- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
- Messages
- 24,648
- Real Name
- Jake Lipson
I've sen everything Pixar has ever put out. I say that as a reference, only because I think the Bao short is the worst thing they've ever made -- and yes, that includes Cars 2. Naturally, it was beautifully animated, but I just thought it was a what-the-**** rabbit hole awful and stupid and uncomfortable and couldn't wait for it to end. I wish that this had gone in theaters last year with Cars 3 and that the short from last year, Lou, was screening now. I have no desire to see Bao again, but it will be on the Incredibles 2 Blu-ray. Conversely, I have no desire to own Cars 3, but I'd love to own Lou (but won't buy Cars 3 just to get it.) So I wish they had swapped the placement of these two shorts.
I also thought it was a bit odd for the introduction from the cast to say "And without further ado, The Incredibles 2," only to have the short first. If they were going to do the introduction, it should have come after the short, not before. The intro was nice, but I thought it was funny that they felt the need to apologize for the movie's tardiness. I'm not saying I liked the wait, but I do think this was worth it.
In my opinion, the original Incredibles is the single greatest superhero film of all time, and remains so. Given the fact that superhero cinema is omnipresent today in a way that it simply wasn't in 2004, it would have been impossible for them to come back and be as surprising and subversive as the original was with its social commentary aspects and deconstruction of superheroism. Marvel and DC have both already touched on the legality of superheroes and have explored a lot of these tropes so much over the last decade-plus that Incredibles 2 simply can't be as form-breaking as the first one was. That was a given going in.
That being said, I think Brad Bird was wise not to try to do that. The film works because it gives us what we want most, which is more time with these characters who have become so loved in the last 14 years. I was really impressed with the continued character development for everyone both individually and as a family unit. It really does seem like they've learned and grown from the events of the first film andd that this is the next step of their journey, and that obviously doesn't happen with every sequel. And what a sequel it is -- it's just a tremendous amount of fun to see these characters again and to get to spend more time in their company. Great characters, great action, great humor and a whole bunch of heart.
I was also really impressed that, even though the movie clearly takes advantage of the advancements in animation technology since 2004, how seamlessly they make you believe this is the same world and the same time period. When I first heard that they were going to start with the Underminer as though no time had passed at all, I thought, "Hmm, that might be really weird," just because SO much time has passed for us since the first one. But as soon as it started, I was right there with it as though I was 15 again. And the new Dash, Huck Milner, feels completely seamless with Spencer Fox, who played Dash in the original but obviously couldn't return given the timeline of the sequel. Jonathan Banks as Dicker, their ally in the government, is a bit more of a change from Bud Lucky, who played the role last time but is unfortunately deceased now (if you stay through the credits, you'll see that this movie is kindly dedicated to him.) But Banks still does a good job taking over for him.
It's weird to think about this because we, having waited for it, are acutely aware of how much time has passed in the real world between movie, but I think that decades from now, when new generations of kids come to these movies and they just exist as a given pair, there won't be any reason at all for those kids to suspect that there was a 14-year gap between the two releases. And that is really saying something.
I think the movie itself was more interested in the family dynamics than the new supervillain, but that's fine with me. What I wanted most was to see the original characters again on a fun new adventure, and it delivers.
I said earlier in the thread that I appreciated it seeming like there was more to the movie than was shown in the trailers. Now, I think I was mistaken in praising the trailers, because they really did give a lot away. It's just that the villain plot isn't as focal in the storytelling as Syndrome was in the original, so there was less of that for them to feature in the trailers. As usual, it isn't the movie's fault that the trailers give away too much, but it was still something i felt. Jack-Jack is great and the audience loved him, but still, most his best moments were in the trailer. So was "Math is math" and much of Bob's storyline for the film. These things were still great in the movie, but maybe ever so slightly less impactful from having seen them so much beforehand in the trailer. I mean, I get that the trailer has to hype people up to see the movie, but I'm still not sure they needed to show as much as they did, especially since there was a high level of hype for this movie anyway.
Still, all in all an A+ movie for sure, and instantly extremely superior to almost everything else so far this year (except maybe Paddington 2, and they are in the same league. Rarefied cinematic air all the way, both of them.)
