We’re Still Suffering From How Bad ‘High School Musical’ Was

high school musical

For many, High School Musical was the first real signal of a true shift in Disney Channel programming. By 2006, the once plucky, experimental network had found more success in streamlined sitcoms like That’s So Raven and Suite Life of Zack and Cody than they had ever found with previous shows. This, of course paved the way for a persistent, familiar formula seen in almost all subsequent Disney Channel features, even to this day.

You might find this formula to be a good thing. Perhaps you enjoy the shows currently broadcasted on that channel, or you might be neutral at best. I’m not going to try to change your mind, but suffice to say that the numerous people who have a distaste for what the channel has become are both wrong and right.

Disney Channel shows have always been great for their time. If you look back at some of their supposedly best projects, you’ll find that they haven’t aged well at all and are actually a lot worse than you remember. Time does that sort of thing. But what I’m arguing is that even in 2006, Disney’s first smash hit movie was a terribly harmful film, and for many reasons.

Put more simply, High School Musical was and probably still is the worst thing ever produced by the Disney Channel. Not in terms of quality and production value, but certainly when it comes to how the Disney Channel Original Movie impacted the countless people who’ve watched it over the last 10 years. How it shaped its fans, for example.

high school musical

This is hard to argue, for sure, because on its surface, High School Musical doesn’t seem all that bad, right? The names of the songs say it all: Start something new! Get your head in the game! We’re all in this together.

Yet the titles of each song send a different message in the subtext. And watching the movie as a whole, you’ll start to see that a specific, alarming set of beliefs are being pushed onto these characters. Let’s back up and recap the film.

The movie begins by introducing us to Troy Bolton (played by Zac Efron) and Gabriella Montez (played by Vanessa Hudgens) just as they’re getting introduced to each other during holiday break. They have a song number meet-cute before going their separate ways, only to meet again at the start of a new semester because it miraculously turns out that Gabriella is now attending the same high school as Troy…even though they met by coincidence somewhere else.

If this sounds at all familiar, that’s because High School Musical was originally meant to be a remake/sequel of Grease in the late 90s, featuring the children of the original movie’s characters. I’m not joking. They couldn’t get the rights figured out, so Disney Channel ultimately decided to turn the script into one of their original movies made for television, with “High School Musical” as the working title. Apparently, they couldn’t come up with something better to name the darn thing, and the rest is history.

high school musical

Anyway, Troy and Gabriella both realize that they belong to different cliques: Troy is the basketball jock and Gabriella is the math nerd. But their bond through music becomes a quasi-reimagining of Romeo and Juliet, where their respective social circles clash over the future of these star-crossed lovers. Well, not really. The romance between Troy and Gabriella is persistently muted, with them often changing the subject to music instead of their own “relationship.”

That’s not necessarily a bad thing — in fact, it’s probably for the best — because it allows for more interesting drama between Troy and Gabriella, who have a decent amount of chemistry together to make the “we’re friends but want to be more” thing work fine. What really poisons this film is the introduction of the titular musical.

Troy and Gabriella decide to try out for the school musical. More specifically, the lead roles. The problem is that the school already has built-in performers who’ve starred in every production. And naturally, they’re the villains of this movie. Sharpay (played by Ashley Tisdale) and Ryan (played by Lucas Grabeel) are exceptionally talented, and for good reason. They’ve trained for years and actually want to turn their passion for theater into a career someday.

But it turns out that Troy and Gabriella, who barely even want to be in the musical and have no acting experience, are both selected for callbacks. Even though they were late to the audition in the first place, by the way. It’s a decision that rightfully upsets Sharpay and Ryan, who have no conceivable idea why outsiders have skipped them over for what is essentially their most critical time to stand out in the industry. All because they can sing about as well as Sharpay and Ryan. And even that is arguable.

high school musical

The real reason Troy and Gabriella are selected is because of their chemistry when no one is watching. They’re late for their audition, so the drama teacher exerts her one moment of clarity by telling them they don’t deserve a role when they can’t respect the rules. Later, she listens in on them practicing a song and decides that earns them a callback. You know, despite the fact that neither of them performed when the pressure was on, which is what they’ll actually have to prove they can handle when on stage for real.

