The Incredulous

So, while the Christmas season has put me in the mood to rant, let me turn my baleful gaze on"The Incredibles", the latest product of the usually excellent (not counting "Finding Nemo") Pixar Studios. I went to see the film yesterday and, as you might expect given the tone of recent entries, hated it. Amazingly, given the competition, "The Simpsons" alumnus Brad Bird has succeeded in creating one of the dullest films of the year; so much so, in fact, that I felt I could have spent my time more profitably by scanning my popcorn for kernels resembling Mother Theresa.

So how did Mr Bird manage his astonishing feat? It's certainly not the premise of the film, which is cheerfully stolen from Alan Moore's excellent "Watchmen" comic (the premise being that the government has banned superheroes from plying their trade, forcing them to live out their lives in their everyday Joe/Joanne personae). Nor can the blame be put on Pixar's animation which, while perhaps a little plainer than in some of its films, is otherwise pretty much up to the studio's usual high standards. The music (a loving 'tribute' to Connery-era Bondage) is also up to snuff, and the voice-acting is fine, if lacking in the pizzazz found in something like "Monsters Inc", "Toy Story 1 & 2" or Dreamworks' "Shrek" movies.

So what are the problems? (By the way, I should probably point out that there are a whole load of plot spoilers ahead but, as the plot's ropey, I can't be bothered) Well, number one is the decision to worship the gods of genre more unswervingly than a Texan worships his semi-automatic, particularly when the genre god being worshipped is the wrong one: Bird starts the film by setting up all these superheroes, but then uses all the genre conventions of the spy movie (baddie intent on using technology to take over the world, volcano lair, the torturing of the hero, the villain's female sidekick who suddenly balks at their mentor's utter lack of morality &c &c). Not a single convention is ever subverted in the slightest - when you see our hero dismiss the ugly kid who wants to be his sidekick, you know that kid is going to come back as the evil mastermind and - waddaya know - you're yawn right, when evil mastermind turns out to have a yawn sexy female sidekick you know she's going to come round to the goodies' side and - waddaya know - you're right again. Next there's the decision to shove in the family-relationship issues (hmm, spies with kids, now where have I seen that before ... hmmm .... perhaps ... "Spy Kids"?), with the inevitable blossoming of self-confidence in the shy yawn goth yawn teenage yawn girl ("You're more powerful than you realise ... You'll know what to do when the time comes" ... but strangely not, "By the way, have I mentioned anything to you about periods?") while the brash yawn and annoying younger yawn yawn brother learns to ... oops fell asleep there for a moment ... learns to be less annoying and brash. Then there's the lack of peril - at no point does anyone seem genuinely threatened: James Bond may be threatened by a missile lurching towards his plane, but that's because he's (just about) human, there's no way an elastic woman, a superfast boy and an invisible goth who can throw forcefields around are going to be imperilled, not even when yawn yawn yawn gothgirl is too lacking in self-yawn-confidence to use her yawn powers. And talking about a lack of peril, how can anybody think it's frightening to use as your final baddie basically the same one Mr Incredible defeated unaided somewhere in the interminable first half of the movie??!!! Please, if anyone out there can explain this to me I'd be really, really grateful. And then, of course, there's the completely idiotic stuff, like having the baddie defeated not by the Incredibles but (a) by his own robot (which seems to have taken against him for some reason best known to itself and certainly never explained in the plot), (b) by the Incredibles' baby, who yawn yawn yawn yawn yawn yawn yawn snore fart twitter turns out to have superpowers after all! and (c) his own cape (in the lamest excuse for keeping down the very expensive business of animating capes yet seen).

And that's not all folks, oh no. Then there's the politics of the thing, now this may just be me but I couldn't help but think that Mr Bird had been on Maggie Thatcher's "How To Be Me" course, the film's messages being (a) that there's no such thing as society there is only the family, (b) when everyone is super no-one is (c) you should only ever lose to people you know you could beat with your hands tied behind your back if you wanted to and (d) goth girls should learn to wear Alice bands and smile more. I half-expected a lengthy discussion on why the British were right to torpedo the General Belgrano when it was sailing away from the Falklands.

And finally there's the matter of tone. The Incredibles is not a family movie. For one thing it spends too much time making overlong jokes for the adults (see Mr Incredible working at his insurance job ... see him sharpen pencils ... see how dull his life is .. see how the, initially packed, audience is rapidly thinning out) to grip the children, for another it spends too much time pandering to the children (no blood, no sex) to grip the adults. And where was the stuff that's supposed to appeal to both groups: the funny jokes, the clever sight gags (even Mrs Incredible getting stretched in a whole series of sliding doors was too drawn out (no pun intended) to work as a joke but too jokey to let us think she might be in danger), the bits that make you - even for a second - care about and feel for the characters? If it was there I missed it, as did all those members of the audience who got bored and left halfway through, led out by their screaming kids.