![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
INT. SHOT, TYPICAL HOLLYWOOD OFFICE.
WILL and JADA SMITH are talking with director HARALD ZWART about remaking The Karate Kid.
WILL
We’ll get Jackie Chan to play the Miyagi character, and our son Jaden will play the kid.
HARALD
Jaden’s a bit young, don’t you think?
JADA
His character will be twelve years old. We want to set the movie in China, but the plot will follow the 1984 movie, with eastern healing techniques, a fancy kung fu move at the end–
HARALD
So we’ll start out with Jaden’s character having trouble with some local kung fu bullies. The problems escalate, and he ends up surrounded by these kids, who start pounding him. Enter Jackie Chan.
JADA
Who proceeds to beat the crap out of a bunch of 12-year-olds!
HARALD
Um…
#
The Karate Kid surprised me with that scene. Jackie Chan made it work. In typical Chan style, he deflects the kids’ attacks against each other, allowing them to be the ones to beat themselves up. I was impressed with how they handled that.
Overall, 
I thought the remake was pretty good. I liked the original story, and this one stayed pretty close to the 1984 version. I liked the restaging of the movie to China. And Jaden Smith is a very charismatic actor.
But in some ways I think the film suffered for being a remake. I kept comparing it to the original, and there were areas where the new film came up short. A few examples (spoilers follow):
-
Mr. Miyagi was a decorated soldier who lost his family in the war, and spent one night each year getting drunk and mourning that loss. Mr. Han’s family was killed in a car accident, and he spends every day rebuilding that car so he can destroy it. Much as I like Jackie Chan, I thought Mr. Miyagi’s backstory was much better.
-
We see Daniel LaRusso practicing the crane technique which he eventually uses in the tournament. The reflection technique we see in the remake is described as something that took a lifetime of practice and mastery to achieve, and we only see Dre Parker trying it once on his mother. Yet he successfully uses it in the tournament.
- In the tournament, Daniel is taken down by an illegal attack to the knee. Master Li tells his student to break Dre’s leg, which doesn’t make sense to me. Leg bones are strong. We see the kid repeatedly elbowing Dre’s leg (which was disturbing to watch), but failing to break it. If you want to take someone out of competition, try going for the foot or hit a joint.
The kids’ ages changed another aspect of the film for me as well. In both movies, our bullies are taught by a very bad man. But in the 1984 version, these were high school students: older and better able to make their own choices.
I’m not saying 12-year-olds aren’t responsible for what they do, but at that age, the abusiveness of their teacher (Master Li) becomes much more troubling: both the way he treats his students and the fact that he’s teaching little kids to be so vicious. As a result, I really wanted to see the parking lot scene (i.e., Jackie Chan unleashing some whoop-ass on Li), and while I understand why that scene might not fit, it left me dissatisfied with the ending.
You know most of Li’s students will be back in his class the next day – they’re kids, and in most cases, I imagine their parents will make them go back. What’s he going to do to them after their “rebellion” at the tournament?
Summary: A pretty good movie, but I like the original better. Jaden Smith was great. Chan … the script didn’t really play to his strengths. Liked most of the changes from the original, but the younger ages made the movie much more disturbing in some respects. 3.8 fire spiders out of five.
Mirrored from Jim C. Hines.
From:
no subject
A martial arts student at twelve is learning foundational person lessons, and doesn't really have the discernment to tell whether a teacher is good or bad. In the sixteen to twenty range, though? One might be able to judge whether Cobra Kai is the right school for you. Then again, if one hasn't seen the alternative, maybe students would just assume that these are things that go together?
When I was in middle school, I took Tae Kwon Do for a few years, and it was really good. However, prior to that I'd done a few classes in another, mixed-style school that was the bad sort of hardcore. The instructor tried to make kids who weren't up to it do major wilderness runs, or keep training if they were dizzy or felt sick.
I ran into this a little bit a few years ago when I tried going back to martial arts; the instructor was very competition oriented and tried to drag everyone up to his speed whether we were ready or not.
Which, I suppose, might have been one of the other, really important lessons of the original film. Not everyone who teaches this stuff is teaching it for the same reasons, or well. Hm.
From:
no subject
The hardcore approach you describe just doesn't sit right with me. The TDK school I attended as a kid had some trouble along those lines, though I didn't see it at the time. I think there's a lot to be said for learning discipline, but I also remember a time when I was verbally cut down by the instructor in front of the class, which just isn't a helpful approach.
I'm much happier with the current style I'm studying, which coincidentally, is completely noncompetitive.
From:
no subject
I'm considering getting back into martial arts again after I finish school in May. I've dabbled just a tiny, tiny bit as an adult (T'ai Chi at a gym for a while, mostly) and think it might not be a bad idea to have a hobby that's not directly related to either of my jobs.
Granted, it's potentially applicable to both...
How did you and your family choose your school, just out of interest? I'm kind of starting to check places out here in town and am trying to suss out what my real criteria are.