Movie Review

Emotions run wild in brilliantly heartfelt sequel Inside Out 2

Joy (Amy Poehler) and Anxiety (Maya Hawke) in Inside Out 2.

Photo courtesy of Pixar

For all of the great films that Pixar has put out over the past 30 years, the one thing they haven’t quite mastered are sequels. The continuing success of the Toy Story series is the exception that proves the rule, as sequels to Cars, Monsters Inc., The Incredibles, and Finding Nemo have all failed to measure up to the originals. So it is with trepidation that fans of 2015’s instant classic Inside Out approach its nine-years-in-the-making sequel, Inside Out 2.

I’m happy to report that no such anxiety is needed, as the film builds upon the original in numerous fantastic ways. Despite there being nine years between films, Riley (Kensington Tallman) has only aged two years, from 11 to 13. Her core emotions – Joy (Amy Poehler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Anger (Lewis Black), Fear (Tony Hale), and Disgust (Liza Lapira) – are working in harmony to keep Riley level-headed as she navigates middle school and playing hockey.

That equilibrium is threatened when the onset of puberty for Riley brings in new emotions, like Anxiety (Maya Hawke), Envy (Ayo Edebiri), Embarrassment (Paul Walter Hauser), and Ennui (Adèle Exarchopoulos). Anxiety in particular seems bent on being in charge of Riley’s mind, especially when she gets invited to a hockey camp with a chance to impress her possible future coach and teammates. Joy and the other original emotions must fight for control, or risk losing Riley to the dark recesses of her brain.

Directed by Kelsey Mann and written by Dave Holstein and Meg LeFauve, the film proves that Inside Out is the most mature and relatable of all Pixar franchises. The changes the filmmakers make to advance the story are all sensible, keeping the heart of all of the returning characters intact while still allowing for growth and change. This is the second Pixar film to address puberty (following 2022’s Turning Red), and they show again how adept they are at addressing the touchy subject in a lighthearted but still honest way.

The film adds on the concept of all of Riley’s life experiences coalescing into a core belief system, and the idea is so simple and wonderfully conceived that it fits right in with everything established in the first film. While the plot involving the emotions inside Riley’s brain follows a similar trajectory to the original, it’s the details that keep the film humming. The physical manifestation of abstract ideas like stream of consciousness, brainstorm, and sarcasm demonstrate the outside-of-the-box thinking at Pixar, as well as the unique flexibility that animation provides.

The brilliance of the film lies in how expertly it melds the two worlds of the story. There is a constant back-and-forth between what Riley’s emotions are doing inside her brain and how that affects her in the real world, and the results are hilarious, intense, and poignant. Anyone who is or has a teenager will recognize all too well the menace that Anxiety is in the film, and the way the filmmakers portray it both in and outside Riley’s brain is exceedingly well done.

There are times when the person playing a voice character can be negligible, but that is not the case here. Poehler, Smith, and Black remain the perfect matches for Joy, Sadness, and Anger, respectively. Hale and Lapira, taking over for Bill Hader and Mindy Kaling as Fear and Disgust, measure up well to their predecessors. Each of the new emotion voices are also great, especially Hawke and Exarchopoulos, and Tallman, Diane Lane, and Kyle Chandler are easy to believe as Riley and her family.

When the first Inside Out was announced, the idea of emotions being anthropomorphized seemed very strange. Now, two films later, it is the most natural thing in the world, and proof yet again that Pixar remains the gold standard in animation. With the rich complexity of the brain to play with and plenty of years left for Riley to grow up, it’s conceivable that Inside Out can be mined for multiple other sequels in the future.

---

Inside Out 2 opens in theaters on June 14.

movies film reviews

Movie Review

Much-anticipated film sequel Gladiator II tells a very familiar story

Photo courtesy of Paramount Pictures

Paul Mescal in Gladiator II.

There are some films for which making a sequel is natural, and others where a follow-up is wholly unnecessary. Gladiator, which made both tons of money and was named Best Picture at the Oscars, told an impactful stand-alone story that ended with the protagonist dead and no real loose ends. And yet because there’s always more money to be made, here we are 24 years later with Gladiator II.

The lead character this time around is Lucius (Paul Mescal), a general in a North African army who becomes a prisoner of war when the Roman army led by Marcus Acacius (Pedro Pascal) bests him and his troops in battle. Taken back to Rome, he is put in the pool of captured men forced to fight at the Colosseum for the amusement of twin emperors Geta (Joseph Quinn) and Caracella (Fred Hechinger).

Lucius is controlled by Macrinus (Denzel Washington), an ambitious schemer who bets liberally on his prized fighter and always has an eye to move up in the world. Meanwhile, Lucilla (Connie Nielsen), the sister of Emperor Commodus from the first film, is now married to Marcus Acacius and has a unique connection with Lucius that is fairly obvious from the get-go.

Directed once again by Ridley Scott and written by David Scarpa, the film commits a number of sins throughout its 150-minute running time, the most blatant of which is that, aside from a few embellishments, it essentially tells the same story as the first film. Lucius, like Maximus, is a deposed military leader who’s out for revenge on the person who killed his family. Instead of one obnoxious emperor, there are now two. And the only way for Lucius to earn his freedom is to fight his way out.

Stories told in the same world can echo each other and, if done well, overcome those similarities. But Gladiator II is shockingly boring for a purported sword-and-sandals epic. Scott and his team try to introduce new elements to the fights, like a gladiator riding a rhinoceros or a ship battle inside the Colosseum (with sharks!), but most of the sequences are inert with no propulsion to them.

The action fails because none of the relationships in the film amount to much. There are stand-out characters like Macrinus and the twin emperors, but instead of creating antipathy or strong feelings of triumph or defeat, the story just kind of happens without any sense of excitement or importance. Much of that issue lies at the feet of Lucius, who simply doesn’t inspire in the same way that Russell Crowe’s Maximus did.

Mescal is a fine actor who’s done good work in more intimate roles, but he’s not up to the task of being an action star, at least not in this film. Any bombast he shows with the character feels forced, and the story doesn’t give him enough opportunities to counteract that lack. Washington, however, fills up the screen with his charisma, and it’s during his scenes that the film comes closest to being rousing. Quinn and Hechinger are a lot of fun as the twin emperors, but in the end they feel like retreads of Joaquin Phoenix from the original.

Any sequel should have a purpose that sets it apart from what came before, but Scott, Scarpa, and the rest of their team fail in that respect in Gladiator II. It’s a mostly lifeless film that delivers scenes that would be exciting if they had any kind of good story to back them up.

---

Gladiator II opens in theaters on November 22.

movies film