A Review of "The Incredibles" 500
First off, this is Slashdot. You know, News for nerds, yadda yadda. So, let's start off with talking about the special effects, or more generally, Pixar showing off all that they have learned and accomplished.
The big hype in the animation sector has been the characters - real human people. Don't be fooled by the hype. Pixar has been doing humans as characters since "Toy Story". With the single exception of "A Bug's Life", human beings have featured as a major character in every Pixar film, and while the effect here is fantastic, it is evolutionary, not revolutionary. No, what stands out in terms of technical acheivement here is the movie's stunning use of light. Sure, "Finding Nemo" accomplished a lot here, but in that film, light was a tool to give depth to the water that surrounded the characters. Here in "The Incredibles" the light is a thing unto itself. Gorgeous shadows, warm red lava, sunlight against clouds, all of these things are breathtaking. The use of sunlight, especially in the jungle sequences, give objects a three dimensionality they have never possessed in a Pixar film before. It's clear that Pixar didn't have the chops prior to this film to do action sequences, because prior to this, the feeling of moving in a three dimensional space just wasn't there.
The movie itself is not just a breakthrough technically, it's a very different movie from previous Pixar productions. This is very intentional. All previous Pixar movies have been dreamed up primarily by John Lasseter and Andrew Stanton, Pixar veterans. So the story goes, these guys are looking back at Pixar history and while they see the series of wonderful made films that the rest of us have seen, apparently they also saw something else: an encroaching rut. There was a very real chance that Pixar could have become the next Disney in a very short time, making well produced and financially successful repeats of their earlier successes for years on end. They didn't want that to happen. And that takes fresh blood. Enter Brad Bird. Bird was an art student with Lasster, and had made one feature film five years ago - the sady underseen "Iron Giant". Brad Bird was challenged to make a different kind of movie, with complete creative control - he wrote and directed. This gamble paid off hugely.
This is not a kids movie. Seriously. Previous Pixar films have been consumate kids movies, movies so well made, and so funny that parents could enjoy them. And there are even a few adult gags the kids might not get. "The Incredibles" is a completely different tack. "The Incredibles" is an action movie, first and foremost, one of the best of the current crop of superhero films. Then it is a family film second, and a kids movie third, if at all.
To give you the basics: the world is full of superheros. The biggest are Mr. Incredible, super strong and invulnerable, Elastigirl, a Ms. Fantastic of sorts, and Frozone, a Silver Surfer/Iceman hybrid. Due to events that occur on Mr. Incredible and Elastigirl's wedding day, superheros wind up on the wrong end of - get this for deja vu - lawsuits. Lawsuits by the thousands. The government comes up with a relocation program, hiding the supers and pardoning them from actions performed in spandex, with the agreement that they hero no more.
Mr. Incredible becomes Bob Parr, an overweight insurance adjuster, with three kids. The symbolism is rampant. Once incredible, now he must suppress both his gifts and his insatiable need to help people, getting in trouble with his boss for actually helping their customers. From incredible, to just par. He's huge. He fills up the entirety of his cubical space, he fills up his entire car, he bends doorknobs, and cutting through his son's steak, he cuts through the table. He is too big for the small world that society wants to peg him in.
On the other hand, he's missing the one incredible part of his life - his family. His son Dash is tired of suppressing his lightning speed, and his teenage daughter Violet is tired of moving everytime the government needs to cover up her father's identity. When she can't hide behind her goth hair, she uses her powers to turn invisible. Managing the two of them and their third child, a normal baby named Jack Jack, Elastigirl is getting tired of being the only real parent.
Their marriage is strained, their kids are young and angry, his job is about to fall apart, and her patience is thin. It's a domestic situation primed to explode, and for the many of us out their who have seen couples divorce, we know exactly where it's going.
Except something happens.
And thereby hangs a tale. As you can see, this isn't some allegory about our lives from the point of view of a bug or a toy or a monster. It IS our lives. But with superpowers. Much like the also fabulous "Shaun of the Dead" the real story is a human one, but framed within spectacular events. The visuals are awesome, the special effects are fabulous, and the dialog not only funny but at times witty. I can bet that 90% of Slashdotters will see themselves on screen, most likely identifying with the daughter Violet or the villain Syndrome.
The performances are of course amazing. Pixar continues its talent of finding distinctive and expressive voices in the world of more traditional acting. Jason Lee as syndrome hints at his performance in "Dogma" and Craig T. Nelson shows us he can be so much more than just the coach from Coach. Holly Hunter shows her never ending flexibility (no pun intended), and newcomer Sarah Vowell as Violet (from National Public Radio's "This American Life") is quite delightful. And the only complaint about Samuell L. Jackson is that there isn't enough of him.
