Submit your Article

Animation/Action

INCREDIBLES 2

CAST: Holly Hunter, Craig T Nelson, Bob Odenkirk, Samuel L Jackson

DIRECTION: Brad Bird

‘The Incredibles’ (2004) remains my favorite Pixar movie. The film’s biggest replay value, for me, is that it shows the day-to-day crime fighting routine of superheroes and also explores the question: “what if superheroes were to raise a family like normal peo­ple?” The film’s writer/director Brad Bird develops this central idea with the loveable husband-wife super­hero duo of Mr. Incredible (voiced by Craig T Nelson) and Elastigirl (Holly Hunter), who need to figure out a way to squeeze in time for their kids while saving the world. Bird’s comic approach was highly successful in bringing out a fun and lighthearted superhero film that took jabs at genre clichés and showed us the personal side of superheroes where they were put down by everyday hassles.

Now after 14 years of its release, many things have changed. The superhero movies have entirely eclipsed the market of mainstream Hollywood cinema. In the wake of ‘Deadpool’ and ‘Thor: Ragnarok’, superhero films have also come-of-age, in the sense that they are not afraid to poke fun at themselves.

So when Pixar green-lit ‘Incred­ibles 2’, Brad Bird was burdened with the same duties that are put on long-awaited sequels: to give fans of the original film a nostalgia trip and at the same time make it relevant for the new audience. After I can happily report that Bird has done an incredible job! He makes this second installment a funny and adventur­ous affair that will find the love of both the fans of the original and audiences who are new to the series.

The film opens on The Incredi­bles—Mr. Incredible, Elastigirl and their three superkids—and their close ally Frozone (Samuel L Jack­son) secretly trying to stop a sophis­ticated bank robber. But their effort causes a lot of collateral damage. This in turn angers the authorities that have already banned superhe­roes. Their point being, superheroes are liable to bring more destruction than protection to their city.

The Incredibles are ordered to stick to their secret identities. But soon, a brother-sister team (Bob Odenkirk, Catherine Keener) pres­ents themselves as guardian angels. They propose a plan to popularize superheroes again and urge the gov­ernment to lift the ban. For this, they choose Elastigirl as the face of their movement, fighting against a face­less and shape shifting supervillain, much to the dislike of Mr. Incredible, who is now left to assume the posi­tion of a homemaker.

The sequel doesn’t let go off the parenthood theme that was at the heart of the first film. Here too, it seems that the film is secretly dis­guised as a children’s film targeted at adults. True, there are enough crowd pleasing action and slapstick set pieces to tickle young audience but the film’s emphasis on good parenting will score high among the adults as well.

Bird remains in the formulaic storytelling territory but spins out new angles on old tropes. Thus in sequences where Mr. Incredible has to be Mr. Mom, Bird adds subtle visual humor and witty remarks to keep the content funny even if we’ve seen these beats before. But the sequel’s actual achievement is its decision to gender flip the story: Elastigirl gets more screen time, donning her daredevil suit and spar­ring against villains.

This is a solid sequel to a classic and much loved film. It is a super­hero movie but nonetheless it cel­ebrates the spirit of family, parent­hood and equality. The film’s enter­tainment factor will quadruple if it’s watched with family members.

Who should watch it?

Just because it’s an animated movie, don’t think it is just for children. As Pixar films go, ‘Incredibles 2’ is cut to satisfy both adults and children. It’s accessible and enjoyable even for those who haven’t watched the first film.

What are the main barriers to Nepal’s prosperity? I enlist eight of them below.

False sense of security

The more the people of a country are action-oriented and can take risks, the faster that country devel­ops. But when it comes to Nepal, the country has only ever been thought of as a ‘safe sanctuary’ since the Homo sapiens first made their way here while expanding away from their base in North Afri­ca around 100,000 years ago. The people belonging to Indo-Europe­an, Tibet-Burmese and Austro-Dra­vidian language families who set­tled in Nepal were for thousands of years occupied with rudimentary agriculture, animal husbandry and hunting—and always cursing their wretched luck.

In the 14th and 15th centuries, when the Europeans were scouring the world in their ships in search of new markets and places, and were making various scientific discov­eries, we were in deep slumber, or busy listening to tales of sages meditating in caves. This is how we missed the road to prosperity.

Quirk of history

Industrial development is pos­sible only in centralized nation-states or federal-states. This is why it was important to unite the many small princely states in this region in the 18th century. This was some­thing that could have been done under the leadership of the Malla rulers of Kathmandu, the Sen rul­ers of Tarai-Madhes or the Khas rulers of the ‘22’ and ‘24’ princely states. Unluckily, the mission was carried out under the relatively weak and poor Khas ruler Prithvi Narayan Shah.

The need of the hour back then was to take the feudalistic society towards capitalism, which was exactly what was happening in Europe and America at the time. But in Nepal the Gorkhali rulers tried to further solidify the feudal order by distributing land to their near and dear ones. Had the unification cam­paign had been carried out under the Malla rulers of Kathmandu, the hub of trade and industry at the time, perhaps Nepali history would have taken a different turn.