Their casting has nothing to do with how technically proficient they are at singing and acting. The worst thing about this is that neither character purports to have any interest whatsoever in theater beyond the attention ascribed to it. Allegedly, it’s because they simply love to sing, but that’s nonsense within the context of the film. Instead of having to work for the roles and pay their dues, the barely proficient are rewarded with what they really want: popularity.

And that is why High School Musical is actually harmful. The movie positions Sharpay and Ryan as sore losers without any real sympathy. Sharpay in particular goes to cartoonishly evil lengths to prevent the protagonists from even getting to their callbacks, just to ensure that the audience doesn’t root for her by mistake. This is a character who is supposed to be good at acting, yet the only skill she seems to have is concocting evil plans to make the audience hate her.

high school musical

The movie tries to say something about how you can be more than your designated clique, which is a great message, but the execution misses the mark completely. Sharpay and Ryan claim to be more upset over the fact that someone has entered the “theater clique,” rather than the more obvious pandering that’s going on with the drama teacher. And the students obsess over kids hanging out with other kids who are different, which is hardly a problem in any school. Yes, there are cliques, but there’s no widespread panic when a jock tries out for a musical or dates a girl with good grades.

And when the film finally tries to resolve the conflict between Sharpay/Ryan and Troy/Gabrielle, it comes down to Sharpay having a rapid change of heart that is shoehorned into the final scene. Sharpay never apologizes. Gabriella never apologizes. The film never tries to lend credence to why she acted so harshly in the first place. It just ends. Is it no wonder Sharpay essentially “resets” her attitude toward them with each subsequent movie, even fawning over Troy during the first sequel?

The ending song says “we’re all in this together to make our dreams come true.” OK, but only Troy and Gabriella’s dreams, which have only been a thing for a few weeks. The movie tells its viewers that a select group of people can and should be the best at everything, even when they’re actually not. The protagonists win everything. A superior movie could explore actual consequences for when teenagers stretch themselves thin and create anxiety for themselves, but not High School Musical. You’re guaranteed a victory just for trying. Even though Troy and Gabriella barely deserved to be understudies, they get to be the stars, win their championships, and smugly dance it off in the very end.

high school musical

The actual dialogue between Troy and Gabriella in the ending scene:

Gabriella: “Congratulations, Wildcat!”

Troy: “What about your team?!”

Gabriella: “We won, too!” 

This is why High School Musical was successful. It wasn’t just the manufactured-to-be-catchy song numbers. It definitely wasn’t the real message of the movie. It was how the movie made its viewers feel, and wrongly at that. The movie convinced many young children who aren’t in high school that simply trying without working earns them the same rewards as the people who actually have legitimate dreams and work hard for them.

For Troy and Gabriella, singing is a hobby, maybe, but nothing they’re at all serious about. The movie positions their plight above the characters who actually have dreams to turn music into a lifestyle (the ones who truly need these roles to get into the right schools), and the script demands them to be manipulative and evil in order to trick viewers into rooting for the privileged brats. It also clamors that high school is a mystical place where a select group of kids are so good at everything, their only real problems are choosing which thing they’re going to be best at.

In this movie, they choose everything. And the whole school worships them for it.

high school musical

There is a way to turn these concepts into a good movie. There’s room for an honest exploration of how the quick ascent of the privileged few can create sharp enemies. And there’s even a good story behind the idea of popular kids getting more popular, paralleling nicely with the concept of the rich getting richer. Shame on us for ever expecting something so useful, I suppose.

I wish I could ignore High School Musical and simply let it be. People like it, and I never have. But there’s something truly exploitative and lasting about what it tries to tell its audience in a way that’s simply ugly and perverse. It’s also allowed Disney Channel to get away with similar storytelling in other shows over the years, resulting in a channel that is currently so embedded in watered-down celebrity-obsessed pop culture, the children who watch it stand little chance of getting by unscathed.


Thanks for reading this. Seriously. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. 

Or just say hello on Twitter: @JonNegroni


Review: ‘Pete’s Dragon’ Both Reinvents And Recaptures Classic Disney

pete's dragon review

I wrote a full review of Pete’s Dragon is on Movie Pilot, which you can read here. Overall, I loved the movie and had a blast watching it, thinking about it, and of most of all, writing about it. I’ll be chatting about the film more in length for Monday’s podcast, along with even more thoughts on Sausage Party, which I also reviewed this week.