One sad difference between "The Incredibles" and Pixar's previous offerings is that it has a few minor niggles. Regardless of how you feel about Pixar's previous work, it was all carefully and consummately made. The movie's mixture of family interactions and superheros almost always works, but is slightly shakey with its villain Syndrome. He's got great lines, a good backstory, and a perfectly over the top performance from Jason Lee, but something just doesn't quite work, and that's the first time I've ever said that about a Pixar flick. But in the end it doesn't matter. So much works here, that the little stuff gets washed away.
Re:Copy? no... "satire" (Score:5, Insightful)
It's precisely because of that sort of thing that the movie works. Rather than "Copy", though, it's more frequently called "tribute" and "satire" (the latter gaining them protection from lawsuits).
There's touches of Fantastic Four, X-Men, Superman, Spiderman, James Bond, Rankin and Bass HeatMiser and more. Just look for them and enjoy the cultural richness
:-)
Re:Computer animation at its best (Score:3, Insightful)
I haven't seen The Incredibles yet, but I know what you mean. I saw a trailer for The Arctic Express the other day, and I really disliked the animation style it uses -- it's trying too hard, IMHO, to be realistic. The end result just looks creepy (especially the Tom Hanks lookalike train conductor ).
I loved it (Score:3, Insightful)
I think there is something silly about the critics (and wanna be critics) finding funny faults with something that isn't "so believable" about movies like this.
You can suspend disbelief about the super strength, the elasticity, the super speed, and invisibilty of cartoon characters but you have a hard time with they straw-man villain of the story?
Hello?
It's called "EN-TER-TAIN-MENT" --say it with me.
Save that kind of criticism for Start Wars: Revenge of the Sith
This movie is fantastic. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's the message.
In public schools, kids who are incredibly intelligent and wish to progress forward in learning are discouraged to do so because it would be "unfair" and what have you. Because of that, they are sent down to the same classes as those who are, to put the bluntly, stupid(or just not as gifted).
It's the same thing in this movie, the unique(or "super") are sent down to live with those who they were once helping because they don't want it anymore.
Now MAYBE I'm just reading too much into something that isn't there, but it sounds like it is a metaphor for an ignorant populace that no longer wants to be helped by ones who can, which could be a metaphor for those who are creative and intelligent. Essentially, scientists and engineers(and the combinations of the two).
They all celebrate mediocrity and everyone being the same. It's a rather socialist point of view, and the Incredibles finally pull themselves out of their stuper and go back to helping mankind.
That's my view on it. Which is why I'm going to go see it again.
And again.
Many, many times over.
Re:Man... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Saw it last night too... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wet hair rendered (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, if we look at some recent Star Wars and Matrix film achievements, I'd say current animation far exceeds constraints of the story. Or rather, it's not the animation capabilities holding back the story. No amount of CG would have made Star Wars good, or The Matrix better. Titanic might be a good example of CG gone right.
Rule of kings (Score:4, Insightful)
The intelligent guy who wants to manipulate the world, he's the one who wants to "rule."
I think the point is much more "it's important to be yourself even if you're not 'normal'" instead of "use your talents to control the world".
And just to be devil's advocate: the young girl's powers DO go together. The theme is "she's hiding from the world and pushes people away." Like a lot of teenage girls. Much like the boy's powers are along the "bundle of energy" theme, and Elastigal is "stretched thin" as a mother.
Re:Saw it last night too... (Score:2, Insightful)
Disney has a very poor bargaining position, regardless of the posturing that Eisner has been attempting. The corporate culture is now concerned with profit first and story-telling last, unlike when Walt Sr ran the place.
IOW, Disney is now fat-n-lazy since they've "made it big" and have huge cash flow from past accomplishments. Middle management becomes way more concerned with defending turf rather then trying to achieve the corporate goals. I doubt that even 5% of the employees have a clue how to bring that Disney magic back (and probably 0% of them are in a position of power to make it happen).
An Origin Tale done right. (Score:3, Insightful)
I really want to see Pixar do more stories of The Incredibles. But please, not so many that they become mediocre.
Shot for Shot Spoof of Rocket Bike Sequence (Score:3, Insightful)
A review of the review (Score:5, Insightful)
"It's clear that Pixar didn't have the chops prior to this film to do action sequences, because prior to this, the feeling of moving in a three dimensional space just wasn't there."
I don't see how you can make that argument. Video games, which have long been focused solely on action, and are far behind the quality seen in this film, have been doing action quite successfully for a long time now. If anything, action is MORE suited to poorer quality graphics, because everything whizzes by so fast you don't have time to notice any details. For the stylized cartoonish animation that Pixar does, the technological enhancements really aren't that noticeable anymore. I think Pixar is reaching a point of diminishing returns here... which isn't bad, it's just to say that things are just about as good as they are going to get doing this sort of cartoon animation.
"Previous Pixar films have been consummate kids movies, movies so well made, and so funny that parents could enjoy them. And there are even a few adult gags the kids might not get. "The Incredibles" is a completely different tack. "The Incredibles" is an action movie, first and foremost, one of the best of the current crop of superhero films. Then it is a family film second, and a kids movie third, if at all."
I mostly agree with this. While I think that this movie would be very entertaining to children, they weren't it's focus. The movie was told from the perspective of the parents, with the children being the supporting characters. A lot of the issues that the parents deal with will fly over the heads of the children, which is ironic in a sense, as you see the same thing happening to the child characters in the movie. Still, it should be made clear that this movie doesn't really go any further than that, and most likely couldn't and remain a kid's movie. Non of the adult characters are really faced with any complex situations or moral dilemmas. There's a firm line between good and evil. Things go down a rather predictable path. Things are spelled out mostly and little left to our intuition. So don't go to the movie expecting anything like that. The ADD kids will have their attention kept by the action, and the ADD adults will have their attention kept by their identification with the adult characters and jokes (ya and the action too =P).
The movie's mixture of family interactions and superheros almost always works, but is slightly shakey with its villain Syndrome. He's got great lines, a good backstory, and a perfectly over the top performance from Jason Lee, but something just doesn't quite work, and that's the first time I've ever said that about a Pixar flick. But in the end it doesn't matter. So much works here, that the little stuff gets washed away.
OK to discuss this I'm going to have to throw out a few spoilers here, so you should probably stop reading here. I think his character worked quite well... for a kids movie. He was a two dimensional villain, [SPOILER] which was somewhat disappointing given that they had taken the time to make him be a childhood fan of Mr. Incredible. It almost looked like they were leading up to a sympathetic villain, but then decided they wanted a very firm line between good and evil in this movie. If perhaps they had made Mr. Incredible more at fault for Syndrome's turn to evil, and have Syndrome struggle a bit more instead of being totally evil, he could have been made into a more interesting character. It would also have been nice to show a change in Mr. Incredible, from a young man who didn't really like children or understand them, to a father. They could have made Syndrome's attack on the city not be a totally evil move, but rather have his intention to be to put on a show and be a hero (with the attitude of collateral damage being just "breaking a few eggs"), and the machine goes out of control. Take out his serial killing of heroes, and he might be able to be a villain you could have s
Re:Alan Moore "Watchmen" (Score:3, Insightful)
Would I deny my kids the right to take the same fun risks? Nope. But the safety nazis and their lawyers have already spoken.
In fact, I bet that ~30ft slide isn't there anymore. I'll have to go back one day to find out.
--
note to parents (Score:4, Insightful)
This isn't "Finding Nemo" - it has people getting killed. It shows parental fear & inability to protect children. Scarey stuff for a four or five year old.
I saw (and thoroughly enjoyed) the film yesterday, but it was partly spoiled by screaming babies. If you're the couple at the Colo Springs showing with four kids under five, that allowed the one baby to cry continuously - please don't do that to a theater again. Next time someone might say something awkward to you. Like "hey man, go be a dad".
And next time, don't assume that because something's animated it's great for kids.
Re:Wet hair rendered (Score:3, Insightful)
Water is actually very easy to model because of what we know about fluid dynamics. Easier than almost anything else, actually. Fire is also pretty easy for precisely the same reason.
Clouds are also easy because they're governed by a particular fractal - the plasma fractal.
The only problem, I think, is that everything else looks so cartoonish by comparison to the realistic water, fire, and clouds.
Re:A review of the review (Score:5, Insightful)
**SPOILERS**
Did you watch the movie? That's exactly what did happen. Syndrome wasn't trying to kill random innocents or take over the world, he was trying to make a name for himself as a hero. Once he was a hero, he wanted to use his technology to eliminate the edge heroes had over the common man.
I thought he was a rather sympathetic character. The wanton killing of earlier heroes in developing his machines was a bit much, but everything he did was a backlash against Mr. Incredible's original rejection of him.
Syndrome's character was defined by his anger over the treatment of the common man (particularly himself) by heroes. He took things way too far, but his goals do make a modicum of sense.
exactly (Score:2, Insightful)
Anyone with wealth automatically exploited society to get it. Its not possible that someone actually earned their money. Not only that, but in order to keep everyone equal we must keep people from becoming rich. This is why socialism is dangerous and this is why the Soviet Union failed so spectacularly. This line of thinking actually does lead to equality, but it leads to everyone being equally poor. Those with skill and drive and talent are forced into mediocrity or at the very least are left without an incentive to perform. The author of the parent post implies that inequality is a bad thing. He fails to recognize that people really are not equal. He cannot see that some people work harder or are more talented and that is why they are successful.
The goal should be to raise everyone's standard of living, not to destroy those who are successful. Of the vast increase in the well being of hundreds of millions of people that has occurred in the 200 year course of the industrial revolution to date, virtually none of it can be attributed to the direct redistribution of resources from rich to poor. The potential for improving the lives of poor people through redistribution is nothing compared to the apparently limitless potential of increasing production. Anyone interested in learning more about this line of thinking should read The Industrial Revolution - Past and Future [minneapolisfed.org], a paper by Nobel Prize winning economist Robert Lucas.
Re:Saw it last night too... (Score:5, Insightful)
And this is why Disney probably won't be able to make a deal with Pixar. Disney has never dealt with a company that can consistantly come up with new and interesting characters. The Disney way is to re-hash successful characters. The Pixar way is to create new. Disney can not understand this way of business.
While Disney could re-hash direct to video Toy Story movies, Pixar will continue to turn out interesting new characters and stories, and make a killing at the box office and through home sales. Pixar operates more under the original 17 year copyright law, while Disney operates under the current copyright law.
Re:Randism? In a world where everyone is super... (Score:3, Insightful)
What bothered me was the implication that being exceptional is effortless. The super-powered people in the movie are all born "super." In reality, if you want to be a concert violinist, sure, having the optimal genome for a violinist is great, but you're also going to need to practice a heck of a lot. I don't want to make a spoiler, but the scene with the baby near the end clearly seems to show that the writer considers hard work and practice to be irrelevant.
I'm not that familiar with Nietzsche [wikipedia.org], but from a brief perusal of the Wikipedia article, it seems like he thought that the superman was in some sense above questions of right and wrong, and that certainly wasn't the message of the movie at all. Mr. Incredible feels a crushingly strong sense of moral obligation stemming from his powers.
Re:Man... (Score:2, Insightful)
My memory's a little fuzzy on this, but wasn't there a reference to Bob having been at that insurance company for 3 years? Jack Jack wasn't that old. It's possible he really only did have 2 kids when it started.
powers of just the right magnitude (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wet hair rendered (Score:3, Insightful)
Kids push limits (Score:2, Insightful)
One of the things I think you don't see about kids is that they will always try to push the boundaries. You probably did, I did, and the kids I deal with today do as well. In other words, kids will always try to be unsafe.
As an example, when I was a kid back in the mid-70s, skateboards were popular. I had a skateboard like many of the other kids. It was about 18" long and about five inches wide. I'll tell you, standing up on this skateboard was an accomplishment. But I got pretty good--I could ride around the playground and not fall down too often. Some other kids weren't so talented and there were plenty of sprained arms as well as skinned-elbows and such.
But as the hospital visits for broken arms and such increased, the skateboard companies made bigger and wider skateboards. These were much easier to stand on and ride around on without falling off. I remember the first time I saw one, I thought "My God! You could hold a dance one one of those things!" But it was a "safer" skateboard. This is a good thing, right?
Nope. Kids started trying to jump them. Kids started trying to ride them down staircase bannisters. They started doing all of these tricks on them. And they got hurt--but they got hurt worse than they ever would have gotten hurt by the skateboards of my day. We never would have considered the stunts that kids do today on our skateboards. Heck, just being able to stay upright on them was challenge enough! Yes, I sprained both my wrists learning to skateboard. Of course, a friend of my nephew managed to lose a bunch of teeth and did a real number on his nose when he fell off his skateboard while going down a railing. And yes--he was wearing a helmet.
So if you go all out to create this safe environment for kids where they won't get hurt, they will work to find ways around this safe environment. Some of these may lead to a greater risk of injury than the original environment would have been.
So you don't want to create an environment where kids will not get hurt. What you want to create, instead, is an environment where kids will get hurt, but not so severely that they will end up in a wheelchair.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure I see that nowadays. The threat of litigation--if my kid breaks his arm, it must be the school's fault--forces schools try to create environments where you can't get hurt. What they can't make safe, they will rule out (ie, no skateboards).