by fate to defeat the big cool cat who for some reason became evil after being raised in a good home. The idea that an innocent child could become evil in a good home is an impossibility and a topic for another time.

What kind of panda is Po?
- They are a Kung Fu nerd who's never tried Kung Fu as a career
- Is the embodiment of laziness
- Gives up every time, even in the final fight
- Has low self-esteem with high neuroticism
- Hates their current life
- Dreams about a miracle that would change their life
- Expects good things to be handed to them just because
- Has surprisingly good social skills

Po doesn't train, gives up, miraculously wins with a professional, the end.

Panda turns out to be a good mirror onto the common man. A mediocre, depressed, passive (and passive-aggressive) individual who is a nerd of a certain thing and escapes to their dreams and entertainment as if it were a cure for their powerless and hopeless reality. A person who only follows social norms, does what is expected of them and has things happen to them as opposed to choosing the things they want.

Showing this as the hero model serves no purpose or is deconstructive towards actual hero models. It's also very successful and relatable to a lot of would be or actual losers telling them that it's fine to pass time and escape problems until they lose all opportunities for actualizing their dreams.

As a child I would expect to be told a better bedtime story than what was presented in the movie and most people can improvise better stories than Kung Fu Panda.

 

[Cognisant]

The idea that an innocent child could become evil in a good home is an impossibility and a topic for another time.

Tai Lung adopted his father's philosophy that mastery of kung fu is all important and one's mastery of it is a measure of their rightful standing in society. This makes his evil behavior a consequence of Shifu's arrogance, granted Tai Lung is correct from a purely meritocratic perspective where merit is determined by combat ability (might makes right). However from a spiritual and interpersonal perspective he is a deeply flawed and unstable person, a warrior wielded by the sword (yes he's not a swordsman, don't take it too literally).

By contrast Po comes from a humble background and what he lacks in skill and experience he makes up for by being a genuinely kind and friendly person. In Chinese culture martial arts is as much about physical/mental health and spiritual development as it is about combat ability.

Tai Lung is the better warrior but Po is the better person, where Tai Lung makes enemies Po makes friends, when Tai Lung reads the scroll he gets angry thinking he's been tricked but Po understands the spiritual significance. Realistically Tai Lung should beat the crap out of Po and rule the village with an iron fist, however ultimately Po will still have friends, he will still be liked for who he is. Whereas Tai Lung will be forever lonely as his ability to beat people into submission is all that he's got going for him and that won't last forever.

 

[ZenRaiden]

It was not a memorable movie to be honest.

It was a childrens movie anyway so I would not read into it.

I think most children like the movie.

You kind of remind me how Slavoj ZIzkek made a bid deal analysing this movie, but I think he meant it a sociological analysis and those are worth penny or less.

I think the movie was not lazy though. I think it played into stereotypes as matter of policy to make it funny.

I think the point of the movie was exactly that it was naive. If you miss that then you are too old to watch it, or too young to understand movies.

 

[Daddy]

If I was a furry, I'd probably watch it. But I'm not.

 

[Cognisant]

I used to hate furries until I figured out that they're just unorthodox transhumanists.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Asian made movies capture their own vibe better unsurprisingly. "believe in yourself" Naruto did it better.

This has it's American spin to it and it just embarrasses us because the main character can't fight unless they are motivated by food which is a disadvantage until he sees a fucking mirror

I was around the target demo when I saw it, even back then I never cared for watching it a second time, which is indicative because Jack Black is awesome.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I used to hate furries until I figured out that they're just unorthodox transhumanists.

lol

 

[Daddy]

I used to hate furries until I figured out that they're just unorthodox transhumanists.

Sound like it could be a black mirror episode. Transhumanists using technology not only to modify humanity, but to turn people into pets and animals, against their will or not. Sounds horrifying. In a trnashumanist world, they could be like terrorists.

 

[peoplesuck]

I used to hate furries until I figured out that they're just unorthodox transhumanists.

It is a bit concerning the baphomet character is a tranny with animal parts.
Christianity and god are outlandish, but satanism and evil are quite blatant.

kung fu panda was extremely difficult to fap to
4/10

 

[scorpiomover]

The story fails to introduce the characters as individuals and instead relies on proven stereotypes of their animal forms

"The brave hero who relies upon his bravery and strength to save the day" is an archetype.

"The clever guy who comes up with a technical marvel or medicine to save the say" is also an archetype.

It was a cartoon. Cartoons picture animals because the animals are metaphoric archetypes, no different to "the brave hero" and "the clever guy".

which is lazy and doesn't make any of the characters likeable or realistic.

Po was extremely likeable, and funny. Po climbing six feet and doing a complete split, just to get some cookies, was side-splittingly funny. Po fighting for ages against his sensei just to get a doughnut, was hilarious.

Tigress is admirable. Even the praying mantis is admirable because of his ability to fight and overcome enemies much, much bigger than him.

Similarly the Chinese kung fu world is a generic template that doesn't get its mythos or names and is a placeholder at best.

The focus is on the philosophy of martial arts, not the details. If you wanted details, you should have gone to a dojo and just done martial arts yourself. Part of the movie is that point, that anyone can be a great martial artist, even an obese compulsive eater like Po.

The main focus is on the loser panda who is chosen by fate to defeat the big cool cat who for some reason became evil after being raised in a good home. The idea that an innocent child could become evil in a good home is an impossibility and a topic for another time.

Actually, it's quite common for people who were worked and worked ceaselessly as kids, to turn to the opposite of the way they were raised. The way they were raised was incredibly painful. So the opposite of a painful lifestyle would be doing the opposite of the way they were raised.

What kind of panda is Po?
- They are a Kung Fu nerd who's never tried Kung Fu as a career
- Is the embodiment of laziness
- Gives up every time, even in the final fight
- Has low self-esteem with high neuroticism
- Hates their current life
- Dreams about a miracle that would change their life
- Expects good things to be handed to them just because
- Has surprisingly good social skills

Po doesn't train, gives up, miraculously wins with a professional, the end.

Panda turns out to be a good mirror onto the common man. A mediocre, depressed, passive (and passive-aggressive) individual who is a nerd of a certain thing and escapes to their dreams and entertainment as if it were a cure for their powerless and hopeless reality. A person who only follows social norms, does what is expected of them and has things happen to them as opposed to choosing the things they want.

Po is the same character as Danny LaRusso in The Karate Kid. Both are under-achiever archetypes.

The point is that Po DOES become superb at martial arts, by training extremely hard. At one point, he is doing push-ups with one hand, which is extremely hard, even for hardcore jocks.

That demonstrates that the only thing holding under-achievers back, is lack of hard work and lack of dedication.

The question then one asks, is that knowing this, then WHY don't under-achievers work hard, since they can clearly see that by working hard, they too can achieve their dreams?

The answer is shown when Po climbs up 6 feet and does a full split, to get to some cookies. People are motivated by different things, and usually the things they are used to. Motivation is governed by Pavlovian conditioning. If you're a fat kid like Po, then your Pavlovian conditioning is with food. So food is your motivator.

If you are motivated by posting stuff on the internet, and you post 20 posts a day, then if you make your exercise routine that you have to do a push-up before every post, then you'll do 20 push-ups every day, and more when you post even more.

Moreover, if you're a teacher, and you want to motivate your students, don't beat them like Shifu does to Tai Lung. Motivate them with the things that they are already motivated by, like Shifu does with Po by motivating him with food.

Showing this as the hero model serves no purpose or is deconstructive towards actual hero models. It's also very successful and relatable to a lot of would be or actual losers telling them that it's fine to pass time and escape problems until they lose all opportunities for actualizing their dreams.

It explains what makes some people become heroes and others not. A hero isn't the greatest warrior. A hero is the guy who trains hard. Greatness comes from dedication.

So what makes some students dedicated and others not? Usually, it's because the students happened to have a teacher who motivated his/her students with motivations that were familiar to the students who became dedicated, and were unfamiliar to the students that subsequently were not dedicated.

Find a teacher that motivates his students in the ways that motivate you already, and you'll become like Po the Dragon Warrior.

Stick with your teachers who motivate their students in ways that don't motivate you, and you'll probably end up a lardass who dreams of fantasies.

Moreover, if you're a teacher, then either motivate your students in different ways, according to what motivates them, or make sure to send you un-motivated students to different teachers who use motivational techniques that your un-motivated students would respond to.

Keep all your students, and teach them all the same way, and only 6 will ever succeed, one of them will turn into a criminal like Tai Lung, and none of them will become the Dragon Warrior.

As a child I would expect to be told a better bedtime story than what was presented in the movie and most people can improvise better stories than Kung Fu Panda.

A better ending might have been to show all the kids becoming dedicated martial artists by learning to motivate themselves by appealing to what motivates each one greatly.

Also by Shifu then teaching all his students according to what motivates them.

But fantasy stories like that of Icarus and Daedalus, rarely end with practical applications like "so when you're driving a car, make sure you don't drive so fast you can't control the car, or you'll spin off the road and kill yourself."

That sort of thing is left to the imagination.

But that is the message: motivation is driven by Pavlovian conditioning. You know what motivates you already. Design your training program to make use of your existing motivations that already work on you, and you'll become dedicated quickly, and then it won't be that long before you see yourself achieve.

The other message is that of the scroll, i.e. what is confidence?

Confidence is when you realise that the scroll is empty. You can only do what you had the potential to do already. So when you reach that point where you have to go beyond your teaching, you have to accept that what you learned and what you were taught, simply brought out your potential that was there already. So doing even more than what you were taught, is simply a matter of continuing to develop your potential.

Then you can do even what your teachers never taught you, like Po does with the Wuxi Finger Hold. Then you truly are the Dragon Warrior.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Who IS watching kobra kai

 

[Cognisant]

It is a bit concerning the baphomet character is a tranny with animal parts.
Christianity and god are outlandish, but satanism and evil are quite blatant.

 

[Cognisant]

I used to hate furries until I figured out that they're just unorthodox transhumanists.

Sound like it could be a black mirror episode. Transhumanists using technology not only to modify humanity, but to turn people into pets and animals, against their will or not. Sounds horrifying. In a trnashumanist world, they could be like terrorists.

Forced? Ha ha no.
They'll do it to themselves, and those that can't will envy those that can.

Consider the current trajectory of wealth inequality and ask yourself would you rather be a wage slave being worked to death by your corporate techno-overlords (that's assuming you can get a job) or would you rather be a trillionaire's sentient pet?

Imagine if your pets received an allowance which is more than the average worker earns today and they're smart enough to buy things online and go out into the world without your supervision.

"Uh honey where's the cat?"
"I think it's doing a winery tour in Alaska, should be back in a day or two"

 

[ZenRaiden]

I think the best lesson is that violence solves problems.
Kung fu movies rarely go beyond fundamentals.
The whole psycho trip for panda leads to a good ol punch.

 

[Daddy]

I used to hate furries until I figured out that they're just unorthodox transhumanists.

Sound like it could be a black mirror episode. Transhumanists using technology not only to modify humanity, but to turn people into pets and animals, against their will or not. Sounds horrifying. In a trnashumanist world, they could be like terrorists.

Forced? Ha ha no.
They'll do it to themselves, and those that can't will envy those that can.

Consider the current trajectory of wealth inequality and ask yourself would you rather be a wage slave being worked to death by your corporate techno-overlords (that's assuming you can get a job) or would you rather be a trillionaire's sentient pet?

Imagine if your pets received an allowance which is more than the average worker earns today and they're smart enough to buy things online and go out into the world without your supervision.

"Uh honey where's the cat?"
"I think it's doing a winery tour in Alaska, should be back in a day or two"

Sounds good on the surface, but still sounds a little horrifying. Like they could reduce or change your intelligence enough that you could never go back to being you. At least with intelligence you can learn to turn it off, if you want, and live within certain means comfortably. I am jealous of my cat, but I don't want really want to be a cat. Plus she's pretty helpless, without me. I guess you are right though; that's probably what would happen. Most people don't seem to really think through things too much to care about the downsides.

 

[leonacrawford]

This is a very good and meaningful movie, I have watched all the parts of the movie with the app inat tv pro apk modsuper, I rate it 9/10.