Thoughts on “Inside Out” 2 (2024)
A Review by Victor DeBonis
It’s never easy trying to follow up with a masterpiece.
A few instances in cinema have occurred in which a sequel adds to a bona fide classic, such as the second “Godfather” movie and, recently, “Across the Spiderverse.” As a whole, though, it is a challenge.
Naturally, one can debate about whether something is truly a master work, warts and all, but the legacy and impact of a work that is perfect or near it is undeniable. Almost a decade has passed since 2015’s “Inside Out” was released, and most people either have seen it or know what you’re referring to when you mention it. The characters and animation were memorable and wonderful to behold as one would come to expect from Pixar in their strengths. Yet, the innovative spirit, thought-provoking ideas, and emotional weight helped seal it as a modern classic in the heart and mind of myself and others. The relevance of the themes and emotion-related concepts is executed so well that psychology classes are using this movie as part of their curriculum and for good reason.
To me, “Inside Out” is one of those movies almost anyone can benefit or gain something good from viewing. The climax is easily one of my favorite movie moments of all time. I didn’t shed a tear when Mufasa died (Very well-done scene, though), but the water runs hard or wells up strong in my eyes every time I return to what Riley experiences and what Sadness and Joy do and learn near the end of “Inside Out.” Movies are partly made for incredible scenes, such as this.
The movie itself has brought me much happiness and clarity to me in my personal journey and played a part in reviving my love for Disney and animation, especially with what it communicates regarding the importance of both good and difficult emotions as long as it’s done in a balanced way. It’s a movie I wish was shown to my generation when it was younger and becomes increasingly relevant as time goes on, particularly during harder recent times in the past few years. I have encountered people then and particularly now who insist on only expressing one feeling or emotion at all times, and a part of me wishes they would see this movie to see that truly healthy experience of feelings comes from expressing them all in an appropriate and balanced manner.
The success of the original movie made a sequel inevitable, and I was excited when I heard about the release date. The original is one of the few Disney movies I feel deserves a sequel. Putting its success aside, the original does leave enough open to cause me to wonder: What would happen when Riley got older beyond her pre-teen years? What good and bad experiences would she have in her teenage years and beyond? How do Joy, Sadness, and the rest of the emotion crew attempt to adapt and work off of each other as Riley inevitably evolves?
Unlike most Disney films not needing a remake or addition to their story, the original “Inside Out” leaves enough for a story to potentially add to what’s already there. Yet, I was also skeptical about whether the newer film would dare to expand upon the heavier ideas and feelings experienced from before.
Admittedly, a little uncertainty also brewed in my mind when I learned that the director of the previous film and probably one of the best creative minds from Pixar, Pete Docter, wasn’t returning. Kelsey Mann steps into the seat in charge this time around for his feature directorial debut. I applaud his involvement as a storyboard artist for numerous animated shows, such as “Foster’s Home for Imaginary Friends” and he has done jobs for multiple projects for Pixar Animation Studios. The experience of knowing what takes place within the process for bringing an animated project to life is there.
So, how is the sequel to my favorite Pixar film and probably one of my favorite movies, in general?
The good news is this: In my eyes, it is definitely a good movie, and I recommend others to see it.
Where I differ from others is that I don’t think it’s a great one.
Great elements certainly shine in “Inside Out 2” to be sure. Amy Poehler returns to voice the enthusiasm and vibrant spirit belonging to Joy. Similar to the previous film, Poehler breathes with a gusto and optimism that never feels overstated when it easily could have and expresses a hopefulness for the well-being of her fellow colleagues and Riley. Phyllis Smith is delightfully uncertain as Sadness and conveys the subdued happiness at seeing Riley in a good emotional state while also feeling more at home with the other feelings. Lewis Black, once more, is a blast as Anger and releases hints of his amusing aggressiveness through throwing his fists at unexpected times or socking someone when they ask for someone to pinch them because they’re in disbelief. I get hints of Daffy Duck and a similar comedic frustration from Anger, and it increases my enjoyment from the experience.