Here’s a quick excerpt from my review of Pete’s Dragon:

There are a lot of intelligent, aspirational elements at play within Pete’s Dragon, as it sets up the forest as an idyllic setting that needs to be cherished, but not ignored. Like the dragon himself, there’s something beautiful about man and nature coming together, but the obvious message about environmentalist values you might read into here is one thing the movie smartly downplays, instead accepting that man’s role in the world doesn’t have to be a passive one.

Pete’s Dragon revels in its simplicity and digestible themes, which is why it’s such an easy film to immerse yourself in, at just about any age (and not just because Robert Redford steals all of his scenes). For that reason, it’s the best family movie of the year and among the best films in 2016, overall.


Thanks for reading this. Seriously. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hello on Twitter: @JonNegroni


If Disney Princesses Played Pokemon GO

princess pokemon go


Longtime readers and podcast listeners know that digital illustrator Kayla Savage has done some stellar artwork for this platform, including the logo for this page, the design of The Pixar Theory and The Pixar Detective, just to name a few.

Recently, we’ve been working on a comic series titled Modern Princess, which debuts with the panels you’ve just read. Kayla did the artwork, obviously, and I wrote the script. We’ll be releasing more entries in the coming weeks, so be sure to keep checking back for more, or just follow on Twitter.

And that’s not all, believe it or not. Kayla went to the trouble to produce a few bonus panels, which you can check out below:

princess pokemon go anna

princess pokemon go

Thanks as always for reading. Let us know in the comments if you like Modern Princess, want to see more mockups like the ones above (Jasmine with a Growlithe, anyone?), or if you just want to know how you can request artwork from Kayla Savage herself. Her portfolio and contact form is right here.


 

Pixar Is Taking a Break from Sequels After ‘Incredibles 2’

pixar sequels incredibles 2

Turns out that tip I reported was correct after all.

Allanah Faherty confirmed the rumor yesterday on Movie Pilot:

Pixar President, Jim Morris has revealed that after the release of the last sequel on the current slate, The Incredibles 2 in June 2019, the studio will release four original films.

“Everything after Toy Story and The Incredibles is an original right now,” he said. At the moment there are two untitled original films scheduled to be released in March and June 2020, and a further two are in early development, and look “highly likely” to join the studio’s schedule soon.

This is interesting news for a few big reasons. The most obvious one is that this addresses the “sequel-fatigue” many of us have been experiencing with the studio since Cars 2, as well as the doubts people have been having about Pixar’s quality in comparison to Walt Disney Animation Studios’ recent wave of huge success.

But the other big reason we should consider is how this will reflect on Pixar’s massive hit, Finding Dory, which is of course a sequel. The film has been a box office juggernaut in the U.S. (it will soon dethrone Captain America: Civil War as the biggest domestic hit of 2016), and the movie has also enjoyed steadily positive praise from critics.

In other words, this news implies what a lot of us have always suspected about Pixar as a business. Their decisions on which movies to release are not solely driven by short-term numbers and cash grabs. It seems they’re more interested in telling the stories they want to tell.

Note: the top image is a reference to Pixar’s next original film, Coco, which will release next year.

Review: ‘The BFG’ Is Big and Friendly, But Maybe Too Giant

Big friendly Giant review

Based on the Roald Dahl book of the same name, The BFG (Big Friendly Giant), probably shares more in common with Zemeckis’s animated rendition of A Christmas Carol with Jim Carrey in 2009.

Both films center around revolutionary visuals (for the time) that emphasize a digitized performance by a great actor — Mark Rylance in BFG‘s case. But both films also stumble in the same ways. They’re both trying to force a small story into something bigger and broader for the big screen.

Taking place sometime in the 80s, The BFG starts off with a young orphan girl named Sophie (played by usually-precocious newcomer Ruby Barnhill) who sees a “giant” man sneaking around the foggy streets of London. To prevent her from blabbing his existence, the giant (Mark Rylance) snatches her from her bed and whisks her away to Giant Country, only for her to discover that this fearsome creature is actually the runt of his kind.

The rest of the film focuses on Sophie’s discovery of this side of the world, where dreams can be chased and massive cannibal giants skate across the hills with cars under their feet. At its best points, The BFG fully embraces the charismatic imagination Dahl envisioned with these characters, placing them in amusing set pieces that make us want to dig into their world even further.

