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.

Spider-Man: Homecoming Review

Spider-man: Homecoming is the Star Wars: The Force Awakens of the MCU/Spider-man movies. And that's fine. For the quick review: If you're curious about the movie, go see it. It's an enjoyable summer blockbuster for which a big audience will greatly help.

As for a more extended spoiler-free review...

The fast pacing/editing of the film helps it become Marvel's funniest movie yet, easily glossing over a number of conveniences in the story, but sadly ruining any dramatic moments. There were a number of what should have been great dramatic character moments that were undercut by poor setup, the previously mentioned fast pacing or just awkward editing. Indeed, subsequent scenes progress as if nothing happened.

Regarding acting, Tom Holland is an excellent Peter Parker / Spider-man. He exudes a natural intelligence and charisma, creating two distinct personalities for the two personas (the awkward Peter and confident Spider-man).  While it was great seeing Michael Keaton on screen, particularly as a villain, I found his character to lack real motivation - it felt more contrived for the story Marvel / Sony wanted to tell than actually fitting of the character - why did he have such a grudge / the motivation he had? Better writing would have helped him greatly. At least Marvel tried to do a villain justice with this one, though.

The supporting character were lots of fun (Ned, Liz, Michelle, Flash), but ultimately created in service of Peter - I look forward to seeing them fleshed out. Aunt May was a particular victim of this. While Marisa Tomei is fun in the role, Aunt May was mostly around to be sexualized, providing Peter very little of the dramatic character motivation (and reminder of Uncle Ben) that's such an integral part of Spider-man.

As for the core MCU characters, Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) and his assistant/friend Happy (Jon Favreau) did fine, but felt largely unnecessary. However, Chris Evans as Captain America stole every one of his cameos.

As a hybrid installment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, along with Sony's own Spider-man franchise, there are a TON of fun Easter Eggs and cameos that make the film a treat to watch, though also more of a Marvel movie than Spider-man, per se. Unlike with the Amazing Spider-man movies, I look forward to the pending "Spider-man Cinematic Universe" - it's been set-up nicely so far.

For music, following in the footsteps of Danny Elfman, Christopher Young, James Horner and Hans Zimmer, Michael Giacchino's score was underwhelming and ancillary - it nicely helped accentuate what was happening on-screen, but ultimately unmemorable. It kept teasing the retro theme used in the Marvel logo, but never built to it in the film. On a side note, of the pantheon of Spider-man composers, Christopher Young is my favorite of the bunch for his work on Spider-man 3 and contributions to Spider-man 2.

All of the above said, Spider-man: Homecoming is definitely RECOMMENDED. It's a fun time, but more of an intro chapter/return-to-form than proper Spider-man movie. Regardless, I'm looking forward to more Spider-man.

Jurassic World Review - A Successful Modernization, But Nothing New

Jurassic World was probably the biggest and best example of a "been there, done that" movie, but it was surprisingly enjoyable after going in with low expectations.

There was good humor and interesting characters, but there wasn't so much a story as things "just happened" and character arcs were ho-hum. Bryce Dallas Howard had the most interesting story (a mix of Alan Grant and Richard Hammond from the first one - genius scientist playing god/obsessed with control and not understanding kids/family, learning the value of the opposite over the course of the movie), but the film was neither built around her nor gave her the right focus or beats. As well, Chris Pratt didn't entirely work as the action expert due to his comedy getting in the way, despite some good banter/delivery of his lines with BDH (although BDH lacked chemistry with him).

Speaking of which, the meta humor was cheeky, but somewhat distracting. While it was fun seeing and hearing the references to the original Jurassic Park, some early humor about the situation took away from a later point in the movie, as well as raising overall questions on the logic and world building of Jurassic World.

Most disappointing, Michael Giacchino continued his streak of uninspired scores by creating another fairly generic big orchestra score, which may have been a commentary on the movie itself - reusing old cues and trying to be bigger, but the end result being rather generic. I hope studios take note to try and find someone else to follow in John Williams' footsteps (suggest either Thomas Newman or David Arnold).

All that said, the film earns a  RECOMMENDED for those wanting to revisit the world, but don't expect the intelligence, intrigue, excitement or awe of either of the Spielberg versions.

Pixar's Up movie review

Up is a delightful story - beautiful, touching and powerful.

As much as I'd love to support Pixar, I'd be more inclined to recommend Up as a film that people watch privately in their homes, if only to make the film more of the intimate experience that it is. Believe me when I tell you how unfortunate it can be when some of the most heart-wrenching moments of the film are interrupted by the shuffling of feat of other little noise distractions that are exacerbated in the open-forum nature of the movie theater.

As intimate and touching as the film is, it almost seems like the film is trying to purposely manipulate you into sadness. Take for example the character of Russel the child. I will. not say how, but they keep tacking on things into his background that try to squeeze every last drop of emphasis out of your emotional grab bag (probably not the best way of putting it, but hopefully you get the idea).

Indeed, even the opening 10 minutes of the film are some of the best 10 minutes in film storytelling in years. Notice how I didn't say animation, as Pixar (and indeed the medium in general) has moved beyond the restrictions of "master animators" and stepped into the forum of "master storytellers" (though the starting point of the latter could be argued for some time, i.e. they've been master storytellers for roughly the past decade).

It's a solid tale that has plenty of mild humor, if not a constant comedy tone. Up's humor is more light-hearted in nature.

Probably the best way to describe the film is a mix between character study and coming-of-age, even if the characters aren't all children. Up is a very human tale, with a rather human presentation and it makes it all the better.

Not surprisingly, the film is excellently scored by composer Michael Giacchino, who only gets better with each project he takes on. He's often been called a modern John Williams, and listening to Up you can definitely hear that as the film sounds and feels like Star Wars.

Speaking of which, Up does a very good job with it's action scenes, becoming very reminiscent of Star Wars. The opening of the film even has a Citizen Kane vibe to it. Considering how those two films are held in such high regard, any combination can only be considered good.

As great as Up is, if you have to see it in theaters, do yourself a favor and wait a couple of weeks for the crowd to die down. Otherwise, just wait until the Blu-ray for that purely intimate experience.



For those curious, my order of favorites for Pixar films is Incredibles, Ratatouile, tie between Wall-E, Up, and probably Finding Nemo (need to rewatch), followed by the Toy Story films, then A Bug's Life (haven't seen Cars yet; shame, I know)