Incredibles 2: A "Parr for the Course" Superhero Movie

This review’s a little late, I know. But at least it didn’t take fourteen years.

Alright, now that we’ve got that obligatory joke out of the way, how does Incredibles 2 fare?

The first thing I’ll praise about this film over the first one is how much better the animation has come. There’s definitely a lot more detail with the hair and the clothing, and the action scenes look very fluid and impressive. But even with all this detail, it still manages to maintain the stylized Iron Giant-esque character designs from the first movie, which I appreciated.

I will say that even though the animation is much better, the first movie had a better mastery of light and color. The first movie had some really cool shots with really effective mood lighting and colors given the situation, and in this movie, it felt like a lot of it had ever-present bright colors and everything was washed in this soft golden light. While it makes for a bright and colorful movie, it also makes for a less visually interesting movie than the first one.

The Jack-Jack stuff is funny and cute with how they show all of his powers, especially that battle with the raccoon. And I appreciated the dynamic shift that happens in the movie between Bob and Helen, where she’s the new hero in action and Bob has to stay home with the kids. It’s a side of both of these characters we didn’t really see in the first movie.

By and large, I’m glad that the sequel doesn’t feel like a rehash of the first movie, which was a big fear I had after watching some of the trailers. There’s some stuff that feels like repeats of the first movie (a superhero doing missions for a corporation, a tech-based villain who hates supers, etc.) but it’s all pretty superficial. It definitely feels like its own movie.

That being said, the movie’s pretty predictable, especially when it comes to the villain. As I predicted in my Ant-Man and the Wasp article, they opt for another Disney surprise villain reveal. Admittedly, the villain has some pretty good speeches and understandable motivations (I mean, for a superhero movie), but I am getting so sick of this recent cliché with Disney films, especially now that it’s bleeding into Pixar. With Incredibles 2, the past two Pixar movies have had a twist where a supposed ally was the villain all along, and I’ve just grown so bored with this twist. It’s becoming so predictable when every Disney movie is doing it now. Why can’t villains just be out-and-out villains anymore?

On the whole, Incredibles 2 is nowhere near as good as the first movie, which is to be expected. The Incredibles is a classic, one of my favorite Pixar movies, and one of my favorite superhero movies. It would be hard to beat, or even match the same quality. But that doesn’t mean this movie is bad. It’s good, just not as good as the first. I just hold Pixar to such high standards with animated movies that when they deliver one that’s just okay, it feels like a bit of a disappointment. But if this movie were made by a lesser animation studio (like, say, Illumination) it would probably be seen as really great.

The feeling I got from leaving this movie reminded me of the feeling I had after leaving Finding Dory: it’s a fine movie, but it doesn’t have the emotional weight or impact that the first movie had. Thus, the sequel doesn’t feel as important as the first installment and, in some regards, a little unnecessary.

That feeling could also come from the fact that Incredibles 2 was released in 2018, when there are already a butt-ton of superhero movies on the market. The first movie was back in 2004, before the superhero movie boom, at a time when superhero movie releases were more sporadic and not always of the best quality. It had it’s own identity to set it apart from not only other superhero movies, but superhero entertainment aimed at children and families. Incredibles 2, while a fine film, feels like just another superhero movie in an already overflowing sea of tights and masks. It doesn’t have what the first movie had that made it stand out, be that the subject matter or the time of release. Maybe Syndrome's plan actually came true: "When everyone's super, no one will be."

Also, it needed more Frozone and Edna in it. Come on, Disney, you love to give every character and their mother a spin-off movie, why not give one to these two?

An Ant-Man Theory: Janet van Dyne is a Villain

I know, I know. After the universe-shattering finale of Infinity War, it’s hard to care about the MCU’s next film, Ant-Man and the Wasp.

Regardless, I have a highly likely theory about the movie that may or may not drum up some more interest in it.

Recall the first Ant-Man movie, and how a large part of Hank Pym’s backstory was that his wife Janet van Dyne – the original Wasp – was lost in a mission when she shrunk down into the inescapable Quantum Realm. Janet will apparently return from the Quantum Realm in the sequel, however, and will be played by Michelle Pfeiffer.

Now here’s the theory: What if Janet will turn out to be a villain?

