I just saw The Incredibles and it was very good!

Oh, those National Review guys are so cute. I wonder what they thought of the movie's depiction of the insurance industry as corporate bloodsuckers? I mean, there's some cartoonish (ha) Objectivism there, along with the jabs at trial lawyers, but the attacks on public education seem as much in line with '60s anti-conformism as '90s Gingrichism. And the government itself is embodied by the sympathetic agent who keeps on bailing Bob out and reminds him tiredly that taxpayers are footing the bill for his outbursts. And Bob's character arc is all about him learning that he can't do things on his own, he needs other people. Politically, the movie's a nigh-on incoherent mishmash. Which is fine with me. I had a good time.

Yeah, I loved those -- made perfect sense that they didn't show them until the end of the movie, as otherwise they would have given it away. ;-)

Frozone was more a straight crib of Iceman.

Violet was indeed adorable, but the hint of creepiness was definitely of a bulimic nature, given that she could actually become invisible. I mean, how much more anorexic could she be?

Interesting take, but to be pedantic, anorexia and bulimia are separate disorders.

http://www.risingsun.net/cosplayers/elastigirl

muhfuggin' FREAK, yo!

Also, I don't think I mentioned this elsewhere, but I am sorta slightly convinced the bit where Violet and...argh, the older son's name, who I'm blanking on...run out from the tunnel and jump away towards the camera, followed by lava suddenly flooding out, is a *very* quick but specific homage to the scene in Return of the King where Frodo and Sam do the same while fleeing from Mt. Doom. Then again I could be on crack.

Just saw this on blu-ray and while it was pretty good after a while I couldn't stand Holly Hunter's shpeech impediment anymore. (not the drawl, her s that shoundsh like sh all the time - hash she ever been in a movie with Sean Connery?)

mum is HOT in this

Mirage is pretty hottt as well

can i have some simpsons porn

So anyway.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/we-ve-seen-the-power-packed-first-footage-from-the-incr-1796939620

Talks one isolated scene shown in particular but the key points:

* Starts immediately where the first film left off with the Underminer.

* "will largely focus on Elastigirl, leaving Mr. Incredible at home to watch Jack-Jack."

Updates updates updates:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/one-of-these-new-incredibles-2-characters-is-totally-th-1822303947

New characters per Disney PR stuff and who plays them:

WINSTON DEAVOR (voice of Bob Odenkirk) leads a world-class telecommunications company alongside his genius sister, Evelyn. Ultra-wealthy, savvy and suave, Winston goes big in everything he does—including his infatuation with Supers. He has been a supporter of Supers returning—all he needs is a hero (or three) to help him change public perception and bring them back into the sunlight.

EVELYN DEAVOR (voice of Catherine Keener), the brilliant brainchild behind her brother Winston’s telecommunications company, knows her way around tech. She loves tinkering with tech, and has never met a problem she can’t solve.

VOYD (voice of Sophia Bush) is a young, overeager “wannabe” Super and a mega-fan of Elastigirl. Her superpower is the ability to divert and manipulate objects around her by creating voids that allow the objects to appear and disappear, and shift in space.

The Supers find an advocate in a dignified foreign AMBASSADOR (voice of Isabella Rossellini) who is committed to the support and legalization of Superheroes.

And tickets for II on sale etc.

Dear critics who are chagrinned by the upcoming Pixar film The Incredibles 2, may I suggest using one of the following in your review:

The Uncredibles
The Inedibles
The In-crud-ibles
The Incredibles...At Actually Being Terrible

And sequel seen. Totally great, unsurprisingly. Plays around with a slew of the same themes but feels like a natural progression nonetheless, and otherwise you got your perfect 60s/Bond/Mission Impossible/etc pastiche on lock once again, set pieces galore, Edna Mode rules all.

Ned what was the last major sequel you thought sucked, just so I can calibrate expectations here

I saw The Incredibles and Incredibles 2 in a double feature last night. Incredibles 2 is much better.

“Evelyn Deavor”

oh man i'm looking forward to this

Yeah I might have to go with Silby here.

I thought this was OK, mostly, and at times disappointing. I liked the creativity of the set pieces, even if they were almost all built around runaway vehicles hurtling toward their doom, but other aspects I found very lazy. Maybe my biggest disappointment was in its apparent lack of self awareness, given the cliches and predictable stuff. The first one is not my favorite Pixar, but I like it better. Clearer theme. This one was all over the place.

That weird short cartoon, though, What the fuck?! The dude next to me leaped up in his chair and exclaimed "Well, that went dark pretty fast!"

Idk what’s the theme of the first one, tort reform?

Wait what’s not to get about the short?

does she just miss her grown son? to the point of tears? the reaction in our theater came to her eating the bao child.

theme of the first one if I recall correctly was one of identity, I am a superhero, that is who I am, if you take that away, what am I?

the theme of the first one was if you are great you are born to it, and if you are not born to it but you aspire to greatness, then you are a creep and a pretender , iirc

You know what else kind of irked me about this one, besides the tedium of watching them first stop a runway drill, then later a runway train, then later a runaway boat? (Again, with no self-awareness - which would have been funny). Clearly Jack-Jack is the crowdpleaser character, but the baby was already the subject of a Pixar short, so not only did we already know the baby had powers, we already knew the baby had a huge range of powers. And yet that's played as a punchline reveal again and again and again in this. "Wait, Jack Jack has powers!?" Dad doesn't know, mom doesn't know, the siblings don't know, Edith doesn't know, Frozone doesn't know, the villain doesn't know ... They should have just found a way to make the movie about the baby. At the least baby vs. raccoon would have made a great short.

this seems like...an oversight

for anyone watching the Incredibles 2!! pic.twitter.com/HuIS1A6qc6

— valentine (@METlCHE) June 15, 2018

interesting. I do know that every time I see a concert these days most the time they have a notice posted if there are strobe lights involved, for that very reason.

I thought this one was not as good as the first probably slightly, but still pretty fun (esp. the raccoon sequence) and I could kind of watch these characters do anything.

Short OTOH featured someone in the audience out loud saying "What the fuck??!?!" I mean okay the theme at the end is fine (had my wife in tears) but what a weird/dark turn.

And yeah it's a short sequence I could see it being problematic. Definitely got the full warning at A Place To Bury Strangers earlier this week so yah weird oversight.

Nobody told me this was the fucking animated adventures of Better call Saul

Ermantrout sounds like he’s on the verge of death

I’m taking kids to this later in the week. How nervous should I be about the opening short?

(the kids are 5 and 8, btw)

Arrive 30 minutes past the starting time and miss nothing.

Fuck John Lassiter, fuck the Opening short. No one gives a shit about your fucking clever crap. There were audible groans in the theatre today that echoed my sentiments.

The theatre I saw this in had a warning up in the lobby

About strobing, or about the short?

There's no way the short gets a warning, as fucked up and weird as it is. I bet we're talking about the strobing.

More I think about this movie, less I like it. Just kind of a predictable mess, albeit a ... highly competent mess? Would have been satisfied with Jack-Jack v. raccoon standalone short.

there was a note about the strobing.

the short: it's just a metaphor. I agree that moment was ... shocking but also funny? yeesh you guys.

She missed her son, so she imagined a life with a bun-son ... and then eats him, the relationship ending (metaphorically) the same way as her relationship with her real son? I guess what makes it awkward/confusing is that her real son still looks like a bun-son, and also that we never find out what left them estranged. Might have needed a beat at the beginning to establish her son was MIA.

Maybe I missed it. I miss a lot. Like the plan/motive of the villain in "The Incredibles 2."