I also thought it was a bit odd for the introduction from the cast to say "And without further ado, The Incredibles 2," only to have the short first. If they were going to do the introduction, it should have come after the short, not before. The intro was nice, but I thought it was funny that they felt the need to apologize for the movie's tardiness. I'm not saying I liked the wait, but I do think this was worth it.
In my opinion, the original Incredibles is the single greatest superhero film of all time, and remains so. Given the fact that superhero cinema is omnipresent today in a way that it simply wasn't in 2004, it would have been impossible for them to come back and be as surprising and subversive as the original was with its social commentary aspects and deconstruction of superheroism. Marvel and DC have both already touched on the legality of superheroes and have explored a lot of these tropes so much over the last decade-plus that Incredibles 2 simply can't be as form-breaking as the first one was. That was a given going in.
That being said, I think Brad Bird was wise not to try to do that. The film works because it gives us what we want most, which is more time with these characters who have become so loved in the last 14 years. I was really impressed with the continued character development for everyone both individually and as a family unit. It really does seem like they've learned and grown from the events of the first film andd that this is the next step of their journey, and that obviously doesn't happen with every sequel. And what a sequel it is -- it's just a tremendous amount of fun to see these characters again and to get to spend more time in their company. Great characters, great action, great humor and a whole bunch of heart.
I was also really impressed that, even though the movie clearly takes advantage of the advancements in animation technology since 2004, how seamlessly they make you believe this is the same world and the same time period. When I first heard that they were going to start with the Underminer as though no time had passed at all, I thought, "Hmm, that might be really weird," just because SO much time has passed for us since the first one. But as soon as it started, I was right there with it as though I was 15 again. And the new Dash, Huck Milner, feels completely seamless with Spencer Fox, who played Dash in the original but obviously couldn't return given the timeline of the sequel. Jonathan Banks as Dicker, their ally in the government, is a bit more of a change from Bud Lucky, who played the role last time but is unfortunately deceased now (if you stay through the credits, you'll see that this movie is kindly dedicated to him.) But Banks still does a good job taking over for him.
It's weird to think about this because we, having waited for it, are acutely aware of how much time has passed in the real world between movie, but I think that decades from now, when new generations of kids come to these movies and they just exist as a given pair, there won't be any reason at all for those kids to suspect that there was a 14-year gap between the two releases. And that is really saying something.
I think the movie itself was more interested in the family dynamics than the new supervillain, but that's fine with me. What I wanted most was to see the original characters again on a fun new adventure, and it delivers.
I said earlier in the thread that I appreciated it seeming like there was more to the movie than was shown in the trailers. Now, I think I was mistaken in praising the trailers, because they really did give a lot away. It's just that the villain plot isn't as focal in the storytelling as Syndrome was in the original, so there was less of that for them to feature in the trailers. As usual, it isn't the movie's fault that the trailers give away too much, but it was still something i felt. Jack-Jack is great and the audience loved him, but still, most his best moments were in the trailer. So was "Math is math" and much of Bob's storyline for the film. These things were still great in the movie, but maybe ever so slightly less impactful from having seen them so much beforehand in the trailer. I mean, I get that the trailer has to hype people up to see the movie, but I'm still not sure they needed to show as much as they did, especially since there was a high level of hype for this movie anyway.
Still, all in all an A+ movie for sure, and instantly extremely superior to almost everything else so far this year (except maybe Paddington 2, and they are in the same league. Rarefied cinematic air all the way, both of them.)
Was anyone at all surprised by the Screenslaver reveal? I had that pegged from the start, but expected Winston/Bob Odenkirk was in on it too as part of their whole plan, rather than it being Catherine Keener/Evelyn by herself. Especially since the Screenslaver himself is a nonentity for much of the film, I always thought it had to secretly be a major character that was already established, and nobody from the first film would have done that, so it being the employers was kind of obvious, but that's okay because it works. I suspect kids might be more surprised by it though. They really did a nice job with her motivations, though, once it was revealed.
Also, do you think the Incredibles are going to say in Winston's house still, or now that superheroes are legal again, will they be able to afford to move?
Also, do you think the Incredibles are going to say in Winston's house still, or now that superheroes are legal again, will they be able to afford to move?
Last edited:
