Potential spoilers
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:38:48 -0800 (PST), Chad Underkoffler
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some spoilerspace for discussion of THE INCREDIBLES:
>
> > Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 17:20:47 -0600
> > From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > So, what did you see that reminded you of Brin's essays?
>
> Okay.
>
> Two primary scenes, one secondary. Essays in mind are the Salon
> essays on LotR and Star Wars, plus "Otherness."
>
> SCENE 1: After Dash vs. his teacher, Helen and Dash are in the
> car driving home. Helen says, "Everybody is special," then Dash
> says, "Which is another way of saying no one is."
>
> SCENE 2: Syndrome is monologing at the captured Mr. Incredible
> about his plans vis-a-vis the Omnidroid. He says that when he
> gets bored of heroing, he'll sell his inventions so that
> everyone can be super. "And when everyone is super, no one will
> be."
>
> SCENE 3: Bob and Helen fighting over Dash's Grade 4
> "graduation." Bob says, "They keep coming up with new ways to
> celebrate mediocrity!"
>
> Now, in the context of the movie, Scene 1 is intended to be
> taken as true. However, Scene 2 is intended to be taken as
> false. Why? (Scene 3 supports Scene 1, I think.)
We finally got a chance to see the movie. (We loved it!)
I see all three of these scenes reinforcing the same point, which is a
different one than Dr. Brin's Salon essays. (Though more on that in a
bit).
The theme I see here in all three scenes is that it is wrong to try to
suppress talents so that no one stands out and everyone can be equally
"special". Dash and Bob (the good guys) want to use their special
talents for good, while the bad guy wants a level playing field where
everyone is special and therefore no one is special.
Perhaps there's some social commentary in there about self-esteem
building trends where everyone is rewarded for participating, rather
than for success, but I don't think the movie goes much deeper than
that.
> I have some thoughts that when Syndrome is using the word
> "super" he means "super-powered" -- note that during his
> Incrediboy phase, he's talking about cool stuff and powers and
> catchphrases, not helping people. Contrast Mr. Incredible's
> actions before the wedding -- on a tear of do-gooding -- and
> even during his underground days as Bob Parr, Insurance Guy.
Certainly Buddy/Syndrome is fixated on the power aspect, rather than
the hero aspect.
> He's a hero, through and through. Sure, he gets a thrill from
> it. But he doesn't lord it over folks, doesn't necessarily think
> he's better than them, or more fit to rule, or anything. Indeed,
> in hero mode, he's incredibly (heh) inclusive in his
> discussions, with a lot of use of "we" and "us" and whatnot.
>
> I pose that Bob -- and the audience -- are meant to interpret
> Syndrome's use of the word "super" as "super-hero," which is
> what makes his statement to be taken as false.
Could be, but I didn't notice anything that would reinforce that
point. Bob, friends, and family are all elites, and the elites are
the ones doing all the (super) hero-ing. Normals really make no key
contributions*. Those elites are quite noble and upstanding, but they
are elites nonetheless. Syndrome's Scene 2 goal was to essentially
render them non-elite by effectively raising everyone else to their
level.
* ie: notice how the military was fighting the robot (albeit
ineffectively), but disappears entirely as soon as the super heroes
show up?
> Now, there's no arguing that the Incredibles are
> fantastically-gifted, and that most people will never be able to
> mimic their abilities. They are only held in check by their
> morality and ethics. This is what related the movie to the SW
> article Dr. Brin did. How is the Incredibles different, or is it
> the same issue there?
Different, I think. IIRC, Dr. Brin's SW articles argue against the
Romantic notion that the elites (whether they be benevolent super
heroes or a noble king) will take care of things for the rest of us,
while he supports the Enlightenment idea that the common man is
empowered to take care of himself.
> The supers have government backing, like the Jedi. They have
> abilities far beyond human, like the Jedi. They are -- at least
> early on -- a law unto themselves. Yet they are different: they
> back away from the public eye when the public no longer wants
> them.
>
> Additionally, and interesting thing: the non-powered guy here --
> Syndrome -- is a genius of such a level as to create devices
> more powerful than supers and also amass a gigantic fortune. He
> is merely unlimited by any morality. Does that change the
> "Jedi-read" above? Possibly.
I can almost read this movie as anti-Brin. If you take Syndrome to
represent the non-super-powered guy here who wants to empower eveyone,
he's essentially the Enlightenment side being depicted as the bad guy
who is fighting on the side of Mediocrity, while the noble Romantic
elites save us and prevail.
B
