![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The plot description is WAY too long, with numerous non-essential details. This is an encyclopedia article, not Cliff's Notes (sp?). I first read this article right after watching the movie, and found it extremely tedious. Not only was virtually everything I saw in the movie present here, but even stuff I didn't notice. I think this article has everything needed to become a Good Article, but it has way too much of it. :-) Mdotley 19:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I rewrote the plot. I agree; it was way too long, had far too many details; even worse than the original Dead Man's Chest article. Hope this helps. Nqnpipnr 00:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
No offense, but while it's better, it still could be a lot better. I don't know; for some reason, animation film articles get the most rambling of plot summaries, and while this is far from the worst out there, it still could be better. I'll try and clean it up later today. Nqnpipnr 14:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
(Above section reinstated to the main talk page from /Archive2 because IP users keep overextending the Plot section. Would any future archivers please keep this section on this page. -- Korax1214 ( talk) 17:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC))
I wish people (especially anonymous IP editors) would realise the purpose of the Plot section; it's supposed to be a summary of the major plot points, not a detailed blow-by-blow account of every last scene. I've just had to do a revert for the second time in under 36 hours. This is an encyclopaedia, not the IMDb. -- Korax1214 ( talk) 16:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I have written an under 400 word plot summary and posted it, but it was removed and replaced by the original. I still have a copy and would post it again, but it would probably be removed again. If you want it back, please write to "Dagihiker@yahoo.com" with the subject "wikipedia" thanks.
One trivium says the following: " Mirage begins to say, 'Oh, hello, you must be Mrs. Incredible.' " But since (as this item admits) she doesn't complete the sentence, how do we know that this is in fact what she was going to say, and not "Mrs. Parr"? 217.171.129.69 ( talk) 15:39, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
What happened with the soundtrack info? This is probably Giacchino's most popular score and it doesn't have a section? -- Surten ( talk) 05:37, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Surten
Some of the extras mentioned seem to be absent from the Region 2 (Europe) version of the DVD, namely:
Also, I for one have only seen the Region 2 version in widescreen, not 4:3. -- Korax1214 ( talk) 14:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
(Please reply here as I rarely log in, let alone and never check my talk page.)
I've just been to the official Disney website for the DVD, th try and find out if the Vowellet essay and the character interviews are on the region-2 disc, and if so where; I couldn't look at it long enough to navigate it, whoever thought that having blue hyperlinks on a bright red background is A Good Idea needs to have his head examined, and his artistic licence revoked. :-) -- 217.171.129.79 ( talk) 04:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The aforementioned DVD extras don't appear on my copy of the Region 4 widescreen release. 220.253.197.112 ( talk) 03:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure that at one point, the "DVD Extras" section stated (correctly) that Vowellet isn't on the Region 2 DVD; but if so, somebody has reverted it. — 188.29.166.249 ( talk) 20:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
I add a {verylong} tag to the beginning of the article, and a few hours later someone makes it even longer by expanding the Plot section!
Perhaps I should have added a {stub} tag instead, maybe then he would have shortened it. :-) 217.171.129.69 ( talk) 00:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I've deleted the two "films set in..." category tags, because the clues indicating that the main part is set in a particular year or decade all point in different directions; e.g. Bob is reading a newspaper dated "196x", and later learns of the deaths (in the late 1950s) of two superhero friends of his who were guests at his wedding 15 years earlier; but the movie also features things such as personal computers (first introduced in the late 1970s), mobile phones (early 1980s, I think), flat-screen TVs (1990s), and (in the Jack-Jack Attack short) CDs (1983).
Hence, as per the IMDb board thread "Was this set in the early 80's?" (meeds login to view), the only thing that's clear about this movie's time period it that it's ambiguous (perhaps deliberately so?), thus "films set in..." tags are innappropriate for this article. -- 217.171.129.73 ( talk) 03:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Futuristic technology in "the present" is a standard feature of the superhero setting. I think it's clear that they were being faithful to the trope by giving their alternate 1960's actual technological artifacts from 10-30 years later (as opposed to the typical way-out "super science" that showed up in actual 1960's comic books). The opening/wedding sequence has a pretty strong 1950's vibe. Markjreed ( talk) 00:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
If the Plot section (which looks to me to be longer than the entire rest of the page) were to be split off into Plot of The Incredibles, that might solve the length problem. Trouble is of course that it would also break the flow.
Discuss. -- 217.171.129.74 ( talk) 05:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Jun 19, 2007, been a while... any more current info on this possibility that could make it into the article?
Interview with Brad Bird on possibility of sequel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cowicide ( talk • contribs) 12:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
From the looks of it, they aren't gonna make an Incredibles 2 anytime soon. 74.33.174.133 ( talk) 13:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Who would want to make a sequel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benschar ( talk • contribs) 11:44, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
I've at least twice found the end of the Plot section suggesting that it's Syndrome's cape, rather than Syndrome himself, that gets killed, and have corrected this; but it keeps getting put back!
I wish some people would take more care in editing. -- Korax1214 ( talk) 07:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
There's an edit war currently underway on List of Pixar film references; I've deleted the nonsense about the "Pizza Planet truck sighting", only for someone to re-insert it (this has happened twice so far); apparently the other editor believes that a "vaguely seen" something for which "you have to look really hard" is enough to "prove" this myth true. (It isn't for me; to my mind, for the Pizza Planet truck to be present someone actually has to see it, not merely catch a "vague" glimpse which their imagination could conceivably twist into anything they want to see.)
