That character story about her father, when retold by her brother, could have been the tear-jerking scene this movie needed. "He wasn't being stupid, he just wanted to protect us..."
Its interesting that the Incredibles films take place in the 1960s. I hadn't thought of the Screenslaver name being out of place for the period. The mid-century style is popular right now and many people would just say this takes place in a fictional retro future. -Josh
The incredibles looks more present day than 60's, they had "ipads" in the first one, and all the computers we see look more advanve that the ones of today.
@@pacoramon9468 it varies, much of the architecture and technology in the ordinary world, such as Bob's job, is designed to look dated and 60s. Most of syndromes technology is far more advanced than that so therefore looks modern or futuristic
With this change, the sequence of Jack Jack fighting with the racoon, makes thematic sense. Let's say that the scene of the thief on television, is about someone fighting against him, so the baby imitates what he sees.
I think his father wanted to show it off a bit to some guest or relatives, instead of putting it in a saferoom. But, why didn't he make another pair of the telephone for the saferoom??
For real, there should've been another phone in the panic room, and even though the line would've still been dead since supers had just been outlawed he would've been in the panic room and thus safe from the burglars.
At the end of Winston's speech he can say: "Dad didn't think he was a hero, he was a hero." She can look all confused and angery, understanding but not yet willing to change. Then Winston can reach for her and say really emotionally. "Eve, I don't want to lose you too. Not like this." And that can be what convinces her. Because The Incredibles is about family, how family can lift you up to places you could never reach on your own. And having Evelyn's brother, her only family left, be the one to succeed in reaching her would bring the family theme into every aspect of the film more organically.
@@_booth7992 Roughly 150,000 views, meaning if 1% of people scroll down to my comment, and 3% of the people that scroll down like my comment, we'd get roughly that number of likes.
@@Snidbert I think he means that it's obvious or something and only dumb people would miss it, coz he's super smart and nothing flies over his head, his reflexes are too fast.
Lol I feel like the process of him making his own movie would have far more than enough nitpicking and would make it near impossible for him to criticize anything after it's done
@Hajir Abd panic rooms are usually reinforced and locked tight so if they went into the panic room they would've been safe until the cops showed up and the worst that would've happened is some of their stuff was stolen.
For me one of my major problems was the new superheros and how they looked. They all looked to much like cartoon characters and not the slik 50s/60s estetic that the other heros looks screamed. They look like something I would expect to see in big hero six or from the classic tick comics then the incredibles
This is going to come off as dickish, but for future reference, the word is 'aesthetic.' I don't know why, just English being stupid as always, I guess. I agree tho, not a fan of the costumes.
Seriously, they looked comically bad. Like we accepted that there are some wide ranges of body types from the first film (such as Bob's boss being tiny) but we kinda got the idea that Bob was about the largest humans would probably be, being a super strength muscly hero. Yet we have that Brick character...dude is absolutely gargantuan, he couldn't possibly hide his identity because OH LOOK IT'S THAT ONE GUY THAT'S AS BIG AS A MINIVAN. Each of them except Void looked cartoonish and completely out of place.
Winston's speech at the end of the video was amazing. Would've made the movie 10x more compelling, considering how relevant it would feel in the Marvel-era
@@cabrondemente1 Definitely! But that's why you work on a team. Collectively you build and critique each other's ideas till you come up with something amazing.
This would’ve made the movie much better. It also fits with the family importance in the series. See in your version her dad did what any dad would’ve done risk his life protecting his family. Since the beginning of humanity that has been an important role for the father. It could do the same things for the movie that you mentioned and still have that family theme that is important to the series.
DragonRider1396 Nice connecting this version to the core theme of the movie! I agree, this would've been more affective in expressing this theme of family!
Well, the movie adopted that Family Values™ theme largely with feminist undertones. The big arc with Bob taking care of Jack-Jack and letting Helen do the superheroing, culminating in Violet agreeing to take care of Jack-Jack on the boat, was supposed to mean that both the job of being that formerly-exclusively-masculine, tough-guy breadwinner AND the job of being your family's caretaker were equally difficult and important jobs, and that doing either job had nothing to do with whether you were the mom or dad. It's okay that Bob takes care of the baby because it's okay that Violet can too, when the situation calls for either. If you imply that Evelyn's dad was supporting a Family Values™ theme BECAUSE he's acting in a way that aligns with being the fatherly protective figure ("her dad did what any dad would've done"), then he falls into the wrong again - he tried fulfilling the role for the wrong reason, that he was the man and that's what the man's gotta do. He WAS being practical though, because he fulfilled the hero-type role because the situation DID call for it. If you want to hammer home this theme, maybe have the mother (perhaps in an interaction Winston recalls) remember his last words being something like, "I trust you with the kids." - they both agreed that they were taking the best course of action, even though the father died a hero for it. Edit: Got some coffee, rewatched the video, removed an edit, and tweaked my last two paragraphs. Thanks for reading, and for critically analyzing the show to begin with!
I guess I hadn't made it clear, but I'm arguing against that. I said that the original comment rationalized the father's actions in a way that went against the feminist undertones of the movie, and that in reality it didn't matter whether it was the father or mother that did something to protect the children.
Oh my god....13:25...I started tearing up for real. It would have been a more emotionally tragic story, and Evelyn could have become not just the jaded cynic who has a point, but someone who is actually sympathetic for not being able to understand her father. And with BOTH Evelyn's point of people becoming slaves to fiction and Winston's the point of super hero stories boosting people's morals, the movie's story would have become more rich and complex. SOMEONE WRITE A FANFIC OF THIS MOVIE!
Yeah, and imagine Evelyn breaking down and truly let out the sadness she held in after their father's death and Winston comforting her. This fix would made the movie so much better.
Is that a compliment or what?, because she was one the character which i liked even when she was shown to be the villain. Her design and movement SPEAKS a very stressed and hardworking person in her first second of showtime.
That might be good point but eeh . People have attempted to kill presidents and there protected by the entire country so just because your protected doesn't mean someone won't try to take you out . unless your literally like a goku or a superman type character .
Because the events that happened, were just after the Public forced a Ban on Superheroes. A notable thing was that shortly after the Heroes were Banned from being Heroes, Crime rates Rose. It's Why in the Incredibles, Mr Incredible and Frozone were listening in on the Emergancy Radio at Night. That was the only time they could be Heroes. It also explains Why that Cop who held Frozone at Gunpoint was shaking. He didn’t know if the seeming Criminals would pull a Gun on him and shoot him before he can even pull the Trigger. Of course, the media in The Incredibles were not going to outright say it, that Crime rates were rising after the Heroes were banned. It's almost like Pixar predicted what the Media would do to stifle what doesn't benefit them...
Edit: HOLY SHIT! This is the most amount of likes I've ever gotten. Thanks for liking it, just something that popped in my head. I personally think they should have switched her brother's and father's roles. Her brother should have been the one killed in the robbery. Have the robbery take place when they were teens. The mom and the sister run to the safe room. The father tells his son to get his gun from the safe in the foyer while he calls the heroes. The heroes don't come, and the son faces them himself and he dies. The father sees this as a need to bring back heroes, so he fights to get his old company back and bring superheros back. In the process, he shuts out his wife and daughter, which leads to his daughter becoming bitter. When his wife is put in the hospital at the beginning scene with Underminer, he sees this as his opportunity to make heroes legal again, and it also sets in motion Evelyn's plan. Bada Boom Bada Bing, better story, better character relationships (she and her brother had little to none) and the movie is better for it. She doesn't hate heroes... She just wants her brother back, and she can't bring herself to hurt her father, so she hurts the heroes that didn't come. She's the one stuck in her childhood. Her trauma never let her grow up. She's just a bitter little girl who wants a family again.
@@puddingaming6462 Exactly... Stories portrayed in this 60s time period (whether a fictional version or not) tend to sugar coat things. Heck, in the last film they did an awesome job portraying real people with Syndrome not having a father and him finding one in Mr. Incredible. Showing realistic portrayal of family and life is important. Mad Men, a show steeped in nostalgia and a bright atmosphere, did it well whenever the characters were in public they acted like the perfect 60s family and behind closed doors it showed a real portrayal of broken families and broken lives.
I loved «Incredibles 2», but I have to agree the villain was weak and predictable. I would really love to se your version, but sadly that’s not an option. Keep up the great work :)
When I was watching the movie, the first time she showed up, it was so obvious that I literally thought that she would be a good guy and the rich man dude would be the villain, maybe to give the heroes a big bad to beat so that they can come back and the girl was nervous and hesitant to commit crimes just to give them a chance. But that didn't happen, did it.
They got Bob Odenkirk. They didn't want it to be the father or the charismatic Good(man) guy. They rewrote it to showcase what trauma can do to a person and how cynical they become if they only follow their own doctrine. It shows she is selfish, cynical, and thinks that she will succeed. Her being bipolar would explain her poor planning. I think it's just fine if not better than everyone needing to relate to it. I related to it.
To be honest, the hole "governments makes Supers illegal" plot was always strange to me, why would anyone think treating every superpowered beings as enemies would go anywhere but bad for them. The supers would most likely snap under the pressure of being treated like monsters even if they didn't do anything wrong, and they would obviously overpower anything non-powered beings without breaking a sweat
That's the thing though. The government doesn't outlaw superheroes, they bowed to public pressure because the people didn't want supers any more. What are the supers gonna do take on every single American citizen and the army?
That also makes me wonder why we didn't have a "villain" that used to be a Super but due to the Governments making them illegal could ruin their life or something
@@Ben-fx9kx Plus the relocation program allowed for hero’s to have pretty decent jobs and lively hood, so most of them wouldn’t have too much to complain
. I think if you toned down the "He thought he was a cowboy and got shot" bit, and made it more simply on the lines of "He saw all these heroes and thought he could be one, because all the heroes on the stories won, right? Wrong. This is the real world, and if you treat it like the heroes always come out on top, like the bad guys can't hurt you, or end you... I can't let it happen to anyone else. I'll be sure noone ever looks at a screen again.", perhaps with a little Zootopia spice of "'It won't work!' 'Fear, _always_ works.'" Everything else about the writing is great though, don't get me wrong. Just, the dark-backstory speech at the end sounds like one of those jokes where they make a mock backstory that's overly-tragic and silly to poke fun at the tragic backstory trope.
What's even greater about this version is that it echoes what the Parr family is going through. With a few tweaks. The kids can feel some abandonment from Helen cause she's gone and Bob isn't himself and mostly preoccupied with Jack-Jack. Bob in turn feels slightly left behind while Helen fights crime. Helen can also feel unneeded at home because of Bob's lies that it's all going smoothly. Feeling abandoned from parents who try and save the day, that's the cominality. But by the end the whole family can understand that the reason the person left was for them. In this situation everyone wanted to stay together. And now they can be Supers together! It's all so flawless. Props Nando.
I'm going to be honest here. The major problem I have with 'outlawing supers' is that villains, obviously, will not stop. A bunch of super villains with incredible powers and genius minds now don't have to deal with super heroes so they have free reign and normal measures wouldn't cut it against them. In fact, the beginning of this movie almost seems like people have just accepted super villainy in their day to day. I mean, when the Incredibles were arrested, the cops made it out to be that the bank was insured and that the Incredibles should have done nothing. What? Have people just accepted being at the whim of villains? Almost makes it out to be that a villain or two would have been in the midst of the hero ban.
Honestly I think the logical result of such a situation is the government cracking down on vigilantes... and at the same time setting up their own equivalent to a justice league or other meta-human task-force. The people get the reassurance that the super issue is handled, the government gets more control and those who won't work with the government either bow out of the super game or become criminals. (where upon their capture they are neutralized in the governments view.) The only thing that even vaguely lets things be as they are is that the villains somehow stopped. I think the ominous implication is that the government watched for villains and then used special forces wet works teams to eliminate them before they could do anything public. Which is beyond terrifying to picture. Until a more valid in universe explanation comes up, thats the one that makes sense to me. As you said, Villains by definition will not stop because something is illegal.
Watchmen had the same issue, except in the comics, it's implied that police took a no-prisoners approach to "super" villains. That's why we do see one or two as old men. They basically figured getting killed wasn't worth the risk any more (whereas before all they felt they had to worry about was getting arrested). Pair that up with a line/concept from Captain America: Civil War where Vision posits that the existence of super heroes "creates" super villains. I think that's kind of where The Incredibles" sits. In a realistic sense, when someone commits a crime like a bank robbery, they have a plan. Maybe not a good one, but a plan nonetheless. And that plan revolves around whether or not there's a guy with a bullet proof vest and a glock by the front door. Or whether any of the folks inside value their valuables above their own lives. Kind of like the two bandits at the diner in Pulp Fiction, talking about how no one there is going to play a hero. The employees make minimum wage doing a job they hate, they're not gonna take a bullet to protect the $50 in the register. But then think about a world where there are people who are invulnerable or super fast or can teleport or are mind readers and they make it their JOB to run around and stop burglars and bandits. Suddenly, your revolver doesn't mean jack shit. There's NO way to plan around that... unless you have a bigger weapon. A way to distract them. A way around their powers. And once you have THAT? The gun that can freeze people solid? The headband that makes you immune to telepathy while giving you telekenisis? The goggles that let you see invisible people and see through walls and track super-speeders? Well guess what, you're suddenly a super villain. Heck, this is even called out in "Batman Begins", when Gordon talks about escalation and how when the cops get bullet proof vests, crooks get AKs. And then points at Batman and says "YOU dress up in an armored bat-suit" and then hands him the joker's card. What this misses, though, is external threats. Beings that are already super and evil and would commit their heinous acts regardless, like you mentioned. Or natural disasters. Or malevolent aliens. It would have been dark for this series, but I think a Thanos-level threat would have been a big enough kick to the ass for the governments of the world to legalize heroism again. I suspect that will play out by the end of Avengers 4; the Sokovia Accords get scrapped, and the heroes are allowed to do their own thing again.
Demonstrate Value Engage Physically Nurture Dependence Neglect Emotionally (in this case physically) Inspire Hope (in supers) Separate (from public life) Entirely
My problem with the ending was that from the world's perspective, the supers' last contact was a declaration of war. Then they landed a ship on a city street and everybody was cheering for them. Nobody outside the boat knew what was going on. That event should have been met with tempered caution.
I like that new motivation a lot better actually-especially since its kind of realistic. Sometimes what we see on TV does have too much impact on how we see the world and how we act. I also like how its different from Syndrome's motivation. Evelyn's whole thing about how people were too dependent on supers sounded too much like Syndrome's idea that "if everybody's super nobody is". Good Work!
The character ScreenSlaver had potential to be as good as syndrome(not better) and could be remembered as well as others, but instead they decided to pull that twist which didn’t really set well with me. Great Video.
Actually if they did something like Syndrome, we would have gotten Mezzmerella who is a female syndrome from the debunked Incredibles comics. Mezzmerella even has the Hypnosis powers that we later see Evelyn have
My big issue with the movie was...there was no surprise with the Screenslaver. I wanted to be shocked with a big reveal, but instead I just sighed as said..."Of course it's her."
It would be more shocking if screenslaver was actually gazerbeam in disguise and he survived the events of the first movie , faked his death with a body double corpse then went to take revenge on mr incredible and the rest of superhero society.
@@NeroLeMorte YES!!!! Instantly a much better movie. In fact, the movie should proceed as normal making you suspicious of the brother first, then the sister and then BAM! Your twist hits. Although they would have to first reference GazerBeam in the movie to refresh the viewer's memory. Maybe have a small scene near the beginning of Mr Incredible visiting GazerBeam's family to tell them what happened to him and give them closure.
@@starbrand3726 or they could zoom in on the same newspaper article from the first movie that showed gazerbeam's civilian identity being missing. Although I like your funeral idea featuring his family members having closure too.
I feel like people keep sugar coating why the movie was bad as other things like too much hype and it being a different time with more hero movies. When really it was just poorly written in some aspects.
I don't think the Screenslaver was disappointing, I loved the Fight Scene Between the Screenslaver and Helen, I just think the person behind the Screenslaver and the motive was disappointing.
I'd have much preferred if Gazerbeam and Fironic had been shown to be secretly helping the Deavors even when illegal and it was Syndrome's involvement in killing both those heroes before the events of Incredibles 1 which caused the Deavors family incident. It would be like a domino effect of Syndrome's tampering with the superhero order that indirectly caused further villains to appear in the future. Screenslaver's motivations I thought were solid, if just a bit poorly detailed/explained.
I think it's fairly certain that this was implied seeing as how they specifically chose Gazerbeam to be a part of this event as he is the only super given by name as a confirmed death in the original as well as several scenes with his corpse. Although if they were kids when this happened it doesn't really fit the timeline. I'm not sure when their dad dies because he looks so old in that scene I assumed they were older. And Syndrome had been killing off supers for years that when you see Gazerbeams corpse he's basically a skeleton suggesting he had been dead for years prior
@@PsypherWolf Oh, aye for sure the parent's death would have to have been shifted forward considerably. That would probably be required anyway to show that they could still depend on their heroes in secret.
Woah... This would have made the movie so much better. It would have addressed a very prominent current issue, one which many people could relate to and would have made Evelyn SO much more multi dimensional and interesting. Thanks for making this!
@@NandovMovies I'm surprised big movie companies apparently don't have job positions for the kind of stuff you do. Analyzing the whole story, then suggesting rewritings (like you did here). With the goal to assure better coherence and sticking to a more engaging plot, _during development._ There's so many movies with weak plot points that severely hurt the story, yet that (in hindsight) could be easily fixed. I mean obviously in big projects like that, nothing can be set in stone, and there's usually already plenty of review processes and a fair share of rewriting involved; unwanted last-minute changes included. But I feel like it could help to try a more strategic approach. Have a job position _specifically_ for a literary critic providing the overarching final draft of the major plot points with detailed explanations on each change and the overall vision, and with enough leverage and knowledge to strategically avoid executive meddling from busting it. More importantly, each plot point could be modularized and shown a dependency from other plot points. That way, one could potentially even come up with substitute drafts to provide anti-fragility. (Similarly to your different suggestions of how the ending could have played out.) 'The next best thing' to fall back on in case of unexpected budget or time cuts. So that in case the original vision becomes impossible to realize, rather than being forced to butcher the plot, there'd still be a satisfying substitute. Sorry for the long tirade, haha. It might just be a naive vision on my part. But I that's a thought I come back to every time I watch a review from movie critic like you; and keep wondering why so many big movies with such a broad arsenal of people that fill such a broad spectrum of expertise seemingly seem to neglect the most important aspect for immersion and memorability in a movie - the plot itself.
Mr. Wezzer idk I get what he was saying but screenslaver could also just mean enslaving screens into doing your bidding instead of just a play on “screensaver”
Faketendo swatch right????? And before the movie played the I went to theater showed this giant hype thing where the creators were like get ready to be amazed but then showed us some dumb wacky plot
I feel like they waited WAYYY too long (and then gave a speech at the beginning explaining how amazing the movie was going to be). The original Incredibles was set in theatres in 2004...they didn't even do a "ten year later" thing.
Change it from putting cowboy stories on the radio to superhero stories and you have it perfect. Just one thing I want to correct, though. In the film, Eveline is worried that her brother's plan with heroes will make them legal again, so that's why she has enough fear to start her plan and promote Elastagirl as a trap
I think the point of having it be cowboy stories is to move the motivation away from hatred of supers specifically. Changing it to superhero stories also muddies the connection to the "inability to separate fantasy from reality" angle: you can think you're a gunslinging cowboy, but you probably won't forget you don't have superpowers. It could definitely work with superheroes, but I think the choice of cowboys has unique merit.
@@BradGreer I see your point. That would create an interesting change in theme, and focus on the delusion aspect a bit more and potentially avoid confusion with the superhero theme. Both would make a better and cleaner movie than what was the final product (though I did still end up enjoying myself thoroughly when I saw it in theatres)
I've heard some other improvements, like making Winston the Screenslaver: he creates the situations, to make the supers look good in the public eye. This, however, is a really great improvement as well. It manages to fix the whole story, without needing to change too much; it's literally just changing a bit of dialogue.
I had a theory when I saw the trailers that Winston was the screen slaver, the reason why he did it was because he wanted to bring supers back so bad that he created a villain. Created a reason for supers to need to be back. I wish that was what happened , I feel like that’d be more interesting than an idiot who got himself and his wife killed cuz he wasn’t up to date with the news of his idols.
My issues were her motivations. She didn’t have any motivations. You could argue that her parents died so she was driven by that, but she insulted her parents and hated them. Even if she did care, she didn’t seem connected to her motivations
@neutral name someone else who has dealt with real issues in the comments I see. The world is irrational. A lot of movies are pointing that out right now. It's like how Thanos plan is a good one until you factor in how horrible the thing he is doing is. But HE feels justified. So nothing else matters in his mind and anyone who doesn't get it is wrong.
I love what you did with Winston's speech. With the overabundance of superhero movies, great to forgettable, it's nice to be reminded why these kinds of stories resonate and stay with us. The cut the MCU at 13:52 was touching.
I also had another idea for the villain of the movie. Instead of becoming the screen slaver to ban heroes why not become a villain to make heroes legal again? Here me out, if they just had Elastigirl fighting normal thugs or something similar it wouldn’t exactly encourage the government to immediately unban supers, sure it’s helpful but not exactly major enough to undo the ban. But if they were to intervene in potential tragedies or fight seemingly dangerous villains it might convince them otherwise I believe this would cause conflict between the family once discovered as what would they do? Would they stop her at the risk of supers never becoming legal again or simply go along with it to ensure that one day they can use their powers for good? It can even lead to a mini civil war if they truly wanted the other heroes involved. And besides what’s a superhero without a super villain to fight. As it seems there aren’t any around at that time except underminer I’m open for improvements on this but I believe something like this would have made a far greater villain.
Maybe Screen Slaver uses her hypnosis tactics to make stronger villains in order to carry out the plans to cause as much damage as possible. She could even make those villains as distractions for her own personal goals (in the original movie or Nando's rewrite.) Nobody is going to question a villain's motivation, even if they're hypnotized. Maybe a hero could be framed for making the hypnosis tech when they're discovered, thus creating the scenario where a hero is plotting to bring superheroes back by making super villains hard to deal with the military alone.
I'm pretty sure this is an early draft of the film; also the siblings working together. Not sure if Evil Endeavor (seriously her name is literally Evil Endedavor) was always meant to be the bad guy, I can see the brother being the final boss because he gets mad at the heroes or something; but this was definitively the original intent
@CrimsonGear15 isn't that the plot of that movie "Unbreakable"? Also, @@MakiPcr I believed her brother to be a red hearing instead of a leftover script version
This would have made The Incredibles 2 such a better movie. The plot was all over the place and the ending wasn't that great. In the first movie, we had an awesome chase scene with Dash and great character development from Violet. In the sequel, they were barely used. I wanted to see them in action with more control of their powers. We saw a little of it in the beginning with the Underminer, but that was it...
I personally don't find the Screenslaver's plan to be that unreasonable. The reason why it was so easy for Supers to become legal again in Incredibles 2 is because enough time had passed since they became illegal that the public at large doesn't hate them any more. They're kind of neutral on the issue, and it only takes a little good PR to sway them to the "legalize supers" side. For someone like the Screenslaver, who hates Supers, this is a horrible position to be in. Why? Because without public disapproval of Supers, them becoming legal again is simply an inevitability. By working with her brother ostensibly to make Supers legal, it puts her in the perfect position to sabotage that goal and make the public hate Supers again and keep them illegal.
Sagiri ok but that wasn’t in the movie or at least it wasn’t it highlighted. She had another dumb reason that was way too “let’s just fill in these loop holes”
@@thingsicantfind9545 Well, to be fair, Batman could have become the joker. That's the shtick of things, is that a hero and a villain can be so closely related and the only thing that sets them apart is their choices on how to react to things.
I really thought this movie was going for the Unbreakable twist, and it honestly would've been a way better twist even though it's been done before. Where the villian sets up tradjedies that the supers can make less bad but then the heros find out that it's them causing the tradjedies and have to stop the villian even though the villian isn't "against" them
Disney needs to let go of its fetish for 'shock value' or twist villains for their animated films. Just establish the villain and their motivations in the beginning, and continue from there.
@@cosmicdream17 I both kind of agree and disagree. Screenslaver in this movie is established from the beginning, and their motivations are pretty clear in the monologue they give. The only twist is their identity, which was done for dramatic purposes. I get that is the part you disagree with, the twist where u find out who they are. Personally I kind of feel the case for doing both, you can have amazing villain right from the start like Thanos or the Joker, but you can also have great villains which are introduced as a surprise, like Screenslaver. Just getting rid of the idea of having twists with the villians seems to just be something that would dumb down movies to me.
This...this is amazing. I wish so much that you were a professional screen writer because all of your proposals are well thought out and make almost every movie you covered like 1,000,000x better. If given the chance I swear you'd be as great as or better than Kevin Fiege.
My take on Evelyn's plan was not to get super's banned, but start a war. She's playing the long game, effectively. She thinks supers murdered her parents, so she wants to murder all supers. While perhaps she could do this by just hypnotizing them and making them fight to the death, that route could fail. Instead, she wants to make the entire world turn against them and demand their death or incarceration for declaring war on normals. Basically, Evelyn is being Magneto. Though unlike in the X-men, the war between super and normal is not set up as an inevitable. So in forcing it to happen, it's not something bad done for noble motivations, it's just bad for the sake of vengeance. In other words, Evelyn is a sociopath, she doesn't care how many people, super or not, have to die to get rid of all supers for good. There are definitely room for improvements though, even keeping the aesthetic that Evelyn is a genocidal sociopath. Having her acting independently of the supers returning to try and get rid of them "once and for all" would be a good touch to tie up bringing the supers back for a happy ending. Rather than it being a focus on hating screens. It's possibly less of a happy ending, given the implication is that the super and villain cycle is already going, and cannot be ended, and people welcome supers back accepting that banning the supers doesn't ban the villains they may have already created.
Thats not a bad idea and would have made her motivation better, but the movie doesn't really ever imply this is her plan hardly so it mostly only works as a head canon
@@BubblesZap Part of a work is how you interpret it, something that seems a lost art in the information age and beyond. In the past a lot was left up to individual interpretation for books and film. It's a lost art to give the audience _just_ enough to get them thinking, and elaborating. The fact people dismiss this now with 'that's just head cannon' is a big part of the issue. If you notice, works that explain every little last thing with tons of exposition are some of the least engaging things out there. Most people like being able to mentally engage with a story to _some_ degree.
I thought they were going to have it turn out that Evelyn was under the control of her brother, who created the Slaver so that the heroes would have a villain to fight, thus showing the public why heroes are needed.
EPM 101 Too obvious. You should read the Rules of Pixar. One of them is: Think of the first thing to expect and then throw it out the window. Always go for the option that you don’t immediately expect but still makes sense.
Rainpooper Well they clearly broke that rule because they went with the most obvious twist I’ve ever seen. The only part that surprising was the fact that they went with it.
@@epm1012 See, I thought Evelyn's brother creating the slaver for heroes was going to be the twist. I didn't expect Evelyn, since I was more focused on her brother the entire time.
Oh it's not just you. After I recorded the video, I realized that I had accidentally said "Screenslayer" about half of the time and had to rerecord everything.
I totally thought that was his name, too, and it felt really weird hearing it "correctly" upon seeing the film. The misheard name arguably may even make more sense.
I thought that too, when I heard the character's name for the first time in the film I thought the actor had just tripped over their words and added a letter or something, but then I realized I was dumb and the character's name isn't that cool.
@Zimmit's Fabulous Wonder Hoagies what do you think about the video? Do you think that has substance enough to be a great sequel? And how would you have had the Underminer fulfill a greater role in the incredibles 2? I personally feel like the Underminer is more of a Saturday morning cartoon villain than anything significant. I can't really see him taking center stage in the movie. Although I agree it felt lackluster to end off with him just getting away with no real mention after to who the heck he was. Maybe a short can be made where they try and find him after with a set of other heroes. Either it occurs after or meanwhile the whole screen slaver event. I guess you can write in that they are endorsed by or work for the government. Since having supers in your country but not using them is one of the dumbest things. If we can make theories of how the government could have funded syndrome's work I think we can have secret agent Super 1.
I like your edits, it plays to a much more structured theme which overarches both movies: that superheroes are flawed but necessary symbol. The buildup in the first movie with syndrome staged what happens when the image is warped by one ignorant fan and the second could’ve expressed another concern by Evelyn, (who’s father would slightly parallel syndrome in his innocence and fascination of supers) in fear of what the image does for the community, the negative effects. That’s what I feel 2 lacked, a core to the story. Not to mention the model swap for Evelyn from megamind
1st time I've heard of you and seen any of your videos. This was a great first impression. That "speech" you gave in place of Evelyn's monologue to Elastagirl left me speechless. All I could say was "wow". I'm so glad this came up on my recommends. Keep it up dude! 👏👍
That sounds fantastic! I would love this to be the actual Screenslaver. If only this was what they went with. Even if this isn’t what the villain for The Incredibles 2, this is still a great video, with great ideas. Keep up the amazing work!!!
The Xplodenator yeah I thought it was Winston or Roxan Ritchie but then it got more obvious when Elastigirl Was catching on because I figured out screensaver was innocent the moment he was unmasked
Even though it was obvious u have to remember their target the kids not adults weather it was obvious or not u have to know if the brother was in on it or not
@@rebornjm It's actually not angled towards specifically kids. Brad Bird himself stated he found it frustrating that places like iTunes classified it as "Kids and Family" when it should've been classified in the same category as Starwars and Marvel movies. There are swear words in the movie as well, it's definitely angled more at a "family" than it is for "kids." I can understand where the confusion come from though since animated movies in the west usually target kids.
You misunderstand what I mean I mean that they didn’t want it to be an Uber complicated mystery they wanted it to be something that kids could also follow. syndrome was also very obvious with his what he wanted y else would they show him at the beginning of the movie, but these two villains have something that made them different ones motives was purely selfish, the other was because she people to completely rely on people that are super powered. She also hated the role that women were looked at having which was the support role. In a way people immediately believed that screenslaver was in fact male instead of the villain actually being a female, because of the time frame the movie was based in. In truth you see the villain from the 1st time you meet them however you don’t see if the brother was in on it as well because they had different thoughts about the night their dad died but that could have been a lie about how he felt about the situation also he could have been the one to tell his sister what to do to the point where she overthrows her brother, like they wanted you to see all the possibilities along with the older audience knowing who the villain was and having the kids to figure it out.
I liked the suggestion that Greg from Armoured Media made in his review of the film of having Winston be the main villain. I like the idea of a villain who is so obsessed with super heroes that he goes out of his way to create these situations that only a hero could resolve.
Having Helen desperately run after a screenslaver desaster that started on the other half of the city could be very entertaining Just having Wiston hearing some live emergency news and warning Helen could be enough
That... Sounds much better than what Incredibles 2 went with. I wasn't with you at first, I didn't think Incredibles 2 was great but I didn't pinpoint Screenslaver and her motivation as the weak point buuut you are right. You hit the nail on the head and your suggestion is the best fix with the smallest deviation from the film itself. Subscribed.
Love that sum up about superhero movies. Many ppl just look at them like they are 2 or more guys in costumes beating each other, rather then looking at message they send. ^.^
That character story about her father, when retold by her brother, could have been the tear-jerking scene this movie needed. "He wasn't being stupid, he just wanted to protect us..."
Hunter Brown
Now that would have made this movie Oscar worthy!
legit his line: "He didnt *think* he was a hero, he WAS one" seriously hit me in the feels lol. It would have 100% worked cinematically
yes, yes and nice OMAM icon ;)
David Chaz Ah, thank you! I love OMAM!
I know, my eyes were watering as he said it!
Also side note: if their dad was smart he would've put the superhero phones in the panic room. DUH!!!
Why did I not think of this.
I was watching this movie yesterday and this is exactly what I thought, or at least have phones in both places!
“With a capital ‘UUH!’”
IKR! I get wanting to show them off, but how can you not have back up phones in your panic room.
BMT115 this was always my biggest problem with the film
Its interesting that the Incredibles films take place in the 1960s. I hadn't thought of the Screenslaver name being out of place for the period. The mid-century style is popular right now and many people would just say this takes place in a fictional retro future. -Josh
Yeah, I like combinations of different historical eras.
It's even more interesting when you remember the technology that Syndrome had.
The incredibles looks more present day than 60's, they had "ipads" in the first one, and all the computers we see look more advanve that the ones of today.
@@pacoramon9468 it varies, much of the architecture and technology in the ordinary world, such as Bob's job, is designed to look dated and 60s. Most of syndromes technology is far more advanced than that so therefore looks modern or futuristic
It's looks both 1960's, 1990's and 2010's at the same time?
With this change, the sequence of Jack Jack fighting with the racoon, makes thematic sense. Let's say that the scene of the thief on television, is about someone fighting against him, so the baby imitates what he sees.
J Melchor -that’s a really good point and a good way of tying in an otherwise pointless (although still entertaining) scene
You blew my imagination
That works out surprisingly well. Awesomely spotted!
Wow, your right!
Woah...YEAH!!!
Also, why didn't they have a phone *inside* the safe room.... ?
That was all I could think about after leaving the theatre
I think his father wanted to show it off a bit to some guest or relatives, instead of putting it in a saferoom. But, why didn't he make another pair of the telephone for the saferoom??
For real, there should've been another phone in the panic room, and even though the line would've still been dead since supers had just been outlawed he would've been in the panic room and thus safe from the burglars.
FUCKING THANK YOU
I KNEW I WASN'T THE ONLY PERSON WHO THOUGHT THIS
@Adrian same reason people think police can get to their house in time to stop the robbery.
At the end of Winston's speech he can say: "Dad didn't think he was a hero, he was a hero."
She can look all confused and angery, understanding but not yet willing to change. Then Winston can reach for her and say really emotionally.
"Eve, I don't want to lose you too. Not like this."
And that can be what convinces her.
Because The Incredibles is about family, how family can lift you up to places you could never reach on your own. And having Evelyn's brother, her only family left, be the one to succeed in reaching her would bring the family theme into every aspect of the film more organically.
*fairy tail opening plays*
Say cheese
Loved the movie, but you honestly made it so much better
What's up, Gubz?!
Gubz? Wtf are you doing here
Gubz! Thanks! Off topic but I totally agree about Spectacular Spider-Man. It's the best.
Ay Gubz! Good to see you here!
Gubz, did you just find this channel?
8:16 better than the Movie. You made Screenslaver a Well-intentioned Extremist.
Nice opinion.
Thank you!
Thats... just...
Yeah
Oh my gosh, that monologue was insanely good!
I see you're a troper
"And then, maybe more kids won't grow up fatherless because their dad thought he was a cowboy."
I'm dead.
Just like Dear ol Daddy...
That line should have been in the movie. It is both serious and ridiculous.
You're dead? Why did you think you were a cowboy?
Woody: Now I resent that remark!
Oh my gosh
Evelyn Deavor
Evil Endeavor
Woah just saw that mind blown
God Dammit pixar
Snidbert damn, 50 likes? How have you guys even made it this far?
@@_booth7992 Roughly 150,000 views, meaning if 1% of people scroll down to my comment, and 3% of the people that scroll down like my comment, we'd get roughly that number of likes.
@@Snidbert I think he means that it's obvious or something and only dumb people would miss it, coz he's super smart and nothing flies over his head, his reflexes are too fast.
The true villain was the raccoon all along.
of course it was that damn Raccoon 🤯
“He wants heroes back because he wants his dad back.” Just great writing set-up and wordplay
“I WANT TO BE A COWBOY BABY!”
no. please.
Hell yeah!
HELLYEAH
A baby cowboy?
Ethan Davila
“But she’s so wonderful... *S N I F F”*
“And spontaneous...”
*”W H Y W O U L D S H E B E A C O W B O Y”*
When you inevitably make your own movie, will you nit pick your own movie for us?
Maybe I'll leave that up to you guys.
Lol I feel like the process of him making his own movie would have far more than enough nitpicking and would make it near impossible for him to criticize anything after it's done
@@NandovMovies self critique would be a good model for us though. 😉😁
We'll nitpick it and he'll nitpick our nitpicks
TV aka “TERROR VISION” is a cooler name
Oh yeah I like that
Sounds like how my mom says TELEVISION... yes, she's Japanese. 😂😂😂
LOL
Terror Vision is a great bad movie
Wow
Why didn’t they have a phone in the panic room?
exactly, this also removes that plothole
Actually why the fuck why?!?! Why isn’t in it the panic room
Poor design? Not everyone thinks logicially in real life
@Hajir Abd panic rooms are usually reinforced and locked tight so if they went into the panic room they would've been safe until the cops showed up and the worst that would've happened is some of their stuff was stolen.
Crow the mad and they must have been rich to so probably most of their stuff was insured.
For me one of my major problems was the new superheros and how they looked. They all looked to much like cartoon characters and not the slik 50s/60s estetic that the other heros looks screamed. They look like something I would expect to see in big hero six or from the classic tick comics then the incredibles
This is going to come off as dickish, but for future reference, the word is 'aesthetic.' I don't know why, just English being stupid as always, I guess.
I agree tho, not a fan of the costumes.
Seriously, they looked comically bad. Like we accepted that there are some wide ranges of body types from the first film (such as Bob's boss being tiny) but we kinda got the idea that Bob was about the largest humans would probably be, being a super strength muscly hero. Yet we have that Brick character...dude is absolutely gargantuan, he couldn't possibly hide his identity because OH LOOK IT'S THAT ONE GUY THAT'S AS BIG AS A MINIVAN. Each of them except Void looked cartoonish and completely out of place.
@@foosbabaganoosh1 yes. And I believe brick was actually a chick but yes. They all look like they belong in a humer comic from the 60s
@@helious5056 Holy hell you're right it was a chick...yikes
@@foosbabaganoosh1 I know she almost is as bad as the current version of she hulk.
I’m loving this series - “Dad didn’t think he was a hero: he was one.”
Winston's speech at the end of the video was amazing. Would've made the movie 10x more compelling, considering how relevant it would feel in the Marvel-era
"and then.. maybe more kids won't grow up fatherless because their dad thought he was a cowboy "
I felt that.
@@cheesecakelasagna I tasted that
I second that
Sounds simular to Justce Lord Batman's "I do what I do so no eight year old boy loses his parents to some punk with a gun" or however he said this
@@crowthewicked8344 I heard that
I’ve got one thing to say...
Someone from Pixar should hire you on their creative team. Would be such a win for them.
@@nickdijkema what do you mean?
SINCEA King second channel There was another comment that I reacted to. But it’s deleted
Criticizing a plot isn't as difficult as building one from the ground.
@@cabrondemente1 heard!
@@cabrondemente1 Definitely! But that's why you work on a team. Collectively you build and critique each other's ideas till you come up with something amazing.
This would’ve made the movie much better. It also fits with the family importance in the series. See in your version her dad did what any dad would’ve done risk his life protecting his family. Since the beginning of humanity that has been an important role for the father. It could do the same things for the movie that you mentioned and still have that family theme that is important to the series.
DragonRider1396 Nice connecting this version to the core theme of the movie! I agree, this would've been more affective in expressing this theme of family!
Well, the movie adopted that Family Values™ theme largely with feminist undertones. The big arc with Bob taking care of Jack-Jack and letting Helen do the superheroing, culminating in Violet agreeing to take care of Jack-Jack on the boat, was supposed to mean that both the job of being that formerly-exclusively-masculine, tough-guy breadwinner AND the job of being your family's caretaker were equally difficult and important jobs, and that doing either job had nothing to do with whether you were the mom or dad. It's okay that Bob takes care of the baby because it's okay that Violet can too, when the situation calls for either.
If you imply that Evelyn's dad was supporting a Family Values™ theme BECAUSE he's acting in a way that aligns with being the fatherly protective figure ("her dad did what any dad would've done"), then he falls into the wrong again - he tried fulfilling the role for the wrong reason, that he was the man and that's what the man's gotta do. He WAS being practical though, because he fulfilled the hero-type role because the situation DID call for it. If you want to hammer home this theme, maybe have the mother (perhaps in an interaction Winston recalls) remember his last words being something like, "I trust you with the kids." - they both agreed that they were taking the best course of action, even though the father died a hero for it.
Edit: Got some coffee, rewatched the video, removed an edit, and tweaked my last two paragraphs. Thanks for reading, and for critically analyzing the show to begin with!
Why are so many people like you who think people's actions are dictated by their junk? Not all people of the same sex act like identical clones.
I guess I hadn't made it clear, but I'm arguing against that. I said that the original comment rationalized the father's actions in a way that went against the feminist undertones of the movie, and that in reality it didn't matter whether it was the father or mother that did something to protect the children.
@@Andrew-ow6fq I talking about what DragonRider said.
Oh my god....13:25...I started tearing up for real. It would have been a more emotionally tragic story, and Evelyn could have become not just the jaded cynic who has a point, but someone who is actually sympathetic for not being able to understand her father. And with BOTH Evelyn's point of people becoming slaves to fiction and Winston's the point of super hero stories boosting people's morals, the movie's story would have become more rich and complex. SOMEONE WRITE A FANFIC OF THIS MOVIE!
Yeah, and imagine Evelyn breaking down and truly let out the sadness she held in after their father's death and Winston comforting her. This fix would made the movie so much better.
That's some pussy shit
You breakdown to a deadpan narration of a fanfiction?
lawson carpenter haha you’re right humans don’t have feelings
@@zdsfhnbvhigf having feelings doesn't equate to crying at a monotone reading of a plot that isn't that sad
Under mind control...
Under... MINED control?
The Underminer was actually behind everything!
Why does she look like Roxanne Richie from Megamind?
I guess the visual language for strong-speaking, high-ranking-job, stylish woman in animation falls right there or something
Is that a compliment or what?, because she was one the character which i liked even when she was shown to be the villain. Her design and movement SPEAKS a very stressed and hardworking person in her first second of showtime.
@@balz.k3483 that was such an awesome movie but I still feel weird about the disguise-kiss and her being written to get over it pretty quickly xD
THATS WHAT I THOUGHT
Ikr
Do a video where you make your own movie.
Preferably a superhero movie.
More like preferably NOT a superhero movie
He literally did that. Twice. He did a complete 4 part rewrite of the Justice League and then pitched how he'd go about making Suicide Squad 2.
@@Wiebejamin yeah but he should do a new superhero who hasn't been introduced yet
He will be doing a lot more movie pitches for various sequels in the near future
How about Moonknight? I would love to see the movie about him, he’s so underrated…
Your final monologue from Winston gave me chills. Well written.
Always love your breakdowns, man. Really support you expanding the type of content you look at.
Hello Future Me A fellow fan of , Nando. Likewise, I love your content man and keep up the amazing work.
Thanks Tim. We should work on something together sometime.
@@NandovMovies Love to!
We have witnessed the beginnings of a crossover. I can't wait to see it if anything happens!
@@NandovMovies A HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON CROSSOVER EPISODE!
Why would these muggers rob a house that's known for pretty much having heroes on speed dial
That might be good point but eeh . People have attempted to kill presidents and there protected by the entire country so just because your protected doesn't mean someone won't try to take you out . unless your literally like a goku or a superman type character .
@@stealthbrandon even if you had someone like Superman or goku by your side, there would still be blokes out there dumb enough to try and take you out
Because supers were just made illegal and they got confident
*Its almost like they have a fortune*
Because the events that happened, were just after the Public forced a Ban on Superheroes.
A notable thing was that shortly after the Heroes were Banned from being Heroes, Crime rates Rose.
It's Why in the Incredibles, Mr Incredible and Frozone were listening in on the Emergancy Radio at Night. That was the only time they could be Heroes.
It also explains Why that Cop who held Frozone at Gunpoint was shaking. He didn’t know if the seeming Criminals would pull a Gun on him and shoot him before he can even pull the Trigger.
Of course, the media in The Incredibles were not going to outright say it, that Crime rates were rising after the Heroes were banned. It's almost like Pixar predicted what the Media would do to stifle what doesn't benefit them...
(2:17) Bob Parr has a computer in his office.
Even if The Incredibles is technically set the 60's, it's not the 60's we know.
Technically, that was Syndrome's computer, but agreed. Also, don't forget the tablet Syndrome used to contact Bob.
@@Steven-qi2dx I meant literally in the cubicle where he works.
@@Nikolapoleon True, he did.
Edit: HOLY SHIT! This is the most amount of likes I've ever gotten. Thanks for liking it, just something that popped in my head.
I personally think they should have switched her brother's and father's roles. Her brother should have been the one killed in the robbery. Have the robbery take place when they were teens. The mom and the sister run to the safe room. The father tells his son to get his gun from the safe in the foyer while he calls the heroes. The heroes don't come, and the son faces them himself and he dies. The father sees this as a need to bring back heroes, so he fights to get his old company back and bring superheros back. In the process, he shuts out his wife and daughter, which leads to his daughter becoming bitter. When his wife is put in the hospital at the beginning scene with Underminer, he sees this as his opportunity to make heroes legal again, and it also sets in motion Evelyn's plan. Bada Boom Bada Bing, better story, better character relationships (she and her brother had little to none) and the movie is better for it. She doesn't hate heroes... She just wants her brother back, and she can't bring herself to hurt her father, so she hurts the heroes that didn't come. She's the one stuck in her childhood. Her trauma never let her grow up. She's just a bitter little girl who wants a family again.
Caleb Richardson I think Danny Devito should have been in it! “I’m the trash man!”
This is great
She also is juxtaposed with the family component of the Incredibles
@@puddingaming6462 Exactly... Stories portrayed in this 60s time period (whether a fictional version or not) tend to sugar coat things. Heck, in the last film they did an awesome job portraying real people with Syndrome not having a father and him finding one in Mr. Incredible. Showing realistic portrayal of family and life is important. Mad Men, a show steeped in nostalgia and a bright atmosphere, did it well whenever the characters were in public they acted like the perfect 60s family and behind closed doors it showed a real portrayal of broken families and broken lives.
This is how it should've gone down
I loved «Incredibles 2», but I have to agree the villain was weak and predictable. I would really love to se your version, but sadly that’s not an option. Keep up the great work :)
When I was watching the movie, the first time she showed up, it was so obvious that I literally thought that she would be a good guy and the rich man dude would be the villain, maybe to give the heroes a big bad to beat so that they can come back and the girl was nervous and hesitant to commit crimes just to give them a chance.
But that didn't happen, did it.
second
I didnt really like it cause it was more about the mom than the family. Other than that it was good.
Thanks Kristian. I loved your Cap/Man of Steel video. I watch it all the time.
Nando v Movies Thank you so much :)
I legit got choked up on that part where Winston explains about their father. That was such masterful writing.
I thought the Screenslaver WOULD be motivated by the escapism of television and contrast Syndrome's admiration of "heroes". So dissapointed.
Syndrome's dead tho
@@akeiai ok...Asa didn't say he was?
Syndrome, more like Down syndrome
Considering Brad Bird's usual writing, I think this was his initial plan, it just got changed by execs.
They got Bob Odenkirk. They didn't want it to be the father or the charismatic Good(man) guy. They rewrote it to showcase what trauma can do to a person and how cynical they become if they only follow their own doctrine. It shows she is selfish, cynical, and thinks that she will succeed. Her being bipolar would explain her poor planning. I think it's just fine if not better than everyone needing to relate to it. I related to it.
Sebastian Applewhite hmmm... maybe
I never thought of Screenslaver's name to be inspired by the word screensaver, I thought of it as an ideology that screens enslave people's minds.
TakeTheJurny it’s wordplay
Daniel Ezulike 60s
Both
It's also an ironic pun cuz no one in the movie gets it but the audience does, and it still makes sense despite that.
Very slow individual you are...
Your version is 100% better.
I didn't even know my comment had so many likes!
0 comments to 3 in 1 hour
Peepeepoopoo looool
3:20 so you're saying we need to make a trilogy of this, have time travel bring the family to alternate realities
Jesus your version of the reveal has some real messaging behind it. That wouldve made it one of the most profound morals in the media in recent years.
To be honest, the hole "governments makes Supers illegal" plot was always strange to me, why would anyone think treating every superpowered beings as enemies would go anywhere but bad for them.
The supers would most likely snap under the pressure of being treated like monsters even if they didn't do anything wrong, and they would obviously overpower anything non-powered beings without breaking a sweat
Honestly, I would imagine that there would be a ton of, helpful, mundane uses for Superpowers.
That's the thing though. The government doesn't outlaw superheroes, they bowed to public pressure because the people didn't want supers any more. What are the supers gonna do take on every single American citizen and the army?
That also makes me wonder why we didn't have a "villain" that used to be a Super but due to the Governments making them illegal could ruin their life or something
@@Ben-fx9kx Plus the relocation program allowed for hero’s to have pretty decent jobs and lively hood, so most of them wouldn’t have too much to complain
The government was forced by the public. Politicians can't get re-elected if they're supporting an incredibly unpopular policy
. I think if you toned down the "He thought he was a cowboy and got shot" bit, and made it more simply on the lines of "He saw all these heroes and thought he could be one, because all the heroes on the stories won, right? Wrong. This is the real world, and if you treat it like the heroes always come out on top, like the bad guys can't hurt you, or end you... I can't let it happen to anyone else. I'll be sure noone ever looks at a screen again.", perhaps with a little Zootopia spice of "'It won't work!' 'Fear, _always_ works.'"
Everything else about the writing is great though, don't get me wrong. Just, the dark-backstory speech at the end sounds like one of those jokes where they make a mock backstory that's overly-tragic and silly to poke fun at the tragic backstory trope.
That would make her echo Elastigirl from the first movie too.
Yeah there was too much cowboy talk and it came off as shallow-trying-to-sound-deep. otherwise a solid motivation
This is perfect.
Woah I see you everywhere. Well, I guess I’m everywhere too~
Cowboy count: 34253436210193628182652718273635262735355362810010193747108719184946652648 cowboys.
The monologue dude, wow.
What's even greater about this version is that it echoes what the Parr family is going through. With a few tweaks. The kids can feel some abandonment from Helen cause she's gone and Bob isn't himself and mostly preoccupied with Jack-Jack. Bob in turn feels slightly left behind while Helen fights crime. Helen can also feel unneeded at home because of Bob's lies that it's all going smoothly. Feeling abandoned from parents who try and save the day, that's the cominality. But by the end the whole family can understand that the reason the person left was for them. In this situation everyone wanted to stay together. And now they can be Supers together!
It's all so flawless. Props Nando.
I'm going to be honest here. The major problem I have with 'outlawing supers' is that villains, obviously, will not stop. A bunch of super villains with incredible powers and genius minds now don't have to deal with super heroes so they have free reign and normal measures wouldn't cut it against them. In fact, the beginning of this movie almost seems like people have just accepted super villainy in their day to day. I mean, when the Incredibles were arrested, the cops made it out to be that the bank was insured and that the Incredibles should have done nothing. What? Have people just accepted being at the whim of villains? Almost makes it out to be that a villain or two would have been in the midst of the hero ban.
Honestly I think the logical result of such a situation is the government cracking down on vigilantes... and at the same time setting up their own equivalent to a justice league or other meta-human task-force. The people get the reassurance that the super issue is handled, the government gets more control and those who won't work with the government either bow out of the super game or become criminals. (where upon their capture they are neutralized in the governments view.)
The only thing that even vaguely lets things be as they are is that the villains somehow stopped. I think the ominous implication is that the government watched for villains and then used special forces wet works teams to eliminate them before they could do anything public. Which is beyond terrifying to picture. Until a more valid in universe explanation comes up, thats the one that makes sense to me. As you said, Villains by definition will not stop because something is illegal.
I was thinking that too, like, did they SEE how many people could've died there if they didn't do anything??
Watchmen had the same issue, except in the comics, it's implied that police took a no-prisoners approach to "super" villains. That's why we do see one or two as old men. They basically figured getting killed wasn't worth the risk any more (whereas before all they felt they had to worry about was getting arrested). Pair that up with a line/concept from Captain America: Civil War where Vision posits that the existence of super heroes "creates" super villains. I think that's kind of where The Incredibles" sits.
In a realistic sense, when someone commits a crime like a bank robbery, they have a plan. Maybe not a good one, but a plan nonetheless. And that plan revolves around whether or not there's a guy with a bullet proof vest and a glock by the front door. Or whether any of the folks inside value their valuables above their own lives. Kind of like the two bandits at the diner in Pulp Fiction, talking about how no one there is going to play a hero. The employees make minimum wage doing a job they hate, they're not gonna take a bullet to protect the $50 in the register.
But then think about a world where there are people who are invulnerable or super fast or can teleport or are mind readers and they make it their JOB to run around and stop burglars and bandits. Suddenly, your revolver doesn't mean jack shit. There's NO way to plan around that... unless you have a bigger weapon. A way to distract them. A way around their powers. And once you have THAT? The gun that can freeze people solid? The headband that makes you immune to telepathy while giving you telekenisis? The goggles that let you see invisible people and see through walls and track super-speeders? Well guess what, you're suddenly a super villain. Heck, this is even called out in "Batman Begins", when Gordon talks about escalation and how when the cops get bullet proof vests, crooks get AKs. And then points at Batman and says "YOU dress up in an armored bat-suit" and then hands him the joker's card.
What this misses, though, is external threats. Beings that are already super and evil and would commit their heinous acts regardless, like you mentioned. Or natural disasters. Or malevolent aliens. It would have been dark for this series, but I think a Thanos-level threat would have been a big enough kick to the ass for the governments of the world to legalize heroism again. I suspect that will play out by the end of Avengers 4; the Sokovia Accords get scrapped, and the heroes are allowed to do their own thing again.
The online serial Worm worked like this. You might have to include the term "parahuman" in a Google search to find it.
Sorain1 Whoops, replied to the wrong person, meant to reply to you
Demonstrate Value
Engage Physically
Nurture Dependence
Neglect Emotionally (in this case physically)
Inspire Hope (in supers)
Separate (from public life) Entirely
Anthony Paone Dennis
D-E-N-N-I-S
*THE DENNIS SYSTEM*
Dennis even kfejh. CD hjdscdveq uidew
Dang, your idea of the conversation between Evelyn and her brother was powerful. That honestly would have been a privilege to watch.
My problem with the ending was that from the world's perspective, the supers' last contact was a declaration of war. Then they landed a ship on a city street and everybody was cheering for them. Nobody outside the boat knew what was going on. That event should have been met with tempered caution.
Tempered caution and a lot of guns. Hella guns.
I like that new motivation a lot better actually-especially since its kind of realistic. Sometimes what we see on TV does have too much impact on how we see the world and how we act. I also like how its different from Syndrome's motivation. Evelyn's whole thing about how people were too dependent on supers sounded too much like Syndrome's idea that "if everybody's super nobody is". Good Work!
Exactly
RO Payne um...it’s like how we really relay on TV a lot.
"He didn't /think/ he was a hero, he /was/ one"
SOB
The character ScreenSlaver had potential to be as good as syndrome(not better) and could be remembered as well as others, but instead they decided to pull that twist which didn’t really set well with me. Great Video.
PS4 Dude I think syndrome is a better villain.
@@srstriker6420 ps4 dude said that she had the potential to be better. Not that he was better infact ps4 dude stated that she wasnt.
Darius Cole-Samuels well it is understandable.
Actually if they did something like Syndrome, we would have gotten Mezzmerella who is a female syndrome from the debunked Incredibles comics.
Mezzmerella even has the Hypnosis powers that we later see Evelyn have
@Ruffels they butchered the sequel. They can't do everything.
I mean, if you have a direct line to the superhero for an emergency wouldn't it be logical to put those in the panic room?
My big issue with the movie was...there was no surprise with the Screenslaver. I wanted to be shocked with a big reveal, but instead I just sighed as said..."Of course it's her."
It would be more shocking if screenslaver was actually gazerbeam in disguise and he survived the events of the first movie , faked his death with a body double corpse then went to take revenge on mr incredible and the rest of superhero society.
@@NeroLeMorte YES!!!! Instantly a much better movie. In fact, the movie should proceed as normal making you suspicious of the brother first, then the sister and then BAM! Your twist hits. Although they would have to first reference GazerBeam in the movie to refresh the viewer's memory. Maybe have a small scene near the beginning of Mr Incredible visiting GazerBeam's family to tell them what happened to him and give them closure.
@@starbrand3726 or they could zoom in on the same newspaper article from the first movie that showed gazerbeam's civilian identity being missing. Although I like your funeral idea featuring his family members having closure too.
@@NeroLeMorte
Why would he need to take revenge on Mr Incredible? He was friends with him and the others.
Incredibles 1 was, in my opinion, the best animated film ever made. Incredibles 2 was good, but it had so much to live up to.
Same.
Evelyn did a fine job. Your changes would just lead to Female Syndrome aka Mezzmerella from the debunked Incredibles comic.
I feel like people keep sugar coating why the movie was bad as other things like too much hype and it being a different time with more hero movies. When really it was just poorly written in some aspects.
I feel the same way about finding nemo.
Ikemeitz There is no “best” animated movie
No matter how much I love the film this is such a good idea.
The screenslaver was definitely disappointing.
This is so much better.
All Light You are everywhere aren't you?
Megashark 101 LMAO I've seen this guy spamming the same thing on so many comment sections.
I don't think the Screenslaver was disappointing, I loved the Fight Scene Between the Screenslaver and Helen, I just think the person behind the Screenslaver and the motive was disappointing.
*High Quality Content joined the chat*
Holy that speech in the end is gucken incredible
I feel the Same I got chills
"Directed INCREDIBLY well" Wow Nando, good one...
An incredibly well thought pun?
Yeah that was an incredibly bad joke
'Disillusioned, split up, vaporized" all clips of Marvel movies
... that sounds about right
I like the connection you make between screens and fantasy. I feel like the movie wanted to do this, but couldn’t.
I'd have much preferred if Gazerbeam and Fironic had been shown to be secretly helping the Deavors even when illegal and it was Syndrome's involvement in killing both those heroes before the events of Incredibles 1 which caused the Deavors family incident. It would be like a domino effect of Syndrome's tampering with the superhero order that indirectly caused further villains to appear in the future. Screenslaver's motivations I thought were solid, if just a bit poorly detailed/explained.
This is really a great thought! My absolute favorite scene is the island cave scene from the first and this would tie everything so nicely together
I think it's fairly certain that this was implied seeing as how they specifically chose Gazerbeam to be a part of this event as he is the only super given by name as a confirmed death in the original as well as several scenes with his corpse.
Although if they were kids when this happened it doesn't really fit the timeline. I'm not sure when their dad dies because he looks so old in that scene I assumed they were older. And Syndrome had been killing off supers for years that when you see Gazerbeams corpse he's basically a skeleton suggesting he had been dead for years prior
Syndrome was still a kid when supers were just made illegal. I'd been cool if it connected but the dates just don't match.
@@PsypherWolf Oh, aye for sure the parent's death would have to have been shifted forward considerably. That would probably be required anyway to show that they could still depend on their heroes in secret.
Damn, that's an amazing idea!
Woah... This would have made the movie so much better. It would have addressed a very prominent current issue, one which many people could relate to and would have made Evelyn SO much more multi dimensional and interesting. Thanks for making this!
How the hell are you not a writer for a movie company yet
...how do you know I'm not?
I'm not, though.
Nando v Movies Ahhhhh you had me for a second
@@NandovMovies I'm surprised big movie companies apparently don't have job positions for the kind of stuff you do.
Analyzing the whole story, then suggesting rewritings (like you did here).
With the goal to assure better coherence and sticking to a more engaging plot, _during development._
There's so many movies with weak plot points that severely hurt the story, yet that (in hindsight) could be easily fixed.
I mean obviously in big projects like that, nothing can be set in stone, and there's usually already plenty of review processes and a fair share of rewriting involved; unwanted last-minute changes included.
But I feel like it could help to try a more strategic approach.
Have a job position _specifically_ for a literary critic providing the overarching final draft of the major plot points with detailed explanations on each change and the overall vision, and with enough leverage and knowledge to strategically avoid executive meddling from busting it.
More importantly, each plot point could be modularized and shown a dependency from other plot points. That way, one could potentially even come up with substitute drafts to provide anti-fragility.
(Similarly to your different suggestions of how the ending could have played out.)
'The next best thing' to fall back on in case of unexpected budget or time cuts. So that in case the original vision becomes impossible to realize, rather than being forced to butcher the plot, there'd still be a satisfying substitute.
Sorry for the long tirade, haha.
It might just be a naive vision on my part.
But I that's a thought I come back to every time I watch a review from movie critic like you;
and keep wondering why so many big movies with such a broad arsenal of people that fill such a broad spectrum of expertise seemingly seem to neglect the most important aspect for immersion and memorability in a movie - the plot itself.
@@LinkEX I'm not gonna read all that but movies have directors what he does is what directors do he'd be an amazing director
finally someone addressed the dumb name "screen slaver"
I like the name screenslaver. It sound like a perfect username for gamer.
Mr. Wezzer idk I get what he was saying but screenslaver could also just mean enslaving screens into doing your bidding instead of just a play on “screensaver”
i laughed in the theater when they introduced him as the screen slaver. i couldn't believe he was the primary antagonist.
All their names are dumb.
@@johndisco5280 no, “The Screenslayer" sounds better
How is it that they had fourteen years to make this and in fifteen minutes you make it ten times better?
I remember hearing they wouldn't make an incredibles sequel unless the story was as good or better than the original.
Guess that didn't stick
Faketendo swatch right????? And before the movie played the I went to theater showed this giant hype thing where the creators were like get ready to be amazed but then showed us some dumb wacky plot
I feel like they waited WAYYY too long (and then gave a speech at the beginning explaining how amazing the movie was going to be). The original Incredibles was set in theatres in 2004...they didn't even do a "ten year later" thing.
Fitting for you to make a video about the importance of Superhero stories the day after Stan died.
The dialogue you created between Evelyn and her brother made me feel more emotion than the actual movie
Change it from putting cowboy stories on the radio to superhero stories and you have it perfect. Just one thing I want to correct, though. In the film, Eveline is worried that her brother's plan with heroes will make them legal again, so that's why she has enough fear to start her plan and promote Elastagirl as a trap
I think the point of having it be cowboy stories is to move the motivation away from hatred of supers specifically. Changing it to superhero stories also muddies the connection to the "inability to separate fantasy from reality" angle: you can think you're a gunslinging cowboy, but you probably won't forget you don't have superpowers. It could definitely work with superheroes, but I think the choice of cowboys has unique merit.
@@BradGreer I see your point. That would create an interesting change in theme, and focus on the delusion aspect a bit more and potentially avoid confusion with the superhero theme. Both would make a better and cleaner movie than what was the final product (though I did still end up enjoying myself thoroughly when I saw it in theatres)
This was such a more satisfying plot rearrangment. Thank you so much for making this!
I've heard some other improvements, like making Winston the Screenslaver: he creates the situations, to make the supers look good in the public eye.
This, however, is a really great improvement as well. It manages to fix the whole story, without needing to change too much; it's literally just changing a bit of dialogue.
I had a theory when I saw the trailers that Winston was the screen slaver, the reason why he did it was because he wanted to bring supers back so bad that he created a villain. Created a reason for supers to need to be back. I wish that was what happened , I feel like that’d be more interesting than an idiot who got himself and his wife killed cuz he wasn’t up to date with the news of his idols.
I think that was their red herring. Gotta have a twist somewhere
My issues were her motivations. She didn’t have any motivations. You could argue that her parents died so she was driven by that, but she insulted her parents and hated them. Even if she did care, she didn’t seem connected to her motivations
They abandoned her by dying. Her irrationality makes this so much more believable to me.
@neutral name someone else who has dealt with real issues in the comments I see. The world is irrational. A lot of movies are pointing that out right now. It's like how Thanos plan is a good one until you factor in how horrible the thing he is doing is. But HE feels justified. So nothing else matters in his mind and anyone who doesn't get it is wrong.
neutral name that’s the problem. She wasn’t connected to her motivations. Always smiling maniacally
I love what you did with Winston's speech. With the overabundance of superhero movies, great to forgettable, it's nice to be reminded why these kinds of stories resonate and stay with us. The cut the MCU at 13:52 was touching.
I also had another idea for the villain of the movie. Instead of becoming the screen slaver to ban heroes why not become a villain to make heroes legal again?
Here me out, if they just had Elastigirl fighting normal thugs or something similar it wouldn’t exactly encourage the government to immediately unban supers, sure it’s helpful but not exactly major enough to undo the ban.
But if they were to intervene in potential tragedies or fight seemingly dangerous villains it might convince them otherwise
I believe this would cause conflict between the family once discovered as what would they do? Would they stop her at the risk of supers never becoming legal again or simply go along with it to ensure that one day they can use their powers for good?
It can even lead to a mini civil war if they truly wanted the other heroes involved.
And besides what’s a superhero
without a super villain to fight. As it seems there aren’t any around at that time except underminer
I’m open for improvements on this but I believe something like this would have made a far greater villain.
Maybe Screen Slaver uses her hypnosis tactics to make stronger villains in order to carry out the plans to cause as much damage as possible. She could even make those villains as distractions for her own personal goals (in the original movie or Nando's rewrite.) Nobody is going to question a villain's motivation, even if they're hypnotized. Maybe a hero could be framed for making the hypnosis tech when they're discovered, thus creating the scenario where a hero is plotting to bring superheroes back by making super villains hard to deal with the military alone.
I'm pretty sure this is an early draft of the film; also the siblings working together. Not sure if Evil Endeavor (seriously her name is literally Evil Endedavor) was always meant to be the bad guy, I can see the brother being the final boss because he gets mad at the heroes or something; but this was definitively the original intent
@CrimsonGear15 isn't that the plot of that movie "Unbreakable"? Also, @@MakiPcr I believed her brother to be a red hearing instead of a leftover script version
@@daniellins4114 Honestly Evelyn makes a better red herring
@@MakiPcr I tink it depends on the person, because I was watching it with my uncle and he was sure the brother was the villain and the twist got him
Wow... that honestly is a much better plot. So when you getting into film writting?
Bro I got literal chills over your rewriting. Great job
This would have made The Incredibles 2 such a better movie. The plot was all over the place and the ending wasn't that great. In the first movie, we had an awesome chase scene with Dash and great character development from Violet. In the sequel, they were barely used. I wanted to see them in action with more control of their powers. We saw a little of it in the beginning with the Underminer, but that was it...
I think Evelyn is pretty evil, but she wouldn't have wanted the entire train of people to die or get injured.
Hell, she even tried to save her brother from her own plan.
The train plan might have been because it was because of a train supers became illegal.
except for the part where she tried to ram a hyrdofoil into a city killing a ton of people im sure in the process.
I personally don't find the Screenslaver's plan to be that unreasonable.
The reason why it was so easy for Supers to become legal again in Incredibles 2 is because enough time had passed since they became illegal that the public at large doesn't hate them any more. They're kind of neutral on the issue, and it only takes a little good PR to sway them to the "legalize supers" side.
For someone like the Screenslaver, who hates Supers, this is a horrible position to be in. Why? Because without public disapproval of Supers, them becoming legal again is simply an inevitability. By working with her brother ostensibly to make Supers legal, it puts her in the perfect position to sabotage that goal and make the public hate Supers again and keep them illegal.
Sagiri ok but that wasn’t in the movie or at least it wasn’t it highlighted. She had another dumb reason that was way too “let’s just fill in these loop holes”
Her backstory made 0 sense, its like saying after batmans parents died he became the joker....
@@thingsicantfind9545 Well, to be fair, Batman could have become the joker. That's the shtick of things, is that a hero and a villain can be so closely related and the only thing that sets them apart is their choices on how to react to things.
@@rayesafan9628 Which The Incredibles 2 did not touch upon. The villain is not the hero's antithesis.
Zeturic **evelyn in particular
I really thought this movie was going for the Unbreakable twist, and it honestly would've been a way better twist even though it's been done before. Where the villian sets up tradjedies that the supers can make less bad but then the heros find out that it's them causing the tradjedies and have to stop the villian even though the villian isn't "against" them
I thought that was where the movie was going. Kind of disappointed
Disney needs to let go of its fetish for 'shock value' or twist villains for their animated films. Just establish the villain and their motivations in the beginning, and continue from there.
@@cosmicdream17 I both kind of agree and disagree. Screenslaver in this movie is established from the beginning, and their motivations are pretty clear in the monologue they give. The only twist is their identity, which was done for dramatic purposes. I get that is the part you disagree with, the twist where u find out who they are. Personally I kind of feel the case for doing both, you can have amazing villain right from the start like Thanos or the Joker, but you can also have great villains which are introduced as a surprise, like Screenslaver. Just getting rid of the idea of having twists with the villians seems to just be something that would dumb down movies to me.
Exactly what I thought was going to happen
This...this is amazing. I wish so much that you were a professional screen writer because all of your proposals are well thought out and make almost every movie you covered like 1,000,000x better. If given the chance I swear you'd be as great as or better than Kevin Fiege.
My take on Evelyn's plan was not to get super's banned, but start a war. She's playing the long game, effectively. She thinks supers murdered her parents, so she wants to murder all supers. While perhaps she could do this by just hypnotizing them and making them fight to the death, that route could fail. Instead, she wants to make the entire world turn against them and demand their death or incarceration for declaring war on normals.
Basically, Evelyn is being Magneto. Though unlike in the X-men, the war between super and normal is not set up as an inevitable. So in forcing it to happen, it's not something bad done for noble motivations, it's just bad for the sake of vengeance. In other words, Evelyn is a sociopath, she doesn't care how many people, super or not, have to die to get rid of all supers for good.
There are definitely room for improvements though, even keeping the aesthetic that Evelyn is a genocidal sociopath. Having her acting independently of the supers returning to try and get rid of them "once and for all" would be a good touch to tie up bringing the supers back for a happy ending. Rather than it being a focus on hating screens.
It's possibly less of a happy ending, given the implication is that the super and villain cycle is already going, and cannot be ended, and people welcome supers back accepting that banning the supers doesn't ban the villains they may have already created.
Thats not a bad idea and would have made her motivation better, but the movie doesn't really ever imply this is her plan hardly so it mostly only works as a head canon
@@BubblesZap Part of a work is how you interpret it, something that seems a lost art in the information age and beyond. In the past a lot was left up to individual interpretation for books and film. It's a lost art to give the audience _just_ enough to get them thinking, and elaborating.
The fact people dismiss this now with 'that's just head cannon' is a big part of the issue. If you notice, works that explain every little last thing with tons of exposition are some of the least engaging things out there. Most people like being able to mentally engage with a story to _some_ degree.
@@kauske Reminds me of Arcane
I thought they were going to have it turn out that Evelyn was under the control of her brother, who created the Slaver so that the heroes would have a villain to fight, thus showing the public why heroes are needed.
EPM 101
Too obvious. You should read the Rules of Pixar.
One of them is: Think of the first thing to expect and then throw it out the window. Always go for the option that you don’t immediately expect but still makes sense.
Rainpooper Well they clearly broke that rule because they went with the most obvious twist I’ve ever seen. The only part that surprising was the fact that they went with it.
At first, I thought that's what would happen too. But then I realized that would be too obvious, even for Pixar.
Justin Stewart So they went with a more obvious twist?
@@epm1012 See, I thought Evelyn's brother creating the slaver for heroes was going to be the twist. I didn't expect Evelyn, since I was more focused on her brother the entire time.
I liked how the hypno-goggles were just pyro-vision.
not gonna lie - i got chills during the monologue on why superhero stories are positively impactful. this channel really is amazing.
When I first saw the movie, I thought the villain's name was "Screen Slayer." I felt pretty silly after but honestly "screen slayer" makes more sense.
Oh it's not just you. After I recorded the video, I realized that I had accidentally said "Screenslayer" about half of the time and had to rerecord everything.
I totally thought that was his name, too, and it felt really weird hearing it "correctly" upon seeing the film.
The misheard name arguably may even make more sense.
yeah, screenslaver is a ridiculousname, even in a world of superheros.
I'd actually say Screen Slaver makes more sense, since she's using screens to enslave people and all.
I thought that too, when I heard the character's name for the first time in the film I thought the actor had just tripped over their words and added a letter or something, but then I realized I was dumb and the character's name isn't that cool.
I've always said the Incredibles 2's problem is that it's essentially a rehash of the first movie, only with a worse villain.
Don't forget flipped gender roles.
Rehash with too much Jack Jack.
@Zimmit's Fabulous Wonder Hoagies what do you think about the video? Do you think that has substance enough to be a great sequel? And how would you have had the Underminer fulfill a greater role in the incredibles 2? I personally feel like the Underminer is more of a Saturday morning cartoon villain than anything significant. I can't really see him taking center stage in the movie. Although I agree it felt lackluster to end off with him just getting away with no real mention after to who the heck he was. Maybe a short can be made where they try and find him after with a set of other heroes. Either it occurs after or meanwhile the whole screen slaver event. I guess you can write in that they are endorsed by or work for the government. Since having supers in your country but not using them is one of the dumbest things. If we can make theories of how the government could have funded syndrome's work I think we can have secret agent Super 1.
Alright UA-cam, I will watch the video.
Click 3 dots. Click not interested
I like your edits, it plays to a much more structured theme which overarches both movies: that superheroes are flawed but necessary symbol. The buildup in the first movie with syndrome staged what happens when the image is warped by one ignorant fan and the second could’ve expressed another concern by Evelyn, (who’s father would slightly parallel syndrome in his innocence and fascination of supers) in fear of what the image does for the community, the negative effects. That’s what I feel 2 lacked, a core to the story. Not to mention the model swap for Evelyn from megamind
Your cowboy monologue for the villain gave me chills. Don't know why but I feel like it would be too dark and depressing...
Just as dark and depressing as depicting a man jumping off of a building to kill himself...
...like in the first movie.
Dark and depressing can be a good thing for kids because it helps build maturity and it makes the happy ending much more satisfying.
Bruh, in the first movie a teenage girl gets sliced up in a plane turbine, people are so sensitive nowadays.
@@DaDualityofMan Granted, that was done in a comedic way. NO CAPES!
@@DaDualityofMan and we find out she was actually ripped apart by a killer robot made my another teenager with mental health issues
Love how you actually wrote dialogue for the scenes you changed, it really pulls your ideas together
1st time I've heard of you and seen any of your videos. This was a great first impression. That "speech" you gave in place of Evelyn's monologue to Elastagirl left me speechless. All I could say was "wow". I'm so glad this came up on my recommends. Keep it up dude! 👏👍
It’s so simple GOD DAMMIT HOW IS IT THIS EASY TO COMPLETELY CHANGE THE WAY THE FILM PLAYS OUT?
Please don’t use the Lord’s name in vain.
pharmie101 lmao
*pharmie101* Bruh chill out god damn
pharmie101*God Fuckit
I am so impressed with this. Truly amazing where you've thought to take this character, and it makes so much sense
That sounds fantastic! I would love this to be the actual Screenslaver. If only this was what they went with. Even if this isn’t what the villain for The Incredibles 2, this is still a great video, with great ideas. Keep up the amazing work!!!
Can I just say that ‘plot twist’ was super obvious
The Xplodenator yeah I thought it was Winston or Roxan Ritchie but then it got more obvious when Elastigirl
Was catching on because I figured out screensaver was innocent the moment he was unmasked
Even though it was obvious u have to remember their target the kids not adults weather it was obvious or not u have to know if the brother was in on it or not
I watched it with my whole family, I was bothering my mom the whole movie saying it was gonna be her lol, it was so cliche.
@@rebornjm It's actually not angled towards specifically kids. Brad Bird himself stated he found it frustrating that places like iTunes classified it as "Kids and Family" when it should've been classified in the same category as Starwars and Marvel movies. There are swear words in the movie as well, it's definitely angled more at a "family" than it is for "kids." I can understand where the confusion come from though since animated movies in the west usually target kids.
You misunderstand what I mean I mean that they didn’t want it to be an Uber complicated mystery they wanted it to be something that kids could also follow. syndrome was also very obvious with his what he wanted y else would they show him at the beginning of the movie, but these two villains have something that made them different ones motives was purely selfish, the other was because she people to completely rely on people that are super powered. She also hated the role that women were looked at having which was the support role. In a way people immediately believed that screenslaver was in fact male instead of the villain actually being a female, because of the time frame the movie was based in. In truth you see the villain from the 1st time you meet them however you don’t see if the brother was in on it as well because they had different thoughts about the night their dad died but that could have been a lie about how he felt about the situation also he could have been the one to tell his sister what to do to the point where she overthrows her brother, like they wanted you to see all the possibilities along with the older audience knowing who the villain was and having the kids to figure it out.
I liked the suggestion that Greg from Armoured Media made in his review of the film of having Winston be the main villain. I like the idea of a villain who is so obsessed with super heroes that he goes out of his way to create these situations that only a hero could resolve.
This reminds me of the movie Unbreakable
android927 On the other hand, “villain whose villainy derives from their love of heroism” was already done in Incredibles 1.
That's honestly what I thought was going to happen the first time I watched it lol
a bit too predictable, if you ask me
Too predictable, that’s what I assumed was going to happen.
This is a top notch video and I truly enjoyed your re-vamp of the incredibles two plot! Keep up the great work!
Having Helen desperately run after a screenslaver desaster that started on the other half of the city could be very entertaining
Just having Wiston hearing some live emergency news and warning Helen could be enough
That... Sounds much better than what Incredibles 2 went with. I wasn't with you at first, I didn't think Incredibles 2 was great but I didn't pinpoint Screenslaver and her motivation as the weak point buuut you are right. You hit the nail on the head and your suggestion is the best fix with the smallest deviation from the film itself. Subscribed.
Love that sum up about superhero movies. Many ppl just look at them like they are 2 or more guys in costumes beating each other, rather then looking at message they send. ^.^