The long awaited Incredibles 2

analysis
#81

It hasn’t hit streaming here yet so it’ll be a while before I can revisit. But I don’t see the law being the goal in itself either, just an effect of the goal (convincing the public that supers are a force for good).

I’m still 100% convinced the goal is conceiving. The for/against debate, publicity stunts designed to make people think specific things and the Screenslaver putting the ideas into the public’s heads are all very, very, very Conceiving. I don’t know who MC/IC would be or where, but I am almost certain that the ‘supers’ story would be in Conceiving.

3 Likes
#82

Hmmm, I’m not going to @ him because I don’t want to bother him, but I guess we’ll have to keep this thread going until someone comes and tells me why I’m wrong! :wink:

2 Likes
#83

The first time I read this, I followed the logic. Now, I’m like: “Huh? How did this ever make sense?” How is “showing people that heroes can be trusted” even remotely an external process??? Also, are they trying to show people, or trying to convince people? Subtle, but important, difference.

I know that I see it as “trying to convince people.”

Also, are you making the claim that this is a result of some deeper conflict? If so, could you phrase it using your “Some item leads to conflict” tool? Here’s the template: “An unchosen item leads to showing people that supers can be trusted.”

That sounds way too specific to a single moment in the movie, to me, no matter what you fill “unchosen item” with. Also, “showing people that supers can be trusted” doesn’t even sound like conflict, using that method.

It seems more like it should be written thus: “Trying to show people that supers can be trusted leads to breaking the law, destroying the city, saving the city, moonlighting as a villain, etc.”

Perhaps you can convince me otherwise, though.

One more thing: This movie doesn’t come off to me as a Desire-style (lower-left) movie. It seems more in tune with either Ability (upper-right) or Thought (lower-right) than anything, genre-wise, I think.

#84

I guess this is where I don’t follow. The “showing” springs from an attempt to change the attitudes of the public. The whole conceit of the movie is that some people think other people have problematic ways of thinking about supers and that this difference of opinion causes problems.

But does the story really present it this way? They’re not saying “we have to find a way to get rid of this law” and then trying various options to do so. The law isn’t something that Evelyn possesses and is in danger of losing. It’s not presented as a personal or group achievement or something to be “won”, that brings up questions of how to Approach changing it (that’s taken for granted) or the Morality/Self-Interest of doing so (e.g. no one is saying, it’s selfish to try to change that law, or we can’t change that law because it requires too much self-sacrifice).

They’re saying “how do we change everyone’s minds”.

I could see that but then it messes up the RS Problem of Accurate which I feel pretty committed to!

Looking at the quads underneath: is this story more about “Permission/Need/Expediency/Deficiency” (Conceiving) or “Knowledge/Thought/Ability/Desire” (Being). I could see either.

#85

Okay, so forget the word “show” and I’ll boil it down to this. All of the conflict seems to me to come from getting the law changed. A law is external, changing it is a process. Therefore external process/Physics.

Changing people’s minds is in service of changing the law. Much like Scar manipulating Simba in The Lion King is in service of obtaining the throne. But even then, minds changing doesn’t lead to conflict.

Putting Elastigirl on the street leads to Evelyn attacking the train. Putting Elastigirl on television leads to Evelyn taking control of the control room and attacking the mayor. Putting all the supers and dignitaries on a boat to sign the law leads to the boat being piloted toward shore.

Winston mentions how public opinion is changing in their favor after one of Elastigirls moments. What conflict do those changing opinions lead to?

#86

It involves protecting a city and not causing an excessive amount of collateral damage. What part of that is internal?

I know I said to forget the word show, but I’d say they are showing them in hopes of convincing them.

Yes. That.

Genre level would be the Domain/ Throughline level, and Ability would be Physics, would it not?

#87

…which springs from an attempt to change the law and make supers legal.

