Would it make more sense for Screenslaver if he was an actual character that ties in directly to Helen’s role, like maybe he can be somewhat her old ex boyfriend before she met bob.
@@NaterGater2496Would definitely be better than what we have, and would do a good job in making the plot feel more personal, but an old ex would be a touch lame and predictable.
Ngl I thought the twist was going to be that the Screen Slaver was a villain manufactured by Winston and Evelyn to give Elastigirl someone to fight and improve her public image
I HAD THIS IDEA TOO where elastigirl has an existential crisis because maybe the world DOESN'T need superheroes, only for the other supers to come in and remind her that fighting criminals is only half the battle, the other half is giving the people hope and someone to see themselves in also the climax is them fighting the underminer because yeah guys like him are still running around 💀
Not so. It was more like wanting people to use the fire extinguisher on the burning toaster, instead of immediately calling the fire department and waiting for them to show up while the fire spreads into the entire room.
@@jacksquatt6082 But why go after fire fighters themselves? Not every average citizen is capable of putting out fires. Some may be too big or complicated to put out on their own, and Evelyn would just be screwing those people over by getting rid of them. There are better ways to get people to be more self reliant than actively going after people who devote their lives to protecting you. Her whole argument falls apart when the firefighter actually saves her life from a fire she created, yet she acts ungrateful as if she’d prefer to die in a fire like her father before her to prove some kind of point than realize how misguided her entire plan was just to spite the firefighter. Expanding upon this, it’s like saying we don’t need doctors because we can get first aid kits or we don’t need police because we can get guns for ourselves
@@jacksquatt6082Still sometimes the situation turns out so that you can’t put out the fire yourself. Or fire started spreading without your involvement, so you had no way to stop it. So you need help from firefighters.
@@Sjono "Why go after the fire fighters themselves?" You hit the nail on the head. This is what makes her a villain. She started with the reasonable premise of "people need to take responsibility for their own lives and have a stake in keeping themselves safe," and she moved into the realm of insanity by saying, "I'll SHOW you that you have agency! I'll give you NO CHOICE but to do so." I never thought this was inherently stupid. Rather, it always seemed like it was the villain's trap of being so obsessed with their own fanatical purpose that they lost sight of what actually mattered. Could it have been executed better? Yes. But the core idea still has a lot of merit to it.
Syndrome: I wanted to get rid heroes because my idol turned me down! Evelyn: I wanted to get rid of heroes because they wouldn't help my dad during a home invasion in the middle of the night with no way of them knowing about it!
Even worse, the dad had one of those red phones that could directly call heroes in an emergency. But super heroes had just been made illegal so the phone didn’t work. And the flashback shows he got shot while he was trying to make the phone call, so even if it did work, they wouldn’t have been able to respond fast enough. Which just begs the question of why didn’t he have the emergency hero phone in his emergency safety room?
@@Death2all546 That's what he should've done. But he was so bent on thinking heroes would help him each time, he throw out his common sense. And that just made Evelyn's motive even less sense why blame the heroes for something beyond their control? Then she would help make them legal only to make them illegal and the twist was so obvious.; That's why I love Syndrome's motive way more. He's petty as all hell but it's more straightforward. And they reveal him being Buddy Pine all grown up happened way earlier
@@Hamster_Dogg I think Evelyn’s dad died about a week after super heroes became illegal. Which was shortly after the very beginning of the first movie when Syndrome was still a kid.
I don't even care that much that the father tried to use the phone after supers became illegal. What I can't tolerate or believe is that their house had a panic room and the hero phone wasn't even in it. What kind of logic or architectural sense is that? Someone was paid to write that and it made it to final.
"I hate heroes instead of villains because of.. Reasons!!" Literally, she could have been a way more interesting villain if she was a vigilante, going on a killer route killing EVERY cryminal
They should have taken away her motives entirely and she becomes a villain because someone has to be their opposite, so why not her. Evil for the sake of evil can work, we've seen it. Elastigirl: Evelyn? Evelyn: Why are we surprised, it's in my name. I mean haha it is a total coincidence like naming a speedster Dash. I mean who does that?! Elastigirl: ... Evelyn: You didn't?! You did! Well onto my evil plans, what's a hero without a villain? So I decided to do it, and why not open a few franchises while I'm at it?! And on the plus side, we're always cooler than the heroes.
@@younglove3362 Yeah, and? His motive is cliche, yes, but his method is interesting and he have his own worldview. Like how he try to make "everyone special so no one will be" is unique, I didn't really saw this too much in other things. I think motives can be simple, ebcaues most motives are simple. Like, you have any interesting reasen to go to work? Or eat every morning? Or help your loved ones? Not really and it is same for bad actions as well. A robber doN't have complicated reasens to rob a house, he most probably just want money.
@@reactiondavant-garde3391 As entertaining as Monarch is, his motive has been done so many times that people commonly mock and joke about it. It's not unique at all and has been done enough times. Stop ✋️.
His motive is actually dumb. He put his life in risk in many situations and really only slowed mr. incredible down until he had enough to tell syndrome that what’s he’s doing is horrid and impulsive. He got his feelings hurt and decided to kill every single super hero because why not?
For Pete's sake, they could've done the obvious route of "supers accidentally killed my dad while trying to help" instead of this super contrived plot. Heck, it could've involved supers who were actually evil or selfish that caused her dad to die and thus ruin her opinion of EVERY super to ever exist and only once her life is saved does she realise that not all supers are out for themselves.
Friendly reminder that for example Gamma Jack and Psychwave among others showed some red flag behavior, establishing that not all supers are goodie two shoes. I'm also dissapointed that the sequel didn't really have the sinister undertones Incredibles 1 had
@@lumiauroras6741 We don't even need to go in that direction. Remember how in the first film a bunch of heroes were shown getting themselves killed due to wardrobe malfunction of all things; their capes just getting stuck where they shouldn't. That shows that even the most powerful heroes can have their moments of carelessness. Bob Parr gravely injured a man trying to jump while rescuing him, and at times he lost control of his own strength due to anger, and he's nonetheless extremely good at what he does. If even someone like him, who was shown to be a very effective hero, can slip up from time to time, so can anyone else.
imagine the scenario: the super heroes pose for the cameras to try and make a case for re-legalizing supers, resulting in the father dying, so evelyn lets the superheroes pose for the cameras and try to make a case before causing a huge problem on national television, ensuring they're never re-legalized. it would be perfect and even poetic.
OR Evelyn could see that Elastigirl was a genuinely good person and believe that the idea of a super hero is ”tainting” her in a way, as in sooner or later she would become exactly like the heroes who killed her father
This whole movie is an insult to the original. It's redundant and pointless. For pete's sake, the whole villain plot failed because of Evelyn's monologue. The very cliché the original was mocking.
@@OpticalSorcerer Because Pixar didn't want it to overshadow Toy Story 4 and wanted Incredibles 2 to ride the superhero hype train. Ironically, the MCU made people less interested in Incredibles 2.
@@vetarlittorf1807 Such a shame. The MCU didn't make me lose interest (given that thr sequel is animated and retro in contrast to the MCU being modern and live-action), but I do hate that mindset they had. I care more about TI than TS.
I won't argue the redundantcy. I would say the point is to upgrade the heroes for vigilante to recognized heroes like they were before. Now the villain plot failing due to a monologue i won't say is bad. I mean thats kinda the point. Syndrome died due to his cape which mr incredible called capes a classic. It was a chekhov's gun. Cliches being the undoing of villains isn't new. Hell the monologue joke in the first movie is the villain recognizing it could be his understanding because he is a fan of heroes. While this villain isn't a fan.
@@starterking That's different. Syndrome dying because of his cape was foreshadowed AND it had thematic weight to it. Evelyn failing because of a monologue is just contriving and only exists so she can be defeated. Which is exactly the kind of contrivance the original avoided and outright mocked. Same goes to Bob in the beginning where he got sucked into the Underminer's giant tube because he suddenly took stupid pills and started monologuing for no reason. Even though we KNOW from the previous film that Bob is supposed to be a lot smarter than this. And no. Upgrading the heroes from vigilantes to recognized heroes was already achieved in the original because the Incredibles saved the city and had been actively fighting villainy for 3 months afterwards. But the sequel throws all the character development and progress away simply to do it all again.
"Let's call the super heroes!" "No, Let's go to the panic room!" "Why not both? What if a phone was IN the panic room?" "Genius!" *DIRECTED BY ROBERT ZEMECKIS*
Robert Zemeckis, the same man who directed the Back to the Future trilogy and Who Framed Roger Rabbit. HOW did we get such a shit script when this sequel was in development hell for so long? It's so ridiculous.
I think the movie could have been fixed if it were that Evelyn wanted to 'control' Supers rather than what we got. That she wanted them legal so that they could operate under her control with at best minimum legal interference but have a veritable army of super-powered bodyguards for her and her brother that she could summon in an instant. Effectively doubling down on what her canon self thought was her father's mistake and making her a more extreme version of her brother.
I love this. You could even twist it more to where they are "infected" with their father's love for supers, to the point where they become a sort of yandere fanatics that get further spurred on the the ecents at the end of the first movie. The opposite extreme of Synestro's admiration becoming hate. Alternatively, this could have been a 3rd movie, with an alternative motive(s). The second movie could've featured a vengeful super, possibly a child of one of the supers that Synestro killed. They'd be a sorta Magneto/Homelander/Evil Superman Clone (from Superman: Doomsday) that sorta becomes the dictator of a city. This then leads into the third movie where the brother is business-minded, super greedy motivated villain while the sister is the more fear motivated villain. The brother would want exclusive "contracts" with the supers, "leasing" them out to other powerful individuals and such. The sister, on the other hand, would be more affected by the vengeful super, believing that supers need to be controlled for the safety of everyone.
The fascinating thing about that is, so long as you wrote it as this being the only sinister thing about the scheme (The means rather than the end goal or motive.) it would be a pretty tough pill to swallow. That no, there wasn't a simple motive behind this problem. It'd be a final confrontation problem that could be talked out. (I mean, it wouldn't, but that it could would be neat.)
While the ScreenSlaver did made a valid point that everyone in the Incredibles World kept relying on Supers instead of themselves, he would’ve been a better villain if not revealing the plot twist of Evelyn.
When they put a ban on supers, why did all the supervillains just stop? Like, you'd think they'd hear all supers are banned and then they'd go on a crime spree since there's no heroes left. Why would supervillains care if supers are banned? They're villains! ... but I thought about it, and there are no SUPER villains in this series. Syndrome, Bomb Voyage, Screenslaver, Underminer... all the villains are just normal people using technology. How in this world of superpowered people are there no supervillains? The sequel to incredibles should have had an actual super-powered villain, someone who was originally a hero, hated that supers got outlawed, and just started doing whatever. If you're the only superpowered person, things tend to become easy.... boringly easy. So they would end up trying to lure out other heroes by becoming the "necessary evil" unstoppable enough that there had to be superheroes to step up, regardless of what the law stated. Otherwise, what was the point of existing in this world where everything is too easy for them?
So you might ask, what is the moral center of this sequel? It would be Purpose. Say this superpowered villain has completely jaded society against supers, regardless of the feats of the first movie. Are they still willing to risk their lives against humans that don't want them around? and what is the point of life without challenge? Is being a hero their purpose to live, or is it more? such as prioritizing protecting their family over random civilians? Would they consider teaming up with the villain because he just wants entertainment and company himself, and in return, people are left alone? What choices would the heroes make when the villain is just that strong? Do they give up for the sake of keeping the family safe and letting the villain do what he wants, or do they continue to risk their lives after suffering a horrible loss?
I think the unspoken implication is that the 'super' villains ate Kill Orders and with that established, most would be Super Villains decided to do something less self destructive instead. If the laws only applied to those with powers that couldn't be stripped (like tech) from the user... well we get what we saw. A lot of retired heros and not a single known retired villain.
There were super villians as Blazestone was a former villian & even Gamma jack had villainous tendencies as he thought Supers were the superior race & did kill his villians.
Cruella deVil is already a villain from the start *and it makes sense.* A character named Evil Endeavor being a twist villain is just the dumbest shit.
Just realized given the ages of most of the other new supers, they were likely the first children of the original supers. Supers who Syndrome killed. Just imagine the rich story we could have gotten if you had them explain who their parents were, and how after Syndrome they wanted to stand up and protect others like their parents had once done. Showing what a life of living in hiding would do to Violent, Dash, and Jack Jack, and all of them trying to make a future where kids like them could be free to discover their own powers/talents.
We met Evelyn and I was hoping, almost praying, that I was wrong about her being the villain. I was hoping that Screenslaver was the real villain and would be revealed he's actually a Super who despised being called on for every little thing before Supers were illegal. Then the twist happened and I zoned out for the rest of the movie.
I was _sincerely_ hoping for them to double-untwist the villain and have it be *Alexander Galbaki,* the namedropped _fashion designer_ behind Elastigirl's new silver suit responsible for the glasses _themselves_ and thus _also_ responsible for continuing the plot, with or _without_ Evelynn. The *Screenslaver* is a far more insidious villain as a _concept_ that can be enacted by _anyone with the means to do so._ It's Conspiracy Theory 101: those with the means to _escape_ responsibility for their purported crimes will *do* so, out of rational self-interest.
Genuinely same here, I had taken my mom to see this at the theater I was working at at the time and I can so distinctly remember getting to the part where the kids are padding out the runtime chasing the baby around like he was the new Olaf, and I remember just kinda looking at my mom like "... Is this it?" I don't think I've ever been so painfully aware that I was sitting in a seat watching a movie that I wished would just end already.
Even the play on names between Syndrome and Evelyn shows the stark difference in quality. Syndrome is a play on Heroes Syndrome, a phenomenon of someone orchestrating dangerous scenarios to be the one who valiantly saves lives (exactly what his plan with the Omnidroid was in the final act) Evelyn Deaver is just a nod to “Evil Endeaver”, it literally just references that she’s evil in her introduction before the twist. It’s a name that pats itself on the back for being so clever. She’s a character who falls into the modern villain writing of trying to make them have a valid point while still being evil, but losing sight of the complexity required to make that writing work.
Honestly I wish the Incredibles 2 had answered my question from the first movie: How the actual F the law against supers stopped supervillains from being active? There’s no reason to expect supervillains to respect a law against superpowers if they’re not willing to respect other laws and yet the first movie showed they were willing to lie low until the law was repealed. That would make sense for the Lex Luthors of the world, characters whose main motivation is to defeat their local superhero, but what about everyone else? It would have been more interesting to find that the supervillains had used the down time to build an empire, then decided they actually liked having a secret underground empire and had the Underminer be their emissary to the surface to invite the heroes down to their super paradise.
''We realised we just wanted to be free to use our abilitie how we wanted, like you. So yeah, we just...made a society 2KM under the city.'' And this society built entirely by criminals and vigilantes is actually somewhat decent with crime being discouraged because whats the point of stealing something if your neighbour would steal it right back? The crime rate was so high for like a week that it crashed back down to zero.
@@paulrasmussen8953 Not to mention the fact that all those people on the train could've been killed, if Mr. Incredible hadn't stopped it. Or the fact that it was because of Bomb Voyage planting a bomb on Buddy's cape, that the bridge went out in the first place; which never would've happened if Buddy hadn't gotten involved against Mr. Incredible’s wishes. So really, Mr. Incredible shouldn't have faced any consequences whatsoever. And that suicidal man should’ve been forced to seek counseling, as Mr. Incredible suggested.
@@fabienchamberland4791 "Turns out that just doing whatever you want without thinking of the consequences doesn't lead to a long lifespan when everyone else is super too. It does lead to a lot of reconstruction work during the first month or so, but things settled down after that."
The more time goes on, the more I’ve grown to loath Incredibles 2. I saw the original in theaters, it’s still one of my favorite movies of all time. I remember the 14 year build up and hype for a sequel.
Best how it should have ended. Have the phones in the safe room, and after supers became Illegal. Hire some bodyguards and plot twist one of them is a super he supported. Because after super heroes became illegal, they needed regular jobs. So what's a better way to repay a person and provide for your family, while also using powers to help people.
@@VidiaReePhoenix It really didn't since you could have driven an Incredibles 2 off the villain side of things and what happened to them, with the twist within the twist it was the kids of the villains and not their parents, but they weren't so much planning true villainy such as turning heroes and villains into an elaborate smoke and mirrors profit scheme, so supers could socially acceptably stretch their powers, while keeping property and civilian damage to a minimum.
This movie could have gone two ways honestly. Point A) Keep with the Under Miner to pick up from where the first movie left off Point B) Make the Screenslaver an actual villain rather than a plot device. Both villains had plenty of potential to work with and ideas to follow. We did not need Evelyn.
Evelyn could keep the motivation, the biggest problem was making her the *main* one when that is like a henchwoman's motivation. Screen Slaver could have instead been a real villain who was blackmailing her because she tried and failed to pull this off before, she had the tech knowhow, but not the "street smarts" and cunning, coming from a life spent narrowly focused on a singular goal.
@@Poglavnit_Pferdefuhrer I can agree to this idea. Like I said, Screen Slaver has the potential. Same for Under Miner. Either way, there are a lot of ideas to put into either villain.
If they wanted to focus on drama for most of the film, they could easily have had Under Miner be the opening... and then the issues that arise from the family's actions to stop him are the meat of the story. The questions about 'But what is our solution to Under Miner type issues with heroes being illegal?' that their entire society (and the script of the first film wisely) avoided for all this time is suddenly the central issue of your sequel.
When I think of the original movie, I think about the many quotes I can recall at the drop of a hat from Syndrome alone. "Lame lame lame!" "You sly dog! You caught me monologuing!" "And got BIZAY!" Can't remember a single line from Evelyn and I watched the sequel way more recently.
Yeah, while I didn’t hate this movie, it was a clear step down from the original and the villain shows that (though to be fair, no one can surpass Syndrome)
The thing about the Under Miner is he was never meant to be anything special. He's like a two-bit villain, and it's not even a cliff-hanger, it's one of those "Here we go again/Never the end/For me it was Tuesday" things. When doing a sequel... yeah, you should probably address it, because a lot of people probably _thought_ it was a sequel hook. But the strangest thing is, they immediately had him tunnel underground? Like, declaring war on the surface dwellers, only to rob a bank is _kinda_ odd... but coming up, declaring war, then going back down again, what even is going on? Story cohesion level: RWBY Only to not bring him up again? (I think he gets a drive-by in the credits, but still.)
I hate how all the new superheros look ridiculous. In first movie they are just people with superpowers, now there is a bird, a frog and a guy two times bigger than Mr Incredible xddd
When I first saw this movie, I thought that Evelyn HAD to be a red herring. I couldn't believe it when the revealed she was actually the villain. Even a toddler could have seen that one coming.
By the way, the two super heroes probably didn't pick up the phone because syndrome killed them. So syndrome caused the death of Evelyn's parents, which made her go super villain, so syndrome caused all the events of the incredibles 2, and is also somehow more evil than he already was.
No, the superhero decommission happened when they were kids. Syndrome basically caused it when he was a kid, so he's about the same age as Evelyn...giver or take a year.
Unlike Syndrome, Evelyn had no personal ties to the Incredibles. It might have been a little better if Evelyn had a grudge against supers due to Mrs. incredible having failed to save her parents when she was a kid.
Evelyn Deaver really didn't work as a villain. Her goal was already achieved 15+ years prior, and the only one standing in opposition to her goal was herself. Society already stopped relying on Supers, and with so few supers left after Syndrome, Evelyn should have been sitting comfortably knowing she already has what she wants. All she had to do to win was to simply not help her brother. Winston's plans to reinstitute Superheroes as a legal force was ONLY possible because of Evelyn. She's obviously not helping her brother out of obligation or love, their relationship is already broken. To make the screenslaver work, they should have changed Evelyn's backstory completely, and made it so that the reinstitution of Superhero legality was from an external third party that Evelyn doesn't enable. Which shouldn't have been that difficult, considering the incident with Syndrome did spark some public interests in Superheroes. Also, they should have completely scrapped the Incredibles' arrest after the Underminer conflict, because that was stupid too.
The reason to that Incredibles 2 was bad, its because the producers basically recycled the plot of the prequel; - The movies started with a failed battle against a villain, that ended with collateral damages, that leads to the politics banned the Superheroes for public pressure. - One of the parents, are given an offer to work with powerful organizations, to may continuing their heroic activities. - The villains aren't definite, but they are "twist plot villains", that were apparently allies, that turned be enemies of the heroes. - The motivations of the villains to hate the heroes are cheap and unfair; Syndrome hates the heroes only because Mr Incredible rejected him, and Evelyn hates the heroes only because she think that they makes weaker the people. - The movies ends with the heroes gaining back the favor of the public. Making that the Incredibles 2, only be actually a rip off of the Incredibles 1, than an original sequel.
I’ll be honest. I really wish the second movie had done a villain who was a Superhero Supremacist. Someone to counter Syndrome. I mean, there’s already a character like that in canon - Gamma Jack. Dude was on a watch list by the government because he believed supers were superior to humans.
Yeah, nothing about the villain we got works. Status quo: supers are shunned. Goal: supers are shunned. "evil plan"?: make supers legal and accepted so to force a new level of paranoia when obvious mind-altering "substances" are used to make the heroes "turn evil". How to execute? encourage the person trying to break the status quo you want so badly to keep and make an ally out of the mascot for the movement despite wanting to control them in the end. Motivation? parents died in an accident that "heroes" as icons of peace couldnt stop, with no consideration as to WHY they couldnt stop it. First issue, status quo. Her plan isnt proactive, because it CANT be. Wait, what? she IS proactive towards reaching her "goal"? In an environment where her goal was already achieved?! Second, who is leading the charge? Her own brother. Why get others involved in the first place? The only person you need to stop is your own brother and the status quo is maintained. Being your BROTHER, you should be able to talk him down, and if you cant, stopping him physically would give us a more intersting character as she continues to dig her heels into the spot of her grave, digging it in the process. Third, why help elastigirl at all and try to win her over to "your side" of things if you dont trust her on some level? If you dont trust her, put the hypno goggles into her new supersuit from the very beginning (replacing the mask, maybe) and cut out the middle man and room for error! Fourth, "I dont trust you, and just because you saved me doesnt mean you were right!" Really? you are being such a petulant child. Again, see the more interesting plot that would have emerged from keeping your distance from her in the entire movie and the potential to brainwash her long-term with very calculated use of the hypno mask. Fifth, motivation. If your brother lost no faith despite the "way your parents died", talk to him! See why he holds no hate. This villain doesnt work because every moment of her character is contradictory. She wants to stop the legalization of supers by... legalizing them?! She works with elastigirl towards legalizing supers... despite the fact she not only wants to betray her in the long run, but that elasitgirl only got the plan from your own brother you could have talked to in order to find a middle ground?! Supers are already shunned by society... yet you effectively run a positive PR campaign for them?!
In all seriousness, that’s literally The current Brazilian President’s (yes I am talking about Lula’s) plan for Gay people, and yet that didn’t stop him from defeating someone (his opponent, who I abbreviate as “Bol”, cause his actual name is too long for me to pronounce) that supported Gay Marriage existing the entire time.
Honestly, it would've made sense to put goggles in her super suit and then hypnotize her unto screwing up in the hopes that it will squash her brother's movement to bring supers back. Just make them look bad like at the beginning of the first movie. I get it's a little redundant, but it makes more sense than get them legalized.
It's almost like the writers had two seperate characters, one the sister that supported her brother and one the villain that wanted heroes shunned, and then rolled them together for a 'twist' without anyone pointing out the new draft's massive issues.
I really felt that they dropped the ball with the twist villain. I feel like it would've worked more if perhaps her father died via collateral damage from a super fight. It presents a complex point. Yes super heros are needed to fight super villains, and you can't make a whole people illegal. But there are casualties from the giant, bombastic fights that maybe aren't noticed or rectified, creating resentment in the victims families and friends that could definitely fester over time. It would've made her motivations make far more sense, and made her a more compelling villain in my opinion.
Honestly I wish more people would take off the Rose Colored glasses. Incredibles 2 was a terrible sequel, with poor writing and an immensely underwhelming story. I remember coming out of that movie Opening night feeling absolutely nothing. The film also seems really obsessed with emasculating Bob. The action and animation were great and those were the only positives.
@@abraham2172 Seeing him parenting, and trying to be "Mr. Mom" was good, and funny, but what was emasculating I guess was how he was a bit of a punching bag in the movie, or the butt of the humor too much to make his wife look like a better hero.
@@beauwalker9820 Thats a very narrow sided and overly negative view of the movie. Being a good parent is not emasculating, nor does it automatically make fathers the butt of the joke, nor a punching bag. Also Mr Incredible was just as capable and strong as in the previous movie.
@@abraham2172 I just literally stated it wasn't about him parenting, and I respect parenting and understanding it's not easy. Though, I'm just saying I can understand why some feel he's a bit nerfed in the movie. Granted, he was a bit clumsy and impulsive at times in the first movie, so it could just be his character flaws.
Wait wait wait...so her backstory is that her parents died because the heros refused to help due to the law put on them? So her issue should be with trying to destroy the government and not the heroes...right?
@@normanclatcher , One Piece Film Red is a childrens film that says overthrowing the government is a good thing, and I would've liked Evelyn as a character as much as Uta if she actually did overthrow the government with mind controlled superheroes instead of the bastardized character we actually got in the end.
No joke as soon as I was Evelyn's run in all frazzled the first time we saw her my brain went. She's the bad guy. Then after her brother tells the backstory of their father, she said their parents could have gone in the safe room instead of calling for help. Then I knew for SURE she wasn't into the super hero thing. They more or less copy and pasted the first movie without ANY OF THE EMOTION!!
Syndrome has a stupid reason, but we at least understand it Syndrome at least works because he's meant to be a petty villain. Like, you get his reasoning and it's just so stupid.... but you know man children exist.... and that's what he is... a man child.... But it's just done again, but this time, we just don't understand it..... Like..... why blame heroes????? It feels so forced...
I liked her as a villain, but the prejudice against heroes needed more fleshing out, not just brief discussions and flashbacks. I didn't feel like they were threatened like the X-Men.
That would be a very interesting plot for maybe an incredibles 3, like they can include a anti super that wants nothing to do with humans that aren’t super like him and wanted to save his own kind by the hands of some government nonsense only to end up revealing that he was once a test subject and take his vengeance on anyone who experimented on him, make him more of a Homelander mixed with magneto in a way.
@@NaterGater2496 Yeah, that does sound in line with Magneto. The issue is still the same, though; you gotta flesh out the issue presented, and as a trilogy, a villain lashing out because of an ongoing issue won't have as much impact if the said ongoing issue hasn't been properly brought up. I also mentioned on another post that Screenslaver as a Mr. Sinister-type of villain would've been cool.
@@OpticalSorcerer well it’s just a thought I could chime in and see what goes on in my head into thinking of what I want to see happen in the next incredibles film.
Honestly, this movie annoyed me because there's a good movie in here if they just made some tweaks to the story. I think for one, having the supers still be banned and, more importantly, heavily scrutinized by the public really makes Evelyn's whole plan seem stupid because she's working to undermine herself. Another thing, Evelyn's father not going to their safe room was dumb in the context of the movie: He could've put the phones in the safe room or just waited until after the killers left so it's hard to completely refute Evelyn's argument. (I honestly like Nando v Movies idea where, instead of trying to call the supers, her father tried to slow down the killers to ensure his family's safety, giving the idea that supers inspire people to be better themselves)
Imagine the twist being that the Deavers created artificial supervillains for the supes to fight so that they can get positive reputation, which would put the Incredibles in a dilemma where they can either follow and gain the fame and reputation back from the old days, or stop the ultimate evil by sacrificing their reputation and showing everyone that they accidentally helped the bad people and chose to act against them, turning them eventually into true heroes.
One plot twist Pixar villain that worked much better was Dawn Bellwether. She wasn’t a perfect villain but her motivations and plans were better than Evelyn’s. Her villainous plot twist was more surprising than Evelyn. In Incredibles 2, you can tell the true villain was either Evelyn, her brother Winston, or both of them.
@@OpticalSorcerer Agreed. If nothing else, I do appreciate 2 for still being enjoyable on that end too, least in my opinion, even if the ultimate plot wasn't as interesting by comparison. "Math is Math!" is worth it in my book.
I still stand by the idea that the film would have been infinitely better had they pulled a Death Note twist. Her brother was the screen slaver and mind controlled his sister into believing she was the screen slaver, and then forcing her to mind control him into forgetting he was until she was arrested.
I think they gave the Underminer was given his own game, so he did have his time to shine. Also, thinking back on it, Evelyn Deavor (Evil Endeavor) seems more on the nose than Syndrome (Hero Syndrome).
Also, if the Deaver guy wants to bring superheroes back to the forefront, and wants someone to the the face of this effort...why'd he pick Helen? Bob's got a lot more presence than she does, being larger in size and in strength, and he's also the one that directly defeated Syndrome in the first movie; surely he'd be the first, and better, option than his housewife. Picking her just makes no sense in-universe - it really feels like Helen was chosen by the writers to have a female-led sequel, even when that makes little sense, and when we've got loads of that type of garbage nowadays.
What's funny to me about this is, they could easily have run with 'Bob says no, Helen decides to take the role for the sake of her kids.' It'd be an instant internal dramatic divide in the family in which the kids don't have a clear side to take. One where both sides have viable points to their PoV, and solved that issue in the bargan. (Mind, you'll need to allocate screen time appropriately, even if the divide is bridged in a single conversation.)
My whole thing is why didnt the family work together? The ending of the first movie was clearly setting that up and yet....we are emasculating Bob, propping Helen on a pedestal, and the kids are just ..there. It didn't feel like an Incredibles movie. It really disappointed me.
@@shannonhill5676 That's actually a good point you made - the whole point of the first movie was that the family had to work together to escape the island and defeat Syndrome, and were poised to do that again versus the Underminer. But in the sequel, as you said, that's forgotten. Yet another way the sequel never should've been made, not like this anyway.
Heres a better idea for a motive. She wants all villains dead, but heroes dont kill. So she helps her bro with the plan to legalize heroes again, and then screenslaves the heroes, motivating them to kill the villains so they never escape to cause more havoc.
I think Evelyn was actually an okay villain. What really hurt her was the obvious twist, and having to stand next to the peak villain that is Syndrome.
My idea on how they could have fixed it, was the supers where being lazy or just playing it off as "the old man is just being ubsurdly paranoid" and evelyn could have SEEN the death and heard the phone call, leaving her with major trust issues with all supers
I think it’s an even bigger shame we never got to see the movie open with the Now Removed Opening of GAZERBEAM’s Memorial! Showing more background story as to who he was as both a civilian and a Hero, and the tragic circumstances of what All Heroes desire. Wanting to be of Service, doing goodbye one degree or another.
One of the other structural issues with Evelyn is just how few interactions she gets with the characters because basically for the finale a lot of the most interesting characters she could be interacting with are basically in time out until their goggles can be removed. It just decreases the opportunities for villain hero interactions or having her minions have some personality. Syndrome’s minions while pretty standard for super villains are absolutely bursting with personality. But just Evelyn doesn’t have anyone villainous to play off for a large majority of the film with her janky motive being something else that hinders her likability. Meanwhile syndrome is given so many opportunities to interact with other characters, from ambushing mr incredible, to his dynamic and straining relationship with Mirage leading to her betraying him, or even his over confidence with the Omnidroid and underestimating its intelligence (adding a hint of irony of that being the fake story they used to lure supers to their death) Evelyn just isn’t given many if any moments to organically interact with anyone when in villain mode. I think the only time is when she takes off mrs incredible’s goggles just so she can monologue at her and then again in the jet. Tldr: I feel like Evelyn’s crappy motivation is just a symptom of a much larger issue of being too few opportunities to interact with others organically
Ya know something, with Pixar's previous work it always had a satisfying conclusion. Even if it didn't answer every question, the stories were wrapped up quite nicely. Now there's debate. That's how i know they've failed. I shouldn't wonder if the story had a good ending or not. They used to be able to pull it off, but not anymore.
I watched this movie for the first time around a week ago, then dreamed that Evelyn swore undying revenge on Helen...and Helen distracted her obsessive stupidity by buying a cheap burner phone and pretending to be a copycat Screenslaver. Evelyn would seek first to track down and destroy the copycat and never get anywhere. I thought it was funny.
In it of itself, the general goal of Evelyn makes sense and is the next logical step. For the first movie, where there we're no sign of the super's situation changing, the villain would be someone who wants to profit on the fact that things aren't changing and activly prevent things from changing going forward by offering an alternative. That is the case of Syndrome and his plan to make super's obsolete with technology and that works with his desire for petty revenge too. In a situation where things are activly changing or on the way to change, the villain would logicaly be someone that simply doesn't want things to change because of their personnal beliefs or because they would lose something if things changed. That would be the case for Evelyn and the screenslaver but it was executed like dogshit. Making her a complete biggot that refuses to see when she's wrong doesn't work here because she isn't morally gray, she just wants to hurt people, there ain't no ambiguity here.
I would've preferred in Underminer was the figure head villain throughout instead of screen slaver and the twist was just that he was working for the Deavers, who don't seem to realize what they're doing is wrong. The other heroes they hired might be also on board with the shenanigans, seeing a city as a playground. But the film doesn't investigate that idea for whatever reason
How is it that Syndrome, someone worse then Evelyn, had a more understandable goal and reason to be evil then someone whose parents died from a robber and heartbreak because the dad tried calling heroes even though they were illegal now.
I actually enjoy the movie... ...until her ass stated why she did what she did. You could make the argument that "Oh, she wanted Supers to be gone so that the world wouldn't rely on them as much as her dad did!" But that just makes it worse. What are humans gonna do against villains like the Underminer and his giant drill or Bomb Voyage, a mine who uses actual bombs? And plus a home invasion is definitely a situation where someone would need a Super. Plus her actions SHOWED that the world needed Supers to begin with.
Please read the whole comment and tell me what you think about how I would’ve written the twist: I always thought the twist would’ve been better if it was revealed halfway to the viewer that Winston and Evelyn were working together. Then when Elastigirl finds out, they reveal their motivations. Winston really does want to help the Supers become legal but he wants to take it further. He blames the leaders who outlawed Supers for his dad’s death, and has decided that in addition to making them legal, he’s going to put them in power. He knows the Supers wouldn’t willingly rule as dictators so he uses Evelyn’s technology to hypnotize them so that they can kill everyone in power and anyone who doesn’t support them while, in Winston’s view, taking over their rightful place as society’s rulers. Winston, this way, could be a reverse of Syndrome as someone who worships Supers too much to the point where he’s willing to hurt as many people as possible to help them. Evelyn could just be the anarchist chill tech-based villain who’s happy Winston’s using her genius for some actual gadgets.
I mean, the original had what i saw as one primary plot hole, the fact that seemingly supervillains just, got bored or something after the supers were banned... I guess calling the police on the villian with an army of minions setting up their death ray across the street worked? But it was excusable, hey, we can't see what's going on, they could find some justification... It was irrelevant, because Syndrome was the problem, and although his motivations were petty, they worked... In the sequel... Geez. I found it ironic someone proclaiming thst people need to be self reliant, is a wealthy scientist, who I'm sure mines, refines and manufactures all her components, and reinvented circuitry from scratch. The motivation might work for a, down with society, back to zero type villian, but...
I think it was hinted at that the government would deal with Supervillains. They just didn't want to deal with Superheroes due to innocent people getting hurt and property destruction. I imagine that the government would kill the supervillains, hence why they never resurfaced in society to cause havoc. Considering we know superheroes can die, it wouldn't be too farfetched for supervillains to be killed as well.
evelyn gets even stranger when you remember that the monologue that that screen-slaver broadcasts is based off of the writings of ted kyzinski whos primary thesis is (TLDR) that the govenrment and corporations finding ways to integrate technology into everything (i.e. the things that make us dependent on others/other things) is actually what is poisonous to society. for evelyn to suggest that being dependent on superheros negates a persons self preservation capabilities she then would also have to acknowledge that just because superheros were outlawed that didn't negate supervillains like the underminer from resurfacing now and again. ultimately the people of this world traded one dependency that did mostly keep them safe for another dependency that ultimately doesn't. evelyn is advocating for people to be able to find the strength to fend for themselves whilst also telling them to keep the current system of dependency that encourages those same people to act against their own need for self preservation.
I feel like the movie would've been a bit better if Evelyn blamed supers to deal with her grief, and she learns to move on and accept what happened by the end
Evelyn is basically just a pixar karen lol I wouldve prefered the screen slaver to be an actual villain or the underminer and the screenslaver working together
I also had trouble with the foundation of her Evil back story. Her parents died because they tried to call the Hero's. Except the robbers were already in the house and it only took them maybe 30 seconds from when he tried to pick up the phone till their death. I am sorry but unless their hero is Super man I don't think any one could of got there in time to save them either way.
You should do a Jack Jack video next. The youngest member of the Parr family has more potential than Dash and Violet since has 17 powers. While it is exciting to see what he can do when he gets older, but what if your loved one decent to evil without being challenged and disciplined? And what if there is a dimension where the heroes sees themselves as their own worst enemies? I think having a grown up Jack Jack would be a perfect villain for Incredibles 3.
I think Jack-Jack would be too well-raised. Helen and Bob are competent parents, they'll have learned how to deal with his older child and teen years through previous experience. Jack-Jack also has Edna Mode as an aunt. It wouldn't make sense for him to become so maladjusted as to become a villain, unless he was seperated from his family during his younger years and go through major tragedy.
8:33 Actually, the lair was already set up Evelyn just called Pizza Guy & ambushed him when he arrived, it would take at least 3 days to set up the lair and that means Pizza Guy would have to be missing for 3 days (and Evelyn would have to feed & change him), it's also supported by Pizza Guy idefing as "Pizza Guy" and still being in employee mode
How the hell is anybody still thinking she was a dumb villain when her entire motivation actually is more justifiable and reasonable and quite relatable than Buddy's. When you're relying on someone or something far more than you actually should be, you become absolutely crippled without it
If they’re going to make a 3rd, I hope Pixar thinks of a villain who instead of having hatred for the supers instead having hatred for society, seeing all non-supers as undeserving and a pack of idiots for suing and banning the heroes over “little boo-boos” despite them being the reason that they’re alive and believing that building that can be rebuilt and replace are more important than saving lives which are all irreplaceable. A villain that though is on the supers side and makes solid points would take things to far by working to make everyone a super through a globe-spanning device, believing that without the 90% of the world that don’t have gifts yet somehow have more influence and power that supers would never be prosecuted against and for those who once did not have this life to finally understand what it means to be super and finally understand the pain, scorn and suffering they had put their saviors through. However, such a plan would lead to a new world order that has so many unpredictable variables that could lead to even greater time and catastrophe, but the villain has become hollow over the idea as the flaws of society and the consequences they have made from their emotionally fueled actions have taken its toll on him and he’d rather let the chips fall, and what’s worse is that he plans on making things permanent by erasing all information and the memories of all those working on the project with the blueprints now solely residing inside his head, the last non-super who will take what was left of the previous plague called society with him to the grave via suicide by self-destruction! Yeah, I really thought this over, but anyway my point is, give us a villain like that and I will happily buy a ticket to the next installment. Whenever that’ll be. 🤷🏻
1:55 This Guy was so good in the PS2 Game where you have to Consistently Pursue Him as Mr Incredible and Frozone, and You Eventually Get The Guy in the end! The Game gave him more Proper Justice than This Movie did!
It goes to show that sometimes all you need is one movie to tell an entire story and not rely on sequels. The incredibles movie was always a classic and it is sad the sequel could not live up to it. I guess not everyone can be the toy story franchise.
I think the core of the villain's motivation was actually really good. She wanted people to take agency over their own lives, to stop waiting for someone to come along to save you. That's a real problem in today's society. Too many people have been trained to wait for help from some other source, instead of learning to help themselves.
@@gustavolourenco5709 The ban was still in place, true, but after the fight with Syndrome from the first movie, it had softened. There was a push - both by the general public and private entities - to support lifting the ban entirely. The villain in the sequel wanted to ensure that this didn't happen.
I would have loved that instead of non super a lashing out at the super that let them down like in the first film, the sequel be about a super that felt unwelcome in society and was lashing out because of it. We could've gotten som e background in established villains and why they do what they do
It really is werid that every Increadibles villain is always a normal human using what they have to get stuff done, and often someone who is pulling themselves up by their bootstraps despite their weaknesses.
Evelyn could've worked by being resentful of the government instead of the heroes and just simply view the heroes as tools to overthrow the government. Or maybe have screenslaver be a completely different person who's a hero fanatic like Syndrome but is abscessed over the idea of having the hero back so decided to make themselves as this powerful villain to give a reason for the heroes to comeback. But I guess that will introduce moral grayness or nuances and Pixar doesn't like that.
So crazy thing for me to say, but instead of Evelyn being the villian what if the father not only survived the shot but became jaded or would that lean too much into Syndrome? What do you guys think?
honestly screenslaver would’ve probably been a better villain on his own without Evelyn’s involvement.
If Syndrome was an ode to Robin, I'd have loved Screenslaver being an ode to Mr. Sinister.
Definitely. Or Evelyn should've been Screenslaver and actually have something to do with Screenslaver's motivations.
Syndrome was a Great Villain and also Funny, When he said and "Got Busy" to Funny 😆😅😂🤣
Would it make more sense for Screenslaver if he was an actual character that ties in directly to Helen’s role, like maybe he can be somewhat her old ex boyfriend before she met bob.
@@NaterGater2496Would definitely be better than what we have, and would do a good job in making the plot feel more personal, but an old ex would be a touch lame and predictable.
Evelyn Deaver=Evil endeavor
Evelyn=A villain
This may be the worst twist villain of all time.
This honestly feels like an Ace Attorney name pun with how on the nose it is.
@@lowlycommenter3332 I Agree.
I bet the writers were really patting themselves on the backs with that one.
@@Kaitou1412Fangirl In a Smug Manner?
i wonder if that pun worked in other languages?
Ngl I thought the twist was going to be that the Screen Slaver was a villain manufactured by Winston and Evelyn to give Elastigirl someone to fight and improve her public image
even that would have been more interesting XD
@@MeloRat69 ikr 😭
I HAD THIS IDEA TOO where elastigirl has an existential crisis because maybe the world DOESN'T need superheroes, only for the other supers to come in and remind her that fighting criminals is only half the battle, the other half is giving the people hope and someone to see themselves in
also the climax is them fighting the underminer because yeah guys like him are still running around 💀
Ugh! It was so disappointing it wasn't that!
@@thedeliveryboy1123That would have been so cool actually
Evelyn’s plan sounds as ridiculous as trying to get rid of firefighters because fire extinguishers exist
Not so. It was more like wanting people to use the fire extinguisher on the burning toaster, instead of immediately calling the fire department and waiting for them to show up while the fire spreads into the entire room.
@@jacksquatt6082
But why go after fire fighters themselves? Not every average citizen is capable of putting out fires. Some may be too big or complicated to put out on their own, and Evelyn would just be screwing those people over by getting rid of them.
There are better ways to get people to be more self reliant than actively going after people who devote their lives to protecting you.
Her whole argument falls apart when the firefighter actually saves her life from a fire she created, yet she acts ungrateful as if she’d prefer to die in a fire like her father before her to prove some kind of point than realize how misguided her entire plan was just to spite the firefighter.
Expanding upon this, it’s like saying we don’t need doctors because we can get first aid kits or we don’t need police because we can get guns for ourselves
@@jacksquatt6082Still sometimes the situation turns out so that you can’t put out the fire yourself. Or fire started spreading without your involvement, so you had no way to stop it. So you need help from firefighters.
@@Sjono
"Why go after the fire fighters themselves?" You hit the nail on the head. This is what makes her a villain.
She started with the reasonable premise of "people need to take responsibility for their own lives and have a stake in keeping themselves safe," and she moved into the realm of insanity by saying, "I'll SHOW you that you have agency! I'll give you NO CHOICE but to do so."
I never thought this was inherently stupid. Rather, it always seemed like it was the villain's trap of being so obsessed with their own fanatical purpose that they lost sight of what actually mattered.
Could it have been executed better? Yes. But the core idea still has a lot of merit to it.
Honestly my whole thing was why not use her knowledge to make people rely less on hero's by making them better and not make the hero's worse?
Syndrome: I wanted to get rid heroes because my idol turned me down!
Evelyn: I wanted to get rid of heroes because they wouldn't help my dad during a home invasion in the middle of the night with no way of them knowing about it!
Even worse, the dad had one of those red phones that could directly call heroes in an emergency.
But super heroes had just been made illegal so the phone didn’t work.
And the flashback shows he got shot while he was trying to make the phone call, so even if it did work, they wouldn’t have been able to respond fast enough. Which just begs the question of why didn’t he have the emergency hero phone in his emergency safety room?
@@Death2all546 That's what he should've done. But he was so bent on thinking heroes would help him each time, he throw out his common sense. And that just made Evelyn's motive even less sense why blame the heroes for something beyond their control? Then she would help make them legal only to make them illegal and the twist was so obvious.; That's why I love Syndrome's motive way more. He's petty as all hell but it's more straightforward. And they reveal him being Buddy Pine all grown up happened way earlier
@@Death2all546didn’t gazerbeam get killed by syndrome or was that after the incident?
@@Hamster_Dogg I think Evelyn’s dad died about a week after super heroes became illegal. Which was shortly after the very beginning of the first movie when Syndrome was still a kid.
I don't even care that much that the father tried to use the phone after supers became illegal. What I can't tolerate or believe is that their house had a panic room and the hero phone wasn't even in it. What kind of logic or architectural sense is that? Someone was paid to write that and it made it to final.
"I hate heroes instead of villains because of.. Reasons!!"
Literally, she could have been a way more interesting villain if she was a vigilante, going on a killer route killing EVERY cryminal
Cryminal? Is that like a criminal who sobs a lot?
@@evanbarth7173 They will with this concept lmao
They should have taken away her motives entirely and she becomes a villain because someone has to be their opposite, so why not her. Evil for the sake of evil can work, we've seen it.
Elastigirl: Evelyn?
Evelyn: Why are we surprised, it's in my name. I mean haha it is a total coincidence like naming a speedster Dash. I mean who does that?!
Elastigirl: ...
Evelyn: You didn't?! You did! Well onto my evil plans, what's a hero without a villain? So I decided to do it, and why not open a few franchises while I'm at it?! And on the plus side, we're always cooler than the heroes.
We could’ve had a antagonist whose a corrupt hero taking advantage of the newly fixed reputation of heroes
@@angrytheclown801agreed with being cooler than the heroes part, whole heartedly.
Syndrome would laugh at her backstory. Say what you want about the guy at least his backstory make sense.
Facts
And is cliche as hell.
@@younglove3362 Yeah, and? His motive is cliche, yes, but his method is interesting and he have his own worldview. Like how he try to make "everyone special so no one will be" is unique, I didn't really saw this too much in other things. I think motives can be simple, ebcaues most motives are simple. Like, you have any interesting reasen to go to work? Or eat every morning? Or help your loved ones? Not really and it is same for bad actions as well. A robber doN't have complicated reasens to rob a house, he most probably just want money.
@@reactiondavant-garde3391
As entertaining as Monarch is, his motive has been done so many times that people commonly mock and joke about it. It's not unique at all and has been done enough times. Stop ✋️.
His motive is actually dumb. He put his life in risk in many situations and really only slowed mr. incredible down until he had enough to tell syndrome that what’s he’s doing is horrid and impulsive. He got his feelings hurt and decided to kill every single super hero because why not?
For Pete's sake, they could've done the obvious route of "supers accidentally killed my dad while trying to help" instead of this super contrived plot.
Heck, it could've involved supers who were actually evil or selfish that caused her dad to die and thus ruin her opinion of EVERY super to ever exist and only once her life is saved does she realise that not all supers are out for themselves.
Friendly reminder that for example Gamma Jack and Psychwave among others showed some red flag behavior, establishing that not all supers are goodie two shoes.
I'm also dissapointed that the sequel didn't really have the sinister undertones Incredibles 1 had
@@lumiauroras6741 We don't even need to go in that direction. Remember how in the first film a bunch of heroes were shown getting themselves killed due to wardrobe malfunction of all things; their capes just getting stuck where they shouldn't. That shows that even the most powerful heroes can have their moments of carelessness.
Bob Parr gravely injured a man trying to jump while rescuing him, and at times he lost control of his own strength due to anger, and he's nonetheless extremely good at what he does. If even someone like him, who was shown to be a very effective hero, can slip up from time to time, so can anyone else.
@@lumiauroras6741Yo I was just thinking of Gamma Jack! Pixar really missed an opportunity here. This guy was literally Homelander before Homelander.
imagine the scenario: the super heroes pose for the cameras to try and make a case for re-legalizing supers, resulting in the father dying, so evelyn lets the superheroes pose for the cameras and try to make a case before causing a huge problem on national television, ensuring they're never re-legalized. it would be perfect and even poetic.
OR Evelyn could see that Elastigirl was a genuinely good person and believe that the idea of a super hero is ”tainting” her in a way, as in sooner or later she would become exactly like the heroes who killed her father
This whole movie is an insult to the original. It's redundant and pointless.
For pete's sake, the whole villain plot failed because of Evelyn's monologue. The very cliché the original was mocking.
@@vetarlittorf1807 I'll never understand why they moved up the release date.
@@OpticalSorcerer Because Pixar didn't want it to overshadow Toy Story 4 and wanted Incredibles 2 to ride the superhero hype train. Ironically, the MCU made people less interested in Incredibles 2.
@@vetarlittorf1807 Such a shame. The MCU didn't make me lose interest (given that thr sequel is animated and retro in contrast to the MCU being modern and live-action), but I do hate that mindset they had. I care more about TI than TS.
I won't argue the redundantcy. I would say the point is to upgrade the heroes for vigilante to recognized heroes like they were before.
Now the villain plot failing due to a monologue i won't say is bad. I mean thats kinda the point. Syndrome died due to his cape which mr incredible called capes a classic. It was a chekhov's gun. Cliches being the undoing of villains isn't new. Hell the monologue joke in the first movie is the villain recognizing it could be his understanding because he is a fan of heroes. While this villain isn't a fan.
@@starterking That's different. Syndrome dying because of his cape was foreshadowed AND it had thematic weight to it. Evelyn failing because of a monologue is just contriving and only exists so she can be defeated. Which is exactly the kind of contrivance the original avoided and outright mocked. Same goes to Bob in the beginning where he got sucked into the Underminer's giant tube because he suddenly took stupid pills and started monologuing for no reason. Even though we KNOW from the previous film that Bob is supposed to be a lot smarter than this.
And no. Upgrading the heroes from vigilantes to recognized heroes was already achieved in the original because the Incredibles saved the city and had been actively fighting villainy for 3 months afterwards.
But the sequel throws all the character development and progress away simply to do it all again.
"Let's call the super heroes!"
"No, Let's go to the panic room!"
"Why not both? What if a phone was IN the panic room?"
"Genius!"
*DIRECTED BY ROBERT ZEMECKIS*
Robert Zemeckis, the same man who directed the Back to the Future trilogy and Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
HOW did we get such a shit script when this sequel was in development hell for so long? It's so ridiculous.
I think the movie could have been fixed if it were that Evelyn wanted to 'control' Supers rather than what we got. That she wanted them legal so that they could operate under her control with at best minimum legal interference but have a veritable army of super-powered bodyguards for her and her brother that she could summon in an instant. Effectively doubling down on what her canon self thought was her father's mistake and making her a more extreme version of her brother.
Omg that’s a good motivation
I love this. You could even twist it more to where they are "infected" with their father's love for supers, to the point where they become a sort of yandere fanatics that get further spurred on the the ecents at the end of the first movie. The opposite extreme of Synestro's admiration becoming hate.
Alternatively, this could have been a 3rd movie, with an alternative motive(s). The second movie could've featured a vengeful super, possibly a child of one of the supers that Synestro killed. They'd be a sorta Magneto/Homelander/Evil Superman Clone (from Superman: Doomsday) that sorta becomes the dictator of a city. This then leads into the third movie where the brother is business-minded, super greedy motivated villain while the sister is the more fear motivated villain. The brother would want exclusive "contracts" with the supers, "leasing" them out to other powerful individuals and such. The sister, on the other hand, would be more affected by the vengeful super, believing that supers need to be controlled for the safety of everyone.
Hmmm
This is perfect.
The fascinating thing about that is, so long as you wrote it as this being the only sinister thing about the scheme (The means rather than the end goal or motive.) it would be a pretty tough pill to swallow. That no, there wasn't a simple motive behind this problem. It'd be a final confrontation problem that could be talked out. (I mean, it wouldn't, but that it could would be neat.)
While the ScreenSlaver did made a valid point that everyone in the Incredibles World kept relying on Supers instead of themselves, he would’ve been a better villain if not revealing the plot twist of Evelyn.
Supers were outlawed for 15 years though. How do you "over rely" on something you banned for that long?
@@Koopa_Klawz🤷♂️
When they put a ban on supers, why did all the supervillains just stop? Like, you'd think they'd hear all supers are banned and then they'd go on a crime spree since there's no heroes left. Why would supervillains care if supers are banned? They're villains!
... but I thought about it, and there are no SUPER villains in this series. Syndrome, Bomb Voyage, Screenslaver, Underminer... all the villains are just normal people using technology. How in this world of superpowered people are there no supervillains? The sequel to incredibles should have had an actual super-powered villain, someone who was originally a hero, hated that supers got outlawed, and just started doing whatever. If you're the only superpowered person, things tend to become easy.... boringly easy. So they would end up trying to lure out other heroes by becoming the "necessary evil" unstoppable enough that there had to be superheroes to step up, regardless of what the law stated. Otherwise, what was the point of existing in this world where everything is too easy for them?
So you might ask, what is the moral center of this sequel? It would be Purpose. Say this superpowered villain has completely jaded society against supers, regardless of the feats of the first movie. Are they still willing to risk their lives against humans that don't want them around? and what is the point of life without challenge? Is being a hero their purpose to live, or is it more? such as prioritizing protecting their family over random civilians? Would they consider teaming up with the villain because he just wants entertainment and company himself, and in return, people are left alone? What choices would the heroes make when the villain is just that strong? Do they give up for the sake of keeping the family safe and letting the villain do what he wants, or do they continue to risk their lives after suffering a horrible loss?
I think the unspoken implication is that the 'super' villains ate Kill Orders and with that established, most would be Super Villains decided to do something less self destructive instead. If the laws only applied to those with powers that couldn't be stripped (like tech) from the user... well we get what we saw. A lot of retired heros and not a single known retired villain.
@@Sorain1 they are villains. They want the law to incapacitate Heroes, if they proof the law wrong by doing super Bad things, there would be no point
i can feel it... your cooking
There were super villians as Blazestone was a former villian & even Gamma jack had villainous tendencies as he thought Supers were the superior race & did kill his villians.
Cruella deVil is already a villain from the start *and it makes sense.* A character named Evil Endeavor being a twist villain is just the dumbest shit.
Just realized given the ages of most of the other new supers, they were likely the first children of the original supers. Supers who Syndrome killed. Just imagine the rich story we could have gotten if you had them explain who their parents were, and how after Syndrome they wanted to stand up and protect others like their parents had once done. Showing what a life of living in hiding would do to Violent, Dash, and Jack Jack, and all of them trying to make a future where kids like them could be free to discover their own powers/talents.
But why do that when you can watch Dash do math?
there is no Incredibles 2 in Ba Sing Se
💯💯💯
There’s an Incredibles 2? Who who’d have thunk
We met Evelyn and I was hoping, almost praying, that I was wrong about her being the villain. I was hoping that Screenslaver was the real villain and would be revealed he's actually a Super who despised being called on for every little thing before Supers were illegal.
Then the twist happened and I zoned out for the rest of the movie.
I was _sincerely_ hoping for them to double-untwist the villain and have it be *Alexander Galbaki,* the namedropped _fashion designer_ behind Elastigirl's new silver suit responsible for the glasses _themselves_ and thus _also_ responsible for continuing the plot, with or _without_ Evelynn.
The *Screenslaver* is a far more insidious villain as a _concept_ that can be enacted by _anyone with the means to do so._ It's Conspiracy Theory 101: those with the means to _escape_ responsibility for their purported crimes will *do* so, out of rational self-interest.
Genuinely same here, I had taken my mom to see this at the theater I was working at at the time and I can so distinctly remember getting to the part where the kids are padding out the runtime chasing the baby around like he was the new Olaf, and I remember just kinda looking at my mom like "... Is this it?" I don't think I've ever been so painfully aware that I was sitting in a seat watching a movie that I wished would just end already.
Even the play on names between Syndrome and Evelyn shows the stark difference in quality.
Syndrome is a play on Heroes Syndrome, a phenomenon of someone orchestrating dangerous scenarios to be the one who valiantly saves lives (exactly what his plan with the Omnidroid was in the final act)
Evelyn Deaver is just a nod to “Evil Endeaver”, it literally just references that she’s evil in her introduction before the twist. It’s a name that pats itself on the back for being so clever. She’s a character who falls into the modern villain writing of trying to make them have a valid point while still being evil, but losing sight of the complexity required to make that writing work.
Honestly I wish the Incredibles 2 had answered my question from the first movie: How the actual F the law against supers stopped supervillains from being active? There’s no reason to expect supervillains to respect a law against superpowers if they’re not willing to respect other laws and yet the first movie showed they were willing to lie low until the law was repealed. That would make sense for the Lex Luthors of the world, characters whose main motivation is to defeat their local superhero, but what about everyone else? It would have been more interesting to find that the supervillains had used the down time to build an empire, then decided they actually liked having a secret underground empire and had the Underminer be their emissary to the surface to invite the heroes down to their super paradise.
Frankly the law should have never happened. The fact this was started after a suicide attempt
Honestly, this is a very good point
''We realised we just wanted to be free to use our abilitie how we wanted, like you. So yeah, we just...made a society 2KM under the city.'' And this society built entirely by criminals and vigilantes is actually somewhat decent with crime being discouraged because whats the point of stealing something if your neighbour would steal it right back? The crime rate was so high for like a week that it crashed back down to zero.
@@paulrasmussen8953 Not to mention the fact that all those people on the train could've been killed, if Mr. Incredible hadn't stopped it. Or the fact that it was because of Bomb Voyage planting a bomb on Buddy's cape, that the bridge went out in the first place; which never would've happened if Buddy hadn't gotten involved against Mr. Incredible’s wishes. So really, Mr. Incredible shouldn't have faced any consequences whatsoever. And that suicidal man should’ve been forced to seek counseling, as Mr. Incredible suggested.
@@fabienchamberland4791 "Turns out that just doing whatever you want without thinking of the consequences doesn't lead to a long lifespan when everyone else is super too. It does lead to a lot of reconstruction work during the first month or so, but things settled down after that."
The more time goes on, the more I’ve grown to loath Incredibles 2. I saw the original in theaters, it’s still one of my favorite movies of all time. I remember the 14 year build up and hype for a sequel.
It's really funny once you realize the whole movie could have been avoided if Evelyn's dad just kept the phones IN THE SAFE ROOM
Idiot Plot is a term that somewhat describes this.
Why didn't he put the phones in the safe room?
Best how it should have ended. Have the phones in the safe room, and after supers became Illegal. Hire some bodyguards and plot twist one of them is a super he supported. Because after super heroes became illegal, they needed regular jobs. So what's a better way to repay a person and provide for your family, while also using powers to help people.
@@cooldude2255 Because the plot needed to happen.
@@VidiaReePhoenix It really didn't since you could have driven an Incredibles 2 off the villain side of things and what happened to them, with the twist within the twist it was the kids of the villains and not their parents, but they weren't so much planning true villainy such as turning heroes and villains into an elaborate smoke and mirrors profit scheme, so supers could socially acceptably stretch their powers, while keeping property and civilian damage to a minimum.
This movie could have gone two ways honestly.
Point A) Keep with the Under Miner to pick up from where the first movie left off
Point B) Make the Screenslaver an actual villain rather than a plot device.
Both villains had plenty of potential to work with and ideas to follow. We did not need Evelyn.
Evelyn could keep the motivation, the biggest problem was making her the *main* one when that is like a henchwoman's motivation. Screen Slaver could have instead been a real villain who was blackmailing her because she tried and failed to pull this off before, she had the tech knowhow, but not the "street smarts" and cunning, coming from a life spent narrowly focused on a singular goal.
@@Poglavnit_Pferdefuhrer I can agree to this idea. Like I said, Screen Slaver has the potential. Same for Under Miner. Either way, there are a lot of ideas to put into either villain.
If they wanted to focus on drama for most of the film, they could easily have had Under Miner be the opening... and then the issues that arise from the family's actions to stop him are the meat of the story. The questions about 'But what is our solution to Under Miner type issues with heroes being illegal?' that their entire society (and the script of the first film wisely) avoided for all this time is suddenly the central issue of your sequel.
@@Sorain1 Unfortunately yeah
When I think of the original movie, I think about the many quotes I can recall at the drop of a hat from Syndrome alone. "Lame lame lame!" "You sly dog! You caught me monologuing!" "And got BIZAY!"
Can't remember a single line from Evelyn and I watched the sequel way more recently.
"Wheres my super suit"
Naming a TWIST villain EVIL ENDEAVOR is the absolute dumbest thing they could have done. So stupidly obvious that she was the villain.
Yeah, while I didn’t hate this movie, it was a clear step down from the original and the villain shows that (though to be fair, no one can surpass Syndrome)
The thing about the Under Miner is he was never meant to be anything special. He's like a two-bit villain, and it's not even a cliff-hanger, it's one of those "Here we go again/Never the end/For me it was Tuesday" things. When doing a sequel... yeah, you should probably address it, because a lot of people probably _thought_ it was a sequel hook. But the strangest thing is, they immediately had him tunnel underground? Like, declaring war on the surface dwellers, only to rob a bank is _kinda_ odd... but coming up, declaring war, then going back down again, what even is going on? Story cohesion level: RWBY
Only to not bring him up again? (I think he gets a drive-by in the credits, but still.)
Roxanne was such a pathetic villain
Yeah, she does look like Roxanne Richie…
At least Tighten/Titan is better villain even if he's an incel
I thought that design looked familiar......
She looks like Roxaxane with a dr*g problem.
@@meathead2934 ABSOLUTELY!
I hate how all the new superheros look ridiculous. In first movie they are just people with superpowers, now there is a bird, a frog and a guy two times bigger than Mr Incredible xddd
Ya know I’m just a little confused why the *panic phones* weren’t in the *panic room*
Because plot
When I first saw this movie, I thought that Evelyn HAD to be a red herring. I couldn't believe it when the revealed she was actually the villain. Even a toddler could have seen that one coming.
^That's who they wrote it for.
The sheer subtlety of the Jack-Jack character arc should make that much very clear...
By the way, the two super heroes probably didn't pick up the phone because syndrome killed them. So syndrome caused the death of Evelyn's parents, which made her go super villain, so syndrome caused all the events of the incredibles 2, and is also somehow more evil than he already was.
Ah the "it was me barry" moment
@@DJPrimeAmvs Syndrome: It was me, Incredible!
@@DJPrimeAmvs...Fironic was Buddy's dad.
@@normanclatcher was that confirmed?
No, the superhero decommission happened when they were kids. Syndrome basically caused it when he was a kid, so he's about the same age as Evelyn...giver or take a year.
Unlike Syndrome, Evelyn had no personal ties to the Incredibles. It might have been a little better if Evelyn had a grudge against supers due to Mrs. incredible having failed to save her parents when she was a kid.
Evelyn Deaver really didn't work as a villain. Her goal was already achieved 15+ years prior, and the only one standing in opposition to her goal was herself. Society already stopped relying on Supers, and with so few supers left after Syndrome, Evelyn should have been sitting comfortably knowing she already has what she wants. All she had to do to win was to simply not help her brother. Winston's plans to reinstitute Superheroes as a legal force was ONLY possible because of Evelyn. She's obviously not helping her brother out of obligation or love, their relationship is already broken.
To make the screenslaver work, they should have changed Evelyn's backstory completely, and made it so that the reinstitution of Superhero legality was from an external third party that Evelyn doesn't enable. Which shouldn't have been that difficult, considering the incident with Syndrome did spark some public interests in Superheroes. Also, they should have completely scrapped the Incredibles' arrest after the Underminer conflict, because that was stupid too.
The reason to that Incredibles 2 was bad, its because the producers basically recycled the plot of the prequel;
- The movies started with a failed battle against a villain, that ended with collateral damages, that leads to the politics banned the Superheroes for public pressure.
- One of the parents, are given an offer to work with powerful organizations, to may continuing their heroic activities.
- The villains aren't definite, but they are "twist plot villains", that were apparently allies, that turned be enemies of the heroes.
- The motivations of the villains to hate the heroes are cheap and unfair; Syndrome hates the heroes only because Mr Incredible rejected him, and Evelyn hates the heroes only because she think that they makes weaker the people.
- The movies ends with the heroes gaining back the favor of the public.
Making that the Incredibles 2, only be actually a rip off of the Incredibles 1, than an original sequel.
I’ll be honest.
I really wish the second movie had done a villain who was a Superhero Supremacist. Someone to counter Syndrome.
I mean, there’s already a character like that in canon - Gamma Jack. Dude was on a watch list by the government because he believed supers were superior to humans.
"I want to illegalize supers because they were the reason why my parents are dead!"
Gurl, it sounds like you need therapy.
Yup
Yeah, nothing about the villain we got works. Status quo: supers are shunned. Goal: supers are shunned. "evil plan"?: make supers legal and accepted so to force a new level of paranoia when obvious mind-altering "substances" are used to make the heroes "turn evil". How to execute? encourage the person trying to break the status quo you want so badly to keep and make an ally out of the mascot for the movement despite wanting to control them in the end. Motivation? parents died in an accident that "heroes" as icons of peace couldnt stop, with no consideration as to WHY they couldnt stop it.
First issue, status quo. Her plan isnt proactive, because it CANT be. Wait, what? she IS proactive towards reaching her "goal"? In an environment where her goal was already achieved?!
Second, who is leading the charge? Her own brother. Why get others involved in the first place? The only person you need to stop is your own brother and the status quo is maintained. Being your BROTHER, you should be able to talk him down, and if you cant, stopping him physically would give us a more intersting character as she continues to dig her heels into the spot of her grave, digging it in the process.
Third, why help elastigirl at all and try to win her over to "your side" of things if you dont trust her on some level? If you dont trust her, put the hypno goggles into her new supersuit from the very beginning (replacing the mask, maybe) and cut out the middle man and room for error!
Fourth, "I dont trust you, and just because you saved me doesnt mean you were right!" Really? you are being such a petulant child. Again, see the more interesting plot that would have emerged from keeping your distance from her in the entire movie and the potential to brainwash her long-term with very calculated use of the hypno mask.
Fifth, motivation. If your brother lost no faith despite the "way your parents died", talk to him! See why he holds no hate.
This villain doesnt work because every moment of her character is contradictory. She wants to stop the legalization of supers by... legalizing them?! She works with elastigirl towards legalizing supers... despite the fact she not only wants to betray her in the long run, but that elasitgirl only got the plan from your own brother you could have talked to in order to find a middle ground?! Supers are already shunned by society... yet you effectively run a positive PR campaign for them?!
In all seriousness, that’s literally The current Brazilian President’s (yes I am talking about Lula’s) plan for Gay people, and yet that didn’t stop him from defeating someone (his opponent, who I abbreviate as “Bol”, cause his actual name is too long for me to pronounce) that supported Gay Marriage existing the entire time.
Honestly, it would've made sense to put goggles in her super suit and then hypnotize her unto screwing up in the hopes that it will squash her brother's movement to bring supers back. Just make them look bad like at the beginning of the first movie. I get it's a little redundant, but it makes more sense than get them legalized.
It's almost like the writers had two seperate characters, one the sister that supported her brother and one the villain that wanted heroes shunned, and then rolled them together for a 'twist' without anyone pointing out the new draft's massive issues.
@@Sorain1 , there was a 14 year hiatus, so there shouldn't be complicated issues in the plot.
I really felt that they dropped the ball with the twist villain. I feel like it would've worked more if perhaps her father died via collateral damage from a super fight. It presents a complex point. Yes super heros are needed to fight super villains, and you can't make a whole people illegal. But there are casualties from the giant, bombastic fights that maybe aren't noticed or rectified, creating resentment in the victims families and friends that could definitely fester over time. It would've made her motivations make far more sense, and made her a more compelling villain in my opinion.
Honestly I wish more people would take off the Rose Colored glasses.
Incredibles 2 was a terrible sequel, with poor writing and an immensely underwhelming story. I remember coming out of that movie Opening night feeling absolutely nothing.
The film also seems really obsessed with emasculating Bob.
The action and animation were great and those were the only positives.
Emasculating? He was doing simply parents or fathers stuff, how was that emasculating?
@@abraham2172 Seeing him parenting, and trying to be "Mr. Mom" was good, and funny, but what was emasculating I guess was how he was a bit of a punching bag in the movie, or the butt of the humor too much to make his wife look like a better hero.
@@beauwalker9820 Correct.
@@beauwalker9820 Thats a very narrow sided and overly negative view of the movie. Being a good parent is not emasculating, nor does it automatically make fathers the butt of the joke, nor a punching bag. Also Mr Incredible was just as capable and strong as in the previous movie.
@@abraham2172 I just literally stated it wasn't about him parenting, and I respect parenting and understanding it's not easy. Though, I'm just saying I can understand why some feel he's a bit nerfed in the movie.
Granted, he was a bit clumsy and impulsive at times in the first movie, so it could just be his character flaws.
Remember, they scrapped the scene explaining Gazerbeam's backstory so they could instead makd the plot about the bad twist villain
I regret not seeing Incredibles 1 as a child.
I'm glad I never saw Incredibles 2 as a child.
Wait wait wait...so her backstory is that her parents died because the heros refused to help due to the law put on them?
So her issue should be with trying to destroy the government and not the heroes...right?
🥴🤡🤫
...we don't talk about "overthrowing the government" in children's media.
@@normanclatcher , One Piece Film Red is a childrens film that says overthrowing the government is a good thing, and I would've liked Evelyn as a character as much as Uta if she actually did overthrow the government with mind controlled superheroes instead of the bastardized character we actually got in the end.
No joke as soon as I was Evelyn's run in all frazzled the first time we saw her my brain went. She's the bad guy.
Then after her brother tells the backstory of their father, she said their parents could have gone in the safe room instead of calling for help.
Then I knew for SURE she wasn't into the super hero thing.
They more or less copy and pasted the first movie without ANY OF THE EMOTION!!
It's fucking raw.
Helen and Evelyn made the Incredibles 2 feel like it was *made* for DeviantArt yuri shippers and hypnosis fetishists 😅
As a lesbian, Evelyn gives me _major_ gay vibes. I feel like some of the writers, designers and animators / storyboarders knew what they were doing.
I vibe with it.
@@iclynnxHuh, kinda glad I'm not the only one who noticed.
Almost every new Disney or Pixar thing feels like it was made by Deviantart shippers.
@@iclynnxyeah because she’s fatherless and has daddy issues
Syndrome has a stupid reason, but we at least understand it
Syndrome at least works because he's meant to be a petty villain.
Like, you get his reasoning and it's just so stupid.... but you know man children exist.... and that's what he is... a man child....
But it's just done again, but this time, we just don't understand it.....
Like..... why blame heroes????? It feels so forced...
I liked her as a villain, but the prejudice against heroes needed more fleshing out, not just brief discussions and flashbacks. I didn't feel like they were threatened like the X-Men.
That would be a very interesting plot for maybe an incredibles 3, like they can include a anti super that wants nothing to do with humans that aren’t super like him and wanted to save his own kind by the hands of some government nonsense only to end up revealing that he was once a test subject and take his vengeance on anyone who experimented on him, make him more of a Homelander mixed with magneto in a way.
@@NaterGater2496 Yeah, that does sound in line with Magneto. The issue is still the same, though; you gotta flesh out the issue presented, and as a trilogy, a villain lashing out because of an ongoing issue won't have as much impact if the said ongoing issue hasn't been properly brought up.
I also mentioned on another post that Screenslaver as a Mr. Sinister-type of villain would've been cool.
@@OpticalSorcerer well it’s just a thought I could chime in and see what goes on in my head into thinking of what I want to see happen in the next incredibles film.
Honestly, this movie annoyed me because there's a good movie in here if they just made some tweaks to the story.
I think for one, having the supers still be banned and, more importantly, heavily scrutinized by the public really makes Evelyn's whole plan seem stupid because she's working to undermine herself.
Another thing, Evelyn's father not going to their safe room was dumb in the context of the movie: He could've put the phones in the safe room or just waited until after the killers left so it's hard to completely refute Evelyn's argument. (I honestly like Nando v Movies idea where, instead of trying to call the supers, her father tried to slow down the killers to ensure his family's safety, giving the idea that supers inspire people to be better themselves)
Imagine the twist being that the Deavers created artificial supervillains for the supes to fight so that they can get positive reputation, which would put the Incredibles in a dilemma where they can either follow and gain the fame and reputation back from the old days, or stop the ultimate evil by sacrificing their reputation and showing everyone that they accidentally helped the bad people and chose to act against them, turning them eventually into true heroes.
One plot twist Pixar villain that worked much better was Dawn Bellwether.
She wasn’t a perfect villain but her motivations and plans were better than Evelyn’s. Her villainous plot twist was more surprising than Evelyn.
In Incredibles 2, you can tell the true villain was either Evelyn, her brother Winston, or both of them.
I would have honestly preferred if The Incredibles 2 just hadn't happened at all.
I don't recognize it as existing.
@@cherryhazard8002 As controversial as it is, I do prefer it over the first simply due to the more domestic setting, so I love it existing.
@@OpticalSorcerer abysmal taste
Agreed. Incredibles 2 is an insult to the first movie. The only thing it improved on was the animation. Everything else was a downgrade.
@@OpticalSorcerer Agreed. If nothing else, I do appreciate 2 for still being enjoyable on that end too, least in my opinion, even if the ultimate plot wasn't as interesting by comparison. "Math is Math!" is worth it in my book.
I still stand by the idea that the film would have been infinitely better had they pulled a Death Note twist.
Her brother was the screen slaver and mind controlled his sister into believing she was the screen slaver, and then forcing her to mind control him into forgetting he was until she was arrested.
Agreed. Winston got off too easy.
Dang, that's much more interesting
I think Pixar was going to make Winston the screenslaver, or at least the villain but changed it because they wanted a main female villain
I think they gave the Underminer was given his own game, so he did have his time to shine. Also, thinking back on it, Evelyn Deavor (Evil Endeavor) seems more on the nose than Syndrome (Hero Syndrome).
Other thing is that you don't hear the name Syndrome until he ambushes Mr Incredible, while Evelyn is hanging there since the plot started.
That game is the true sequel.
Superheroes keep us weak? That sounds like something that came out of a bad fortune cookie.
Also, if the Deaver guy wants to bring superheroes back to the forefront, and wants someone to the the face of this effort...why'd he pick Helen?
Bob's got a lot more presence than she does, being larger in size and in strength, and he's also the one that directly defeated Syndrome in the first movie; surely he'd be the first, and better, option than his housewife. Picking her just makes no sense in-universe - it really feels like Helen was chosen by the writers to have a female-led sequel, even when that makes little sense, and when we've got loads of that type of garbage nowadays.
What's funny to me about this is, they could easily have run with 'Bob says no, Helen decides to take the role for the sake of her kids.' It'd be an instant internal dramatic divide in the family in which the kids don't have a clear side to take. One where both sides have viable points to their PoV, and solved that issue in the bargan. (Mind, you'll need to allocate screen time appropriately, even if the divide is bridged in a single conversation.)
My whole thing is why didnt the family work together? The ending of the first movie was clearly setting that up and yet....we are emasculating Bob, propping Helen on a pedestal, and the kids are just ..there. It didn't feel like an Incredibles movie. It really disappointed me.
@@shannonhill5676 That's actually a good point you made - the whole point of the first movie was that the family had to work together to escape the island and defeat Syndrome, and were poised to do that again versus the Underminer.
But in the sequel, as you said, that's forgotten. Yet another way the sequel never should've been made, not like this anyway.
Heres a better idea for a motive. She wants all villains dead, but heroes dont kill. So she helps her bro with the plan to legalize heroes again, and then screenslaves the heroes, motivating them to kill the villains so they never escape to cause more havoc.
I think Evelyn was actually an okay villain. What really hurt her was the obvious twist, and having to stand next to the peak villain that is Syndrome.
My idea on how they could have fixed it, was the supers where being lazy or just playing it off as "the old man is just being ubsurdly paranoid" and evelyn could have SEEN the death and heard the phone call, leaving her with major trust issues with all supers
I think it’s an even bigger shame we never got to see the movie open with the Now Removed Opening of GAZERBEAM’s Memorial!
Showing more background story as to who he was as both a civilian and a Hero, and the tragic circumstances of what All Heroes desire. Wanting to be of Service, doing goodbye one degree or another.
Her name basically being, Evil Endeavour. I remember all the posts like, obviously, she the villain.
NGL, I thought Evelyn and her brother were both gonna be revealed to be the villains.
You know whats worse? Evelyn robbed us of something much greater, a Rise of the Underminer movie adaptation.
One of the other structural issues with Evelyn is just how few interactions she gets with the characters because basically for the finale a lot of the most interesting characters she could be interacting with are basically in time out until their goggles can be removed.
It just decreases the opportunities for villain hero interactions or having her minions have some personality. Syndrome’s minions while pretty standard for super villains are absolutely bursting with personality.
But just Evelyn doesn’t have anyone villainous to play off for a large majority of the film with her janky motive being something else that hinders her likability.
Meanwhile syndrome is given so many opportunities to interact with other characters, from ambushing mr incredible, to his dynamic and straining relationship with Mirage leading to her betraying him, or even his over confidence with the Omnidroid and underestimating its intelligence (adding a hint of irony of that being the fake story they used to lure supers to their death)
Evelyn just isn’t given many if any moments to organically interact with anyone when in villain mode. I think the only time is when she takes off mrs incredible’s goggles just so she can monologue at her and then again in the jet.
Tldr: I feel like Evelyn’s crappy motivation is just a symptom of a much larger issue of being too few opportunities to interact with others organically
Her villain motivation is literally to make heroes EXTRA illegal when they are already illegal.
Ya know something, with Pixar's previous work it always had a satisfying conclusion. Even if it didn't answer every question, the stories were wrapped up quite nicely. Now there's debate. That's how i know they've failed. I shouldn't wonder if the story had a good ending or not. They used to be able to pull it off, but not anymore.
I watched this movie for the first time around a week ago, then dreamed that Evelyn swore undying revenge on Helen...and Helen distracted her obsessive stupidity by buying a cheap burner phone and pretending to be a copycat Screenslaver. Evelyn would seek first to track down and destroy the copycat and never get anywhere.
I thought it was funny.
...would've prefered that plot too, tbh.
In it of itself, the general goal of Evelyn makes sense and is the next logical step. For the first movie, where there we're no sign of the super's situation changing, the villain would be someone who wants to profit on the fact that things aren't changing and activly prevent things from changing going forward by offering an alternative. That is the case of Syndrome and his plan to make super's obsolete with technology and that works with his desire for petty revenge too. In a situation where things are activly changing or on the way to change, the villain would logicaly be someone that simply doesn't want things to change because of their personnal beliefs or because they would lose something if things changed. That would be the case for Evelyn and the screenslaver but it was executed like dogshit. Making her a complete biggot that refuses to see when she's wrong doesn't work here because she isn't morally gray, she just wants to hurt people, there ain't no ambiguity here.
I would've preferred in Underminer was the figure head villain throughout instead of screen slaver and the twist was just that he was working for the Deavers, who don't seem to realize what they're doing is wrong. The other heroes they hired might be also on board with the shenanigans, seeing a city as a playground. But the film doesn't investigate that idea for whatever reason
"The tragic background of Syndrome"
What???
The thumbnail: *Incredibly* stupid
See what you did there
How is it that Syndrome, someone worse then Evelyn, had a more understandable goal and reason to be evil then someone whose parents died from a robber and heartbreak because the dad tried calling heroes even though they were illegal now.
I actually enjoy the movie...
...until her ass stated why she did what she did. You could make the argument that "Oh, she wanted Supers to be gone so that the world wouldn't rely on them as much as her dad did!" But that just makes it worse. What are humans gonna do against villains like the Underminer and his giant drill or Bomb Voyage, a mine who uses actual bombs? And plus a home invasion is definitely a situation where someone would need a Super. Plus her actions SHOWED that the world needed Supers to begin with.
Lol I said the same thing about her actions, I mean she left ambassadors to collide with civillians, and even left her brother to die
i remember the trailer and thinking "wow its going to talk about cooperation's evil and using heros for thier own gain"
Can i say that this movie goes for the cliches that the first movie makes fun of??
You can say it
...It doesn't make you _right,_ but yes, you _can_ say it...
Evelyn is a very weak villain. But she did have a point in her speech. When you rely on something too much, it makes you very weak.
Yes, and her reliance on her absolute hatred of supers made her mentally weak
i gotta say, “Evil Endeavor” is one of the funniest on-the-nose villain names i’ve heard
Please read the whole comment and tell me what you think about how I would’ve written the twist:
I always thought the twist would’ve been better if it was revealed halfway to the viewer that Winston and Evelyn were working together. Then when Elastigirl finds out, they reveal their motivations. Winston really does want to help the Supers become legal but he wants to take it further. He blames the leaders who outlawed Supers for his dad’s death, and has decided that in addition to making them legal, he’s going to put them in power. He knows the Supers wouldn’t willingly rule as dictators so he uses Evelyn’s technology to hypnotize them so that they can kill everyone in power and anyone who doesn’t support them while, in Winston’s view, taking over their rightful place as society’s rulers. Winston, this way, could be a reverse of Syndrome as someone who worships Supers too much to the point where he’s willing to hurt as many people as possible to help them.
Evelyn could just be the anarchist chill tech-based villain who’s happy Winston’s using her genius for some actual gadgets.
Giving that the government made Supers illegal by the time her parents died shoulnt she blane the government?
I mean in my opinion, there is only one Incredibles movie.
I mean, the original had what i saw as one primary plot hole, the fact that seemingly supervillains just, got bored or something after the supers were banned... I guess calling the police on the villian with an army of minions setting up their death ray across the street worked?
But it was excusable, hey, we can't see what's going on, they could find some justification... It was irrelevant, because Syndrome was the problem, and although his motivations were petty, they worked... In the sequel... Geez. I found it ironic someone proclaiming thst people need to be self reliant, is a wealthy scientist, who I'm sure mines, refines and manufactures all her components, and reinvented circuitry from scratch. The motivation might work for a, down with society, back to zero type villian, but...
I think it was hinted at that the government would deal with Supervillains. They just didn't want to deal with Superheroes due to innocent people getting hurt and property destruction. I imagine that the government would kill the supervillains, hence why they never resurfaced in society to cause havoc. Considering we know superheroes can die, it wouldn't be too farfetched for supervillains to be killed as well.
evelyn gets even stranger when you remember that the monologue that that screen-slaver broadcasts is based off of the writings of ted kyzinski whos primary thesis is (TLDR) that the govenrment and corporations finding ways to integrate technology into everything (i.e. the things that make us dependent on others/other things) is actually what is poisonous to society. for evelyn to suggest that being dependent on superheros negates a persons self preservation capabilities she then would also have to acknowledge that just because superheros were outlawed that didn't negate supervillains like the underminer from resurfacing now and again. ultimately the people of this world traded one dependency that did mostly keep them safe for another dependency that ultimately doesn't. evelyn is advocating for people to be able to find the strength to fend for themselves whilst also telling them to keep the current system of dependency that encourages those same people to act against their own need for self preservation.
I feel like the movie would've been a bit better if Evelyn blamed supers to deal with her grief, and she learns to move on and accept what happened by the end
Evelyn is basically just a pixar karen lol I wouldve prefered the screen slaver to be an actual villain or the underminer and the screenslaver working together
I think the Underminer was just a parody of the "typical gimmick villain."
@beauwalker9820 te true sequel was the video game Incredibles: Rise of the Underminer
I agree with you fully that Evelyn truly is just Pixar Karen.
I also had trouble with the foundation of her Evil back story. Her parents died because they tried to call the Hero's. Except the robbers were already in the house and it only took them maybe 30 seconds from when he tried to pick up the phone till their death. I am sorry but unless their hero is Super man I don't think any one could of got there in time to save them either way.
You should do a Jack Jack video next. The youngest member of the Parr family has more potential than Dash and Violet since has 17 powers.
While it is exciting to see what he can do when he gets older, but what if your loved one decent to evil without being challenged and disciplined? And what if there is a dimension where the heroes sees themselves as their own worst enemies?
I think having a grown up Jack Jack would be a perfect villain for Incredibles 3.
I think Jack-Jack would be too well-raised. Helen and Bob are competent parents, they'll have learned how to deal with his older child and teen years through previous experience. Jack-Jack also has Edna Mode as an aunt. It wouldn't make sense for him to become so maladjusted as to become a villain, unless he was seperated from his family during his younger years and go through major tragedy.
8:33 Actually, the lair was already set up Evelyn just called Pizza Guy & ambushed him when he arrived, it would take at least 3 days to set up the lair and that means Pizza Guy would have to be missing for 3 days (and Evelyn would have to feed & change him), it's also supported by Pizza Guy idefing as "Pizza Guy" and still being in employee mode
How the hell is anybody still thinking she was a dumb villain when her entire motivation actually is more justifiable and reasonable and quite relatable than Buddy's. When you're relying on someone or something far more than you actually should be, you become absolutely crippled without it
If they’re going to make a 3rd, I hope Pixar thinks of a villain who instead of having hatred for the supers instead having hatred for society, seeing all non-supers as undeserving and a pack of idiots for suing and banning the heroes over “little boo-boos” despite them being the reason that they’re alive and believing that building that can be rebuilt and replace are more important than saving lives which are all irreplaceable. A villain that though is on the supers side and makes solid points would take things to far by working to make everyone a super through a globe-spanning device, believing that without the 90% of the world that don’t have gifts yet somehow have more influence and power that supers would never be prosecuted against and for those who once did not have this life to finally understand what it means to be super and finally understand the pain, scorn and suffering they had put their saviors through. However, such a plan would lead to a new world order that has so many unpredictable variables that could lead to even greater time and catastrophe, but the villain has become hollow over the idea as the flaws of society and the consequences they have made from their emotionally fueled actions have taken its toll on him and he’d rather let the chips fall, and what’s worse is that he plans on making things permanent by erasing all information and the memories of all those working on the project with the blueprints now solely residing inside his head, the last non-super who will take what was left of the previous plague called society with him to the grave via suicide by self-destruction!
Yeah, I really thought this over, but anyway my point is, give us a villain like that and I will happily buy a ticket to the next installment. Whenever that’ll be. 🤷🏻
I will forever blame disney execs for limiting Brad Bird's potential
1:55 This Guy was so good in the PS2 Game where you have to Consistently Pursue Him as Mr Incredible and Frozone, and You Eventually Get The Guy in the end! The Game gave him more Proper Justice than This Movie did!
It goes to show that sometimes all you need is one movie to tell an entire story and not rely on sequels. The incredibles movie was always a classic and it is sad the sequel could not live up to it.
I guess not everyone can be the toy story franchise.
I think the core of the villain's motivation was actually really good. She wanted people to take agency over their own lives, to stop waiting for someone to come along to save you. That's a real problem in today's society. Too many people have been trained to wait for help from some other source, instead of learning to help themselves.
Execpt that they were already relying on themselves. The superheros were already banned...
@@gustavolourenco5709 The ban was still in place, true, but after the fight with Syndrome from the first movie, it had softened. There was a push - both by the general public and private entities - to support lifting the ban entirely. The villain in the sequel wanted to ensure that this didn't happen.
You can tell it's her from a mile away and that really sucks for a sequel
I would have loved that instead of non super a lashing out at the super that let them down like in the first film, the sequel be about a super that felt unwelcome in society and was lashing out because of it. We could've gotten som e background in established villains and why they do what they do
Syndrome could run so Evelynn could barely drag her body across a room.
I remember the first time I watched this movie, the moment she walked on screen I thought “she’s probably the villain”
It really is werid that every Increadibles villain is always a normal human using what they have to get stuff done, and often someone who is pulling themselves up by their bootstraps despite their weaknesses.
I prefer her villain persona "The Sceenslaver" over normal Evelyn. But Eve still looks just like my mom.
Fascinating.
Is she a writer?
Evelyn could've worked by being resentful of the government instead of the heroes and just simply view the heroes as tools to overthrow the government. Or maybe have screenslaver be a completely different person who's a hero fanatic like Syndrome but is abscessed over the idea of having the hero back so decided to make themselves as this powerful villain to give a reason for the heroes to comeback. But I guess that will introduce moral grayness or nuances and Pixar doesn't like that.
So crazy thing for me to say, but instead of Evelyn being the villian what if the father not only survived the shot but became jaded or would that lean too much into Syndrome? What do you guys think?
This movie is by far the absolute worst sequel ever
They ruined every single characters progression in this one.
Im so fucking angry