Mr & Mrs Incredible
Monday, June 27, 2011 at 3:18PM June Wedding (reprinted from the TFE archives)
Helen and Bob Parr were married June 27th, 1989, at the church on St. Pablo Ave. Justice of the Peace Brad Bird presided. The bride is the daughter of Mr and Mrs. Conyers Georgia. The groom is the son of Mr and Mrs Craig T Parr. The bride wore an ivory silk Valenta ball gown. She carried a bouquet of white daisies. Best man was Lucius Best.
The bride is a graduate of Metroville University with a degree in hydrocarbon polymerology. She currently serves the public as a superhero. The groom also performs heroics. They plan to continue incredible crime fighting and reside in downtown Metroville.
[excerpted from the Municiperg Tribune, June 27th, 1989]
Happy 22nd anniversary to Mr & Mrs Incredible! (If Pixar must be in the sequel business, The Incredibles are beyond the most deserving, wouldn't you agree?)
Pixar, The Incredibles, animated films, sequels, superheroes, weddings
Reader Comments (14)
I was saddened when Pixar announced the sequels to Cars and Monsters, Inc. I mean, really? A sequel to the movie general consensus has deemed their worst (though it's all relative) and to an extremely underrated film that wrapped up its plot perfectly well ("Kitty!" - I die EVERY TIME)... and NOT to the one movie they've made that actually went to the trouble of setting up a sequel (and, frankly, their one film that actually deserves one)?!?!? While I don't agree with the lists that put The Incredibles at the top of Pixar's output, it's a damn good movie and the characters would actually be well-served by a sequel.
The Monsters, Inc. sequel better be damn good. I mean, I loved Monstropolis and I think it offers a lot just in terms of character design, but if they ruin something as good as the first one, they will be on two strikes. Three strikes and you're out! (I know this doesn't relate to movie studios, but don't you wish it would?)
That's *22nd anniversary! Hydrocarbon polymerology sounds pretty intense.
Also, I'm assuming Google doesn't exist in The Incredibles universe, or else it'd be very easy to dig up info on former superheroes.
So far, every Pixar film that's had a sequel (not counting Toy Story 3) has been directed by its "original" director. I guess Brad Bird is super busy with Mission Impossible 4?
Michael- doesn't that mean that only 2/3 Pixar sequels have been directed by their original director? Ha! I wouldn't make too many generalizations about that then!
1989? No way. They were married in the very late 1950s or early 1960s. Remember the dates in Edna Mode's "No Capes" speech? This dates most of the movie as occuring in a superhero version of the mid-late 1970s. Clever joke about the habit of "a movie occurs the year it's released" but it doesn't apply to The Incredibles.
I would willingly admit myself to one of those religious nutjob "gay re-education camps," where I would meet and marry a similarly self-hating lesbian, so we could then have mutually-black-out-drunk sex with each other, and keep doing that until we had a baby, and then immediately sign that baby's soul over to Satan if I could exchange that baby-born-out-of-hate's soul for a sequel to The Incredibles. IT WOULD ALL BE WORTH IT.
Volvagia - I think you're right about the dates. WEIRD.
Evan - I think that what Michael's trying to say is that every Pixar film that's had a second film has been directed by the one who made the first one. Maybe Brad doesn't want to do a sequel to Incredibles?
But also, all we know is that Incredibles might have a sequel in Nov. 2013! That is unless we don't die in 2012.
Sequel for The Incredibles? Totally. I mean, why so long for the sequel? Why bother with Cars 2? Are they planning on some Oscar revenge with Cars 2 this year to beat Happy Feet 2?
So can we say that Rango is still the one to beat in animation department so far this year?
Hmm I've been saying that since it opened - it should, nay, it DESERVES a sequel. And from Pixar the only ones I'd want to see a sequel of would be The Incredibles and in lesser level Finding Nemo. And at one time those were the two sequels Disney wanted to make. Then the whole thing fell apart when Pixar became part of Disney and was required to make BANKABLE franchises (I hate that word).
Alas, I also read somewhere that its rights partly belong to Brad Bird who is not exclusive with Pixar and so that explains why they didn't jump at the possibility of a sequel. I think it will all come down to whether Brad Bird wants to do another sequel.
I've read about it here:
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun/17/business/la-fi-ct-toystory-20100617/2
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=21218
also JA -- i'm still laughing at your comment. such complex justifications... but who can blame you?
Not wanting to get into a whole big debate about it, but I'd say that for a Woody Allen movie to reach $41mil in today's climate - with ticket prices as high as they are and with non-mainstream fare being looked down upon by so many cinemas - is just as impressive as "Hannah" making $41mil back in 1986.
Yes, obviously more people saw "Hannah and her Sisters", but the inflation thing is a dangerous ledge to walk upon. Are we really saying that "Hannah" would make $85mil if released today? Or that "Annie Hall" would make $135mil? Actually, if "Annie Hall" had the same best picture buzz today that it did back then then $135mil would be likely, but "Manhattan"? $125mil? Un-freakin'-doubtful!
So, I dunno, I tend to stand back a bit from "adjusted for inflation!!!" arguments. Would "Gone with the Wind" make $1bil? I find that hard to believe. Any film that somehow convinces $1bil worth of people to pay upwards of $20 to see it in 2011 deserves the applause.
Glenn -- you have a good point that I don't think i've heard expressed in quite this way. genuine thanks. I had been celebrating its box office. I should go back to doing so. Auteur films making money is always good news for cinephiles.
Yeah. I enjoyed going to the BRAVE Scott Pilgrim to the cinema, knowing I didn't want to be "to blame" for it's failure. It crammed way too much greasy plot onto it's little donut of time and maybe they should have had the "full picture" before starting to write the adaptation (and expanded on the material much more), but it was a fun time, though not as filling as, say, The Social Network or the wrenching Blue Valentine. Overall: B.
Thanks Nathaniel. I know a lot of people worship at the alter of inflation numbers, but I don't since there's just so much blurriness and vagueness in the maths of it.