‘Halal’ revolution

Industrial development has been possible in various countries only after the completion of the political revolution against authoritarian monarchies, so as to establish mul­tiparty democracy, rule of law and to restructure the state according­ly. But in Nepal, starting in 1950, all political revolutions and peo­ple’s movements have ended either in compromises or partial achieve­ments, in what may be called a ‘halal revolution’. In this revo­lution, the revolution­ary forces always enters into compromises with the ruling power. This in turn ensures that the old rulers remain in place and thus any change in state mechanism becomes cosmetic.

Fatalism and casteism

There can be no meaningful change or revolution unless there is first a revolution in how people think. In the 10,000 years of human civilization, only in the past 500 years has there been meaningful changes and developments in their lives. This change happened when they were able to shed their old superstitions and conservatism. The scientific revolution, the Enlighten­ment, the political revolution, and the industrial revolution, they all happened in Europe in the period between 16th to 18th centuries. Cru­cially, this followed the reformation of the church in the 15th century. But in Nepal we have to this day been unable to shed our unscien­tific and regressive supersti­tions, conservatism, fatalism and casteism, which are all being perpetuated in the name of religion. Fatalism and casteism have been especially harmful for Nepal’s prosperity.

Geopolitical trap

A country’s prosperity or decline largely depends on internal reasons. Nonethe­less the outside world cay play an important, and even decisive, role in a special period in a coun­try’s history. In Nepal’s case, the 1816 Sugauli Trea­ty dealt a body blow to the cottage industries that were in the process of developing into modern man­ufacturing industries. The small cottage industries of Nepal were in no position to compete against the big Indian indus­tries. Likewise, the Chinese Communist Revolution broke Nepal’s traditional trade relations with Tibet, further ham­pering its cottage industries. But while the country has been time and again affected by this geo­political trap, there has been no national consensus in Nepal on how to deal with it, and how to reduce our overreli­ance on India.

Wrong capital allocation

For an industrial revolution, it is vital that the primary capital from agricul­tural and industrial activities is accumu­lated and reinvest­ed in productive sectors. But in the history of Nepal, especially beginning with the Rana period, most of the capital that was accumulated from agricultural and industrial activities has been later invest­ed in unproductive consumer goods and in building big plac­es for the ruling elites.

Even in recent times most of our remittances are being spent on imported luxury goods. It is clear that the cap­ital worth billions of rupees in our banks and financial institutions is still caught up in unproduc­tive sectors. The control over state resources of crony capitalists, mid­dlemen of foreign companies and various cartels and syndicates has further exacerbated the problem.

Labor migration

The presence of a large and independent manpower is one of the prerequisites to industrial rev­olution. After the Sugauli Treaty, abled-bodied Nepalis started to enlist with foreign armies. Now a big chunk of our able-bodied men and women in rural areas are working abroad as migrant laborers. Instead of importing capital and export­ing goods, we export manpower in order to import capital. Nowhere in the world has this flawed model led to prosperity.

Neglect of science

One of the commonalities of the developed countries is their emphasis on science and tech­nology. Scientific quests and discoveries were at the heart of the first, second, third and now the fourth industrial rev­olution. But starting with the mysterious murder of Nepal’s first scientist, Gehendra Shumsher, there has been an almost criminal neglect in the establishment of research facilities and in emphasizing sci­ence and technology education. Our public education is in dire straits and our educated manpower is increasingly migrating. This is no road to prosperity.

What is needed right now is a serious national debate on all these issues. We don’t have the luxury of continuing to be an underdeveloped island amid an ocean of prosperity. As Bhupi Sherchan said: “Who can fall asleep in a hay field when logs are on fire all around?”

Even as Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli is in Beijing on an official visit, there has been much speculation over the supposed Chinese noncha­lance. Some even had issues with the press release issued by our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which made no mention of Oli meeting General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party and President Xi Jinping—and therefore a proof of Chinese lukewarm response to Oli’s vis­it. But in Beijing on Wednesday Xi and Oli had delegation level talks and one-on-one for over an hour; this despite the presence of two other important dignitar­ies in town: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and Bolivian President Evo Morales. But it is true that the Chi­nese side is wary of the gap between Kathmandu’s words and deeds—particularly on project implementation. Nepali side’s tardiness, even childishness, in proposing projects to be built under the Belts and Roads Initia­tives (BRI) has been of concern for them. For example, a certain Nepali ministry had reportedly floated the proposal of building a Disney-style theme park in Nepal under the BRI. Clearly there is gap in understanding between the two sides on what the BRI is and isn’t.

Xi-Modi Summit

There is more to the optics from the Chinese side and it isn’t related to what Oli did or didn’t. If anything, as former Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai pointed out in his article in Kantipur Daily on June 18, the Xi-Modi Wuhan summit in April is likely to cast shadow on Chi­na-Nepal relations for sometime—at least in terms of optics.

While there is no word on what was discussed in relation to Nepal, there are speculations that Modi ‘acknowledged Chinese strategic interest in the Maldives and Sri Lanka,’ while urging Xi to ‘go slow on Nepal and Bhutan.’ This may explain both the sort of toning down of rhetoric on the Maldives in the Indian media as well as some of perceived Chinese nonchalance towards Nepal in the Nepali media. According to this theory, if Beijing has accepted Delhi’s request, the reciprocal high-level visit to Nepal from the Chinese side will happen at Premier Li Keqiang’s level, not at Xi’s level.

China also needs Nepal

Those who see Chinese cold shoulder forget that China needs us as much as we need them. Chinese overture towards Nepal is part of a long strategy—further buttressed by Nepal’s blockade-in­duced strategic autonomy in its foreign policy.

As Sudheer Sharma observes in his brilliant article in Kanti­pur on June 15, China wants over­land access to Indian markets [and parts of Bangladesh] and a route through Nepal is the easiest way.

Indian states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal that border Nepal are highly popu­lous, with around 400 million people between them, which comes to roughly the size of European Union and bigger than the United States. Bangladesh has another 163 million people. These are potentially huge mar­kets for mass-market goods as their already sizeable middle class continues to grow.

This presents Beijing with unique opportunity to develop its Tibet and even Xinjiang as production and trading hubs—with some production capacity outsourced to Nepal. For com­parison, Nepal can be a nodal point to bigger markets than Paki­stan and Central Asia combined. Pakistan has population of 193 million and five former Central Asian Soviet Republics have a combined population of 70 million. Nepal can and should leverage these facts as it deepens engagement with China.

Clearly Beijing could put on a show out of respect for Modi, leader of one of its biggest trad­ing partners, but what matters is the substance (or lack of it) on Nepal-China front. That depends as much on Nepal as it does on China. As Beijing is wary of Nepal’s poor implementation capacity, the idea of establishment of a bilateral oversight mechanism is a significant first step.

A few weeks ago my colleague wrote about the potential opening up of Thamel 24/7. As the time approaches for the powers that be to give a decision on this, let’s look again at what this means for the party animals among us! Firstly, didn’t they try this whole 24/7 opening of Thamel a couple of years ago? If my memory serves me correctly this was the same year or the following year of the earthquake. Which might have been the reason behind this being an enormous fail. Of course the timing of this potential 24/7 opening fits nicely with the tourist off-season; just like remak­ing the roads in Thamel began to coincide nicely with the start of the tourist season this year.

Is there really enough to keep us occupied for 24 hours in Thamel? I read one young person saying it would be great if they could stay up in bars, restaurants, clubs all night because they cannot go home at 2am and expect someone to unlock the door. Nor do they want to pay for a hotel room. Two things here—locks work both ways (gates can also be unlocked from both sides with the right kind of lock: amazing right? But then we all know it’s not really the lock that’s the problem; it’s the parents), and if you cannot pay for a hotel room, shared between the four or five friends you always hang out with, are you going to the con­tributing to the economy sitting over one beer between the hours of 9pm and 6am?

There are a few clubs that have a special license that enables them to stay open until 2 or 3am. And recently the Marriott Hotel started a late night buffet available from 11pm till 3am. But I guess right now there is nowhere to go from 3am until public transport starts running around 6 in the morning.

From the tourists’ perspec­tive—few are coming to Nepal, even Kathmandu, for the night­life. Better nightlife can be had in their own cities and in other part of Asia. On the whole they are com­ing, as we all know, for trekking, climbing, and to experience nature, wildlife, and culture. While they certainly enjoy eating and drinking until late evening, after an exhaust­ing trek do you think they really want, or are able, to stay up all night? Again, after being out in the mountains, or jungle, or experienc­ing the spirituality of Pashupati or Boudha, do you think they really want to listen to cover bands for 12 hours? And personally I wouldn’t really want to do my souvenir shop­ping at 1am.

Having lived in Edinburgh a cou­ple of decades ago, I do remember wishing there was somewhere to go for coffee after coming out of the pub at 1 or 2am. Of course now there are plenty of places open in Scotland’s capital serving coffee throughout the night, but in those days, apart from clubs, there was not a lot open after 1am. Aside from needing a coffee fix, I wasn’t heart­broken I couldn’t party until it was time to go to the office. I survived with partying within the given time!

While many business owners might be attracted to the idea that they can make money all night long, they will also have to employ more staff to cover the extra opening hours. They might want to sit down and do the maths.

And let’s not forget, 24/7 means open 24 hours, 7 days a week. Not just on Fridays when Thamel is at its busiest. Of course venues can choose their own timings. No one is going to force them to open 24 hours a day for 12 months a year… or are they? Will we now see police at 3am, on seeing someone pull­ing down the shutters, telling them “Open up! Right now!” Stranger things have happened!