Big friendly Giant review

What suffers in this take, though, is the lack of substance with Sophie and the BFG himself. The two form a bond through ambiguous means that seem to be lacking a key scene or two. And so much attention is placed in the spectacle of the film, you walk away having no idea what The BFG is even supposed to be about.

Even a children’s film needs to firmly establish the motivations and desires for every character. But the film is so adherent to Dahl’s ephemeral whimsy, it forgets that a big screen story absolutely needs characters who yearn for something, as well as conflict that is substantial enough to make us care about them by the end. In BFG, everyone is quite reactionary and wooden as soon as the plot comes into play. And that’s not even mentioning the rushed third act, kicked off by a slow and bizarre turn of the plot that feels like another movie, entirely.

Perhaps the saving grace for BFG, which keeps it from being an overall disappointment, is how full of life its world is, made possible by stunning visuals that blend naturally with practical effects. The uncanny valley takes some time to dissipate, but once it fades, you’ll forget that the BFG and Sophie aren’t actually that different in size.

This is also a humorous movie that pulls off some of the best physical comedy of the year, actually earning laughs in a way that would plague most kids’ films that rely on fart jokes and slapstick too often to make an impact. When a joke likes this happens in The BFG, it’s sparing and almost always gets the laugh.

Big friendly Giant review

This isn’t the best of the film adaptations on Dahl’s work (that honor still belongs to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory after all these years), but it’s just as good as James and the Giant Peach and only a notch below something like Matilda. It still has that air of a movie that kids will love because it’s as dark as they are, allowing them to feel as if they’re getting away with something while watching it. For families looking to escape each year into smaller films suitable for their kids, The BFG will probably persevere as a popular choice for years to come.

Grade: B

Extra Credits:

  • There’s a lot of interesting trivia behind this film, which I cover in more detail via next week’s podcast. Suffice to say, Dahl movies are always a fountain of nerdy film facts.
  • This is the first time Spielberg has ever directed a Disney film (his 30th film, ever). And honestly…it kind of shows.
  • This is also the first time since E.T. in 1982 that Spielberg has worked with screenwriter Melissa Mathison, who sadly passed away last year. The film is dedicated to her.
  • It’s a Spielberg film, so of course John Williams did the score.
  •  Disney has made only one other film based on Dahl’s work, and that is James and the Giant Peach from 1996. I have a feeling The BFG will have about the same notoriety.
  • In case you forgot, Mark Rylance was in Bridge of Spies just last year, which was also directed by Spielberg. He won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in that film.
  • Disney hardly ever co-produces a film, especially with Walden Media considering their fallout over the Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian fiasco. This is their first time back together since.
  • The BFG enjoys being part of a weird trilogy of Spielberg movies that have acronym titles. E.T. (Extra Terrestrial), A.I. (Artificial Intelligence), BFG (Big Friendly Giant).
  • If you want to catch up on Dahl’s book of the same name, don’t forget to also read the short story he wrote that inspired BFG, which is called “Danny, Champion of the World.”

    I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

Review: ‘Alice Through the Looking Glass’ Is Weird For All the Wrong Reasons

alice looking glass review

When I saw the first live-action film, Alice in Wonderland, I found the whole thing sort of…OK.

It wasn’t very good or anything, but the 3D at the time was so stunning, and the effects so magical, it was easy to overlook how off-putting it was to see Alice being transposed as a fantasy hero, complete with a boring, unrelated side plot in the real world.

Over half a decade later, her adventures continue, though not much has changed to the film’s detriment. It seems Disney learned from all the wrong takeaways in that first film’s success, namely how important the Mad Hatter deserves to be in his role thanks to the fact that Johnny Depp is playing him.

Below are my lingering thoughts on the film, but my full review and breakdown is available here.

I suspect that the only people who will care for this sequel are strict fans of Burton’s 2010 interpretation. And I suspect even further that those fans will be mixed on Looking Glass for the most part. Unless you have a sadist passion for seeing the Mad Hatter and Alice embarking on elaborate adventures in Wonderland just for the sake of it, then this entire film will ring as hollow as the 3D.

alice looking glass review

In the review I linked above, I go into detail over why the story and purpose of Looking Glass is atrocious to the point of my stamping it a very low grade (lower than the “C” I would grade Alice in Wonderland). But I glossed over points about the visuals and how the film measures up to the books.