Doesn’t it? Winston sees Frozone and the Incredibles and is like ‘here’s our chance!’ Then he invites them over so he can tell them how they can change public perception in order to change the law. And then those attempts find Screenslaver trying to stop them. Also, feel free to reword it to ‘trying to achieve legal status’ if it works better.

But they are saying we need to get a new law signed making supers legal again, and then asking how to do that. And the answer is to send a hero out to safely and responsibly save the day.

My phone is acting up, so o can’t quote properly anymore, but…
“That brings up questions of how to approach it” -like not trying out this whole “insurance will pay for everything’ idea right out of the gate.
“No ones saying it’s selfish” except Winston and Evelyn discuss what’s best for everyone. Winston thinks it’s best for everyone if the supers are legal, and Evelyn thinks it’s best if they aren’t.

1 Like
#88

Watched the second half on another flight, haha.

Based on finishing the film, and the cacophony of this discussion, I’m gonna say Incredibles 2 has a broken storyform. The fact that we can’t pin down many of the basics (Resolve, Protagonist, Domains) is testament to that.

Why so much love from audiences and critics? Nostalgia for the first film (there were lots of moments I smiled and laughed because I enjoyed seeing the Parr family back in action) and the usual quality filmmaking from Brad Bird and crew.

A film is not just a storyform, it’s also art, performance, culture, product, and more. Nail enough of those things and people might overlook the story issues.

1 Like
#89

I’m willing to accept this, but think we can still talk about what structure there is.

#90

You do realize you just agreed that the source of the problem is “trying to show people that supers can be trusted” and the resulting conflict is the Physics, don’t you?

Darn it, this terminology. What I was trying to refer to is the feel that Concerns often give…

I seriously think this is the case.

1 Like
#91

Sure. The physics of changing the law through sending out a hero to save the day, thus gaining the public’s trust so that they will be in favor creating a new law, leads to breaking laws, destroying the city, etc.

Another way to word it is ‘To fix the law, I got to break it.‘

#92

Fair enough. I wouldn’t have the same conviction at that level. I’d want to put about half the story in one area and the other half in a different area and wouldn’t be willing to argue any of it. But that goes for other throughline alignments too.

#93

But, but, but. “the physics of changing the law”… This phrase still doesn’t make sense to me to generate the conflict of the movie. The physics of changing a law would involve dealing with jurisdiction, bringing the police in on something, going to courts, talking to judges, even in the universe of the Incredibles.

Well, I’m gonna go see if I can watch it, and try to whittle down the dialogue to motivations.

Oh, here’s something interesting: If you set the Goal to Conceiving, you have the option of setting the Prerequisites to Obtaining, which forces Problem-Solving Style into Holistic. Not sure if that means anything, but I figure I’d mention it.

#94

What if ‘changing the law’ just is the physics I’m referring to here? Not talking about ratifying and vetoing and lobbying, just getting the law to move from here to there. That’s the goal. This group of business people and supers that have no lawmaking authority can’t just bring it to court. They need other people to do that. But what they can do is go out and save the day until the law gets changed.

If some civilians formed a group and said ‘we’re going to impeach Trump’ you wouldn’t expect them to start holding hearings in the Senate, but you would expect them to start making phone calls and handing out flyers and raising money. Same thing. The heroes aren’t involved in gettting the law passed through the legislative body. But they can still do things to change the law/get the law changed/obtain or achieve a legal status (much like one might obtain or achieve an office)

In Wreck-it Ralph, the OS has everyone nervous about the roles they play in their games in service of the physics of not being unplugged. InThe Lion King, Scar manipulates Simba and Mufasa and the hyenas in service of the physics of obtaining the throne. And what about the most under-discussed movie on this forum, Captain America: Civil War where the Physics goal of breaking up the Avengers looks like making them all choose sides against one another? I’m using that same thought process here (or trying to) to show that trying to convince people is all in the service of changing the law.

But I’ve even pointed to the specific physics that lead to various conflicts. What conflict arises from people’s minds being changed? If the OS story were Psychology, we’d need to see the changing of minds causing conflict, wouldn’t we? Or changing behaviors? For instance, people growing more accepting of supers would be what leads to the rise of Screenslaver. Or Bob being stopped from being a superhero leading to the rise of Screenslaver. Instead what we have is an attempt to achieve legal status by sending a controlled hero with a suitcam out to save the day leads to fights with Screenslaver and being mind controlled.

Ps. If I thought changing the law were in service of changing people’s opinions, I think I’d agree with everyone else and put the OS in Psych. And maybe I need to watch the movie again. But as I saw it, that’s just not what was going on.

#95

I don’t think the law or changing it was important in the movie at all. Wasn’t Helen doing all sorts of super stuff and the police just ignored her, or even cheered her on half the time? Nobody really seemed to care about the law itself, it was all about what people thought of the supers.

At the end the conflict about the ship crashing into the city wasn’t “oh no if the ship crashes everyone will say we’re guilty of breaking the law again”, it was “oh no if the ship crashes everyone’s going to hate us even more”.

I think it would be the same movie if it ended without them changing the law. “Yay! Supers are back! It’ll take a few years to get that pesky law changed but in the meantime we can just ignore it.”

(Sorry if I came across as terse, I’m procrastinating from the writing I should be doing! Need … to … close… browser … arrrghh…)

2 Likes
#96

So, I just watched the movie, and kept notes.

The most obvious things first:

  • This movie uses an Action driver, no doubt.
  • This movie ends as a Success/Good movie.
  • This movie is an Optionlock.

Everything else seems to be up for debate. Here’s what I think I’ve found.

The Drivers:

  1. Supers stop a villain, but cause major structural damage. (Or are portrayed to do so)
  2. Helen saves the train, and learns the conductor was hypnotized by the Screenslaver.
  3. The Screenslaver makes an attempt on the ambassador (Or calls people lazy).
  4. Helen is captured (or enslaved) by the Screenslaver.
  5. Supers stop the Screenslaver, without major structural damage. (Publicly acknowledged)

The Relationship Story is most pronounced between Bob and Violet, and their relationship is strained significantly by How They Think (Psychology).

  • V: Mom’s doing something illegal to make it not illegal? Bob: No, it’s her new job.
  • V: You caused my boyfriend to forget! Bob: It can be better for them to forget.

The Main Character appears to be Bob, as we see the home life he lives and feel it. Almost all of Helen’s screen time is hero work, but we never truly shown how she feels. We are shown what she thinks. I’d also say that Bob is the Changed character.

He’s frustrated that he doesn’t get picked as the comeback super. He has a tough time congratulating Helen at the beginning. He can’t be the hero he wants to be for his kids. And, once he gets the call to go rescue Helen, he jumps at the chance. However, when the opportunity presents itself at the end to go after the glory by chasing the Screenslaver, or letting Helen go for it, he backs away and let’s Helen go after the Screenslaver. (In other words, he has a chip on his shoulder, and needs to Stop.)

Interestingly, this places him in Universe, which makes sense. All of these frustrations, headaches and jealousy he feels are actually a result of not being in the spotlight. Thus, he’s also a Do-er, which is fairly well displayed, I think. He learns the math to help Dash. He goes and finds out where Vi’s boyfriend is and takes her there. He takes Jack-Jack to Edna, etc.

Now, for the Objective Story, which has caused so much debate in this topic. Let’s start with the Story Goal. Looking at those first and last drivers, there’s a problem. The OS, per the Relationship Story, needs to go in Physics, but the drivers seem to place it in either Physics or Psychology (Manipulation).

Another thing about this is that the public actually already acknowledge the supers as good, even if the law remains in the books. Removing that law wouldn’t solve the issues here, but neither would coming up with the idea that supers are good. (That’s already there, unless we’re talking about the politicians.) However, that’s only briefly portrayed.

So, this is where I think the story breaks down.

Here’s something else. The number of times the police officers, the news anchors, the Screenslaver, end even Winston, mention “do nothing” or “doing nothing” as the proper solution is astounding.

The police tell the Parr family they should not have gone after the Underminer. Dicker mentions the protection program was shut down, in other words, the government will no longer do anything for the supers. Winston requests up front that Bob do nothing. In effect, most characters are saying that the solution is to do nothing. (The Screenslaver is kind of weird case here in that she also “does nothing” by having technology work for her.)

So, that’s a long post and I didn’t even get into the Influcnce Character, which is definitely Helen influencing Bob. All that to say that if there is a complete story, it’s a weird one.

However, I think the OS conflates Psychology with Physics.
And, I think it likely that the MC conflates Universe with Mind.

#97

Well, my argument is that there are two (broken) storyforms: Conceiving (supers/screenslaver stuff) and Being (family stuff). So the short answer is: both. Which is incredibly unhelpful in this situation. :joy:

But The Screenslaver stuff:

  • The supers don’t have permission to be “publicly” super.
  • Needing a face to lead the PR campaign for the supers.
  • Evelyn’s plan is one expedient solution to turning everyone against the supers.
  • The Screenslaver is depriving the victims of their mental faculties.

I’d probably have some more solid examples if I rewatched. But then, the story is broken as hell, so I doubt the issues are solid, even in the intended concern.

3 Likes
#98

Is it possible that that the weirdness of the storyform (rather than it being broken) is the reason we’re having trouble? In the case of Captain America: Civil War , you had a success/good superhero movie in which the bad guy was the Protagonist (?) and where the title character was neither the Protagonist or MC (and we all know the analysis problems that caused).

Despite their popularity, Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Empire Strikes Back didn’t have official analyses until recently, probably because they each have two storyforms.

In this movie, some of us are saying that:

  • The OS is in Psychology (weird for a superhero movie)
  • The Protagonist (Helen) is not the MC (Bob)
  • The Protagonist is in Mind (weird for a superhero movie)
  • The RS is represented by a family rather than two people

All of which is weird.

This is certainly possible. I didn’t feel that way when I saw it, and it got a 94% on Rotten Tomatoes which seems strange for a very broken story, but maybe it all comes down to nostalgia and otherwise good filmmaking as @LunarDynasty suggested.

#99

The first five things that happen, more or less, are

  1. The Incredibles fail to stop the Underminer and get arrested for breaking the law.
  2. They go to the motel and discuss whether it was right or wrong to break the law.
  3. Frozone shows up with an invitation to speak with Winston.
  4. Winston tells them how his father died because the heroes were illegal.
  5. He explains how they can change things by sending heroes out with cameras and asks them to help him change the law.

There are admittedly things in the movie that undermine this message, like Frozone showing up and telling Bob and Helen he knew the police would let them go. But in the scene with Elastigirl chasing the train, the cops are excited to see her because it’s still neat to see an illegal superhero and they know she’s there to help, but I think the idea is they don’t arrest her because, 1. They’re currently chasing down a train full of people that need saved, which she’s helping to do, and 2. With her bike, she is clearly able to quickly and easily outmaneuver them. She isn’t arrested afterward, I presume, because she didn’t create excessive collateral damage (although I think some cop cars crashed, guess they’re blaming that on the cops) and there were no casualties. And I don’t know, maybe she left before the police get there. Don’t remember if it shows that or not.

1 Like
#100

I doubt I’ll convince you at this point :slight_smile: and really like @mlucas I’m just procrastinating my writing (hmmm, I bet the most productive Dramatica discussions happen in November) but just for the heck of it, here’s something from the IMDB plot summary:

Winston and Evelyn explain that the Supers have been in hiding because of the people’s perception. All they see is the destruction the Supers cause, not the hard decisions they make or the lives they save. To change that, Evelyn shows them that there are cameras in their badges, and says their new super suits will have cameras as well. Winston says they just need to be super, and he’ll make sure they’ll all be legal again some day.

This sounds like a problematic thinking problem to me.

1 Like