Tony Hale and Liza Lapira fill the shoes of Fear and Disgust, respectively, and, while some expressions from them sound a tad exaggerated for the characters they’re portraying in a couple of moments, they perform fine, overall.
The terrific animation also helps her and the other voice actors portraying the other emotions because, as convincing as these performers are in channeling the essence and personalities needed for these feelings, the fluid movements match these characters to a tee and add charm to them. Sadness amusingly flops to the ground or buries her head from weariness. Fear frantically hops up high enough to express to every living soul about his desire to escape a terrible situation. Well-designed expressions push these characters towards representing each emotion close to what any viewer might expect from them, and they help in driving the humor and soul of them.
The wonder of the first film translates well here, too, whenever it explores a new section of adolescence not previously explored in the original. The location of where specific memories go or float to is beautifully designed in a waterfall-like environment and blends with colorful wires, presenting a power that feels strong but warm at the same time. Additionally, when Riley experiences anxiety and grapples with constant worries about what might happen if this scenario happens or another scenario happens, there’s an area of her mind in which creatures are literally drawing or sketching possible outcomes for her to visualize. This is a hugely creative method to present this experience, but, as someone who has often experienced anxiousness, I can also confirm it as viciously accurate.
Speaking of which, Maya Hawke voices the new emotion, Anxiety, and speaks her thoughts in a rapid-fire speed and expresses uncertainty in spite of the overly stretched grin on her face. She is great at depicting the jittery and worrisome demeanor needed for a character who is well-intended and wants to do good for Riley but gets lost through her yearning to overly control what she can’t. Anxiety may be my favorite part of this movie partly due to her actions’ ability to represent what teenagers and adults experience when they undergo anxiousness. Again, I have often experienced anxious feelings and occasionally grapple with it when I am wondering about how something will turn out or how I can best approach it, and the nervousness and yearning of Anxiety to bring control for someone certainly hits close to home and probably does for other adults who experience similar feelings.
All of this sounds great on the surface. So, why don’t I love this movie nearly as much as the first, you may ask? My answer pinpoints mostly to the writing. In all fairness, this is not overall bad writing by any means, and the story does advance with certain ideas about getting older and adapting to unexpected changes as is hoped for. The problem simply centers from this entry not having the emotional weight of the previous movie.
When a dramatic moment happened in the original film, the movie knew to take its time and let the heaviness or loss of the moment linger long enough for the power of it to settle in. We get the right amount of time to know Bing Bong and love him through echoing the innocence of childhood, and, when he vanishes in the previous movie, the scene stays to show the heartbreaking yet necessary disappearing of him and Joy’s pained reaction at losing her friend long enough for its impact to be felt. When Riley tears up or feels angry about disconnecting with a friend from back home, the movie knew the importance of letting that moment stay and breathe for a few seconds in order for the harder emotions to be experienced.
This time around, dramatic scenes do still happen, but there’s not as much quietness to them as there previously was. In one moment, Riley discovers something surprising about her friends from junior high moving on to high school, and she has a moment to experience something representing her feeling greater sadness from this, but the scene cuts quickly to her discovering a new “potential” friend. There are other times in which it seemed as though Riley was going to make a drastic choice, resulting in devastating consequences, or moments in which it seems as though she’s going to lose something incredibly important to her, but the outcome usually doesn’t show her getting into much or any trouble for it. Joy experiences a couple of moments in which she expresses deep doubts, but they feel easily resolved.
The stakes simply don’t feel as high in this film as they did in the other one.
To give credit where it’s due, the climax to this film is rather well-done, overall, and it has a sense of urgency to it and is appropriately presented with what occurs and probably rings true for those who experience something similar in pushing themselves too far. Aside from this scene, though, the story moves too quickly to let the deeper emotional weight settle in. Part of the magic of the original film traced from the story not being afraid to let a heavier moment or emotion take over for longer. This is a bold move, especially in an age in which many people are trying to have their media look as neat as possible without diving more into the darker aspects.
So, to see this idea not translated over to this movie was somewhat disappointing.
The newer characters aren’t as memorable, either. Anxiety, as aforementioned, is well done. There are also a few newer characters relating to Riley’s youth who are rather hilarious and are animated rather well in matching the medium from which they came. One specific character earned my biggest chuckle from me remembering watching certain shows in my early childhood and pondering what this joke brings up. In contrast, however, the other newer emotions, such as Envy and Ennui, are voiced fine, but they don’t have any funny lines and didn’t bring too much to the story until the last moments. They seem to take a backseat as Anxiety does most of the actions driving the story forward.
All in all, “Inside Out 2” carries much of the same spirit and heart as the first one. It is amusing and occasionally heartwarming to see where Riley’s path is going, and the additions to the world of her mind and the charm of the emotion characters remains intact. However, I feel I’m unique from some other people around me at this time in that I don’t see this as a movie on par with the first one, and I honestly don’t think it comes close to surpassing it. The heart pounds steadily with this one, and Anxiety plays a big role in making this work, particularly through moments in which others can relate. However, some who expect a heaviness or tear-jerking, thought-provoking experience on par with the first one may experience disappointment. For what this movie does and is, though, it works well enough.
One last thing I want to touch upon for a second: I personally think Pixar should try to encourage more original stories going forward. One of the statements I am hearing from a few voices in the discourse surrounding this movie is that this is a return to form for Pixar and that it is a sign of hope for helping to bring Disney out of the very bad state it’s in, right now. I am having a hard time understanding this train of thought.
For one thing, original Pixar movies not coming from a franchise, such as “Luca” and “Soul” and “Turning Red” have received positive feedback. “Turning Red” was one of my favorite movies from 2022, and “Soul” possessed an innovative presence not too different from the “Inside Out” films. For another, coming from a franchise or existing IP doesn’t automatically guarantee great quality from its story. “Lightyear” was a spin-off from the beloved “Toy Story” franchise, and it ultimately didn’t work for many, partly due to its lackluster story and action. There has been some criticism for the like of movies, such as “Turning Red” for it feeling too quirky and over-the-top for some audience members, but I argue that this movie was doing something different with its anime-like approach and perspective and had a different feel from so many Pixar movies and family movies up until the point in which it was released. And, I believe Disney made a huge mistake when it pushed those original movies to streaming only when they all would’ve benefited more from being shown on the big screen for months instead of one or two weeks (Limiting other movies to being in theaters for 2 or 3 weeks instead of months to send to streaming as soon as possible is another foolish mistake that companies are making and is hurting theater business, but that’s a topic for another day).
I hear about more sequels outside of Pixar coming from Disney in the future, such as “Moana 2” and “Zootopia 2.” I like those movies fine, and I’m happy for the box office business that “Inside Out 2” is doing at the time of this release. Despite my critique, it is a good movie deserving of good turnout.
Yet, even if I had loved this movie every bit as I did the first one, I think I would still be wondering: What good is coming from relying on only telling stories in the forms of sequels to franchises that have been done before instead of taking greater chances?
I recognize that Disney is not in a good spot, right now. Putting aside the lackluster box office returns for many films from the studio from last year (despite some coming from ones that I liked or loved), the studio has been turning in many mediocre movies and shows for the past few years. It pains me to see this someone as who has and will always love Disney films and shows and holds many of the stories and characters, particularly from the animated realm, close and dear to my heart.
Naturally, I hope Disney works on making more good movies for the future in Pixar and otherwise, IP-related or not.
My suggestion, though, is this: Please continue to go to the theater to support recommended films, such as this one, but to also show the same love and support for original stories not coming from an IP and newer filmmakers trying to get their voices heard by going to them as well. Don’t wait for streaming. If it interests you and is being shown in a theater, go see it there.
Thank you.
Grade for “Inside Out 2”: B