There's a cite on that page where someone from the LA Times states that there's been a Pizza Planet Truck in "every Pixar movie"; but what the inserter of the cite (carefully?) omitted to mention is that the article cited was published in 2003, so should really be read as "every Pixar movie up to and including Finding Nemo". -- 92.40.122.216 ( talk) 13:00, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
It's happened again, by a different user this time; strange how those who claim the truck is there always claim a "blur" or "vague" sighting, or something conveniently unidentifiable like that. -- 92.40.122.216 ( talk) 17:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Lee Unkrich has confirmed on his Twitter that this is the only Pixar film the truck does not appear in. The source for that is on the Pixar Film References page. This should sort things out. trainfan01 21:04, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
I remember when this film came out many people were highly critical about the possible copyright infringement in regards The Fantastic Four, re;
Agreed, the players/powers have been switched around, and Dash and Human Torch have different powers, but it was felt that this was to avoid an obvious copyright battle. I remember reading (in Comic Shop News I believe, although I no longer have the article in question) that Stan Lee sought legal advice in regards the matter, but was told that he would have to prove conclusively that Pixar knew of The Fantastic Four and so, regretably, he had to let the matter drop.
I was wondering if anyone had the article I mentioned, or a similar article, and would put this in the Wiki article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by D f cornish ( talk • contribs) 04:42, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Another similarity is that the main villain is not a Super himself, but uses Technology to emulate such Powers (Syndrome, Dr Doom)-- 194.106.137.50 ( talk) 08:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
A claim in the Critics subsection about the makers of the Fantastic Four movie having to "make significant script changes and add more special effects because of similarities to the storyline of The Incredibles" was supported by a reference ( http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0444,winter2,58041,20.html) that makes no mention, in any capacity, to The Fantastic Four, comics or film. For now, I have removed the reference and asked for proper citation. 24.225.106.239 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC).
I have added two new sections to this article in hopes of expanding it a little more. The first is inspiration, which is about Brad Bird and how he was inspired to write the Incredibles. The second is Problems and talks about the problems with the production. If anybody has any suggestions on those two sections, let me know. I got the info from a book called To Infinity and Beyond. Burton517 ( talk) 21:12, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Why there are no character images for Mr. incredible? Even in the separate characters pages. Thanks Yosef1987 ( talk) 15:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Forgive me if I just missed this, but are we not doing spoiler warnings anymore? I couldn't find the template anywhere. Or is it assumed that, duh, it's a spoiler, because it says, "Plot"? -- 68.183.138.63 ( talk) 04:41, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Most of the character profiles mention a short comic called Holiday Heroes. I cant find t on google. Does anyone know who wrote or published it? Bosco13
I have noticed similarites between the James Bond movie You Only Live Twice and The Incredibles (music for example). Can someone please varify this it has been bugging me for ages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.227.225.153 ( talk) 00:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't remember it ever being confirmed that the movie begins in 1979, and the main plot takes place in 1994-1995. I also don't ever remember it being specified that Bob visited Edna specifically on October 12th. This seems like unfounded research to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.16.170.74 ( talk) 05:42, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
I come with this proposal to merge the list of characters per several reasons. The list fails to meet Wikipedia:Notability, since the characters only appear in just one film and a couple of related video games. The article has no sections dedicated to real world content, discussing the significance of the characters outside The Incredibles. For this reason, the list also violates Wikipedia:Writing about fiction. It seems that the list still exists just because a group of fans that have not managed to prove the notability of the characters to deserve a separate list. Thoughts? -- LoЯd ۞pεth 08:30, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
For some reason my edits linking this film to Atlas Shrugged and the Watchmen have repeatedly been reverted. My first question to whoever keeps doing this is 'have you fucking read either Atlas Shrugged or the Watchmen????' If you had read either you would realise that the fact these texts influenced the film is really fucking obvious and you would therefore not get in the way of me trying to disseminate useful information about the film. That is all. Vulpesinculta51 ( talk) 05:18, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
At The End Of Finding Nemo at Cinemas Just Before The Teaser Coming Soon From The Creators Of Toy Story, A Bug's Life, Toy Story 2, Monsters Inc and Finding Nemo Filmed On 19th August 1999 4.00pm Phone Rings Man On Phone: Mr Incredible We Need Your Help 4.02pm Mr Incredible Puts On His Super Suit 4.05pm Elastigirl: Honey Come To Dinner 4.08pm 1.Pants Into Tights 2.Punch The Table 3.Jerking Around 4.Moving His Chair 5.Stomp His Foot 6.Sit In His Chair 7.Crawls 8.Hitting The Chair 4.10pm Belt Is On and Belt Comes Off Destorying The Lamp In The Room North America South America and Oceania 1:59 Europe Africa and Asia 1:18
File:The Incredibles (2004 animated feature film).jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.222.79.93 ( talk) 17:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: TonyTheTiger ( talk · contribs) 11:48, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
I'll do this review.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 11:48, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Alright i added a few lists, but what exactly am i supposed to do with the references? Koala15 ( talk) 14:35, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Well it looks like the references have been fixed thanks to Carniolus. Koala15 ( talk) 15:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Alright, i think i fixed it all. Koala15 ( talk) 19:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Alright, i fixed it. Koala15 ( talk) 14:20, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
It looks like someone else fixed it already. Koala15 ( talk) 17:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I cannot find any DVD sales or anything like that, but i think i fixed most of what you mentioned. Koala15 ( talk) 14:43, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Add --
TonyTheTiger (
T/
C/
WP:FOUR/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:WAWARD)
15:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
{{
personality rights}}
to
File:Brad bird cropped 2009.jpg.
