Evelyn is an insanely predictable villain to the point that even the movie's most stringent supporters are even mocking it for. At first I thought Bird was messing with me and that it would've gone darker with it being both Winston and Evelyn, and Evelyn going rouge quickly after. Would've raised so many more questions and possibly have provoked a far more meaningful climax, with far greater payoff.
But nope. Evelyn is just bitter about her father dying due to his faith in superheroes. On the second watch I noticed there's a subtle hint to tying the plots together: to be a parent is also sort of being a superhero, whereas Evelyn wants faith in neither. She demands the human race to be independent, free of any guiding hands so we don't become weak. The thesis is very (very) subtly suggested that family is more than just familial, and even superheroes need help from us.
The problem is in the delivery of this thesis... it's delivered through the B-story, not the A-story. Why is this an issue? Because it robs our "main character" (Elastigirl) of an arc. There's kind of one, in the first act. Helen gets the assignment, but she's stubborn on her viewpoint... and then she changes that viewpoint and just embraces it. From there she's simply just taking names and kicking ass... it's very entertaining, but not very dramatically fascinating. It comes across as simple, which is what colored my poorer impression of the film overall compared to the first.
Instead, Bird throws the emotion and character building again on Bob Parr. Bob realizes that being a family man is just as heroic, if not more strenuous as being a superhero, with even more rewards. Very sweet lesson, and of course there's also the fact that we see Edna (a non-super) help Bob out in times of need. All nicely presenting our moral. Too bad Bob only gets what, two scenes and barely any dialogue exchanged with the antagonist? And none in a fashion wherein she's not BS'ing. Our moral and our villain never really meet.
The closest it gets is when Helen and Evelyn exchange their last lines.
Evelyn: Even though you saved me, it doesn't make you right.
Helen: It makes you alive.
Leaving it like that is such a confusing note, as though your immediate reaction is to think Bird is merely saying (with the hints of his alleged Randian objectivism) "shut up and be grateful". That, or "shut up and enjoy your flashy action cartoon". Helen never realizes anything in connection with Evelyn, and the whole structure kind of becomes wonky.
The first film worked wonders with this idea: Bob and Syndrome, like Helen and Evelyn, had the conversations about their viewpoint. Syndrome was made bitter because Bob himself refused to work with anyone else, wanting supers eradictated figuratively and literally. Through the course of the film, Bob realizes that his family (others) are more important than anyone else. He is not strong enough to risk losing his family again. They need each other, like society needs supers. Bam, moral hand-in-glove.
I2 of course has a similar moral delivered in a less controversial way (by hinting that Supers need help too), it just doesn't do it as finely as the first. It's structurally ajar.
Of course, I don't blame people for loving it. I just have mild OCD so this crap drives me nuts, even though I know there are many, many facets to this film that are objectively wonderful. That monorail sequence is by far the best action sequence I've seen in a film all year, yes I'm including Black Panther and Infinity War. The scene with the raccoon and Jack Jack had me belly laughing both times. The script has some wonderful lines, moody scenes and totally smart and irreverent wit. This is a film that has all the right pieces but a couple of them got put in the wrong order and man it's frustrating.
It's good, but it's frustrating.