As far as the books go, I’m not very disappointed with how they’ve been adapted, if only because it’s probably impossible for anyone to adapt them faithfully. Carroll wrote them to be veiled absurdist stories that criticized the Victorian Era, so a more modern interpretation suffers a herculean task: how can you use wordplay to capture the spirit of the original while also applying the Carroll effect to current events? If any filmmaker was able to do this successfully, they’d have a masterpiece on their hands. But for obvious reasons, that will probably never happen, at least anytime soon.

When it comes to the CGI, I have little doubt that this will be a splitting point between fans and critics. Some of the actual design and movement of these characters is solid, even compelling at times. My main issue with them is that the existence of the green screen was all too apparent throughout the film, thanks to bizarre hiccups in lighting that contradicted the faces of the characters with their backgrounds. Why some are heralding this as a visual treat on par with this year’s Jungle Book completely baffles me, but for whatever reason, I’ll probably be the minority opinion on that front.

alice looking glass review

So chances are that you’ll enjoy the visuals and hopefully overlook the massive narrative issues that doomed this film for critics like me. Otherwise, you’re probably better off scouring for other, better adaptions of Looking Glass, including the somewhat decent 1998 movie with Kate Beckinsale.

Grade: D


I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

Snarcasm: The Villain of ‘Incredibles 2’ Is Going to Be Dash, I Guess

incredibles 2 villain

Snark + Sarcasm = what you’re about to read.

“Hey Jon,” said the Internet.

“Yes?”

“Check out this Incredibles 2 fan theory.”

“Uh, OK. Is it a copy-paste job of some random Reddit posting that is now on Buzzfeed?”

“No.”

“Cool. So, what’s the—”

“It’s on MTV.com.”

makes dial-up noises

Professional Reddit user and MTV writer Stacey “don’t tell me you don’t want her job” Grant recently put out this gem:

This Incredibles 2 Fan Theory Suggests a Beloved Character Could Actually Be a Villain.

incredibles 2 villain

Now, I don’t have any problem with speculating future movie plots and suggesting potential villains for sequels. Just as long as you give good reasons for why you think the story will turn out the way you play it out in your head. I’ve done this in the past for saying that a revived Tadashi-turned-Sunfire would make for an excellent villain in Big Hero 7, but in that case, I backed it up with reasonable evidence for why it would make sense for the story that is begun in Big Hero 6.

What you’re about to read isn’t really a case for why Dash is going to be the villain in Incredibles 2. It’s barely more than a wild guess.

The Incredibles 2 won’t be in theaters for another three years, but the fan theories are already starting to emerge with Dashiell speed.

Dashiell who? Do you mean Parr? Do you mean “Dash’s speed?”

The most recent one comes from Reddit user Professor_Wonder.

Until next week’s fan theory by w33d_sm0k3r91.

Inspired after rewatching The Incredibles, this fan theory says who the villain will be for the animated sequel. (It definitely won’t be Syndrome, thanks to that whole cape/jet turbine fiasco.)

Oh, Stacey, you slay me.

According to Professor_Wonder, the villain isn’t going to be some brand new character, but instead be someone from the first film, someone we know and love: Dashiell “Dash” Parr.

This is a weird interpretation of the Redditor’s original post. He wasn’t saying it as if he’s some insider trying to crack the code while trying to pay attention during his meeting with the Illuminati.

incredibles 2 villain

He was just exercising a neat idea he had, certainly not to get attention or have people take his speculation seriously beyond “Oh, that’s cool, maybe.”

FOR STARTERS, DASH IS SUPER POWERFUL, WHICH IS ALSO HIS DOWNFALL.

Says who? Pretty sure having a cape is the only downfall we see much of in these movies so far.

Professor_Wonder points out how the Parr family’s oldest son “is always going to be told to [rein] in his superpower.”

Right…

Remember at the end of The Incredibles when Bob and Helen Parr had to keep reminding their son to slow down and get his super speed under control?

