Movie Review: Kung Fu Panda 3

I actually love this franchise, and it’s one of the few film series that I don’t mind sitting through unnecessary sequels for. I knew it wasn’t a great sign that the studio decided to put this in January, a traditional dumping ground for movies that aren’t worth watching in more competitive times, but it’s still a lot better than most run-of-the-mill animated sequels.

What Works: The “Kung Fu” franchise is nobly trying to teach kids more Eastern-style ideals of zen and peace, and lord knows our ADD-addled audiences could use those lessons. And not only is it a more nourishing experience than most animated films (which is important) but it has a more visceral appeal that is undeniable: Po is the rare children’s hero that can seem both cuddly and badass at the same time. So the wish-fulfillment for kids is a logical one, and this film’s addition of Bryan Cranston–as Po’s biological father–and the introduction of other pandas may serve as a nice allegory for kids who find themselves in expanding homes (step-parents, half-siblings, being reunited with biological parents, getting adopted, etc.). The messaging is great, Cranston is clearly having great fun, the action is inventive, so what’s missing?

What Doesn’t: The first “Kung Fu Panda” was a minimalist classic, a straight-forward hero origin story that could be told for decades without losing its original luster. The second “Kung Fu Panda” was a grander story that felt like a true epic. This one doesn’t really have either of those things going for it, instead choosing a more spiritual-theme that is naggingly abstract, and a little inconsequential. The “rules” are never that compelling because death doesn’t really matter, and anyone can be brought back. Plus, the villains in the first two (Ian McShane’s ferociously jealous Leopard, and Gary Oldman’s power-mad peacock) felt serious, adult, rich, and menacing. This time out, J.K. Simmons is a great voice actor for a world-conquering ox character, but the character itself never feels fully fleshed out or threatening enough. We’re told he has a grudge against the heroes, but that never has the pathos or personal hurt that the first film’s villain had.

What I Would Have Done Differently: I had a great time with this film, but it’s worth noting that I can’t remember it very clearly a few days later. The first two films were not just enjoyable in the theater but months later as well. If there is a fourth film, I’m hoping for something more memorable