Kung Fu Panda -- destiny and faith

Directors: Mark Osborne & John Stevenson, 2008.

Like the Olympics, there is a top tier of animation studios, led by Pixar, Disney and Dreamworks. Three recent movies from these studios highlight the hierarchy: WALL-E was clearly the best animated movie of 2008. Bolt, the recent release from Disney was its best in years, but not in the Pixar realm. Kung Fu Panda from Dreamworks is a close third to Bolt but not as good as its earlier (and best) release Shrek.

The movie starts with a classic animation look and feel as Po, the giant panda joins his kung fu heroes the Fabulous Five (Tigress, Monkey, Viper, Crane and Mantiss) to save the Chinese world. These images with sharp angles and bright colors dissolve into more realistic animation when Po awakes from this dream. He is still a large and ungainly panda. He is no kung fu panda.

When Po tells his dad, Mr. Ping the noodle maker, that he had the dream, he misinterprets this as the sign: "You are almost ready to be entrusted with the secret ingredient of my secret ingredient soup. And then you will fulfill your destiny and take over the restaurant just as I took it over from my father." Destiny is one of the themes. But Panda's lineage is in question as his father is a goose. And destiny is in question as Panda wants nothing more than to be a kung fu master.

When Grand Master Oogway, the old turtle, announces that it is time to appoint the new Dragon Warrior, Po just wants to watch the ceremony. Little does he realize that events will conspire to make him this warrior.

Against the wishes of Master Shifu and the fabulous five, who each wanted this great honor, it falls to Po. The pudgy panda must learn to be the wise warrior. In so doing, he must fulfill his destiny, this destiny, and so save the region from the evil snow leopard Tai Lung, a former apprentice of Shifu who turned to the dark side.

Drawing heavily from Star Wars, Kung Fu Panda plays out to a formulaic finale, with good battling evil, Panda vs Leopard. Shifu is a version of Yoda, even looking a little like the wizened Jedi master. Tai Lung is the dark Darth Vader, once the most promising student now wanting total power. And Po is an unlikely Luke, diminutive in spirit if not girth.

Kung Fu Panda has an excellent voice cast, led by Jack Black as Po and Dustin Hoffman as Shifu, and supported by Angelina Jolie (Tigress), Ian McShane (Tai Lung), and even kung fu star Jackie Chan (Monkey). Its animation is good. But its script is clichéd and pseudo-philosophic. For example: "Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the present." Or, "One often meets his destiny on the road he takes to avoid it."

The film splits time between the training of the heroes and the three major fight sequences: the first between the five and Tai Lung, the second between the master and the grown padwan, and the finale between Tai Lung and Po. In the training, one of the lessons of the film emerges. While Shifu tries to make Po a warrior in the same way he has done before, he fails miserably. But when he realizes Po is different and is motivated differently, he tailors his training to Po's unique personality. When he does this Po immediately responds. It is almost instinctive. When we treat everyone alike we are making cookie cutter characters. When we find their distinct styles and tastes, and customize the motivation to these distinctives, we can help them become the people they were made to be.

That brings us to the major theme of the movie: destiny. Oogway says, "There are no accidents." No accidents, no coincidences, only destiny. And we don't control destiny, we simply discover it and follow it. There is some biblical truth in this. God is sovereign. He is in control. There are no accidents. He is moving humankind through a history, some of which is still being written, to a finale of good and evil where good, in the person of Jesus Christ, wins out finally over evil, in the person of Satan. As followers of Jesus, we must discover his path for our lives and follow it. Serving him, we help restore the created order.

But this all takes faith, belief. Shifu demonstrates a lack of faith early in the movie. When Oogway tells him he has no control, but must believe in the chosen one, Po the "Dragon Warrior," he finds this hard to accept. "No, you just need to believe," Oogway tells him. He is called to faith in a "Savior" that does not fit his expectations. He imagined a famous warrior and he found a fat weakling. He looked at the externals. This was similar to the coming of Messiah. People expected a great warrior and they saw a lowly carpenter. Outward appearances can be deceiving.

Finally, there is the issue of self-acceptance. The only reason Po endured the hours of painful training, he tells Shifu, is "because I thought if anyone can change me, can make me not me, it was you!" He wanted to unbecome, to become someone else. He was not happy. His destiny was to be a pudgy noodle-maker, and he did not like that. He did not like himself. But the message that changes it for him comes not from Shifu but from his dad: "To make something special you just have to believe it's special." This simplistic message works in the film but is not true to life. We cannot simply believe we are special and we are so because we believe. That is magical thinking. It has no foundation. Yet, it is true that we are all special, uniquely created by the loving creator. We are all loved for who we are. But we can be special in this sense because of the underlying reason -- God made us this way. And he is in the process of changing us from within to become like him, beautiful beyond imagination! That is, if we let him. So, believe that you are special, not as an act of magic but based on biblical truth.

Copyright ©2008, Martin Baggs

The Grocer's Son (Le Fils de l'épicier) -- a simpler life

Director: Eric Guirado, 2008.

The Grocer's Son is a beautiful French film. A coming-of-age story merges with a dysfunctional family plot. But rather than being a Hollywood comedy, it is a charming low-key movie, brimming over with a sense of reality that most American films avoid. Part of this is due to the fact that many of the characters in the film are actually real people, not actors, and they are repeating their everyday experiences in front of the camera.

The movie begins with scenes from an old home movie: a young boy in the country. This is the young Antoine Sforza (Nicolas Cazalé). Without explaining this scene, the film moves to Paris, the big city. There Antoine, the hero, is now 30 years old and still trying to figure out what he wants to do or be. He is always "between jobs" never quite able to hold down a steady job. Part of this is his attitude: he has a chip on his shoulder.

When his father (Daniel Duval) is taken to a hospital, he reluctantly comes to see his mother (Jeanne Goupil). He is estranged from his father. Further, there is little love between Antoine and his brother François (Stéphan Guérin-Tillié), who runs a hair salon. But since his dad is a grocer in a small Provençe village and he drives a grocery van to the surrounding hamlets, someone needs to take over this job or the elderly villagers will not get their supplies. Surely Antoine could do this. But he is opposed to going back to the village and a life he had left 10 years earlier.

When he does decide to go back, he takes with him Claire (Clotilde Hesme), a beautiful young neighbor he has a crush on. She, too, is trying to find herself after an immature marriage and early divorce, and is applying for college in her mid-20s.

At first, as he drives the almost decrepit van to the outlying villages and homes, Antoine is rude to the villagers who seem strange and stubborn. He is all business and there is simply not much of that. It is only when he takes Claire with him that things change. She brings an air of sweetness and light that brightens up the face of even the gruffest old lady. Where customers refused to buy from Antoine, they line up to buy from Claire.

What makes The Grocer's Son a delightful movie is true-to-life realism and beautiful scenery. You could believe finding yourself in one of these villages and expect to see and hear these exact conversations. And you could think of worse ways of spending your time than being in a countryside like this, lazily eating French bread and drinking French wine.

The problem that caused Antoine to leave home is never described. It is simply there, like the elephant in the room that everyone knows is there . . . except Claire. To her, it is a family feud that has embittered Antoine and the others. François, too, has his own secrets. Both brothers have abandoned their parents, but in their own ways. Antoine has gone physically, wanting little or nothing to do with them. François is present but withholding the truth from them, living a lie.

Antoine had walked away from the place of his family. How often do we walk away from a place that has love and life, though we cannot see it because the tears of our pain blur our vision and blind us to reality? When we see only the hurt and the conflicts, we focus on ourselves. But when we look outside, beyond our wounds, at the bigger picture, we can forgive . . . ourselves, our parents, our siblings, our friends, even our enemies. Only in forgiveness, can we find freedom to embrace love and life.

Indeed, as Antoine changes his perspective on the villagers he drives out to, he comes to see them as real people in need, not nuisances or thieves. He begins to understand that he is there to help. This is more than a business, with a profit and loss line. This is more of a ministry. Though his father's competitor had opened a supermarket and was rolling in cash, the Sforza store was about compassion. Bottom line took second place to service.

Antoine rediscovers purpose for his life in a place he had abandoned. Running for years had brought him no sense of meaning, only a wasted decade. In facing his family he found renewed relationship and a place, his place. Perhaps this is a message we need to hear and embrace. Perhaps our purpose is still waiting to be discovered in a place we have left. If in pursuing our dreams we find ourselves in a rat-race of ever-working and never-achieving, perhaps we need to look for the simplicity of a simpler life where we can serve others.

Copyright ©2008, Martin Baggs

Quantum of Solace -- vendettas in vain

Director: Marc Forster, 2008.

Quantum of Solace begins where Casino Royale left off. It is a true sequel, with a plot line dependent on the prior movie. Indeed, it is the first sequel in the Bond series. But while Casino Royale set the bar for this franchise, Quantum of Solace does a limbo, going under this bar. It is an inferior film, but still a passable thriller. While a Bond movie, it's more like a decent Bourne movie -- not surprising since the film's second unit director came from that trilogy.

One of its problems is it simply tries too hard to be an edgy action adventure. It has four chases: on foot, by car, by boat, and by plane. Both the foot chase and the the car chase scenes are too choppy. And in places there is too much juxtaposition that is distracting. The foot chase cuts back and forth to an unrelated horse race through the streets of Siena. Later, a chase and gunfight at an Opera juxtapose Bond's killings with those in the opera, Tosca; this is reminiscent of the climactic scene in The Godfather.

Back from Casino Royale is Mr. White (Jesper Christiansen), introduced in the final act of that movie but never explained. Back, too, is CIA agent Felix Lighter (Jeffrey Wright), this time ambiguous in his relationship with Bond. Also back is Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini), and where his relationship with Bond was ambiguous in Casino Royale, leading to capture and torture by MI5, here he is perhaps the only friend Bond can turn to.

The opening sequence picks up hours after Bond's finale in the the previous film, with a fast-paced and tough to follow car chase. With too-fast jump cuts, this is a confusing opening. Somehow Bond manages to transport Mr. White to an ancient dungeon where M (Judi Dench) and other agents await. In interrogation, White reveals that the money taken from Le Chiffre belonged to a larger mysterious criminal organization called Quantum. No one has heard of Quantum. Yet they have agents everywhere. Shades of SPECTRE.

With M's judgment in question, and potentially surrounded by traitors, even Bond is viewed with suspicion. Before he sets off to Haiti on a mission, M tells him: "I thought I could trust you. You said you weren't motivated but revenge." Is he after revenge? Does he simply want to find and kill the person whose deception led to the death of his one love, Vespa? Or is it true what he says, "I am motivated by my duty"?

In Haiti, he finds a lead. But the ensuing knife fight is bloody and brutal. Bond is blooded, the other bleeds out. Death follows Bond like a dark Pied Piper. But here he meets Camille (Ukrainian Olga Kurylenko with a decent Spanish accent). She is a beautiful Bolivian with a gun. And she tries to kill him.

Camille, in turn leads him to Dominic Greene, the real villain in this film. Played by Frenchman Mathieu Amalric, fresh from his outstanding performance as a paralyzed playboy in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, he has no gimmicks to make Greene evil (no crying-blood like Le Chiffre). Instead, he is more evil in being "normal." But as CEO of an eco-friendly organization he is rich and powerful and craves more. He is also part of this mysterious Quantum organization.

When M thinks Bond has gone rogue, pursuing his personal agenda, she cuts him off. All resources are removed. He can no longer rely on MI5. With no friends, he turns to Mathis, whose trust he lost in Casino Royale. Friend or not, he needs help. And Mathis gets him to Bolivia, where he once again runs into Camile.

But Mathis gives the best line in the film in his dying breath: "She would have done anything for you . . . forgive her, forgive yourself." Vespa really did love Bond, despite her betrayal. Could he forgive her? Could he forgive himself?

Bond has not forgiven. Indeed, does he even know how to forgive? His heart is cold. But he is still human, and seeking that quantum of solace in his relationships. Despite a perfunctory and totally unbelievable romp with the red-headed Strawberry Fields, a throw-away babe, Bond has not moved on from Vespa. He needs some form of closure.

Predictably Bond and Camile end up a team, though not in bed. Both are in some sense damaged goods. Both are on personal vendettas. Both are jaded. Both will do whatever it takes to achieve their agendas. But when Camile kills her nemesis, she comes to realize that she has killed part of herself too. Her vendetta of vengeance ends in vain. How will Bond's? The cost of unforgiveness is high indeed.

The main theme of Quantum of Solace is revenge and forgiveness. Bond needs to forgive those who hurt him. More than this, he needs to forgive himself. Apart from this, he will continue to be driven by a cold desire for vengeance. We, too, must look at what is driving us. Do we have room for forgiveness in our hearts? Jesus calls us to forgive, even when it means leaving justice to others (Matt. 18:21-22). Are we big enough to do this?

Quantum of Solace is a shallower, if shorter, film than Casino Royale. But it does show the further development of the Bond character. Where there was a glimpse of the human underneath the shell in Casino, in Quantum that has disappeared into a black hole. Trust once broken, is tough to retrieve.

Copyright ©2008, Martin Baggs

Casino Royale -- trust shaken, not stirred

Director: Martin Campbell, 2006.

What Batman Begins did for the Batman franchise, Casino Royale does for James Bond. This is a significant reboot and a terrific action movie to boot. Certainly one of the best in the Bond series, if not the best it is at least the longest.

Casino Royale is the first film with the new Bond, Daniel Craig. And a new James Bond this is, as evident from the opening prologue. Shot in grainy monochrome, it shows how Bond earned his "00" status, a status that requires two kills. Bond calmly waits for a double agent. When he confronts him, we see in flashback how Bond makes his first kill -- a violent and bloody fist-fight, ending in a drowning . . . or almoist. If the first kill was not easy, the second, a bullet to the head, was quite the opposite. Sin becomes simple when practiced.

From this prologue, Casino Royale moves to the most exciting opening action sequence in Bond history. It's Madagascar. Bond gets in a foot chase with a bad guy. Entering an under-construction building, both climb to the arm of the crane hundreds of feet up. And then leap to another crane! Unbelievable, yes . . . but it's James Bond so anything is possible. In this sequence Parkour is showcased, the free-running athletic sport. (For more on this, see the French movie District B-13, which starred one of the creators of this exciting sport.)

The plot for Casino Royale soon enough becomes clear. The main villain, Le Chiffre (Dane Mads Mikkelsen, previously seen as the pastor in Adam's Apples) loses a ton of money in a scam gone bad. But this is not his money. He is the financier to global terrorists. It is their money. They will not be happy if it is gone for good. So, he devises a high-stakes game of poker at Casino Royale in Montenegro, Czechoslovakia. The buy-in is $10M, and there are only ten seats. Since MI5 and the CIA want Le Chiffre, both buy-in. Of course, for the Brits, Bond is the man. But since it is his first mission as 007, and it is a lot of money, M (Judi Dench) sends an accountant with him to watch over him and the money. This accountant, however, is no fuddy duddy. She is Vesper Lynd (the French Eva Green putting on an Oxford accent), a beauty with brains.

While the poker itself is as dry as Bond's famous martini (named Vesper here, it must of course be shaken not stirred), the action more than makes up for this. Gone is Q; gone are the gadgets. In their place are technology and technicians at HQ. But back are the classic set-pieces in exotic locations, including the Bahamas, Venice, Miami and London. This is what we want in a Bond film. Few friends, many enemies, fast cars (even a classic Aston Martin), fist fights, it is an exciting entry for Craig.

Daniel Craig makes a terrific James Bond. Gone is the campy Bond of the Roger Moore era. The harder Pierce Brosnan-Bond is a segue to this 007. Here, Bond is tough as nails. He is a hairs-breadth away from being on the wrong side. Violent and brutal, the Craig-Bond shows that killing is dirty work. There is blood on the bodies, and there is blood on him. He cannot kill and walk away, clean and pristine. He needs to clean up, his hands, face and clothing. Gone, too, is the suave debonair Bond of the Sean Connery days. Where Connery had the twinkle in his eye and the line on his lips, Craig's Bond has the same quick line but the twinkle is replaced by a cold killer's glance from those "oh so blue" eyes. Handsome, yes. A ladies' man, perhaps. A man's Bond, certainly.

This is the James Bond that men come to watch, to dream of being. Living vicariously through his exploits, this is a hero who makes you squirm in your seat. And though he has the good looks of a Bond, he focuses on the job. There is little sex here. There are only two Bond babes. Even as Bond rolls on the floor with the first, Solange, he leaves her when he learns that what he wants is in Miami. Duty over delight.

The second babe is Vesper. With her it is different. She warms his cold heart and wins it. When she sees him kill two men with his hands, up close and personal, she goes into shock. Bond finds her sitting in a cold shower fully clothed. Uncharacteristically, he sits with her, sympathizing and comforting.

Bond's biggest issue is his trust. He trusts few people. He loves no one. He has an armor around his heart that would protect Fort Knox. He lets no one in. That is, until he falls for Vesper. He resigns and goes with her to Venice to plan a new life. But trust is a fragile thing, easily shaken. And once broken, difficult to rebuild. The finale in Venice is top-notch, Bond at its best.

Ethically, Bond stands for everything that Jesus speaks against. He is, in some sense, a Hollywood anti-type of Christ. Where Jesus says turn the other cheek (Matt. 5:39), Bond turns his other fist . . . into his enemy's cheek. Where Jesus says love your enemies and pray for them (Matt. 5:44), Bond hates his enemies and "prays" that he can destroy them. And where Jesus tells us to go the extra mile (Matt. 5:41), Bond does . . . but to stalk and kill not to serve .

Even the passion of Jesus is portrayed in some regard in Bond. Jesus, naked and vulnerable, was flogged mercilessly by the Roman soldiers (Matt. 27:26); a naked Bond is tortured with a whip (of sorts) by Le Chiffre. Whereas Jesus was silent before his tormentors (Isa. 53:7), Bond quips, even threatens, as he suffers. And as Jesus died and rose again, Bond flat-lines and is figuratively raised from the dead. Jesus was resurrected by the Father, his eternal love; Bond is raised by Vesper, his "eternal love."

While Casino Royale may leave us dreaming of living the life of James Bond, even if vicariously, perhaps we should reflect on his anti-type, Jesus Christ. He has already lived for us, so we in truth can live out his life, by allowing His Spirit to live in and through us. All that's missing is the line, "The name's Christ, Jesus Christ." Bye bye Bond, hello Jesus.

Copyright ©2008, Martin Baggs