Yeah, it was right before the part where he listened to them without making a big deal out of it because he knows he could win the race easily.

incredibles 2 villain

Kids are impulsive,

Where’s the emojii that makes a “shocked” face?!

and teenagers are definitely no better on that front.

incredibles 2 villain

Tell us more about teenagers, MTV.

Growing up, how many times did you do the complete opposite of what your parents wanted you to do?

Which means Dash could be a compelling character, but a villain? You’re going to need more than a Green Acres diatribe about growing up to reverse the typical coming of age trope we know Brad Bird is a fan of.

MOREOVER, HE RECEIVED POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT WHEN HE ACTED OUT IN SCHOOL.

But you just said that the problem would be that he does the opposite of what his parents want him to do. If you’re concerned about his parents being enablers, then that’s a totally different issue.

After using his powers to put a tack on the teacher’s chair without being noticed (well, almost), his normally melancholy dad perked up and actually smiled and laughed.

What a terrible…father? If anything, this is a positive sign that he gets different types of support from his parents.

True, his mom wasn’t having it, but Dash paid more attention to his dad’s reaction than to his mom’s.

OK, that’s fine and all, but these are just normal behaviors of young kids, not future villains of superhero movies (not that you can’t craft a good origin story out of something mundane, it’s just that you need more to go off of than “look at this imperfect character with imperfect surroundings”).

Professor_Wonder stated, “Dash is able to garner some positive attention by doing something negative.”

Is there anything inherently “negative” or dastardly about a harmless school prank? His father is reinforcing a positive thing, which is Dash feeling free to use his powers from time to time and embracing who he really is. This is seen in the end of the film as you referenced earlier when they allow him to go out for sports.

incredibles 2 villain

It’s not like Mr. Incredible got excited about Dash robbing a grocery store or doing anything else illegal. He was glad that his son was just being a kid and having fun with his abilities.

BASICALLY, MIXING DASH’S TEENAGE IMPULSES WITH HIS DESIRE TO BE NOTICED IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER.

Dash isn’t Kylo Ren. Plenty of superheroes are impulsive teenagers who want to be noticed. But they’re still ingrained with decency that makes them heroes. Dash is already that type of character, so assuming his hormones are going to turn him to some dark side is random, not something to be expected.

It’s the same with normal teenagers. How many tough acting kids do you know who would never harm a fly? If anything, Dash’s arc would make more sense if it positioned him as a hothead superhero who does good things for the wrong reasons, causing unintended consequences. Think Speedball from Marvel’s Civil War comics.

Why did Buddy Pine become supervillain Syndrome? The main reason was because he desperately wanted to be Mr. Incredible’s sidekick, and the superhero promptly shut him down.

OK…but this is a totally different—

Buddy was a teen who impulsively felt like he needed to defeat bad guys like Bomb Voyage, but he didn’t give himself a chance to stop and think about the best way to handle the situation.

OK, but it was also about his feeling inferior to the real superheroes because he lacked powers. That’s kind of irrelevant to—

Instead, he dove in and took action, which ultimately backfired.

Sigh, yes, fine.

His plan of impressing Mr. Incredible and getting his attention failed.

Sure, but that’s probably because it was based on an inherently unhealthy relationship.

incredibles 2 villain

Buddy tried to force himself into Mr. Incredible’s life as his ward, but you can’t just transfer that dynamic onto Dash, who’s his real son.

TBH, it’s not totally out there to think the same kind of thing could easily happen to Dash as well.

OMG, well, yeah, it kind of is for two big reasons. 1) Buddy and Dash are completely different characters with completely different motivations, abilities, and connections to the main plot. 2) Brad Bird is pretty good at making movies, so it would be very odd for him to replicate the Syndrome origin story for someone like Dash, who is already a character with an established personality.

Like they say, history tends to repeat itself.

And like they also say, familiarity breeds contempt.

I don’t want to harp on the Redditor at all, as I said earlier. His full post (which Stacey omits over half of) has interesting ideas in it that are worth a read if you’re interested. It involves a way to present Dash as a character who carries on the subplot from the first film involving Edna’s super suits, and even though it’s probably just wild speculation, it’s ten times more interesting than boiling it all down to those darn teenage kids pulling an Anakin.


Hey! If you’ve come across a silly article that deserves the Snarcasm treatment, send it my way via Twitter or the comments below!

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni