The long awaited Incredibles 2

analysis
#61

Gotcha. That makes total sense.

#62

While this is technically true, the strength of an argument becomes irrelevant if the audience doesn’t accept its givens.

#63

So I was looking at the Wikipedia entry for I2. it says,

The Incredibles, a family of superheroes, pursue the Underminer. Although he escapes with stolen bank money, they stop his drill tank from destroying Metroville’s City Hall with help from Lucius Best. The government, concerned by the collateral damage, shuts down the Superhero Relocation Program, leaving the Parrs without financial assistance from agent Rick Dicker.

It shows a source of conflict (creating collateral damage) leading to conflict (leaving the Parrs without financial assistance). Now that I see it, I have a hard time seeing that scene as anything other than OS Physics. Just a thought.

1 Like
#64

Do story drivers have to represent the OS Domain? I’ve actually wondered this before. I think of this as the first story driver.

Regardless, don’t you think the source of conflict through the rest of the movie is Psychology (Manipulations) and Being? That’s the part that feels like the first movie. Screenslaver is all about mind-control as well, which I think of as more Psychology than Physics. Publicity stunts to convince people to regain trust in superheroes, people pretending to be something they’re not …

4 Likes
#65

Full Disclosure: I watched this movie, and I’ve pretty much forgotten the whole thing already. I do still remember bits and pieces of it, though. Also, I haven’t read this entire thread, so I might be re-hashng some stuff.

Definitely.

But, are those the real sources of conflict, or what the writers wanted to write about? (Using @Greg’s terms and tests.) When I try to think back on the movie, here’s what comes to mind.

  • The conflict between Bob and Helen exists exactly because Helen is out doing hero stuff while Bob is doing home stuff. If we swapped this around, I doubt there would have been any issues.

  • When it comes to everyone who isn’t one of the Parrs, it seems the concern is mostly about trying to bring Supers back into the public eye. (Which is so thematically close to the first that it causes a rehash feel. Didn’t they already do this? Oh, yeah, they ret-conned it on the movie. It’s still illegal.) If no one is doing this, I’m not sure we’d have much of a problem, except Screen Slaver would still be out there, but who really cares?

  • I’m not sure who the MC is, whether it’s Bob or Helen… That, I think, might the biggest problem of the movie, ignoring the rehashing.

  • I remember getting a bit antsy for that whole first scene where Helen went after the Underminer on her own. I was thinking for probably the first 10 minutes of the film: “When will something actually happen? This is fun and all, but where’s the story?”

With all of that in mind, I would be willing to place the OS in Psychology and the RS in Physics. I couldn’t tell you where the MC and IC go, though…

This is always how they’re evaluated, but isn’t the first one really about initiating the ineffable inequity? In other words, aren’t they deeper than the OS? (Might be a good idea to split this part of the discussion into another topic…)

2 Likes
#66

Universe/Progress seems to fit pretty well with Bob to me. His situation – stay at home dad – is causing problems for him, and a big part of that is How Things Are Changing e.g. the reversal of roles.

Helen seems to have a big Fixed Attitude problem when it comes to her ideas of supers. She’s also more of a Be-er – she’d rather change herself than change the environment. And she’s a nervous worrier, which I guess could be Preconscious (though I’m often not sure whether something is Preconscious or Subconscious).

2 Likes
#67

OK. That makes sense. Be-er is easy to see, even with all of the actions she does, which are probably more in the OS anyway.

Is her nervousness a result of fear (Subconscious), or is it the type of nervousness that, for most people, would manifest as the jitters, only quelled by calming the mind and ignoring it (Preconscious)? I’d say, from what I remember, the writers got mixed up between the two, though they were targeting the second. Thus, Helen would be in Preconscious.

  • Doing works really well for the RS, I think, whether we look at Helen and Bob or Bob and the kids.
  • Preconscious makes sense for Helen, as stated above.
  • Progress works especially well for Bob if we reword it to Regress.
  • Being could be bent I think, for the OS to make sense, but it’s not a huge stretch. (I’d almost venture the guess that it’s the same goal as before: Allow the supers to be super again. Wait, didn’t Winston actually say something like this?)

One thing I notice here, though, is how personal Preconscious is to Helen and how personal Progress is to Bob. What I’m having trouble pinpointing is how either of these influence the other. I can’t think of any prime examples.

However, accepting the above, the issues become/are super-clear to me (which is astounding, as that’s the piece of the vertical quad that I have the most trouble with).

  • Helen’s Issue - Threat (whether she’s threatened by the law, or threatening/challenging her husband’s thinking, or just being threatened in one way or another in general.)
  • Bob’s Issue - Worry (Do I even have to explain this one if you saw the movie?)
  • OS Issue - Desire (Wants to improve Supers’ image, want to get people off a screen, want to follow the law, etc.)
  • RS Issue - Experience (Bob’s lack of experience with the kids and the divide of experience between Helen and Bob)

Looking back at the posts, this matches @mlucas’s breakdown, but I came up with it before I saw that. Notice that I’m still non-committal to MC and IC, though? If you twisted my leg, I’d say Helen is the IC, based on my wording and questions above.

1 Like
#68

I wouldn’t think so. But I saw this as affecting everyone in the story in that it regards superheroes and why they are illegal, or seen as a nuisance. Are you thinking it would be part of the RS throughline? Or are you thinking that scene is strictly a story driver?

What conflict does being mind controlled lead to? It has supers fighting for instead of against Evelyn, I guess, but it doesn’t have anything to do with the story of heroes being illegal. What would you add to that?

Also, the goal is pretty clearly to make heroes legal again, which I don’t think solves mind control problems. What it does is allow the heroes to fight villains again without being arrested for it.

I think at the moment I’d say that the physics of getting a new law leads to the conflict of the Screenslaver taking over people’s minds and making heroes look bad.

I’m not sure if it is, but this sounds a bit like you could be referencing the idea that complete stories are more memorable and that this one, being so hard for everyone to agree on or remember, isn’t a complete story. If that’s what you’re going for, I’d just say that this movie may not be complete, in which case all of this discussion is really just an exercise. But I’ll also point out that I pretty much seem to be the odd man out on where throughlines fall (at least at the moment, I can’t remember if earlier in the conversation anyone might have a made a case for this) which means there is some agreement going on. So, you know, it could just be me causing problems. :yum:

This is where things get muddy for me. But Bobs problem seems to me to be that he wants to be the one out there doing things. He thinks big problems call for big solutions. Math is math! It’s this attitude that prevents him being chosen as the face of the campaign or causes him to get angry when helping Dash with homework. He wishes he were stopping trains and chasing villains instead of Helen doing that, and there’s some conflict there, but does that affect the relationship? Do they grow closer of further, stronger or weaker, as a result? Just to be clear, they absolutely might, but I’m not seeing that reflected in the movie (or what I remember of it).

Instead, I’d say I possibly see a change in relationship when they discuss who should work to provide for the family and whether they did anything wrong by breaking the law to stop Underminer. I could also see some relationship throughline between Bob and the kids, though I’d be even less prepared to discuss.

1 Like
#69

Exactly! Is this not the source of all of his “Math is Math!” attacks, though, which strain his familial relationships? Is it not also the source of the, albeit minute, strain in his relationship with Helen? Using your own method: “The endeavors of Helen and the kids cause Bob to grow angry, tired, and frustrated, weakening his connection with them.”

Only partially, but I have a strong feeling that this story is cracked, not necessarily broken. My expectation is that I’m having so hard a time pinpointing an MC and IC because Bob’s issues and Helen’s issues are so personal to them. I think the writer’s wanted to write Helen as the MC, but due to the original movie, ended up writing Bob as one. Thus, I suspect it could be analyzed in either direction. (Like Frozen and the Action/Decision debate.)

2 Likes
#70

I don’t think this is the actual goal. We don’t see any of the physics of changing legislation – legislative debates, ballot petitions, protest marches, jurisprudence etc. If I remember the movie correctly, the goal of changing the law is entirely presented as a matter of public relations (i.e. Psychology). One side is trying to convince (manipulate) the public by showing that supers are good and useful. The other side is trying to use mind control for the opposite purpose.

In this context, Helen is clearly the Protagonist of the story, pursuing the story Goal (which is something like “Letting Supers Be Super Again.”)

4 Likes
#71

One more note, to play the Devil’s advocate for you, Greg: If we stuff everything in the lower-left corner, then I could see an arrangement that allows this:

  • OS - Obtaining (Catching villains, getting a law off the books, getting a boyfriend, getting a good grade)
  • RS - Becoming (Developing into a stable stay-at-home family)
  • Bob - Subconscious (Deep desire to continue as a hero)
  • Helen - The Future (The future of law enforcement, both in city and at home.)

I also have trouble with the issues at this stage. Most likely something like this:

  • OS - Attitude (Winston and supers, Screenslaver and supers/Winston, public against the supers)
  • RS - Obligation (Expectations held between stay-at-home Dad and his kids)
  • Bob - Denial (His life as a super is over, but he won’t admit it.)
  • Helen - Preconception (How supers are viewed, she especially influences this. And home life…)

Opinion Alert
Oh, well look at that. Both allow the viewing of things as a source of conflict and problems…

But, I do have trouble seeing how Obtaining is a source of problems. What I typed above for this looks a lot more like storytelling than story structure to me. Then again, if they can’t catch the villains, or if they can’t get the law off the books, then the supers would have to remain in hiding, having become normal citizens, again.

So, never mind, I can see it.

Umm… I didn’t even have to reach for any of these… In the most kind way I can say it, I hate you @Greg. (That’s a good thing.)

3 Likes
#72

So I’m just looking at how I can view OS as Psychology.

What I’m saying is that attempts to change the law through showing people what heroes can do leads to conflict of battling against Screenslaver. But what you guys are saying is attempts to change law through changing people’s minds is leading to the conflict of battling against Screenslaver? Is that right?

1 Like
#73

I’m not sure what I’m saying anymore. (Sarcasm follows.) Thank you very much…

1 Like
#74

Welp…

I’m beginning to think they broke a number of tropes, at least if my arrangement as inspired by Greg is correct.

  • Winston (neither IC nor MC) would be the protagonist. (Clear the law.)
  • IC would be Helen, who isn’t a major player in the RS.
  • The RS would be between Bob and the kids.
  • It would also swap Bob to Be-er and Helen to Do-er. (Reversed from first, I think.)

This would explain why the movie feels so strange…

That last point seems problematic, though. I’m gonna do more analysis when I have access to the program.

By the way, I purposely didn’t get into this discussion until I had forgotten most of the movie for exactly the reason that storytelling can get in the way. I wanted as much of the movie to leave my mind as is possible before analyzing it. Also, the movie was too charged with ret-conned information from the original.

#75

But we do. Showing people that heroes can be trusted to protect them is part of the physics of changing legislation.

My argument is that it’s the showing that creates conflict, not the changing attitudes of the public that creates conflict.

#76

It seemed to me that the “attempt to change the law” was really two things:

  1. trying to change people’s minds about supers (the brother)
  2. part of a larger manipulation scheme by the sister to mess with people’s heads and convince them they don’t need supers.

And I got the impression that even #1 wouldn’t have existed without #2 – the sister was pulling the strings. Certainly, Helen was manipulated into working for the sister’s aims.

I don’t even remember if they actually did change the law in the end?

2 Likes
#77

They are trying to achieve, or obtain, a new law. This attempt leads Evelyn to start causing problems for them.

Ps, I have no idea where I would put things at the Concern level, though what you’ve used is probably what I’d use (upper right is another possibility, but I’d have to think more about it) I think there’s a possibly a case to be made for Helen affecting Bob through the Future, but it would be hard to make without projecting onto the movie things that aren’t actually in it.

1 Like
#78

Maybe this is where I’m at odds with the rest of you. I don’t see this as a grand scheme by Evelyn to ruin the supers forever. If Winston weren’t trying to change the law, I see no reason to think that Evelyn would still be mind controlling people. Supers are already against the law, after all. So I see what she does as a reaction to the attempts to change the law. Hence the Physics of showing that heroes can save people without breaking everything leads to the rise of the Screenslaver.

Yes,

2 Likes
#79

Maybe it’s time to watch the movie again… (For me, at least.)
Especially now that I’m seriously considering the lower-right…

1 Like
#80

They tell us in the movie why he’s trying to change the law, though, don’t they? And, is he directly trying to change the law?

Isn’t he trying to change the image of the supers (something clearly spelled out in the movie), which would, in his mind, convince the lawmakers that they are wrong and should remove the law from the books (something never really shown)?

2 Likes