Pixar rocks

K. and I saw The Incredibles last night. It is almost certainly my favorite Pixar film—which shouldn't be that much of a surprise, since the writer and director of The Iron Giant, Brad Bird, wrote and directed it. Despite the theater cruelly depriving me of the Episode III trailer, despite the squalling kids that forced us to move our seat, we both loved it.

It has a strange moral, which seems sort of like an attack on political correctness and gives it a weird Harrison Bergeron underpinning; I'm not sure if I agree with it. And the body count is surprisingly high for a kids' movie. But on the superhero fun scale it really delivers, in much the same way Galaxy Quest pinned the TV-skiffy fun-meter. (Actually, come to think of it, The Incredibles is sort of like a cross between Galaxy Quest and Watchmen. No, really.) It gives us the best supervillain lair design I've ever seen in a movie; I suspect Brad Bird has been designing his perfect lair in his head for quite some time now. A lot of the satire has been done elsewhere (superheroes getting sued is rather old hat nowadays), but the specific story being told is sweet and funny and engaging.

I'd love a sequel, but it seems that Disney has retained the rights after the Disney-Pixar split, so if there is one it won't be the same. All the more reason to see this one in the theaters, sez I.

Whatever you do, don't get thee to a nunnery

The anti-gay-marriage (and anti-polyamory, but let's skip that) amendment in Ohio says:

Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.

K. disagrees, but I think that "or" in the last phrase makes this impossibly broad—so broad, in fact, that it outlaws convents. Ask a nun, and she'll tell you that, yes, her relationship with God "approximates...the significance...of marriage," which should be enough to make it illegal. Does anyone else think this is a great opportunity for a reductio ad absurdum legal challenge? People vs. St. Mary's Convent?