Animation is not a genre, but a medium used for telling many different types of stories. It’s frustrating when animation in its entirety is disregarded as the type of farcical, fantastical adventure stories that are exclusively aimed at children, as even family-friendly animated films tend to have a degree of specificity and originality to them. “In Your Dreams” (2025) is the type of film that animation cynics would claim represents the entire genre; not only is it lacking in originality, but it also fails to develop any of the fundamentals of a story.
“In Your Dreams” centers on the siblings Stevie (Jolie Hoang-Rappaport) and Elliot (Elias Janssen), who couldn’t be more different. Stevie is a great student and bookworm who wants to make her parents proud, whereas Elliot tends to cause chaos and mayhem wherever he goes. Stevie may be annoyed by her brother, but she’s forced to consider a deeper family crisis when she senses that her father (Simu Liu) and mother (Cristin Miloti) are arguing. After her mother announces that she has attained a new job, Stevie questions if there’s a way to bring her parents closer together.
The premise of a child reckoning with their parents’ disagreements is not an original one, but may have been compelling if “In Your Dreams” had taken the time to thoughtfully examine Stevie’s relationship with her mother and father. This isn’t the case, as the film’s actual plot revolves around Stevie and Elliot being whisked away to the world of dreams when they discover they share a subconscious imagination while asleep. The Sandman, a mythic figure within folklore, would seemingly grant their wish of saving their parents from divorce. Although there are a number of interesting cultural and mythological angles to approach the character from, “In Your Dreams” introduces the idea of the Sandman after Stevie and Elliot stumble across a magical book in the most hackneyed way possible.
The Sandman is a figure that’s been depicted many times in animation, with the underrated holiday film “Rise of the Guardians” being a prime example. The formless, generic look of the Sandman in “In Your Dreams” may have felt more insulting if it didn’t feel consistent with the rest of the film. This is a film devoid of detail with its environments, as the world of Stevie and Elliott’s dreams is just as banal as their bland living quarters.
While it would be unfair to compare “In Your Dreams” to other recent animated films, it does itself no favors in touching upon ideas and themes that are so evocative of many different Pixar and Studio Ghibli films. There’s even an imaginary friend character of Elliot’s who resembles Bing Bong in “Inside Out;” if “Inside Out” used Bing Bong to make a profound statement about what’s lost in adolescence, the obnoxious presence of “Bologna Tony” (voiced with no degree of subtly to Craig Robinson) is to insert no shortage of slapstick, toilet humor.
Also Read: The 25 Best Animated Movies of All Time
Even when considering that these are young characters who don’t entirely think through their actions, “In Your Dreams” struggles to connect Stevie’s anxiety about her parents to what she experiences while dreaming. This isn’t only because of how little time is spent with the characters before the plot kicks in, but because Stevie’s life is almost completely undefined. “In Your Dreams” doesn’t hint at her interests, show any of her friends, or explore anything fundamental to her personality other than her relationship with her parents. Her surprising degree of both maturity and naivete is even more frustrating when compared with Elliot, who shows a lack of self-awareness that is unrealistic, even for a child his age.
“In Your Dreams” seemingly bases these characters on what other animated films would depict them as being, as there is no authenticity to anything about their relationship. Even if Elliot is intended to reflect the erratic, inexplicable mayhem of a young boy, his choices are calculated to move along the plot in the most manipulative of ways. If the intention was to make the character as obnoxious as possible, then the film succeeded wholeheartedly. Even if seeing a youthful protagonist in a lead role might be engaging to young audiences, it’s hard to imagine Elliot being a particularly likable character, especially in a film where there are already other figures inserted for comic relief.
Stevie’s characterization is already weakened by the film’s inability to say anything about her life outside of home (it’s teased that she’s a great student, but there are no scenes of her in school), and it’s made even less convincing as a result of the static animation. While studios like Pixar and Illumination have been accused of creating “house styles” in which all their films adhere, they are at least able to develop different environments and explore different genres. The animation of “In Your Dreams” is clearly intended to be realistic, but the effects aren’t quite realized to the point where the characters can actually emote without some form of over-the-top reaction or expression. It doesn’t help that the film inserts a style of slapstick gags that feel removed from a wackier cartoon, and don’t congeal with any of the more grounded elements.
“In Your Dream” also uses multiple haphazard ways to justify extending its plot to 90 minutes. A strange device used by Stevie to get her brother to forcibly fall asleep is incredibly lazy, especially given how fast both characters seem to adapt to the unusual logic of a dream. The parents, who are more effectively cast in the background, are brought into the main narrative during the final act to deliver the type of emotional support and wholesome conclusions that the film simply hasn’t earned.
As aggravating as it is for the story to be wrapped up so neatly, it’s even more frustrating when “In Your Dreams” seems to hint at any degree of ambiguity regarding the uncertainty of growing up. Even for those who claim that these films should be judged by different standards, children deserve better than “In Your Dreams,” as with many Netflix originals, it’s intended to be viewed as a background distraction for an unengaged audience.
