[exodust]

Good points, I agree with all that. Political correctness and the efforts to flip stereotypes, were overcooked. It's a shame that stories are managed now instead of written.

The whole "screen slave" thing was also a bit too close to current media attention around the topic of screen-time. Too obvious and blunt. Not a lot of imagination in that concept, only a reflection of recently canvased popular topics, like kids being addicted to screens. Viewers want to escape from reality, not be reminded of recent articles about screens, or gender stereotypes.

[jerf]

"like kids being addicted to screens."

I really felt this conflicted horribly with the setting, too. I'll accept for movie purposes the nifty modern computer screens that Syndrome uses or is on the Elastibike, but this is the 50s or very early 60s. Yeah, people were fulminating against TV screens then, but not to an extent I'd make a huge movie about it. It's a modern issue in a 1950s world, making even less sense than some of the strained political commentary sometimes set back in time.

[WorldMaker]

I think that's one of the problems with Incredibles setting that 2 only makes worse: the films don't seem to be set in the 50s/60s, they seem to be set in a world that never grew out of the 50s/60s. There is too much anachronism for it to be the 50s/60s. It's maybe the case that Incredibles 1 started in the equivalent of our 50s or 60s, but the time jump of "no supers" and the births and ages of the kids would indicate that most of the Incredibles happened maybe in the 80s/90s.

The timeline is probably a mess, but the clear point is that it can't be set in the 50s/60s so much as a world trapped in the 50s/60s idea of a future. It's retrofuturist nostalgia, at best. (Which between Incredibles 2 and Tomorrowland is perhaps where poor Brad Bird is trapped mentally and needs help escaping?)