Is there anything else that needs to be fixed? Koala15 ( talk) 14:29, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
No i did not ignore them i just can't do some of them, Like i can't find the DVD sales or which awards the score won. Koala15 ( talk) 15:21, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok i think i fixed most of it, tell me what i missed. Koala15 ( talk) 15:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok to answer that i think i have covered everything that i can. Koala15 ( talk) 00:06, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
The "island" is mentioned several times in the 4th paragraph and i fixed the Travers comment. Koala15 ( talk) 17:08, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, i fixed it. Koala15 ( talk) 03:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I think you should tell how to beat the game The Incredibles.I also think you should lable the levels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.26.148.215 ( talk) 23:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I polished the plot summary a bit and trimmed it down to 620 words. As it says in the invisible note at the top of the plot summary section, a Wikipedia plot summary is supposed to be between 400 and 700 words. Let's try to keep it short and sweet, Thanks, Invertzoo ( talk) 23:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
UPDATE: Hmm. I see User:Koala15 simply reverted all my changes without an edit summary and without any kind of comment on this talk page. That is not appropriate Wikipedia behavior. Let me find out what is going on. Invertzoo ( talk) 01:13, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
> On his way to marry Helen (also known as "Elastigirl"), Robert "Bob" Parr, better known as Mr. Incredible
Why do these people have pseudonyms? Are they superheroes? Criminals? Pop artists?
> saves a suicidal man
How did that work out? Did the guy thank him?
> and stops an el train from a potential accident when saving his intrusive biggest fan, Buddy Pine
What does "intrusive biggest fan" mean?
> from being blown up by a bomb planted on him by criminal Bomb Voyage.
Why should we care what the criminal's name is? Does he appear again later in the movie?
> After marrying Helen, countless lawsuits ... results in the creation of a relocation program
The lawsuits married Helen?
> for collateral damage and civil unrest from their good deeds
What caused the civil unrest? Is it related to the collateral damage, or is it a separate thing that was somehow caused by good deeds?
> Rejuvenated, Bob's relationship with his family improves
Bob's relationship with his family is rejuvenated?
> Mirage is working for Buddy, now an amoral super villain called Syndrome.
Syndrome sends his robot out to kill superheroes. How is that only Amoral and not IMmoral?
> Syndrome intends to perfect the Omnidroid ... and defeat it while manipulating its controls to become a hero himself
Where? In his back yard? How will that make him a hero?
> and then sell his inventions to the public so everyone will become equally "super", making the term meaningless.
What does that have to do with the plot?
> Bob sneaks into Syndrome's base, finding a big-screen computer where he uses the password "Kronos" left scrawled on a wall by a dead Super, Gazerbeam.
> Mirage, annoyed with Syndrome's selfishness, releases Bob
That's it? All it took for her to betray her employer was a little annoyance at his selfishness? That doesn't sound like much of a reason.
> the Parrs find Syndrome has Jack-Jack and intends on raising him as his own sidekick to seek revenge on the family, only for Jack-Jack's own morphing superpowers to manifest.
What does "only for Jack-Jack's own morphing superpowers to manifest" apply to? Is that the reason Syndrome wants to raise Jack-Jack? Does it mean the manifestation of Jack-Jack's powers somehow thwarts whatever the Parrs were trying to achieve in finding Syndrome?
> Helen rescues Jack-Jack
Really? She rescued Jack-Jack all by herself? Bob had nothing to do with it at all?
> and Bob kills Syndrome by throwing his car at his jet
Whose car? Whose jet?
> causing Syndrome's cape to get caught in its engine, which sucks him in.
Does he get killed? Or did he invent a protective suit that saves him for the sequel? And what happens after the engine stops? Does the jet keep floating in mid-air?
— Coder Dan ( talk) 23:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
How about I send this as a request:
"One day, Bob loses his temper at his supervisor when he refused to let him to foil a mugging, dismissing Bob as a result. Rick leaves Bob to fend for himself and then offers Bob a chance to relocate, which Bob sadly refuses."
Anything to alter it. I'm not making you to do this. It's just a request 81.97.18.158 ( talk) 17:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Lg16spears, you added information on The Incredibles 2 being announced for a Summer 2016 release and provided a source for this news.
However, I did further research into this and uncovered this article at Ecumenical News which is mentioned by the source you linked and found the Ecumenical News article cites its source of information from a KpopStarz article ("KpopStarz spilled plot spoilers") which takes its synopsis of the film from an "Ideas Wiki" on Wikia that anyone could add made-up ideas to. It is of my opinion that the information across the three articles is false, and is just the result of the writer of the KpopStarz article (somehow) mistaking the made-up fan ideas for The Incredibles 2 on the Ideas Wiki for legitimate information. -- Andromedabluesphere440 ( talk) 18:36, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
DAMN YOU WIKI IDEA, YOU GOT US FOR THIS. Lg16spears ( talk) 18:53, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
No listing of The Incredibles: Achieving the Incredible pre-theatrical release promo DVD; I believe it was packed in with Variety Magazine - no packaging, plain paper sleeve. Includes a 20 minutes feature of same name, Incredible Press (images of various newspaper articles about the upcoming movie), Incredible Art Gallery, and Incredible Music. The disc volume label is "THE_INCREDIBLES" with a creation date listed as 10/23/2004 3:10:23 AM, Single-Sided Single-Layer DVD (1.26 GB), regions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and no copy protection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.164.59.189 ( talk) 12:42, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Incredibles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
The reference of the infomation about AFI's 10 Top 10 nomination is not valid yet. Please, allow me to change it to this link: [1].
Dr.saze ( talk) 06:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Why does "Hum Hain Lajawab" redirect to this article? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with this film, and instead should go directly to Hum Hain Lajawab or Hum Hain Lajawab (1984 film). The film is right now is featured in the "if you're looking for" section at the top of this article, although the phrase is not. Who knows? Maybe there's a reason for this I'm not aware of. Cheers! Luthien22 ( talk) 21:23, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Is it alright if we create a franchise article for The Incredibles the same way we have one for Finding Nemo and Monsters, Inc.? The series definitely has enough material to qualify for one. I would gladly contribute to the article if one was made. Zucat ( talk) 17:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Incredibles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Incredibles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Geraldo Perez: regarding this edit, how are the reviews just "mostly" positive? The reception section quotes a couple negative reviews, but if there are very few negative reviews that exist and many positive ones, then the reception is poorly summarized by "mostly positive". It also received some pretty prestigious awards; doesn't that indicate "critical acclaim"?
Also, I think #Themes is a large enough section to have a few words about it in the lead. It was previously tied to critical reviews, but it doesn't need to be. Rhinopias ( talk) 20:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
The film received widespread approval from critics and audiences …", including the highest possible CinemaScoreas you proposed, looks fine for lead section of article. I still don't think it necessary in the reception section to add anything beyond the facts already presented as that is sufficient to get the point across. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 03:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi there. I'd like to ask for an experienced GA reviewer to comment on whether the length of the Violet Parr article poses a barrier to GA status. See Talk:Violet Parr/GA1 for more information. Thanks! Mz7 ( talk) 08:34, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
I've removed a line from the end of the plot summary about the final scene serving as a "teaser" (linked to teaser campaign) a couple times now, but it has gotten re-added repeatedly. Rather than edit-war, I'd like to hear whether other interested editors feel it belongs or not.
My position is that (1) it doesn't fit the definition of a "teaser campaign", and (2) even if it did, and the scene were added in anticipation of a potential second film, it's still more or less a production note, not part of the plot, and so it still doesn't really belong in the plot summary. The article has an entire section devoted to discussing the sequel - there's no reason it needs to go in the plot section, and it seems out of place there to me.
Thoughts? -- Fru1tbat ( talk) 17:25, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
I have no skill to know how to do it, but I think that this anecdote should be added somewhere. See below.
Brad Bird told The McKinsey Quarterly in 2008 [2], “The Incredibles was everything that computer-generated animation had trouble doing. It had human characters. It had hair. It had fire. It had a massive number of sets. The technical team took one look and thought, ‘This will take ten years and cost $500 million. How are we possibly going to do this?’
“So I said, ‘Give us the black sheep. I want artists who are frustrated. I want ones who have another way of doing things that nobody’s listening to. Give us all the guys who are probably headed out the door’. A lot of them were malcontents because they saw different ways of doing things, but there was little opportunity to try them, since the established way was working very, very well.
“We gave the black sheep a chance to prove their theories, and we changed the way a number of things are done here (at Pixar). For less money per minute than was spent on the previous film, Finding Nemo, we did a movie that had three times the number of sets and had everything that was hard to do. All this because the heads of Pixar gave us leave to try crazy ideas.
“One of those ideas was that we didn’t have to make something that would work from every angle. Not all shots are created equal. Certain shots need to be perfect. Others need to be very good. And there are some that only need to be good enough to not break the spell.”
