Sequels tend to be quite peculiar – Hollywood is driven by the idea that the only logical response to a major success is to follow it up with something that attempts to recapture the magic of the original, and while there are some examples of sequels being equal to those that came before it (as well as the occasional example of one that is better than the first), it mostly proves to be a fool’s errand, since there are several reasons for a film’s success that have very little to do with the audience’s desire to once again revisit these stories or characters. However, it’s impossible to condense the entire discourse around sequels into a single conversation, so instead, we should focus on a particular studio that has quite a storied history when it comes to revisiting its past triumphs. Pixar is widely considered the gold standard for animation, but the last decade has seemed to shift focus away from original works, which now have to battle the recent rise in sequels for prominence within the culture, and which rarely (if ever) manage to live up to the legacy of their primary works. Inside Out was a watershed moment for the studio – on one hand, it seemed like they were playing into the idea that their pitch meetings usually consist of choosing a random object and attaching the term “…if they had feelings” onto the end and building a film around it, while also being one of their most original and emotionally-resonant productions, something that is entirely aligned with the premise. It remains one of their most beloved films and one that has stood the test of time better than many of the others that were released around the same time, including those by the studio’s producing partner Disney, which has not fared much better when it comes to sequels to their acclaimed works. It seemed inevitable that this film would receive a sequel, so it’s an immense relief to discover that Inside Out 2 is one of Pixar’s strongest sequels, although not one that comes anywhere close to capturing the magic of the original, at least for the most part. Helmed by Kelsey Mann in his feature debut, and told with an abundance of attention to detail and genuine humour, the film is a delight, albeit one that does have a few minor shortcomings that prevent it from reaching greatness, despite a strong story and intriguing ideas that underpin the narrative.

Considering their track records with sequels are not as strong as some would hope (with only a couple of exceptions), it’s odd to find one in which a sequel seemed logical. Inside Out was a terrific film, but it was also one that had a wealth of possibilities when it comes to expanding on the world it creates, which is precisely why Inside Out 2 feels much more well-formed and meaningful, particularly in how it peels back the layers that were originally introduced when we first met these characters. Inside Out is expansive by design, and it’s very rare to find a film that feels like it warrants multiple excursions into this universe. Mann, despite making his debut, proves himself to be a remarkable storyteller and visual stylist (although a lot of credit needs to go to Pete Docter and the rest of the original team that came up with the core characters and the design of the film), and working closely with screenwriters Meg LeFauve and Dave Holstein creates a film that builds on existing material with vigour and charm. Their method is to do so by introducing new emotions, which proves that this material has an innate advantage to reinvent itself and explore different narratives through the simplest of means. Having this flourish into a franchise with multiple entries may not be the wisest decision, since the novelty will begin to wear away, but we can easily imagine a third film rounding out the story and offering new observations that will bring all these themes full circle and give them the depth they require without becoming overly heavy-handed or feeling entirely forced, a sign of a film that knows exactly what it wants to achieve, and sets out to remain true to the spirit of the original while also acknowledging that there are still ideas that could have played a part in broadening the story and how it navigates some tricky concepts that are nonetheless perfectly endearing and entertaining in the context of this film.

The only disadvantage when taking as wild a swing as Pixar tends to do from time to time is that a lot of effort needs to go into the world-building, which can either result in something magical and compelling, or dreadfully bland and misguided. This studio does reward ambition like few others, and writers and directors are encouraged to think out of the box, which has allowed some wonderful concepts to emerge. However, when it comes to subjects that are more nebulous or not rooted in a recognizable reality, it can become quite complicated, especially since they’re navigating the already narrow tightrope between making films that appeal to audiences of all ages. Much like in the original, Inside Out 2 is built from a clear sense that not even the director or writers themselves knew exactly how the world they have created functions, and not too much thought has been put into the logic behind some of its ideas. This is not at all a criticism, but rather an observation based on how the central ideas right at the heart of the film work, and how it doesn’t need to apply an overt sense of rational thought to absolutely every aspect. It aims extremely high and manages to manage to add a lot of complexity to an already layered story, and in the process (while it may not achieve everything it set out to do), it becomes effortlessly charming, particularly because it strikes the right balance in terms of tone. There are some genuinely tender moments, and while we do find there is a lot of sentimentality (which is one of Pixar’s most notable trademarks), it all feels earned, since the film is committed to saying something, rather than just plucking on the heartstrings, which makes an enormous difference and elevates the film to being much better than it could have been with the wrong approach to the material and its underlying ideas.

The original Inside Out was acclaimed for several reasons, but one of the most celebrated aspects was the characterization, with the film consisting of several colourful, eccentric personalities that were both hilarious and heartfelt, and a lot of that has to do with the performances. We find that Inside Out 2 follows the same general principle, having a few actors return, as well as introducing several new characters that fit perfectly into this world. Amy Poehler once again brings her infectious charm to the role of Joy and is joined by returning actors Phyllis Smith, who is as delightful as ever as Sadness, and Lewis Black as Anger, while Liza Lapira and Tony Hale replace Mindy Kaling and Bill Hader respectively, but still do terrific work that lives up to the standard set by the first film. New actors include Maya Hawke as the villain-coded Anxiety, the adorable and hilarious Ayo Edebiri as Envy and in one of the most amusing pieces of casting in a Pixar film, Adèle Exarchopoulos as Ennui. The cast works together splendidly and brings these characters to life with such vigour and charm. None of them is doing complex work (and no one has the emotional weight that Richard Kind’s Bing Bong brought in the first film, which some may see as a shortcoming to this sequel, but it would be impossible to replicate both that performance and the impact the character made, and it was admirable that they didn’t choose to go against the first film by bringing him back in some form), but rather the kind of straightforward, delightful performances that are filled with energy and genuinely very charming in a way that feels earnest and compelling, enough to carry the weight of the entire film, which is not an easy task, especially when these actors are essentially cast to play literal emotions, and thus have to temper their performances to be more than just hackneyed retreading of old ideas, but rather dynamic and captivating portrayals of abstract concepts that somehow manage to be more human in-depth than a lot of other characters we find in these films.

As it stands, the only example of Pixar sequels that manage to either live up to the legacy of their predecessors or outright overtake them in both acclaim and popularity are the Toy Story films, with the majority of sequels to other properties ranging from good to solid, and only one or two examples of ones that are actively worse. Inside Out 2 is a good film, but one that isn’t able to entirely reach the heights of the original. However, this doesn’t disqualify it from earning our respect, especially when it comes to showing the underlying themes that govern this film and make it so incredibly rich and evocative, particularly in the moments where we least expect it to contain such multitudes of emotional nuance and social commentary. As far as coming-of-age films go, Inside Out 2 doesn’t do anything particularly revolutionary outside of being about the inner workings of a young girl’s mind as she navigates the tricky and treacherous years of early adolescence, but it’s in this simplicity that we find the film thriving and feeling like such a complex, compelling exercise. Rooted heavily in psychological theory (particularly emotional theory – the extent to which Paul Ekman’s work inspired this film remains to be seen, but he was an influence), and brought to life with such incredible charm, Inside Out 2 is an absolute delight, a well-crafted and lovable comedy that can make us both laugh and feel those all too familiar pangs of longing and nostalgia, and it proves to be one of the better sequels in the studio’s history, at least in terms of how it honours the original while also managing to introduce some bespoke concepts that allow it to stand on its own as a great achievement, rather than one that is merely banking on the legacy of the first film, one of the many admirable qualities of this wonderful and insightful film that proves that Pixar still has the potential to challenge conventions in fascinating and heartfelt ways.