EXTRA — Koala Shine, Story 1 in Review

As easily expected, I’m enjoying each and every one of these 2-hour long podcast episodes. While I have no relation or knowledge of anything discussed so far (besides Puss in Boots and the occasional SW, and/or, Marvel reference), the very clinical discussion in these reviews makes it very understandable and enjoyable. It feels like I’m hearing two philosophers debate the defining attributes of pandering-ness, which both assumes and intrigues me.
In common language, I like it lots.

Pandering has always bothered me in real life as well as in media. I considered myself a smart kid when I was young, but I would find myself accepting some forms of general pandering because someone else needed.
My go-to example of a kids movie that never panders but still was beloved by my younger self would be Pixar’s Up. I’m embarrassed to say that it took me until last year to realize that Charles Muntz had murdered all the other explorers and was planning to do the same to Carl and Russel. The moment worked for myself as a kid, and it still worked when I had grown—albeit Besides that, though, I believe that even some forms of intensity can go over a kid’s head until he is able to comprehend the gravity of that intensity—and by then, he is likely able to handle said intensity well.
With Up, my kid self could still comprehend “Oh, Carl’s sad and wants to live alone, but Ellie wants him to move on.” Meanwhile, my current self is able to wrap his mind around the weight of losing a loved one and the grief that weighs one down. The movie communicates well through the visual medium with the iconic, bright balloons filling the frame, and still succeeds through elements like context clues, cliches, and the music in grounding those fantastical elements in a genuine, relatable reality.
With audio, I believe this task of (in my words) palatable vs pandering becomes easier. This is why I believe AIO showed success in teaching lessons to kids by showing a story around the principle rather than telling about the principle. Going to Ryan’s example of “OKay KIDS, toDAY WE’re GOing TO LEarn about DAVid and GoliATH,” Odyssey would juxtaposition that with Connie’s journey in the Audio Enviromental Enhancement Thingamabob. The elements of the story are presented as terrifying and perilous, but because a kid has only his imagination to use, those elements can be however frightening the child’s mind permits.
As for an educational show, I believe that the way to engage a child is either by an entertaining story/premise or by offering the information a child would find intriguing. I can think back to the multiple PBS shows I watched over Disney ones because Disney tried offering (albeit fine, at the time non-woke) morals in their shows, while PBS Kids were better at offering education with a premise I liked. Disney felt more pandering to my ears because they shoehorned a obvious lesson into their shows, and while PBS would sometimes get that way with episodes on such as recycling, they were better about presenting information in such a way that never talked down to kids. The concepts could be the exact same, but I always preferred PBS Kids. (I hope I’ve made my examples as applicable as possible; I understand most kids were watching more Nickelodeon or Cartoon Network than I was.)
I struggle with finding an objective way of applying that here. The concept of a sun bear making friends with his fellow animals feels more pandering as a premise to me—although I’ve never been one for creature-centered media. I suppose it’s fine for an eight minute show, let me give it a listen, actually… WHAT IT’S 20 MINUTES. Anyway, I struggle with engaging with the premise as a young adult, and I question whether I’d be drawn to it when I was a kid. I can only speak for myself, though.
So then presentation is in order, and I do have to agree with Ryan. I would slightly disagree on the voice, as I do find it mostly appropriate but unnaturally pitched higher. She reads it straight, though, with not much in the way of “pandering-inflection” as it were. The issue I take is with the writing and music. The script is full of alliteration and rhymes that make this tale appropriate for a three-year old but not for an adult. Plus, the colourful language leans toward onomatopoeia, a particular callsign of most child’s storytelling. The chill vibe of the music and voicing would also make an adult struggle to listen along; it’s possible, but unlikely. I’m not sure a child over the age of three could either.
Again, I find it hard to speak objectively and fairly about this show, since I seem to be the furtherest thing from its demographic. (All the more reason why I’m still writing this comment.) I find it wholesome in its content, but dull in its execution. Maybe other episodes would surprise me, but I doubt it given this show’s intent.

On a random ancillary note, I have what I believe is a hot take. In my oh so humble opinion, Bluey is a show for adults that masks itself as a preschooler’s cartoon. While I as an adult do very much appreciate the art within, say, a nine-minute silent film about Bluey building a dam across the sidewalk, I doubt a kid will pay attention for that long when social media may very well be nearby.
Another example would be the infamous Hammerbarn episode, wherein Bluey and her sister fight over which items the other has. It leads to the breakage of a glass statue (“MY HUSBAND!”) and a funny line about “If you can’t be grateful for what you have, someone’s husband is gonna get it.” Then the show, instead of showing the consequences of that mishap, shows Bluey and her sister gleefully finding paint samples (“Everything we could ever want!”). While it is a funny moment, and I understand the intent behind it, I struggle to see how a kid is supposed to receive that, and as a result I question the motivation of the creators of Bluey.
Compare that to the LEGO Movie; the message for parents is very present, but so is message for the kids—and more than that, “You can be the Special” is such that it applies to both groups together. The intent behind the LEGO Movie seems kid-oriented with adults very much in mind. That’s how it should be, I argue, for a kids movie. I can’t say the same for Bluey.
(Oh wait, this is just a comment on an Odyssey fan site… probably not the place… oh well.)

As always, I look forward to more, and I’m always glad to hear Ryan on a podcast! I guess Michael too, but I’d much rather that Lee Acim guy come back. (I kid, I kid…)