References
I disagree with this reversion. Between 2000 & 2004 is itself a considerable period of time, during which progress was made in animation. I can't find it right now, but I'm also pretty sure there's a policy which says vague dates should be avoided as well. Clarification in an encyclopedia is a good thing, and reversion when such clarification is asked for is a bad thing. Chaheel Riens ( talk) 11:22, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I am new to editing Wikipedia pages. For one of my assignments, I was tasked with taking a look at a Wikipedia page and looking through its contents as well as contributing an idea that may help the page. I was just researching through this page's older edits, and was wondering why the Character section was deleted? I think that having a personality description of the Incredibles characters would be beneficial to new and returning fans of the series. It could also help to understand the returning characters that reappear in the second film, or it could give some interesting facts about the personality traits of everyone in the movie. I also noticed that the Major Themes section was deleted as well? I think that maybe it could be interesting to talk about the philosophy behind all of the mature themes in the film. I think that these could be added back to the page to give more information about various elements of this beloved story. Just a simple suggestion. Thanks! :) T.J. Reviewer ( talk) 21:53, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello. While the plot section should follow WP:FILMPLOT, I'm thinking we should find a reliable source to support Syndrome's death (i.e. audio commentaries, articles, interviews, etc.), since the guideline does mention "secondary sources must be used for all other cases". Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 19:54, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
It was Ewa Fröling 173.198.62.73 ( talk) 21:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The plot description is WAY too long, with numerous non-essential details. This is an encyclopedia article, not Cliff's Notes (sp?). I first read this article right after watching the movie, and found it extremely tedious. Not only was virtually everything I saw in the movie present here, but even stuff I didn't notice. I think this article has everything needed to become a Good Article, but it has way too much of it. :-) Mdotley 19:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I rewrote the plot. I agree; it was way too long, had far too many details; even worse than the original Dead Man's Chest article. Hope this helps. Nqnpipnr 00:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
No offense, but while it's better, it still could be a lot better. I don't know; for some reason, animation film articles get the most rambling of plot summaries, and while this is far from the worst out there, it still could be better. I'll try and clean it up later today. Nqnpipnr 14:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
(Above section reinstated to the main talk page from /Archive2 because IP users keep overextending the Plot section. Would any future archivers please keep this section on this page. -- Korax1214 ( talk) 17:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC))
I wish people (especially anonymous IP editors) would realise the purpose of the Plot section; it's supposed to be a summary of the major plot points, not a detailed blow-by-blow account of every last scene. I've just had to do a revert for the second time in under 36 hours. This is an encyclopaedia, not the IMDb. -- Korax1214 ( talk) 16:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I have written an under 400 word plot summary and posted it, but it was removed and replaced by the original. I still have a copy and would post it again, but it would probably be removed again. If you want it back, please write to "Dagihiker@yahoo.com" with the subject "wikipedia" thanks.
One trivium says the following: " Mirage begins to say, 'Oh, hello, you must be Mrs. Incredible.' " But since (as this item admits) she doesn't complete the sentence, how do we know that this is in fact what she was going to say, and not "Mrs. Parr"? 217.171.129.69 ( talk) 15:39, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
What happened with the soundtrack info? This is probably Giacchino's most popular score and it doesn't have a section? -- Surten ( talk) 05:37, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Surten
Some of the extras mentioned seem to be absent from the Region 2 (Europe) version of the DVD, namely:
Also, I for one have only seen the Region 2 version in widescreen, not 4:3. -- Korax1214 ( talk) 14:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
(Please reply here as I rarely log in, let alone and never check my talk page.)
I've just been to the official Disney website for the DVD, th try and find out if the Vowellet essay and the character interviews are on the region-2 disc, and if so where; I couldn't look at it long enough to navigate it, whoever thought that having blue hyperlinks on a bright red background is A Good Idea needs to have his head examined, and his artistic licence revoked. :-) -- 217.171.129.79 ( talk) 04:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The aforementioned DVD extras don't appear on my copy of the Region 4 widescreen release. 220.253.197.112 ( talk) 03:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure that at one point, the "DVD Extras" section stated (correctly) that Vowellet isn't on the Region 2 DVD; but if so, somebody has reverted it. — 188.29.166.249 ( talk) 20:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
I add a {verylong} tag to the beginning of the article, and a few hours later someone makes it even longer by expanding the Plot section!
Perhaps I should have added a {stub} tag instead, maybe then he would have shortened it. :-) 217.171.129.69 ( talk) 00:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I've deleted the two "films set in..." category tags, because the clues indicating that the main part is set in a particular year or decade all point in different directions; e.g. Bob is reading a newspaper dated "196x", and later learns of the deaths (in the late 1950s) of two superhero friends of his who were guests at his wedding 15 years earlier; but the movie also features things such as personal computers (first introduced in the late 1970s), mobile phones (early 1980s, I think), flat-screen TVs (1990s), and (in the Jack-Jack Attack short) CDs (1983).
Hence, as per the IMDb board thread "Was this set in the early 80's?" (meeds login to view), the only thing that's clear about this movie's time period it that it's ambiguous (perhaps deliberately so?), thus "films set in..." tags are innappropriate for this article. -- 217.171.129.73 ( talk) 03:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Futuristic technology in "the present" is a standard feature of the superhero setting. I think it's clear that they were being faithful to the trope by giving their alternate 1960's actual technological artifacts from 10-30 years later (as opposed to the typical way-out "super science" that showed up in actual 1960's comic books). The opening/wedding sequence has a pretty strong 1950's vibe. Markjreed ( talk) 00:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
If the Plot section (which looks to me to be longer than the entire rest of the page) were to be split off into Plot of The Incredibles, that might solve the length problem. Trouble is of course that it would also break the flow.
Discuss. -- 217.171.129.74 ( talk) 05:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Jun 19, 2007, been a while... any more current info on this possibility that could make it into the article?
Interview with Brad Bird on possibility of sequel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cowicide ( talk • contribs) 12:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
From the looks of it, they aren't gonna make an Incredibles 2 anytime soon. 74.33.174.133 ( talk) 13:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Who would want to make a sequel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benschar ( talk • contribs) 11:44, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
I've at least twice found the end of the Plot section suggesting that it's Syndrome's cape, rather than Syndrome himself, that gets killed, and have corrected this; but it keeps getting put back!
I wish some people would take more care in editing. -- Korax1214 ( talk) 07:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
There's an edit war currently underway on List of Pixar film references; I've deleted the nonsense about the "Pizza Planet truck sighting", only for someone to re-insert it (this has happened twice so far); apparently the other editor believes that a "vaguely seen" something for which "you have to look really hard" is enough to "prove" this myth true. (It isn't for me; to my mind, for the Pizza Planet truck to be present someone actually has to see it, not merely catch a "vague" glimpse which their imagination could conceivably twist into anything they want to see.)
There's a cite on that page where someone from the LA Times states that there's been a Pizza Planet Truck in "every Pixar movie"; but what the inserter of the cite (carefully?) omitted to mention is that the article cited was published in 2003, so should really be read as "every Pixar movie up to and including Finding Nemo". -- 92.40.122.216 ( talk) 13:00, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
It's happened again, by a different user this time; strange how those who claim the truck is there always claim a "blur" or "vague" sighting, or something conveniently unidentifiable like that. -- 92.40.122.216 ( talk) 17:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Lee Unkrich has confirmed on his Twitter that this is the only Pixar film the truck does not appear in. The source for that is on the Pixar Film References page. This should sort things out. trainfan01 21:04, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
I remember when this film came out many people were highly critical about the possible copyright infringement in regards The Fantastic Four, re;
Agreed, the players/powers have been switched around, and Dash and Human Torch have different powers, but it was felt that this was to avoid an obvious copyright battle. I remember reading (in Comic Shop News I believe, although I no longer have the article in question) that Stan Lee sought legal advice in regards the matter, but was told that he would have to prove conclusively that Pixar knew of The Fantastic Four and so, regretably, he had to let the matter drop.
I was wondering if anyone had the article I mentioned, or a similar article, and would put this in the Wiki article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by D f cornish ( talk • contribs) 04:42, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Another similarity is that the main villain is not a Super himself, but uses Technology to emulate such Powers (Syndrome, Dr Doom)-- 194.106.137.50 ( talk) 08:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
A claim in the Critics subsection about the makers of the Fantastic Four movie having to "make significant script changes and add more special effects because of similarities to the storyline of The Incredibles" was supported by a reference ( http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0444,winter2,58041,20.html) that makes no mention, in any capacity, to The Fantastic Four, comics or film. For now, I have removed the reference and asked for proper citation. 24.225.106.239 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC).
I have added two new sections to this article in hopes of expanding it a little more. The first is inspiration, which is about Brad Bird and how he was inspired to write the Incredibles. The second is Problems and talks about the problems with the production. If anybody has any suggestions on those two sections, let me know. I got the info from a book called To Infinity and Beyond. Burton517 ( talk) 21:12, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Why there are no character images for Mr. incredible? Even in the separate characters pages. Thanks Yosef1987 ( talk) 15:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Forgive me if I just missed this, but are we not doing spoiler warnings anymore? I couldn't find the template anywhere. Or is it assumed that, duh, it's a spoiler, because it says, "Plot"? -- 68.183.138.63 ( talk) 04:41, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Most of the character profiles mention a short comic called Holiday Heroes. I cant find t on google. Does anyone know who wrote or published it? Bosco13
I have noticed similarites between the James Bond movie You Only Live Twice and The Incredibles (music for example). Can someone please varify this it has been bugging me for ages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.227.225.153 ( talk) 00:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't remember it ever being confirmed that the movie begins in 1979, and the main plot takes place in 1994-1995. I also don't ever remember it being specified that Bob visited Edna specifically on October 12th. This seems like unfounded research to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.16.170.74 ( talk) 05:42, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
I come with this proposal to merge the list of characters per several reasons. The list fails to meet Wikipedia:Notability, since the characters only appear in just one film and a couple of related video games. The article has no sections dedicated to real world content, discussing the significance of the characters outside The Incredibles. For this reason, the list also violates Wikipedia:Writing about fiction. It seems that the list still exists just because a group of fans that have not managed to prove the notability of the characters to deserve a separate list. Thoughts? -- LoЯd ۞pεth 08:30, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
For some reason my edits linking this film to Atlas Shrugged and the Watchmen have repeatedly been reverted. My first question to whoever keeps doing this is 'have you fucking read either Atlas Shrugged or the Watchmen????' If you had read either you would realise that the fact these texts influenced the film is really fucking obvious and you would therefore not get in the way of me trying to disseminate useful information about the film. That is all. Vulpesinculta51 ( talk) 05:18, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
At The End Of Finding Nemo at Cinemas Just Before The Teaser Coming Soon From The Creators Of Toy Story, A Bug's Life, Toy Story 2, Monsters Inc and Finding Nemo Filmed On 19th August 1999 4.00pm Phone Rings Man On Phone: Mr Incredible We Need Your Help 4.02pm Mr Incredible Puts On His Super Suit 4.05pm Elastigirl: Honey Come To Dinner 4.08pm 1.Pants Into Tights 2.Punch The Table 3.Jerking Around 4.Moving His Chair 5.Stomp His Foot 6.Sit In His Chair 7.Crawls 8.Hitting The Chair 4.10pm Belt Is On and Belt Comes Off Destorying The Lamp In The Room North America South America and Oceania 1:59 Europe Africa and Asia 1:18
File:The Incredibles (2004 animated feature film).jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.222.79.93 ( talk) 17:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: TonyTheTiger ( talk · contribs) 11:48, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
I'll do this review.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 11:48, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Alright i added a few lists, but what exactly am i supposed to do with the references? Koala15 ( talk) 14:35, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Well it looks like the references have been fixed thanks to Carniolus. Koala15 ( talk) 15:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Alright, i think i fixed it all. Koala15 ( talk) 19:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Alright, i fixed it. Koala15 ( talk) 14:20, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
It looks like someone else fixed it already. Koala15 ( talk) 17:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I cannot find any DVD sales or anything like that, but i think i fixed most of what you mentioned. Koala15 ( talk) 14:43, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Add --
TonyTheTiger (
T/
C/
WP:FOUR/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:WAWARD)
15:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
{{
personality rights}}
to
File:Brad bird cropped 2009.jpg.
Is there anything else that needs to be fixed? Koala15 ( talk) 14:29, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
No i did not ignore them i just can't do some of them, Like i can't find the DVD sales or which awards the score won. Koala15 ( talk) 15:21, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok i think i fixed most of it, tell me what i missed. Koala15 ( talk) 15:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok to answer that i think i have covered everything that i can. Koala15 ( talk) 00:06, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
The "island" is mentioned several times in the 4th paragraph and i fixed the Travers comment. Koala15 ( talk) 17:08, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, i fixed it. Koala15 ( talk) 03:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I think you should tell how to beat the game The Incredibles.I also think you should lable the levels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.26.148.215 ( talk) 23:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I polished the plot summary a bit and trimmed it down to 620 words. As it says in the invisible note at the top of the plot summary section, a Wikipedia plot summary is supposed to be between 400 and 700 words. Let's try to keep it short and sweet, Thanks, Invertzoo ( talk) 23:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
UPDATE: Hmm. I see User:Koala15 simply reverted all my changes without an edit summary and without any kind of comment on this talk page. That is not appropriate Wikipedia behavior. Let me find out what is going on. Invertzoo ( talk) 01:13, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
> On his way to marry Helen (also known as "Elastigirl"), Robert "Bob" Parr, better known as Mr. Incredible
Why do these people have pseudonyms? Are they superheroes? Criminals? Pop artists?
> saves a suicidal man
How did that work out? Did the guy thank him?
> and stops an el train from a potential accident when saving his intrusive biggest fan, Buddy Pine
What does "intrusive biggest fan" mean?
> from being blown up by a bomb planted on him by criminal Bomb Voyage.
Why should we care what the criminal's name is? Does he appear again later in the movie?
> After marrying Helen, countless lawsuits ... results in the creation of a relocation program
The lawsuits married Helen?
> for collateral damage and civil unrest from their good deeds
What caused the civil unrest? Is it related to the collateral damage, or is it a separate thing that was somehow caused by good deeds?
> Rejuvenated, Bob's relationship with his family improves
Bob's relationship with his family is rejuvenated?
> Mirage is working for Buddy, now an amoral super villain called Syndrome.
Syndrome sends his robot out to kill superheroes. How is that only Amoral and not IMmoral?
> Syndrome intends to perfect the Omnidroid ... and defeat it while manipulating its controls to become a hero himself
Where? In his back yard? How will that make him a hero?
> and then sell his inventions to the public so everyone will become equally "super", making the term meaningless.
What does that have to do with the plot?
> Bob sneaks into Syndrome's base, finding a big-screen computer where he uses the password "Kronos" left scrawled on a wall by a dead Super, Gazerbeam.
> Mirage, annoyed with Syndrome's selfishness, releases Bob
That's it? All it took for her to betray her employer was a little annoyance at his selfishness? That doesn't sound like much of a reason.
> the Parrs find Syndrome has Jack-Jack and intends on raising him as his own sidekick to seek revenge on the family, only for Jack-Jack's own morphing superpowers to manifest.
What does "only for Jack-Jack's own morphing superpowers to manifest" apply to? Is that the reason Syndrome wants to raise Jack-Jack? Does it mean the manifestation of Jack-Jack's powers somehow thwarts whatever the Parrs were trying to achieve in finding Syndrome?
> Helen rescues Jack-Jack
Really? She rescued Jack-Jack all by herself? Bob had nothing to do with it at all?
> and Bob kills Syndrome by throwing his car at his jet
Whose car? Whose jet?
> causing Syndrome's cape to get caught in its engine, which sucks him in.
Does he get killed? Or did he invent a protective suit that saves him for the sequel? And what happens after the engine stops? Does the jet keep floating in mid-air?
— Coder Dan ( talk) 23:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
How about I send this as a request:
"One day, Bob loses his temper at his supervisor when he refused to let him to foil a mugging, dismissing Bob as a result. Rick leaves Bob to fend for himself and then offers Bob a chance to relocate, which Bob sadly refuses."
Anything to alter it. I'm not making you to do this. It's just a request 81.97.18.158 ( talk) 17:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Lg16spears, you added information on The Incredibles 2 being announced for a Summer 2016 release and provided a source for this news.
However, I did further research into this and uncovered this article at Ecumenical News which is mentioned by the source you linked and found the Ecumenical News article cites its source of information from a KpopStarz article ("KpopStarz spilled plot spoilers") which takes its synopsis of the film from an "Ideas Wiki" on Wikia that anyone could add made-up ideas to. It is of my opinion that the information across the three articles is false, and is just the result of the writer of the KpopStarz article (somehow) mistaking the made-up fan ideas for The Incredibles 2 on the Ideas Wiki for legitimate information. -- Andromedabluesphere440 ( talk) 18:36, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
DAMN YOU WIKI IDEA, YOU GOT US FOR THIS. Lg16spears ( talk) 18:53, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
No listing of The Incredibles: Achieving the Incredible pre-theatrical release promo DVD; I believe it was packed in with Variety Magazine - no packaging, plain paper sleeve. Includes a 20 minutes feature of same name, Incredible Press (images of various newspaper articles about the upcoming movie), Incredible Art Gallery, and Incredible Music. The disc volume label is "THE_INCREDIBLES" with a creation date listed as 10/23/2004 3:10:23 AM, Single-Sided Single-Layer DVD (1.26 GB), regions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and no copy protection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.164.59.189 ( talk) 12:42, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Incredibles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
The reference of the infomation about AFI's 10 Top 10 nomination is not valid yet. Please, allow me to change it to this link: [1].
Dr.saze ( talk) 06:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Why does "Hum Hain Lajawab" redirect to this article? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with this film, and instead should go directly to Hum Hain Lajawab or Hum Hain Lajawab (1984 film). The film is right now is featured in the "if you're looking for" section at the top of this article, although the phrase is not. Who knows? Maybe there's a reason for this I'm not aware of. Cheers! Luthien22 ( talk) 21:23, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Is it alright if we create a franchise article for The Incredibles the same way we have one for Finding Nemo and Monsters, Inc.? The series definitely has enough material to qualify for one. I would gladly contribute to the article if one was made. Zucat ( talk) 17:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Incredibles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Incredibles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Geraldo Perez: regarding this edit, how are the reviews just "mostly" positive? The reception section quotes a couple negative reviews, but if there are very few negative reviews that exist and many positive ones, then the reception is poorly summarized by "mostly positive". It also received some pretty prestigious awards; doesn't that indicate "critical acclaim"?
Also, I think #Themes is a large enough section to have a few words about it in the lead. It was previously tied to critical reviews, but it doesn't need to be. Rhinopias ( talk) 20:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
The film received widespread approval from critics and audiences …", including the highest possible CinemaScoreas you proposed, looks fine for lead section of article. I still don't think it necessary in the reception section to add anything beyond the facts already presented as that is sufficient to get the point across. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 03:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi there. I'd like to ask for an experienced GA reviewer to comment on whether the length of the Violet Parr article poses a barrier to GA status. See Talk:Violet Parr/GA1 for more information. Thanks! Mz7 ( talk) 08:34, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
I've removed a line from the end of the plot summary about the final scene serving as a "teaser" (linked to teaser campaign) a couple times now, but it has gotten re-added repeatedly. Rather than edit-war, I'd like to hear whether other interested editors feel it belongs or not.
My position is that (1) it doesn't fit the definition of a "teaser campaign", and (2) even if it did, and the scene were added in anticipation of a potential second film, it's still more or less a production note, not part of the plot, and so it still doesn't really belong in the plot summary. The article has an entire section devoted to discussing the sequel - there's no reason it needs to go in the plot section, and it seems out of place there to me.
Thoughts? -- Fru1tbat ( talk) 17:25, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
I have no skill to know how to do it, but I think that this anecdote should be added somewhere. See below.
Brad Bird told The McKinsey Quarterly in 2008 [2], “The Incredibles was everything that computer-generated animation had trouble doing. It had human characters. It had hair. It had fire. It had a massive number of sets. The technical team took one look and thought, ‘This will take ten years and cost $500 million. How are we possibly going to do this?’
“So I said, ‘Give us the black sheep. I want artists who are frustrated. I want ones who have another way of doing things that nobody’s listening to. Give us all the guys who are probably headed out the door’. A lot of them were malcontents because they saw different ways of doing things, but there was little opportunity to try them, since the established way was working very, very well.
“We gave the black sheep a chance to prove their theories, and we changed the way a number of things are done here (at Pixar). For less money per minute than was spent on the previous film, Finding Nemo, we did a movie that had three times the number of sets and had everything that was hard to do. All this because the heads of Pixar gave us leave to try crazy ideas.
“One of those ideas was that we didn’t have to make something that would work from every angle. Not all shots are created equal. Certain shots need to be perfect. Others need to be very good. And there are some that only need to be good enough to not break the spell.”
References
I disagree with this reversion. Between 2000 & 2004 is itself a considerable period of time, during which progress was made in animation. I can't find it right now, but I'm also pretty sure there's a policy which says vague dates should be avoided as well. Clarification in an encyclopedia is a good thing, and reversion when such clarification is asked for is a bad thing. Chaheel Riens ( talk) 11:22, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I am new to editing Wikipedia pages. For one of my assignments, I was tasked with taking a look at a Wikipedia page and looking through its contents as well as contributing an idea that may help the page. I was just researching through this page's older edits, and was wondering why the Character section was deleted? I think that having a personality description of the Incredibles characters would be beneficial to new and returning fans of the series. It could also help to understand the returning characters that reappear in the second film, or it could give some interesting facts about the personality traits of everyone in the movie. I also noticed that the Major Themes section was deleted as well? I think that maybe it could be interesting to talk about the philosophy behind all of the mature themes in the film. I think that these could be added back to the page to give more information about various elements of this beloved story. Just a simple suggestion. Thanks! :) T.J. Reviewer ( talk) 21:53, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello. While the plot section should follow WP:FILMPLOT, I'm thinking we should find a reliable source to support Syndrome's death (i.e. audio commentaries, articles, interviews, etc.), since the guideline does mention "secondary sources must be used for all other cases". Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 19:54, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
It was Ewa Fröling 173.198.62.73 ( talk) 21:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)