Thread:Overseer80/@comment-25030828-20140606141700/@comment-25030828-20140607074251

1. Well... as far as I am aware, Lotso did not personally mention his excuse and when he was called out for it by Woody, the movie plays it in a rather satirical manner, deliberately mocking Lotso for his excuse. In addition to that, the movie never portrayed him in a sympathetic light after Chuckles recounted his backstory – he continues on his reign of terror (which is not played in a tragic light) before pulling off a rather despicable Villains Want Mercy on Woody. Also, if I am not mistaken, even the film-makers specifically stated that Lotso is a CM, so no contest there.

As for Shen, the Soothsayer does call him out for his excuse, but the difference here is the tone in which it is played – this is played, like I said before, in a tragic manner, a sort of a sombre realisation and even then, he does not try to lash out at the Soothsayer for trying to prove him wrong unlike Lotso. After that, the movie still shines a somewhat sympathetic light on him, portraying him as a Death Seeker who has given up on everything. I think I can also quote Jennifer Yuh Nelson on this:

... Yuh Nelson says of Oldman. "But he also gives a really sympathetic tone so you go 'wow, that's really horrible what he's doing, but at the same time I kind of feel for that guy.' "

Feature Interview – Kung Fu Panda 2

Clearly she meant for Shen to be somewhat sympathetic, unlike Lotso.

As for your examples of sympathetic excuses, I agree. These villains are definitely not Complete Monsters. But I guess that is where it gets really messy (for me anyway). I think I should have clarified what I meant by a "pathetic" excuse: The excuse no longer has any tangible emotional effect on the villain him/herself and has devolved to a convenient excuse.

Take The Dark Knight's Joker for example: We do not see an official backstory to him, and he mentions a different excuse every time, as if he were mocking these excuses. The movie basically establishes him to be completely evil, especially during the scene where Alfred Butler summarises Joker's character (Some men just want to watch the world burn). So that does not really count.

Or maybe even Lotso: Sure, he snapped when he saw that Daisy had "replaced" him, but if I remember correctly, he no longer uses that excuse and went instead with his belief: "All toys are trash", which does not really correspond with his excuse. We also see him drag Big Baby and Chuckles along with him even though it is explicitly shown that Daisy only "replaced" Lotso. Besides, Woody gave him a pretty well-constructed Kirk Summation explaining why Lotso is in the wrong – it shows just how out of sync his actions are with his excuse, and the movie clearly does not attempt to make Lotso sympathetic in the least.

As for Shen, again, the movie portrays his actions and situation with shades of tragedy. Unlike Lotso, the debunking of his excuse done in a more solemn, tragic manner. And he does seem to genuinely consider options other than his path of evil – he pauses to rethink his actions, and does so in a retrospective, even somewhat remorseful, manner. And since it was an immediate reaction and he was facing away from the Soothsayer at that time, he had no reason to fake these expressions, so I'd say it is genuine. And the part where he says his parents didn't love him ties in to his revenge, which ties in to his conquest of China. I think it was made pretty clear in the movie that his conviction about his parents not  loving him had left some kind of an emotional void (the metaphorical cup and crater) which he sought to fill by subjugating China. His Freudian Excuse has a clear psychological impact on his character and is not merely a convenient dodge; it is pretty valid... at least that is how I view it.

2. I think I can see your point, but that still does not explain why he never harms her even though he's depicted as a rather sadistic and violent criminal. He had no reason to let her roam about his stronghold, nor did the movie ever mention that the Soothsayer ever refused to provide her prophesying services should she be imprisoned. In fact, he does spend time with her and basically treats her like family, albeit in a bitter manner. Even if he doesn't truly care for her, he still respects her and acknowledges that she has certain rights as a person. Besides, even as he "discarded" her, he did not do it (nor was there any indication, subtle or otherwise) in a particularly vitriolic or sadistic manner, despite the fact that he, again, is a sadistic criminal – it's not a form of Cruel Mercy. In addition to that, Soothsayer does not seem to be afflicted with Stockholm's Syndrome, so Shen has absolutely no reason to manipulate her. I think that is a valid Pet the Dog moment.

3. Hmm... I think TV Tropes is pretty accurate, but I wouldn't count too much on it.

So yeah... I still stand by my conviction that Shen is not a CM. Or maybe it could just be chalked up to Alternative Character Interpretation. I don't know.

Thank you for your time.