Following the sudden death of her husband (Jon Bernthal) and against the backdrop of racially-motivated killing of Trayvon Martin, writer Isabel Wilkerson (Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor) begins to research the origins of bigotry and how it correlates to caste systems around the world, from ancient India to Nazi Germany through to modern times…
Many movies and filmmakers throughout the years have tried to earnestly wrestle with the deep-seated roots of bigotry and racial violence in American history. It’s a topic so vast, so nuanced, so close to the bone, that any kind of examination on the topic often requires an incredible amount of ambition and a director willing to look at the most delicate and uncomfortable aspects of modern society. In ‘Origin’, Ava DuVernay attempts to marry together the non-fiction book ‘Caste’ with a biographical account of the author’s life and work in the same movie.
‘Origin’ opens with a recreation of the killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, who was later acquitted by a jury of his peers of second-degree murder and manslaughter. From there, the movie takes us into the research of Isabel Wilkerson and follows both her personal life falling apart following the death of her mother, her husband and her young cousin, and how she begins to unpack the notion of racism and oppression as it relays both in the US and abroad. We see Wilkerson, played with real vibrancy and depth by Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor, as she has deep conversations with Germans about the comparisons between slavery in the Deep South and Nazi extermination of Jewish people in Germany.
DuVernay uses these scenes in conjunction with recreations of the stories Wilkerson recounts, such as the story of August Landmesser, an ex-Nazi Party member who was married to a Jewish woman and eventually tried to flee the country. Landmesser is also believed to be the man in the famous photograph who refused to salute the Nazis in a shipyard in Hamburg, and discusses the impact of the Nuremberg Laws and how the Nazis were inspired by American eugenics laws. ‘Origin’ then moves further into the caste system, moving towards modern times when it deals with the discrimination of Dalit people in India and tells the story of social reformer Babasaheb B.R. Ambedkar.
While ‘Origin’ utilises an emotional framework for directing this information, namely Isabel Wilkerson dealing with her own feelings towards racism in the US and her own grief, the ambition of it all outstrips the execution. You get the sense in watching ‘Origin’ that it may have succeeded more as a documentary than a narrative movie. Indeed, some of DuVernay’s most comprehensive work has been in documentaries, including the incredible ’13th’, which was nominated for Best Documentary and received a surge of interest in the wake of the killing of George Floyd and the Black Lives Matter movement.
It isn’t that ‘Origin’ doesn’t work or that it lacks depth or substance – far from it. Rather, ‘Origin’ often becomes laboured when it tries to keep the various strings of its story together by keeping the personal story and the wider epic intertwined. Nevertheless, it has a powerful message and one that is urgently needed.
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.
Advertisement
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.
Advertisement
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.
Advertisement
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.
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)!
Murthy (Ajay Ghosh) is a music shop owner in Vinukonda with a wife and two grown-up kids. The shop is a burden on the family as it yields no financial gains. However, Murthy is passionate about music and doesn’t let it go despite daily taunts from wife.
Murthy meets a young girl, Anjana and they immediately form a bond over their mutual liking for music. She inspired Murthy to become a DJ by following his passion. The movie’s story is about whether Murthy achieved the goal or not.
Advertisement
Performances
Music Shop Murthy is Ajay Ghosh’s one-man show. His journey is the movie and he does a neat job with it. The fact that the character is closer to the actor’s age helps to a large degree.
Ajay Ghosh goes about the proceedings in his usual way. However, at times he feels overdoing the goody-good act a bit. It makes the narrative needlessly syrupy, at times, as a result. He delivers in the emotional scenes and manages to pass off as being an old-age DJ without entirely looking ridiculous. Needless to say, as an actor, it is a memorable role for him as he gets a full-fledged lead part.
Chandini Chowdary plays a youngster who lives on her terms. The accent and body language feel too urban for the backdrop (Vinukonda), leaving that aside she is confident and plays a key role in delivering the message.
For Amani, this is a walk in the park. She has done similar roles in the past and does it again with the same conviction and emotion without losing a beat. Despite nothing unusual, she still stands out for the same reason.
Advertisement
Analysis
Siva Paladugu writes and directs Music Shop Murthy. It is a feel-good underdog story where the protagonist rises and shines against all the odds. The difference here from other such genre films is the lead who is an aged guy.
Right from the opening we know where Music Shop Murthy is headed. The world establishment makes it clear and so does the narrative as it unfolds. And still, we don’t mind it or lose interest, and that’s because of the earnestness with which the proceedings happen.
There is sincerity in Murthy, and although overdone, it works eventually. Similarly, the scenarios and the drama he is entangled in feel relatable. But, more than anything it is the age factor added to the story that makes one root for the character.
Age should not make one lose interest in what they are passionate about – this theme and the situations centred on the DJ aspect help Music Shop Murthy escape being completely outdated.
The moments between Murthy and Anjana (played by Chandini Chowdhary) bring a little bit of freshness to the proceedings. The escalation of drama in the pre-interval and interval as a consequence makes it a decent half overall.
Advertisement
The problem for Music Shop Murthy lies in the second half. Even within a predictable tale, the fresh element seen in the first half is missing here as the narrative ticks all the genre-related clichés.
The feel-good factor turns into a fantasy of sorts, the way things happen to our good-at-heart guy. The struggle doesn’t register and neither does the victory. Things just go through the motions as they must conclude.
It is again at the pre-climax and climax portions when the final drama occurs, there is some emotional connection. The sentiments, however predictable and cliché, and contrived at places, still work and leave us with a sense of fulfilment. The end goal is achieved.
Overall, Music Shop Murthy is a routine, but passable underdog story – the kind which is a harmless watch. The neat message and relatability are an additional bonus. Watch it if you like feel-good dramas even if they follow an utterly clichéd path.
Performances by Others Actors
Music Shop Murthy has a limited but decent casting of recognisable faces. Unfortunately, none barring Dayanandh Reddy have any worthwhile part. Dayanandh, for a change, gets a positive part which comes as a mild surprise as he is used to playing the opposite in such setups. Senior actor Bhanu Chander feels wasted playing an utterly one-dimensional part. The same is the case with Amit Sharma.
Advertisement
Music and Other Departments?
Pavan’s music is lacklustre for a film that is supposed to have music at its heart. The DJ bits are fine, but the regular songs are not up to the mark. The cinematography is below par if one looks at it from the big screen perspective. The editing is alright and so is the writing that works despite the utter routine content it dwells in.
Highlights?
Ajay Ghosh Message Few Dialogues (Even Though Predictable)
Drawbacks?
Routineness Feels Rushed Contrived Emotions At Places Lack Of Memorable Music
Advertisement
Did I Enjoy It?
Yes, Few Parts
Will You Recommend It?
Yes, But With Reservations and to those who like underdog winning stories.
What Is the Film About?
Analysis
Performances by Others Actors
Music and Other Departments?
