Terry Gilliam was JK Rowling's pick to direct Harry Potter? Can you imagine?

Maybe they can get him to do the last two.

News or rumors about a Trek prequel . . . one of the rumors has David Boreanaz in the movie.

Goooooooofs... iiiiiiin... Spaaaaaaace....

At best, it promoted the neo-con Republican stance against the liberal Democrat stance.

In what way(s)?

the anvils of politics came thick and fast and repetitively

Yeah, I'm not sure I noticed this. Curious about Scientology, too.

I have read more than one essay by bitter Republicans (John Tierney, e.g.), using The Incredibles to make a point about the excesses of self-esteem classes in grade schools. I think it was a cockamamie point, because, in real life, there are no eight-year-old superheroes, but the idea was that the movie was expressing the axe that at least one republican was ready and willing to grind.

in real life, there are no eight-year-old superheroes

That you know of.

t ominous music

t fade to black

Right-wingers often cite noted lefty Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" story, too, as an example of art demonstrating what they consider the logical consequence of the left's adherence to social equality. But I think it's a spurious point; while the totalitarian left has implemented policies that enforce equality through oppression (such as the Cultural Revolution, the Khmer Rouge, Stalin's pograms), no democratic leftists has ever, or would ever, by definition, push such a program. And it's certainly not like the right-wingers have the moral high ground, what with their totalitarian governments enforcing inequality through oppression. In fact, I think it's safe to say that most democratic thinkers of all stripes find those totalitarian governments embarrassing.

So, I don't think that the politics are as cut-and-dried as that, Raq.

On another point, I used to often judge art by its politics. Now, though, while I may not agree with the politics of Dostoevsky, H.L. Mencken, G.K. Chesterton, or, hell, half of the great poets of the 20th Century (who, as Richard Hugo put it, often mistook their own personal conservatism for political), I figured out that I don't need to agree with them to love their work. And that cuts both ways: I find Michael Moore tiresome, Janeane Garofalo unfunny (at least when she talks about politics - and, y'know, that goes for David Cross, too, who is squandering his talent as the foremost satirist of his age bitching about how dumb Bush is, 'cause, yeah, we get it), and I wish Billy Bragg had learned from his experience playing Woody Guthrie songs that you can say much more about politics by talking about something else.

OK, I see that article now (and others like it). I take the point that the movie can be read an indictment of an exaggerated form of political correctness ("if everyone is special, no one is")-- but at the same time, it can be read as an indictment of politics of exclusion (superheroes are marginalized minorities)-- like The Iron Giant.

I didn't react quite as strongly as Raq, but every time I've watched The Incredibles, I've had a more and more negative reaction to it, and eventually it became unwatchable. I can't get past how much I identify with Syndrome and hate Mr Incredible. (I keep trying to see it as something other than Physical Powers = Good, Brain Powers = Evil, because I know that Pixar is chock full of geeks, but it just hits me too hard. And it makes me too angry to enjoy the parts of the movie I still like.)