Movie Reviews

“Inside Out 2” is Good, but is that Good Enough? (Movie Review)

Published

5 days ago

June 15, 2024

“Inside Out 2” is Good, but is that Good Enough? (Movie Review)

IMG via Pixar

When it was released in 2015, Pete Docter’s “Inside Out” was a seminal moment for Pixar. Coming on the heels of a pair of films that didn’t connect with audiences or critics in the same way that much of the studio’s earlier work had (2012’s “Brave” and 2013’s “Monsters University”), “Inside Out” saw Pixar out to prove they still had it. And as it turned out, they absolutely did.

After some decidedly unflattering discourse discussing the studio’s new penchant for favoring sequels and prequels over original material, “Inside Out” was an original film that hit every possible benchmark for success: it became one of the best-reviewed films Pixar had ever made, grossed just shy of a billion dollars, and won an Oscar. “Inside Out” is a truly stunning film, one that builds upon a bedrock of remarkably nuanced emotional intelligence to deliver an animated feature just as engaging philosophically as it is as a piece of entertainment.

Now, in 2024, Pixar is in a very different position. Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Pixar’s recent output has been incredibly well-received original films, these films have not been released in theaters. This is partially due to COVID-related lockdowns and partially due to Disney’s insistence on betting every chip possible on their streaming service, Disney+. As a result, films like “Soul,” “Luca,” and “Turning Red” (all of which are absolutely wonderful and unique works that deserve to be acknowledged as modern classics within the Pixar oeuvre) were not released in theaters and in their place, the aggressively lackluster films “Lightyear” and “Elemental” were. Thus, Pixar has been pushed back into a very similar corner, one in which their artistic and commercial viability has been questioned from every side, including parent-company Disney most of all.

So Kelsey Mann’s “Inside Out 2” finds itself being released to a scrutinizing media environment, trying to hit every possible quadrant for success once more, just like its predecessor. But does “Inside Out 2” have what it takes to live up to the critical, commercial, and cultural juggernaut that was the first film?

5. Weak Spot: Commodity Over Character

One of the first things to strike this writer as strange in the lead-up to “Inside Out 2” was the lack of returning creatives, both in front of and behind the digital camera. While Amy Poehler is back, as are several others, there are numerous highly notable absences that one does not typically see in Pixar sequels. Neither Bill Hader nor Mindy Kaling have returned to their roles of Fear or Disgust, respectively, and even composer Michael Giacchino, whose score for the first film has become so indelibly ingrained in the minds and memories of audiences, is woefully missing here.

This is all strange, given the lengths Pixar has gone to actively preserve these kinds of creative teams in the past. All four Toy Story films have kept the core voice cast involved as much as possible, and you don’t see Randy Newman not returning to score one of those sequels. In and of itself, this observation is not a problem, but it’s indicative of a larger systemic issue. “Inside Out” was a film about characters, and “Inside Out 2” flattens those characters into commodities in practically every way.

Part of this has to do with the sheer number of characters in “Inside Out 2.” By introducing four new Emotions to the cast, “Inside Out 2” is a far more crowded film, one that feels ultimately unable to devote worthwhile time to properly defining or developing its characters.

As an easy example, in “Inside Out,” Bill Hader as Fear felt like a real character. We spent meaningful time with him, both with the rest of the Emotions and in solidarity, and came to understand his role within Riley’s emotional state on many levels. In “Inside Out 2,” Fear is a caricature of Hader’s original performance. New voice actor Tony Hale does a great job, but the character himself is defined by the broadest strokes imaginable here, and it’s to the overall detriment of the character and the film. In juggling so many more characters and moving pieces, “Inside Out 2” loses the stark clarity, focus, and impact of the first film and muddies the central metaphor at the series’ core.

4. Maya Hawke as Anxiety

The one new emotion who truly shines in “Inside Out 2” is Anxiety, voiced delightfully by Maya Hawke.

Without delving too deeply into specifics to preserve some of the film’s later surprises, Anxiety’s role in the story stands out as a highlight where the emotional intelligence of “Inside Out 2” matches that of the first film. The portrayal of Anxiety manages to convey with genuine subtlety and nuance the ways in which anxiety can impact someone, especially during adolescence.

Maya Hawke’s vocal performance is exceptional, effectively capturing the complexities of Anxiety’s motivations. Supported by the strong writing of the character in Meg LeFauve & Dave Holstein’s script and stunning animation, Anxiety emerges as one of the most skillfully crafted and impactful elements of “Inside Out 2.”

3. Weak Spot: Maintaining the Status Quo

There are several instances throughout the runtime of “Inside Out 2” where it feels like the filmmakers are yearning to break free from the confines of delivering ‘another Inside Out’ and instead offer something beyond that preconceived notion. Throughout the film, concepts such as Riley driving herself without the influence of any Emotions, delving into the emotions that constitute the Emotions themselves, and exploring how one’s primary emotions evolve over time are all hinted at. However, disappointingly, none of these ideas are explored with any real depth.

Instead, “Inside Out 2” appears determined to cling to the status quo established by its predecessor, often to its own detriment. While these ideas suggest potential avenues for a transformative story involving Riley and her emotions, the film fails to fully realize any of them. Instead, the overarching theme of the film feels like a slight variation on the deeper theme of the first film. Similarly, the narrative of “Inside Out 2” feels deliberately reminiscent of its predecessor, lacking the imagination in staging, settings, or character development that made the original so memorable.

2. Weak Spot: A Lack of Imagination

The first “Inside Out” feels bursting with creativity, imagination, and monumental stakes. While the external story is simply about Riley and her family moving to a new city and her contemplating running away from home, the narrative feels almost mythic due to the meticulous interweaving of a propulsive narrative and profound themes by Docter and his team.

In contrast, “Inside Out 2” often feels oddly insular and small-scale in the wrong ways. While using a weekend away at hockey camp as the narrative’s core is not a bad idea, as it serves as a microcosm of Riley’s impending adolescence, the film fails to emotionally convey the magnitude of this event as effectively as it does intellectually.

This is exacerbated by an in-brain adventure for the Emotions that feels more like a straightforward task than the grand odyssey of the first film. While the first film also revolved around retrieving a MacGuffin, it did so to facilitate character growth and thematic exploration. In “Inside Out 2,” this narrative structure remains, but the essential components feel far more scarce and less impactful.

1. The Vault

The true standout scene of “Inside Out 2” revolves around a vault within Riley’s head dedicated to safeguarding her secrets. Within this vault lies a plethora of hilariously clever gags, including a recurring one that parents of very young children will undoubtedly find immensely enjoyable. What sets this sequence apart is its utilization of a mixed-media style of animation, which deviates from Pixar’s typical aesthetic in unexpected ways, enhancing the scene’s impact. There’s a genuine exuberance and innovative energy to this moment, which the film could have benefited from incorporating more extensively.

(B-)

“Inside Out 2” is a very well-made film. It’s funny, charming, and compelling, but it doesn’t quite reach the same level of humor, charm, and emotional resonance as the first “Inside Out” film. While it represents an improvement over Pixar’s previous theatrical releases, “Lightyear” and “Elemental,” it falls short of the artistic fulfillment and singular vision found in recent works like “Soul” by Pete Docter and Kemp Powers, “Luca” by Enrico Casarosa, and “Turning Red” by Domee Shi.

Although “Inside Out 2” isn’t a disaster, it feels like a movie that prioritizes mass appeal and accessibility over passionate storytelling and creative vision at every turn.

Related Topics:Inside Out 2 movie reviews

Click to comment

Movie Reviews

Film Review: King of Prison (2020) by Kang Tae-ho

Published

6 hours ago

June 20, 2024

Press Room

Film Review: King of Prison (2020) by Kang Tae-ho

“King of Prison” is an unusual prison film, which combines drama, action and comedy in a realistic package

Usually in prison films, there is a level of exotification, which moves towards violence in the case of the male ones and sex for the female ones. As such, it is always interesting to watch films that take a more realistic approach, with “King of Prison”, although not completely void of crowd-pleasing elements, definitely following this path.

The story is presented through the perspective of Lee Man-hee, a 28-year-old man who becomes a member of a violent crimes cell, after getting caught up in a violent incident. In his cell, he meets the King of the Prison, Beom Teol, who is actually a former gang member in his 50s, who only uses violence when someone from the cell is bullied or in order to break up fights, while frequently giving legal advice to whoever needs it. Wal-Wal, another man his age, is a true character, who is infamous of how much his excrement smells, while the ‘cell ‘room’ also fosters an older guy who was convicted as sexual offender and frequently makes others laugh with his absurd stories, among a number of other ‘characters’.

In general, things go smoothly in the whole prison, until a true kingpin, Jeong Tae-soo is admitted, and decides to take over the role of the King, with the help of the warden. After a series of failed attempts against Beom Teol, he decides to bring in KTX from isolation, a convict who seems to be as good in fighting as Beom-teol.

If you like King of Prison, check also this article

Although there is the occasional fighting throughout, and a finale that moves in the particular path, Kang Tae-ho’s effort mostly focuses on portraying life inside the prison, which is actually dominated by boredom instead of danger. Beom Teol is one of the main sources of this approach, since both in terms of appearance (essentially a middle-aged man with a mustache) and overall demeanor move towards the particular direction, with him rarely actually fighting.

The way even the most insignificant treats of the outside worlds are treated as valuables inside adds another level in the same direction, with the same applying to drugs, homosexuality and sexual release. Particularly the last aspect offers one of the most realistic scenes, with Wal-Wal’s interaction with his visiting wife, and his requests, highlighting the fact in the most eloquent fashion. The friendship Man-hee strikes with another prisoner his age, although with some homosexual connotations, is in the same path. Lastly, the way corruption works inside, through the cooperation with the employees of the prison, cements this approach.

Granted, occasionally the film goes too far, particularly regarding the presentation of defecation, which eventually even becomes part of the action, but in general, the approach is grounded.

Regarding the action scenes, the fact that the main protagonist is a middle aged man does restrict it somewhat, although the fact that the impressive throughout Lee Sol-gu exhibits a sense of danger with every move definitely helps. In general, the whole thing is slow, while the showdown with KFC could definitely have been handled better. On the other hand, one could say that this approach also follows the overall realistic one.

Apart from Lee Sol-gu, the ones who steal the show are Lee Hyun-woong as Wai-wai, the main source of comedy here, and Yoo Sang-jae who portrays a truly sinister villain as Tae-soo. Kim Min as KTX is both good in the fighting scenes and the humorous ones. The cinematography again focuses on realism, without particular exaltations in terms of visuals, while the editing could have been handled a bit better, at least in terms of pacing. It does not harm the film significantly though.

“King of Prison” is an unusual prison film, which combines drama, action and comedy in a realistic package definitely deserving a watch.

Movie Reviews

How to Make Millions Before Grandma Dies: a movie review

Published

13 hours ago

June 19, 2024

Press Room

How to Make Millions Before Grandma Dies: a movie review

(Editor’s note: Spoiler alert: Today’s column contains details that reveal major details in the movie “How to Make Millions Before Grandma Dies,” which is still showing in theaters.)

A mah or Grandmother (Usha Seamkhum) has stomachaches and blood in her stool, but her children do not tell her about having stage 4 colon cancer. This situation, one of several in the Thai film “How to Make Millions Before Grandma Dies,” hits close to home for many Tsinoy, Pinoy and other Asian families, making this comedy-tearjerker a box-office and viral sensation.

Hoping to be the prime beneficiary of her will, the family suck up to Amah, visiting her often and bringing favorite foods. M (Putthipong Assaratanakul), a college dropout, is inspired by his cousin Mui (Tontawan Tantijevakul), who takes great care of her own grandfather and inherits a fortune upon his death. So M decides to move in himself and take care of Amah.

Suspicious of such sudden solicitude, Amah confronts M, who tells her the truth. Amah’s stoicism upon knowing she has at most a year to live, reminds me of my father, who reacted to the horrible news the same way. He had the same disease, though he only had one month with us after diagnosis.

Amah repeats what M says—it is her body, so she has a right to know. When I work with families, some shield the elderly, fearing that they cannot handle the shock of death. I respect this genuine concern, but the older generation are often stronger than we think.

Amah’s three children portray negative Asian tropes. Eldest son Kiang (Sanya Kunakorn), a self-centered stockbroker, does not make time to visit Amah. The film satirizes his aspirations. He sends his daughter to an international school, endangering her fluency in Teochew. I laugh out loud when M reminds the child to greet Amah in her native tongue—most Tsinoy youngsters will likely squirm at this, given their ineptness in any Chinese dialect. Kiang also grandiosely brings Amah to a temple, but instead of praying for her health, he asks favors for himself. When she does not give him her house, he vows not to attend her funeral.

Youngest son Soei (Pongsatorn Jongwilas), an inveterate gambler, steals Amah’s hard-earned baht (she sells congee every dawn). But like any Asian parent, Amah still gives the house to him, knowing that this is the only way he can pay off his debt. In a self-righteous fit of rage, M accuses Amah of enabling Soei, and loving the wrong person.

As a psychologist trained in Western methods, I have to agree that M. Amah enables Soei, fixing his mistakes and never letting him face the consequences. But as a Tsinoy, I know this is part of traditional culture. For most of his life, my father, who worked extremely hard, was disappointed by relatives who asked him incessantly for favors, and he was saddened when some even got mad when they perceived that the others received more. When I asked him why he still supported them, he said he had no choice since they could not fend for themselves. My friends who migrated to the West cannot understand this, but those who are here nod knowingly.

This behavior may taper off, since the younger generations I deal with mostly resolve to prioritize their own well-being, and choose to ignore family entitlement. Whether prudent or not, I do not know, but the film deserves credit for bringing difficult issues to light.

Middle child and only daughter Chew (Sarinrat Thomas), M’s mother, is the most likable of the three, but Amah finds her self-sacrificial mien disturbing. Working a supermarket shift by night and taking Amah to chemotherapy by day is not wise, and when M tells his mother that Amah privately cries over this, the former retorts that Amah never sheds a tear for her. We know that childhood hurts lurk beneath the surface. M offers to act as his mother’s representative and bring Amah for treatment

Filled with Buddhist rituals (Guanyin is my late mother’s favorite goddess, and I confess to lighting incense to her, too) and shot in Bangkok’s Chinatown, the movie resonates true, with a surprise ending that is also bittersweet. No more spoilers—watch the movie now.

Queena N. Lee-Chua is on the Board of Directors of Ateneo’s Family Business Center. Get her print book “All in the Family Business” at Lazada or Shopee, or e-book at Amazon, Google Play, Apple iBooks. Contact the author at [email protected].

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Movie Reviews

Cora Bora (2024) – Movie Review

Published

21 hours ago

June 19, 2024

Press Room

Cora Bora, 2024.

Directed by Hannah Pearl Utt.
Starring Megan Stalter, Jojo T. Gibbs, Manny Jacinto, Ayden Mayeri, Thomas Mann, Chrissie Fit, Andre Hyland, Chelsea Peretti, Margaret Cho, and Darrell Hammond.

SYNOPSIS:

Fearing her relationship status, Cora returns home to win her girlfriend back, but she realizes much more than her love life needs salvaging.

Who knew Cora Bora would be the most triggering film of the year? No, we aren’t talking about the jokes. The comedy did not offend me, but the film surprisingly hit so close to home that it almost felt ripped out of my social media feeds. We all know someone like Cora, brought to life by comedian Megan Stalter.

That friendship can be tiresome and toxic. We struggle with the growing pains as they seek redemption for their past deeds. That’s what watching Cora Bora conjured up, the feelings of watching the awkward comeback of a person from your past, and goodness, it has its ups and downs.

Director Hannah Pearl Utt deserves all the acclaim for nailing this indie darling and walking the fine line of handling an insufferable leading character. And that is not a swipe against Megan Stalter, who plays the role with true conviction and perfection, but it’s a role that asks a lot from its viewers.

In the grand tradition of “I’ve messed up my life and have to return home” dramedies, Cora Bora follows our titular protagonist as they make the walk of shame back home and bring a cloud of chaos with them. Coming off a rough run in Los Angeles, Cora ventures back to Portland to confront what she believes is her long-distance girlfriend, Justine (Jojo T. Gibbs), having an affair…even though they’re in an open relationship.

That exact contradiction is the basis for so much of what happens with Cora that it quickly begins to wear thin on you. Still, Hannah Pearl Utt’s direction and Statler’s performance reel it back at the moment of pure second-hand embarrassment.

That’s not to say cringe and awkward moments aren’t the basis for most of the comedy, as is how the media is geared at this demographic. I just chalked it up to not understanding the chunks of comedic bits I didn’t enjoy in the film, as it sometimes felt super Gen-Z.

Surprisingly, the “drama” is where I felt most of the film’s weight, seeing that Megan Statler had more range than the early parts of the script gave her. A particular monologue from late in the movie rounds out many character choices, even if it would still take me a lot to justify just how much of a headache Cora was early on.

Again, that’s the odd beauty of the film. Hannah Pearl Utt thrusts you into this situation with a realness that makes you look into your life.

Outside of Megan Stalter, no actor or performance stands out. And that’s no fault of the performers themselves. Great talents like Manny Jacinto, Jojo T. Gibbs, and Margaret Cho barely exist to support our protagonist’s journey, so they come off like NPCs in a video game rather than supporting roles.

It’s easy to chalk this up as a vehicle to get Megan Stalter into the mainstream and serve as a comedy showcase, but it would work better if she had better characters to work off of. Take Chris Farley’s Tommy Boy or Adam Sandler’s Billy Madison; both served as essential showcases for the central talents, but they at least knew to surround the lead with worthwhile characters. Even with that, there are small glimmers of what could work, and those actors make the most of them. Jacinto gets the most character development and makes every charming moment believable, even in the most unbelievable circumstances.

Returning to the likability and the grating nature of the film’s tone, it does hamper the overall experience when the characters are contrived or off-putting. As someone who doesn’t like the quirky tone of a Portlandia, it feels like this film is filled with the little weirdos you’d meet there.

Come for Megan Stalter’s comedy, but stay for that powerful monologue. When she eventually wants to leave comedy behind and become a prestige actress, it could be there. Let’s hope she doesn’t hang around in the cringe trenches too long.

Cora Bora is a great starting point for all involved, but it lacks the secret sauce that elevates it from a “Meet This Bright New Talent Movie” to an all-time comedy classic.

Flickering Myth Rating – Film: ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★

EJ Moreno

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=embed/playlist