Incredibles 2 Movie Review

As a big fan of The Incredibles (a favorite animated movie, favorite score, excellent blend of superheros and James Bond, the emotional journey), I’m rather mixed on Incredibles 2. I tried going in with little-to-no expectations, trying to soak in the movie I saw, but probably still had a degree of bias / expectation.

SPOILER-FREE quick take: Incredibles 2 has a number of really great things in it (such as the action), it also has a few too many plot lines, with no storyline really getting the breadth and depth they deserve. Overall, the film lacks the heart of the first movie, but there's almost always something going on and I was surprised how quickly the movie flew by, despite being bored at times and awkward pacing leading to a general lack of proper climactic moments.

Extended review with SPOILERS:


WHAT I LIKED:
1. The action was really, really great! Some seriously top-tier stuff. That raccoon!

2. Jack-Jack’s micro storyline (the various scenes) were pretty great - he made for some excellent humor and action, giving other characters lots of things to play with.

3. The villain’s message and general motivation was solid – I loved the callout of consumer culture, with regards to people defining themselves by consumption as opposed to creation, as well as becoming passive due to that consumption. And the reason for the villain being a villain is pretty good (ruined faith/reliance in Supers), and fairly in-line with the Syndrome’s motivation (burned entitlement by Supers).

4. Voyd! Like with Blink in X-Men: DOFP, Voyd was awesome.

5. Winston Deavor (MILD SPOILER) actually being an earnest good guy. Yes, men are problematic in society and in media, so it's nice to see an earnest good guy in this.

6. Frozone getting more to do. More Sam Jackson is almost always a good thing in my book.

7. The company logos (Disney and Pixar) in the beginning done in the red Incredibles aesthetic.

8. A number of little moments, such as SPOILERS Evelyn calling out Helen think they'd be friends despite not knowing each other, and Jack-Jack towards the end using his telekinesis to save his mom after recognizing the situation (I would have loved this to have held for an extra beat).


WHAT I'M MIXED ON:
1. The dialogue – For the most part it’s fine, but there were a number of lines that were a bit too on-the-nose for my preference. Again, probably fine, but another pass or two would’ve been nice (may also have been tied to the delivery).

2. Brad Bird’s storytelling voice is somewhat questionable and he isn’t exactly great with women – He’s mostly fine, but there are little signs in Mrs. Incredible, Violet, Edna Mode, Voyd and Evelyn Deavor that are questionable, and are presumably a reflection of his baby boomer upbringing and current middle-aged status. A couple examples: while Mrs. Incredible is an incredible character, she’s a bit more of a plot mover than any real emotional thrust; there’s a fun-but-side-eyed puberty joke at Violet’s expense (plus her general reaction to her plot). Again, things are generally fine, but Bird’s voice has a certain coldness to it that’s become more apparent (after the Tomorrowland bust, presumably).

3. Michael Giacchino’s score – I could probably put this under “didn’t work for me” since it’s a largely forgettable score, saved only by the re-use of the great themes from the original (a personal favorite score). Maybe it’s a fault of the high number of plots causing auditory disarray, but shrug. Maybe both MG and BB are past their prime. :/

4. The new Supers – Again, Voyd is great, but they’re all largely gimmicks and barely characters. They serve the plot decently and do make for good action scenes, which is / can be fine.

5. The villain’s plot – While the motivation is great, the actual plot is a bit wonky, with at least one plot hole towards the end (SPOILER the kids realize the goggles are the problem, but when Violet’s fighting Voyd she doesn’t bother to go for the goggles).

6. The humor - There were some good jokes in the film, but the timing and delivery were occasionally... off/odd.


WHAT DIDN'T WORK FOR ME:
1. It’s kinda boring – The movie had an odd mix of having too many plotlines (Mrs. Incredible taking the lead and female empowerment, Mr. Incredible learning to be a good dad, Violet’s dating life, Jack-Jack’s powers and the family’s discovery, Frozone kinda having something, the tech siblings trying to bring Supers back into the limelight, the commentary on legality, the villain’s message to callout consumer culture, the villain’s motivation, Edna Mode “kinda” having something, the retired FBI guy “kinda” having something) and awkward pacing. There were a number of times where the story would follow Mrs. Incredible and just as she was about to do something, it’d cut back to Mr. Incredible doing boring dad stuff for an extended period, as opposed to following the more interesting Mrs. Incredible. There’s also just a general cold tone that comes through in the cinematography, particularly for Mr. Incredible’s parenting stuff.

2. There’s no emotional thread! – The first one was so great because it mainly followed the emotional journey of Mr. Incredible, along with how it affected Mrs. Incredible (and her reactions), and their journey towards becoming a stronger couple and family. In the sequel, we’re still largely following the emotional journey of Mr. Incredible, despite Mrs. Incredible taking the more prominent role, and there’s also a little journey by Violet, but nothing really comes together. The film touches on so many things, then distances itself.

3. Being an immediate sequel – Can we please stop this trend? It didn’t work in Quantum of Solace, it didn’t work in The Last Jedi, it didn't work in Search for Spock (though awesome opening sequence) and it didn’t work here. Immediate sequels that aren’t written at the same time (e.g. LOTR, BTTF) make for really, really awkward plot structures, and Incredibles 2 highlights that problem for me.

4. Jack-Jacks macro storyline about the family not knowing about his powers. The whole first movie was building towards Jack-Jack having powers, which were revealed at the end. Sure, the characters “might” not have known about the powers, but it’s been 14 years since the movie came out – it was an awkward creative choice to have none of the character aware of Jack-Jack’s powers.

5. Changes in the art direction – While there’s still a lot of the wonderful throwback art direction that made the first one so great, the advances of CG animation since the original has given the sequel a polish that is awkward and took me out of the movie several times – increased details in the characters’ complexions, certain shots with regards to lighting, and other aesthetic choices that just felt disconnected from the more simplified and stylized approach of the original, and some character designs that didn’t feel entirely Pixar-esque. That said, the animation is fantastic.

6. The pacing / climaxes – Kinda touched on this above, but want to explicitly call it out. There were a number of times where the movie felt like it was building towards something only for the film to quickly touch on it, then move on. There was no real weight to anything in the movie for me. Hell, the actual climax of the movie just kinda comes and goes.

7. Screenslaver - The hypnosis angle was interesting, but they ultimately felt underwhelming and SPOILER the identity reveal was rather telegraphed, which gave the movie a somewhat rote plot.


CONCLUSION: WASN'T FOR ME. But while it didn’t work for me, I’d happily put this in the Your Mileage May Vary category, as it does have a number of really good things, but also some questionable creative choices / direction.

It's certainly nice seeing the family, characters and world onscreen again, but what I saw wasn't nearly up to the highs of the first.

Solo: A Star Wars Story Review

Damn

I actually enjoyed Solo: A Star Wars Story!

I went in with low expectations, particularly after hearing people's "mostly mediocre" feedback (although also trying to avoid news and reviews), and was pleasantly surprised with what I saw. My fondness was even growing after the viewing, which was interesting.

Liked:
1. John Powell's score
2. The pulpy adventure tone / story
3. John Williams' Han Solo theme (I guess? since the overall score is good)
4. Most of the aesthetics / visuals, which harkened back to the OT but done in modern CG styles (though multiple scenes were muddy)
5. Most character designs (a couple creature and robot designs were meh)
6. Woody Harrelson and his character Beckett
7. The Kessel Run sequence - it was pretty darn cool, and a certain musical reference was pretty darn nice
8. Enfys Nest - Cool design and interesting character
9. Pretty good pacing

Nitpicks / Mixed reactions / Didn't care as much for:
1. The general premise - I don't think it's necessary to see Han Solo's backstory, but, again, I did enjoy the film and what we have does fit reasonably well into the mythos. Granted, if viewers are fresh, I would not recommend watching this before the OT, but if viewing the films chronologically (or just thinking on how this fits in), then I imagine this is an entertaining addition. However, I did like the general character development of Han in the movie (which is why I'm more accepting of these versions as "younger" versions, even if the older versions don't change a whole lot).

2. Alden's Han Solo - No, he's not Harrison Ford and doesn't entirely come close, but he does take elements and deliver mostly his own take on the character, which worked for me when I accepted Solo as a more modern / just different interpretation, plus the character is younger, so it makes sense he'll be different, but there are nuances to the character and performance that are missed (such as a certain casual coolness, indifference and world weariness that Ford brought, along with the sarcasm, occasional chutzpah and occasional lines delivered under his breath). From my memory, Alden was trying to be stoic, constantly staring at whatever he's focusing on, whereas Ford would "drift" around and sometimes seem indifferent

3. Donald Glover's Lando - He seems so young! His take lacked a casual cool confidence that Billy Dee brought. This might make sense if it's a "fake it til you make it" and Lando didn't really learn that UNTIL his Empire appearance, but it'd be nice to see more of the hints. To put it another way, Glover felt more like a performance than being the character. He was also surprisingly emotional, which could work for the younger Lando, which lacks the gravitas and maturity of the older Lando. Also, Lando's pansexuality felt forced and half-assed.

4. The nostalgia and callbacks - could have used less of these, particularly some very in-your-face ones, though thankfully they weren't too impactful on the plot / story. I would have also skipped some of the minor references (e.g. SPOILER mynoks, Bossk, some outfits), but they're lesser issues.

5. Dialogue could have been tighter, at times (there were some overtly expositional lines)

6. Thandie Newton was wasted

7. L3 was... OK (the line delivery of her and the robot from Rogue One are both really awkward from a timing perspective)

8. Audio mixing on English alien dialogue, plus aliens speaking English is kinda weird (though there's precedent)

9. Emilia Clarke's Kira - very mixed on her, both character and performance, but more worked for me than didn't

10. Paul Bettany's Dryden - I really enjoy Paul Bettany, and Dryden was mostly good, but the film tried to depict him in a mixed way (both mildly good and definitely bad) which didn't entirely work

11. The movie could have used a little breathing room; would've been nice to have some resting moments of pathos, but that's also not what this movie was going for

May was a bad release for Solo. It's a fun movie that would have done better either later in the year or earlier in the year. It's not the greatest movie, but it is entertaining. To put it one way, it's an Anthology movie I can get behind.

With regards to the Disney Star Wars movies, this may be my favorite of the bunch, since there's a good throughline (though, again, not the highest quality), as opposed to The Force Awakens which has great direction and music, but a really derivative story. As for the other two, Rogue One was really messy and I really didn't care for The Last Jedi (I thought Rian Johnson was trying to be too clever and it didn't work for me).

CONCLUSION: RECOMMENDED as a fun popcorn movie.

Animated Movie Reviews: Blame, Pets and Egypt

Watched Blame!, Secret Life of Pets and Prince of Egypt over Memorial Day weekend, so sharing some thoughts...

1. Blame! - I assume/hope there's more to the manga? Dropped essentially into the middle of the story, the world and general idea are interesting, but the film lacks interesting characters with any depth. It poses a number of questions and doesn't fully answer them, which can be fine, but in this case there's so much more world building that outweighs the story. Some cool sequences and nice music, but a little too reliant on tropes and generics. Meh Recommendation.

2. The Secret Life of Pets - This movie made some odd (bad) choices with regards to story, jokes and timing. Louis CK was not a good choice for the lead role as he has neither the range nor the vocals; not to mention he plays an unlikable dog/character. It's largely misfire after misfire after misfire, with the rare fun sequence. It does have a cute ending, which helps make up for the rest, but not nearly enough. Not Recommended.

3. The Prince of Egypt - Some gorgeous animation, intense sequences and a handful of decent songs, it's not anywhere near a typical Disney animated movie. It may be the darkest animated musical I've seen (save for maybe a Don Bluth movie), though it includes some light-hearted sequences to balance the tone. Religious stories like this aren't really my thing, but the film really delivered on a number of emotional sequences and the pure craftsmanship of it all. Strongly Recommended.

Sky High movie review

Spoiler-free review for the top portion, while some more spoilery-comments below*...

For YEARS I have wanted to see Sky High and, thankfully, it was worth the wait. I had grown a bit skeptical due to the relatively low IMDb rating (currently at 6.2, the equivalent of "fun-but-flawed" leaning more towards flawed), but it turns out this is closer to the live action Josie and the Pussycats movie (itself a rather delicious satire of both pop culture and consumerism, among others) where people may just not have been in on the joke.

Suffice to say, Sky High is pure camp fun that almost perfectly blends superheroes and teenage Disney (Channel) sensibilities, complete with elements of coming-of-age, family dynamics, comedy, action and the right amount of commentary on both class and gender power dynamics. There's even some brilliant material on ageism. It touches on lots of topics, yet handles each of them deftly to the point of leaving very few, if any, dangling threads. I would have loved to see more material on certain elements, but I view it more as a positive of wanting more of the world, rather than a critique.

I fully am of the mind that, had Disney continued the trend of Sky High and Enchanted, they could have had a nice renaissance of building tongue-in-cheek worlds to appeal to slightly older audiences, instead of spending BILLIONS on acquiring Marvel (though it's netted well for them).

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED if you're looking for a fun, campy Saturday afternoon (or any time) movie. In a way, it's a genuine classic, if not cult classic.

*Some more SPOILERY comments below.....

Things I liked:

• Kurt Russell may have been perfect in this, with Kelly Preston doing an admirable job, as well
• Mary Elizabeth Winstead - Pretty much everything about her in this was fantastic: the casting, the music that plays when Will Stronghold (Michael Angarano) sees her, her general villainous storyline ESPECIALLY her backstory
• Bruce Campbell, 'nuff said
• The cheesy dynamic between Magenta and Zach, complete with the "happy ending" 
• Every contrived plot moment to allow the "sidekicks" to use their powers
• Steven Strait going from villain to thoughtful stranger-turned-friend
• All the many nods and Easter Eggs to comics/superheroes
• Michael Giacchino's cheesy musical score - it's not really memorable, but works perfectly 

Things that could have been better or are odd, but rolling with anyway:

• Will Stronghold - Angarano was serviceable, but his storyline was rather par for the course. It was both interesting and nice that he developed one of his powers part way through, particularly to advance the story, though there could have been more emotional weight to the idea of never gaining powers building to a reveal at the end (but would have been a different story). As well, while some of the relationship elements were fun, others were a tad too cheesy; or at least, the ending of him and Layla kissing at the end (remember: they're 14ish years old)
• The dynamic between Royal Pain and her "dad" was very strange/didn't make much sense

Despite any flaws, Sky High was such a fun time that I wish we had more of the world and voice. Although apparently as of November 2016 a sequel may be in the works!

Quick assessments of the Princes in Disney Princess movies

For fun and per request from a friend, and as a "sequel" to this column, here are some quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies with regards to their messaging based on the Princes (apologies to my Disney fan friends):

Note: I haven't seen some of these movies in awhile, so these may be off...

Snow White - You only need two skills in life: singing and kissing. You don't need a name, though, but you do get to embrace your necrophilia. Also, be handsome.

Cinderella - Get her some shoes and you'll win her heart. Also, money and charm don't hurt. And be handsome.

Sleeping Beauty - Sometimes your parents can pick out a hottie for you, especially when you come from money. Also, use that money to learn how to use a sword, because you're going to have to fight to protect her. And be handsome.

The Little Mermaid - When the world is at your fingertips, you can wait for the right girl to come to you. Through song (avoid the silent ones). Also, use your money to learn boating. And be handsome.

Beauty and the Beast - It doesn't matter what you look like on the outside, as long as you have plenty of money and servants to help you find a pretty girl who sees the inner you. An inner you who is handsome (with money and servants... and a library).

Aladdin - Lie and manipulate your way to success, until it backfires and you realize being true to yourself is the way. Of course, getting REALLY lucky and having the support of Robin Williams certainly helps. Also, being cute is the poor man's handsome.

Pocahontas - When in doubt, Mel Gibson your way out

Mulan - Be a Man. You must be swift as a coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon, with all the strength of a raging fire, yet mysterious as the dark side of the moon. Also, have no respect for women (unless they act like men (and kinda look like one)). And be handsome. And manly.

Princess and the Frog - Don't entirely remember... When you have money (or don't and pretend to), it's OK to be a manipulative, obnoxious and entitled brat and use women for your pleasure/survival. Also, be handsome.

Tangled - Eh... this is taking too long, so... work your way up the ladder of life, keep some secrets, be handsome.

Brave - N/A

Frozen - Be an evil conniving bastard who can sing, dance and has money, or be a total clown dimwit. Either way, have looks.

Moana - Be The Rock

Feedback is welcome in the comments.

Quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies based on the lead

For fun, here are quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies with regards to their messaging based on the lead protagonist (apologies to my Disney fan friends)..

Note: I haven't seen some of these in awhile, so they may be off (friend corrections are noted below the list)

Snow White - Dated and no

Cinderella - Being oppressed sucks, but wishing for a man to save you vs taking your own actions? No (*friend correction below)

Sleeping Beauty - HELL NO (yay being molested while sleeping)

The Little Mermaid - Fuck you, Ariel, you entitled child. Keep changing yourself for your man more, you stupid piece of shit

Beauty and the Beast - Stockholm syndrome. No (*friend correction below)

Aladdin - Lie and manipulate your way to success, until it backfires and you realize being true to yourself is the way. Of course, getting REALLY lucky and having the support of Robin Williams certainly helps

Pocahontas - Eh... there's a degree of empowerment, but it's for the purpose of romance... Also historical inaccuracies

Mulan - Being empowered, yes and breaking flawed norms/traditioms. This is good

Princess and the Frog - Indifferent/don't remember (*friend correction below)

Tangled - Largely OK? Characters seem independent, yet also goofy/dorky

Brave - Not too shabby. Wanting independence, with a focus on family bonds

Frozen - Eh... the sisterly message is great, but both characters are pretty bad

Moana - TBD

I'm very curious about Moana, particularly since there's apparently no romance element.

Friend updates
When I first posted this list, a few friends had pointed out some corrections for the following (these are verbatim and definitely welcome feedback; the above were admittedly flawed quick thoughts for fun):

*Friend 1: Princess & The Frog - work hard to make your dreams come true - you can't wish on stars - but don't let the joys of life pass you by. Best Disney Movie.

*Friend 2: That is a misunderstanding of Cinderella on a core level. She was not waiting for anyone, let alone for a man, to save her. She was trapped in an abusive household, and she wanted a night off of being a slave to her family to be happy - and equal - for once. She did take her own actions whenever she could, and then used the support system she had when she couldn't. Excellent.

*Friend 2: Ariel wanted to be human long before she met Eric, and Part Of Your World is about how she, existentially, feels complete among humans and not merpeople. Eric gave her a focus point, but she would have made that deal sooner or later. And the thing is... she didn't change for Eric at all, really. She changed her body for her, but her personality remained exactly the same. Eric fell in love with her genuinely. (Sidenote: the entire story makes more sense once you realize it is a metaphor about class relations (HCA original) or a queer coming out story (Disney). Can elaborate on that one.)

*Friend 2: Beauty and the Beast is definitionally not Stockholm Syndrome, as Belle never considers the Beast an authority figure and does not align herself with him over the course of the movie until he changes his behavior. In fact, because Belle is actually in charge in their relationship and the Beast aligns himself with *her*, you could make an argument for Lima Syndrome, if you wanted. But that still rests upon the Beast holding her captive, and it's established very quickly that "holding her captive" is a flimsy formality in their relationship. Belle does whatever she wants from day one.

*Friend 3: Beauty and the Beast is in no way Stockholm Syndrome. Belle is actually one of the strongest feministic characters Disney ever created. She is intelligent in a world that only respects brutality, she is kind and loving, she fights WOLVES head on, and every action she does for the first two acts of the movie are to protect her family and her town. The third act was to literally break out of a prison cart and prevent a mob from murdering an innocent man.

TL;DR: Belle's a badass and a nerd, and easily one of the greatest female characters created.

Also, debunking your Stockholm Syndrome: http://thefederalist.com/2016/08/10/7-reasons-beauty-and-the-beast-is-not-a-tale-of-stockholm-syndrome/

*Bonus: Here is the version with regards to messaging based on the Princes.

Inside Out review - Pixar is Growing Up

The very quick review is that, as of right now, it didn’t work for me.

Inside Out has a lot of great ideas and is a very interesting interpretation on the inner workings of the mind, but as a movie, it fell flat due to its choices of characters and stories. To start, here’s what I liked (minor spoilers ahead):

1. The overall idea that sadness is OK and something we should accept and embrace

2.The general representation of depression being a lack of emotions and mentally shutting down

3. Bing Bong’s arc and emotional climax (favorite character, by far)

4. Riley’s emotional climax

5. One-off gags (e.g. facts vs opinions, catchy songs, most of the end credits), though I do have issues with these explained below

6. A lot of the psychological research that went into the movie


What didn’t work for me was the following:

1. The story of the Emotions taking away from the actual depth of characterization - Riley has less agency as she’s controlled more by her emotions than being an actual “being” (elaborated in #3 below)

2. The Emotions themselves being fairly one-dimensional as characters, though they have a small degree of emotional range; sure, they may gain a wider spectrum as they age, as evidenced by the parents, but what is their actual growth and development journey? Joy seemed to be the same from her day of conception to when Riley’s 11/12 and borderline annoying. Shouldn’t the emotions be more simple with younger age?

3. Similarly, the rules of the world are very, very strange. Pixar made an inventive take on the inner mind, but their consistency for the world at large appears lacking, particularly as other characters’ minds are reduced to stereotypical gags - the dad daydreaming about hockey, the mom daydreaming about the man who got away, teen boys freaking out about girls (which admittedly was VERY funny), the truck driver, the dog, the cat (particularly with the animals, why don’t they have sophisticated emotions like the humans had in their heads? Pixar went for obvious jokes). While they did show an interesting take on the mind expanding with age, it still leaves much to the imagination of how people grow and develop; not to mention why some people have different genders in their head or a different balance of emotions. Also, Bing Bong clearly had emotions - what’s going on inside his head?

4. On a minor note, if the story was about growing up and leaving childhood behind, the Toy Story films did a better job of this, particularly Toy Story 3.


Possibly my biggest irk is that, while this is a semi-autobiographical tale from Pete Docter based largely on his daughter, the story did not feel like his to tell. What should have been a really poignant coming of age story for Riley was reduced to this really adult take on what’s going on in her mind - the emotions were too smart, the humor was geared more for adults (reference and intelligence-wise) and the overall concept may have been too highbrow. As well, it felt rather disingenuous for Docter to tell this really personal story about someone else, when it would have made more sense for his daughter to tell THIS story.

On the other hand, had Docter made the story more about his own journey, that of the Dad’s, as he moves his whole family and ventures into a new land and new creative endeavor, while still figuring out how to balance his family life, particularly his inability to connect to his developing daughter, that would have been much more fascinating. A story of people coming of age together and learning to emotionally connect, especially when they have no idea what’s going on in the other person’s mind feels much more befitting of this than what actually happened.

Or a movie about a person learning to CONTROL their emotions, rather than letting their emotions get the best of them would have had a better message. I’ll easily admit my thoughts are judged by my own experiences and perspective, where I consider the world to currently be too emotional (particularly the US) and emotions getting the best of us causes us to disconnect from others. While the movie’s message of it being OK to accept emotions is a commendable one, a better message for society would be to also learn how to control them as we learn to relate to and communicate with others.

Because the movie only touched on one dimension of emotions in a disconnected-from-character-depth way, it fell flat for me. It was a great first stage of what could have been a more fleshed-out story as mentioned above. As it was, this felt like a gimmick that was best displayed by the dinner scene (which was a trailer).

I’m happy to give the film a rewatch and re-evaluation, but as of right now it gets only an AMBIVALENT RECOMMENDATION, as the artistry and technical prowess behind it is commendable. Also, Richard Kind’s Bing-Bong is just freaking amazing.

Last, it was known there were issues with the film for awhile, so if they were able to create this in a limited time and with limited sources, then that definitely deserves much applause.

Big Hero 6 and the Need for Good Storyboards

Considering the quality of talent involved, Big Hero 6 was a letdown. Co-Director Chris Williams was involved in large roles on two of the more charming Disney Feature Animation movies of the early 2000s - "The Emperor's New Groove" and "Bolt" - so I was rather hopeful that BH6 would at least have heart and charm. It did have both, but only in small doses, instead suffering from a syndrome of mid-2000s video games - great graphics (or animation) over solid, emotional narrative.

Before continuing to the problems, here's a quick list of the good:

1. Beautiful animation
2. Baymax was the best character, followed by Fred
3. Great to see ethnic diversity, even if one character bordered on stereotypical (Go Go)
4. Best of all, the pro education, science and experimentation message

However, none of the above was able to overshadow the generic story with mostly one-dimensional characters who lacked proper emotional arcs/development, particularly both lead character Hiro and the villain. Hiro's emotions lacked a good flow, causing his overall journey to feel shallow (not giving specifics so as to avoid spoilers). The villain had an absolutely unnecessary mystery element to them. There was no need to incorporate a mystery like that when doing an intro film for not just a single character, but a team. It was an extra layer that added nothing.

Like when Hiro and Baymax would take in a spectacular view, when zooming out to the see the big picture of the movie, the story becomes rather strange raising several questions. What is this story about? Is it about the brothers? Is it about a young genius discovering his potential? Is this a world with superheroes? Is this story about superheroes? Is it about relationships in general? Is it a team coming together to overcome the odds? It was scattered, to say the least, with the POV needing work.

As well, in a rather surprising move for a Disney movie, the world felt INCREDIBLY dangerous. The ragtag team of superheroes are actually a group of college students with no prior fighting skills utilizing super sharp and harmful weapons while the villain was overtly violent and murderous. It was shocking how often I felt the characters were in actual danger, particularly due to the previous world issue point (is this a world with superheroes who can take a beating or not?). Because these were real humans in larger-than-life situations, it lacked the proper weight when each superhero discovered their powers. Everyone just accepted their incredibly dangerous new reality as if there were no repercussions (and were suddenly mostly pros). That's a scary message for kids that more than balances out the positive message of point #4 above.

The reasons above could easily have been discovered and resolved during storyboarding had the film given that stage its proper due. To be fair, I have no idea what the pre-production and production phases of the film were like; it could have been plagued with problems. As it appears that there will be a sequel (which I am actually OK with), I hope Disney takes the time to learn from the mistakes of the first film. I'd love to see another example of a sequel that surpasses the original, even if the bar isn't that high.

An additional criticism that should have flagged the quality of the film - the poor use of pop music and rather mediocre soundtrack. The occasional pop song in a film can be great (such as the use of numerous Prince songs in Tim Burton's first Batman), but the ones in Big Hero 6 felt... childish. Granted, they weren't nearly as bad as other kids movies.

On a pet peeve final note, the character Honey-Lemon bugged me. Throughout the film she was the only character to properly pronounce Hiro's name as "Hee-Ro" rather than the more standard american "Hero." However, as even Hiro would pronounce his name as "Hero," I would have preferred if she had done the same. It's similar to Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation.