Nearly 10 years after the first instalment, out of the classic Pixar-Disney partnership, comes a peek into the life of a teenage Riley in the sequel to Inside Out. Much like its predecessor, the movie is intense, uplifting and, understandably, emotional.
The introduction of new characters — emotions and beyond — succeeds in keeping the audience guessing. True to form, the script and animation hold several inside jokes and lean heavily on wordplay. Amidst the dry, chuckle-drawing humour, the writers have also managed to pepper in more complex concepts. This imagery is likely to stick with you after the viewing, drawing reflections from the outside in, ironically.
Even in the innovation and progressing timeline, there is definitely a sense of familiarity. Characters navigate the mind landscape, and make an arduous journey with obstacle after obstacle, which sometimes does seem to drag on.
The voice cast powers this delicate script forward with noticeable nuance, despite some replacements and additions. Amy Poehler continues to be a convincing (and this time, a more likeable) Joy, while Maya Hawke’s Anxiety carries a nervous and excited energy central to the story.
The actors also manage to keep pace with the development of their characters into more multi-dimensional personalities. For those who enjoyed, related to and fondly remember the characters from the first film, the second offers great story arcs to love, alongside new fun introductions.
Advertisement
While Pixar’s bright, lively animation will work great to keep younger audiences entertained, depictions of mental health — particularly a panic attack — might warrant a conversation, context and maybe some reassurance for kids and teens. For older audiences, the movie can come off like one long session of therapy — loads of self-reflection, uncertainty, tears, awareness and hopefully, acceptance.
The story peels back the layers of the confusion, hopefulness and embarrassment of the teen years in a way that feels uncomfortable at times, and profound at others.
In all, Inside Out 2, holds tears, laughs and a slew of, “Oh, I see what you did there”. While it isn’t the most gripping watch throughout, it is thoughtful and sweet, making the film a lovely choice for a quiet day with family or friends. My top tip is to make sure you stick around for the post-credits scene (there’s more than one)!
1 of 6 | Harris Dickinson and Nicole Kidman star in “Babygirl,” in theaters Dec. 25. Photo courtesy of A24
LOS ANGELES, Dec. 22 (UPI) —Babygirl, in theaters Wednesday, is the kind of erotic drama they used to make a lot in the ’80s and ’90s. As such, it is refreshing in 2024, though perhaps still derivative of its genre predecessors.
Romy Mathis (Nicole Kidman) is the founder and CEO of Tensile, a robotics company developing automated drones for warehouses. She is married to a theater director, Jacob (Antonio Banderas), and they have two daughters.
When Tensile begins a mentorship program for interns, Samuel (Harris Dickinson) pushes Romy’s buttons to get one-on-one time with her. His power plays unlock Romy’s repressed sexual desires and they begin an affair.
Playing power games may be inherent to many sexual relationships, so it’s not like one movie invented them, but it’s hard not to think about 9½ Weeks. In that notorious 1986 film, Mickey Rourke played a man who seduces a woman (Kim Basinger) with sex games involving food, spanking and blindfolds.
Advertisement
Still, Babygirl doesn’t play Romy as a cliche of a powerful businesswoman who really likes to be submissive in bed and experience the adrenaline of risking exposure.
Not that the affair compromises Romy’s success, either, although it could if Samuel reports her. She also starts to blur the lines of being submissive in private and at the office, but she doesn’t let it interfere with business decisions.
The love scenes between Kidman and Dickinson are revealing, but not gratuitous. They are vulnerable and uncomfortable rather than titillating.
The way writer-director Halina Reijn approaches consent is interesting and seems realistic. Samuel does insist on consent before continuing, which is a fantastic portrayal of obtaining verbal consent, though the conditions of Romy’s consent remain nebulous.
Romy makes it clear that Samuel’s power games make her uncomfortable. Agreeing to continue while feeling uncomfortable seems like it adds a level of duress.
Advertisement
It’s 80 minutes into the movie before Samuel and Romy even discuss using a safe word, which would give either party, but especially Romy, a way to end a session at her discretion. Yet, this is believable because Romy and Samuel are amateurs at this, so they’re figuring it out.
Samuel may play the dominant role, but he is in many respects just a poser. He is a young intern and very emotional when things don’t go his way.
It seems like Samuel is imitating what he thinks a Casanova would act like, but whenever Romy goes off script, Samuel seems to be at a loss for words. It’s not natural to him, either, though he thinks of some clever workplace games that make Romy play along.
He’s probably watched 9½ Weeks, too, or more likely just read the Wikipedia summary.
The Jacob character is the film’s most stereotypical.
Advertisement
Jacob is a loving husband who just can’t excite Romy. Romy tries to teach him to play games in bed, but Jacob doesn’t enjoy experimenting. It’s odd that a person whose job is in the arts would lack any creativity with his partner, but he’s entitled to have traditional desires, too.
The lack of monogamy is an unmitigated betrayal, as even submissive relationships should respect loyalty unless they’ve discussed and agreed to having an open relationship. The film eventually explores how a couple navigates compatibility, but Romy has to own hers first.
Individual choices the characters make in Babygirl will provoke discussions, and won’t be spoiled in this review. The positive is that the film does show Romy’s growth through the experience.
So, even if a viewer disagrees with part of the journey, the film makes its case for the value of those experiences. That makes it an engaging, provocative film.
Advertisement
Fred Topel, who attended film school at Ithaca College, is a UPI entertainment writer based in Los Angeles. He has been a professional film critic since 1999, a Rotten Tomatoes critic since 2001, and a member of the Television Critics Association since 2012 and the Critics Choice Association since 2023. Read more of his work in Entertainment.
Pottel, directed by Sahith Mothkuri and starring Ajay, Yuvachandra, and Ananya Nagalla in pivotal roles, is a rural drama that delves into the socio-cultural issues of the 1970s. The movie, which captivated audiences with its intriguing title, was released in theaters in October and recently debuted on OTT platforms Amazon Prima and Aha. With music by Sekhar Chandra, the film aims to strike an emotional chord with its thought-provoking narrative.
Plot Summary: The story is set in a remote village during the 1970s, where the powerful Patel family dominates the region. Believing that education empowers people to question authority, the Patels discourage the villagers from pursuing it. Mallanna (Chatrapathi Sekhar), who recognizes the importance of education, dreams of educating his son Gangadharam (Yuvachandra). However, his efforts are thwarted when Patel (Ajay) kills him to maintain control over the village.
The villagers revere a local deity, Balamma, and Patel manipulates their beliefs to suppress dissent. Gangadharam grows up in this oppressive environment, determined to bring change. He marries Bujjamma (Ananya Nagalla), defying her brother and societal norms.
Meanwhile, the village observes a ritual every 12 years, offering a Pottel as a sacrifice to their deity. This time, Gangadharam is tasked with overseeing the ritual. The stakes are high, as failure to perform the ritual properly could have dire consequences for him. Caught between his goal of educating his daughter and empowering the villagers, and the ritualistic traditions, Gangadharam faces immense challenges from Patel. How he overcomes these obstacles forms the crux of the story.
Analysis: The film effectively portrays the socio-political dynamics and superstitions prevalent in rural India during the 1970s. The director highlights the dominance of landlords like the Patels and their efforts to maintain control by keeping the marginalized sections uneducated. The screenplay weaves these themes with clarity, emphasizing the need for education as a tool for empowerment.
Advertisement
The movie also sheds light on superstitions and rituals like animal sacrifices, which were exploited by the powerful to manipulate the weak. The village itself feels like a character in the story, with its landscapes and traditions adding depth to the narrative. The realistic portrayal of the struggles and resilience of rural communities enhances the film’s authenticity.
Performances: Yuvachandra delivers a compelling performance as Gangadharam, capturing the character’s struggle and determination effectively. Ajay excels as the antagonist Patel, portraying the role with authority and menace. Ananya Nagalla impresses with her portrayal of Bujjamma, adding emotional depth to the story. The supporting cast, including Chatrapathi Sekhar, performs within the scope of their roles, contributing to the narrative’s strength.
Technical Aspects: Cinematography by Monish Bhupathiraju stands out, beautifully capturing the rural and forest backdrops, adding an immersive visual quality. Music by Sekhar Chandra complements the narrative well, with both songs and background score enhancing the emotional impact. Editing by Karthik Srinivas ensures a cohesive flow, although some scenes feel slightly stretched. The authentic depiction of rural settings and customs adds to the film’s credibility.
Final Verdict: Pottel is a sincere attempt to address important social issues like education, empowerment, and superstition through a rural narrative. While the film’s pacing and predictability in certain areas might deter some viewers, its emotional core and relevant themes make it a worthwhile watch for those interested in rural dramas.