If you’re familiar with the character, it sounds a bit outlandish, I know, but here’s my evidence:

1.  The Yellowjacket Syndrome

Within the laws of the Ant-Man movies, prolonged usage of the size-shrinking Pym Particles without proper protection can result in a damaged mental state. This happened in the first Ant-Man movie with Darren Cross, a.k.a. Yellowjacket, which helped make him a more unhinged villain by the finale. It seems that something similar is happening with Scott Lang, as every time we’ve seen him use the Pym Particles to grow into Giant-Man, it’s accompanied by an evil laugh. This could just be more some sort of dramatic effect on Scott’s part, but it seems like too much of a coincidence.

With this being said, is it really out of the question for Janet to become corrupted in a similar way?

Unless they really want to mess with the character, Janet probably didn’t start out evil. However, the Quantum Realm probably shares a lot of similar health hazards that the Pym Particle does. And given that Janet has been stranded in this realm for decades, it’s easy to see how she could snap and become a villain.

In addition, her decades of isolation could also lead her to have a resentment for her husband. If her mental state really is that fractured, it would be very easy for her to blame Hank for leaving her stranded there and never coming to rescue her.

2.  Lack of Advertisement

As stated before, Janet’s return from the Quantum Realm will play some sort of part in the movie. Given the history she has with Hank and the impact her disappearance had on him, this will no doubt be an important part in the emotional timetable of the movie.

So why haven’t we seen or heard a whole lot about it?

The obvious answer here is that something about Janet’s character or her return is a big spoiler for the movie, and they don’t want to reveal too much of it in the advertisement. Other than her character poster, we haven’t seen anything of Janet in the movie. There’s a bit in the second trailer about Hank “opening up the Quantum Realm”, presumably to search for her, but we don’t see much of it. The advertisement for the movie seems to focus on Ant-Man and the new Wasp taking down the Ghost after she steals Hank’s tech. To me, it seems intentionally misleading.

In my experience with movie advertisements, a lack of marketing for a certain character – even if they are allegedly in the main cast – means there’s some sort of big spoiler about the character, usually a death (see Suicide Squad, Avengers: Age of Ultron, and Solo: A Star Wars Story). Now I highly doubt they’ll kill off Janet right after they bring her back, especially with a talented actress like Michelle Pfeiffer cast, so the villain angle seems the most likely choice for a character spoiler.

3.  Disney Sure Loves its Surprise Villains

Since Wreck-It Ralph came out, Disney has had this weird obsession with making a seemingly benign character a secret villain. A twist villain can add some good twists and emotional weight to the movie, but Disney does it so much now that it’s almost predictable and kind of boring. Wreck-It Ralph, Frozen, Big Hero 6, Zootopia, and Coco have all had a reveal involving an ally being the main villain (Moana had a similar reveal, but in the reverse). Even before 2012, Disney had done the villain twist before with movies like Monsters, Inc and Up.

(Side note: I also feel like Incredibles 2 is gonna pull the same twist with its villain.)

And of course, Marvel has started to get in on the act, with surprise antagonists in both Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. So it stands to reason that Ant-Man and the Wasp could very likely follow in those footsteps with the surprise villain, given how all the advertisements seem to focus on Ghost, who doesn’t really seem to have a lot of recognizable goals as an antagonist.

Plus, what would be a bigger twist than Hank Pym’s wife, the beloved Wasp, turning out to be a bad guy?

But here’s the thing about this theory: I don’t want to be right.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe has already derailed the character of the Wasp enough. Aside from the fact that they took out Ant-Man and the Wasp’s roles as founding Avengers (Wasp is the one who comes up with the name in the comics, for god’s sake), the two incarnations of the Wasp we have bare little resemblance to the character from the comics.

The Wasp is supposed to be this bubbly, energetic character, but the two versions we have in the movies are a surly businesswoman with daddy issues, and her disappeared mom who may or may not be a villain. And once they bring her back from the Quantum Realm, I doubt they’re going to keep her bubbly comic personality with her sporting the same weary dimensional traveler look that Ford Pines had in Gravity Falls.

So yeah, I really hope they don’t pull this twist and make Janet a villain, thus further bastardizing the character and her role in the Marvel Universe. But from my point of view, it just seems entirely too likely.

Or I could be entirely wrong. But if I am right, I just wanted my prediction documented.

Thank you for reading. Tune in next week when I discuss my theory of how Piglet will be the secret main villain of Christopher Robin.

Arrested Development, Season 5: Part 1 of 2, I Guess?

Now the story of a cancelled cult classic sitcom, and the online streaming service who had no choice but to bring it back for the second time.

It’s Arrested Development: Season 5.

Arrested Development never really had mainstream notoriety, and that’s a real shame. It’s one of those shows that can somehow create a cast of awful people that never change for the better, and yet make them endearing. It’s got a masterful use of running gags and bizarre, fast-paced comedy that probably isn’t for everyone, but it’s certainly an overlooked relic of the mid 2000’s.

With all that praise, Season 4 was less than spectacular. While I only watched the first two episodes of the original cut of Season 4 before I gave up, the recut of the season still wasn’t living up to the expectations of the rest of the show. Between keeping the family separated, not-so-compelling subplots, and the confusing timeline of the season cutting back and forth between present day and flashbacks, it didn’t really feel like the Arrested Development I knew and loved.

Season 5 is slightly better, but seeing as how we only have the first eight episodes of the season right now, I feel like it’s sort of unfair to review and judge the season at the moment.

That doesn’t mean I’m not going to.

The first thing I’ll praise is that it does get the Bluth family back together so we can see them interacting off of each other, which was the backbone of the show during its original run. This being the fifth season in the show’s run, it also pokes fun at some of the recurring tropes of the Bluth family, such as Michael’s repeated “I’m leaving this family for good” attitude – which at this point is such a casual thing he says that even Michael doesn’t believe it most times.

However, even this familiar aspect of the show can get shaky at times. Lindsay is gone for a good chunk of the season after she pulls a Michael and leaves the family, despite the fact that her running for Congress is one of the big recurring bits in the season. I’m assuming she’ll be in more of the season once the final eight episodes drop and we’ll return to the election plotline, but the fact that she’s not there for a portion of this half means that there’s a hole left in the family dynamic.

Because of Lindsay’s absence, it also feels like Tobias has very little connection to the family anymore. They try to keep his presence useful to the season by introducing his bastard son Murphy-Brown (who just kind of stumbles into the show without any real explanation), but he doesn’t feel as connected as everyone else. Of course, that’s often the point of Tobias’s character, but considering he’s my favorite member of the Bluth family, the fact that he’s been so far underutilized in Season 5 greatly disappoints me.

Contrasted to Season 4, Season 5 has a lot more intriguing plot threads that feel more “Bluth-y.” Despite Tobias’s lack of focus, I thought the parts with him trying to impersonate missing members of the Bluth family in order to prove his place among them was fun. Lindsay running for office was an interesting way to go with the character, despite the fact that that plotline has so far been stumbling with the absence of Lindsay. Gob coming to terms with his possibly homosexuality and Maeby hiding out in disguise at a retirement village were both in tune with their characters, and seeing as how these plotlines seemed to be resolved by the end of part one of the season, I’m curious to see what roles they’ll play in part two. Buster being the one in prison now is also a fun way to go with the character and one of the show’s most prevalent themes: a family member in jail.

I still don’t think it’s as laugh-out-loud funny as the first three seasons, which was a similar problem I had with Season 4. But while Season 4 had a lot of moments were it was just uncomfortable to see how unlikeable these characters could be, Season 5 starts off with a lot of familial drama that kind of bogs it down. And not the funny family drama that the show it known for, either. Fortunately, the second half (of the first half of the season) gets much better with that, trying to steer the show back to what it was in its original run. It’s not the same laugh-a-minute comedy of the first three seasons, but it feels like it’s at least trying to be at times.

When I initially completed this run of episodes, I was much more critical with my review of it since it didn’t feel complete. So many plot threads were left dangling and it felt like Arrested Development had lost its steam. But right before typing this review up, I found out that this was merely part one of Season 5, and so I decided to rework my thoughts so I didn’t make a huge mistake and completely lambast one of my favorite sitcoms.

So yes, the first part of Season 5 feels incomplete, but that’s because it is. It’s a somewhat shaky start, but certainly better than Season 4 in many spots. It still doesn’t feel exactly like the original run of the show, but it does feel a few steps closer than the previous season. It leaves you with questions to be answered in the second part, like what Oscar’s stake in all this is, and what’s going to happen with the murder of Lucille 2 (if she even is dead).

In addition to the outcome of those questions, I am curious to see the outcome of the season overall, and if it lives up to the previous seasons I so loved. Because I would hate to pull a Michael and leave the Bluth family for good.

On the next Matt Reviews: Arrested Development:

Matt contemplates whether recreating the running gags and style of an Arrested Development episode would have been better translated in a video review like he used to do, maybe with a cheeky narrator with a successful directing career.

And Ron Howard decides to compete with Netflix’s Marvel shows by trying to tie Arrested Development to his Han Solo origin movie, only to get into hot water with Disney and the police for trying to steal a Chewbacca costume and kidnap Donald Glover.