‘Up’ Review (Pixar)
Written by Serena Obhrai on October 21, 2009 · Filed under Review, TV/Movies
Up (PG)
Cast: Edward Asner, Christopher Plummer, Jordan Nagai, Bob Peterson,
Director: Pete Doctor, Bob Peterson (co-director)
Running time: 96 minutes
Pixar are notorious for creating magnificent pieces of visual work with suitably moving storylines to accompany the animation and soundtrack, thereby undoubtedly producing spellbinding works of art. I am hoping that my previous needlessly complex sentence construction will go somewhat towards explaining how the facets of this film mean to do well when put together, but ultimately don’t manage to cut the mustard. Don’t get me wrong, Up feels like it should do well. But, for some reason, I just can’t get the Pixar magic out of this production.
I don’t usually give away the details to the review so up front, but I fear I’m one of the few people who really didn’t think this film did as well as it could have. So, I’m offering you the chance to click away before you start baying for my blood any more than you really should be.
Now that we have that out of the way, we can begin. What happens when you put together a little fat kid, an OAP, many bright colours, no storyline and a floating house being pulled by a piece of rope? Answer: a film that hasn’t been assembled well at all. It appears that the writers for Up got a little lazy when it came to the story actually having any meaning. Pixar are usually very good at reminding you to treasure your friends and/or loved ones, or to treat people well or be kind to one another. After watching this though, I haven’t got a clue what the moral of this film is at all.
It begins with a tediously long montage of the old man’s life. Do be warned; this goes on for about ten minutes. You apparently need to know how monotonously boring his life was with his wife Ellie before she dies (they don’t seem to have any other friends – did anyone else notice this?). Even the Rocky training montage was only a couple of minutes long. Maybe three and a half, at most. You are then introduced to the annoying little fat kid, Russell. This is the type of kid who you’d imagine to snort in his sleep. The kind of kid who when eating his food not only likes to show you the deluge of mush in his mouth, but will also make sure he’s carrying his lunch around with him on his t-shirt for the rest of the day. Basically, he’s useless. And, I feel as though Pixar put him in there for comedy value rather than anything of worth – simply because he’s a little fat kid. You’re supposed to be laughing at him, rather than with him. Haven’t we got past this attitude yet?
(May I please add here that it pains me to do this…)
So the scene is set. The old man and the fat kid are off on an adventure. Except, at no point are you told this. Now, I’m not stupid, but even the suggestion of the old man wanting to go on an adventure isn’t there. He just ties a few hundred (maybe thousand?) helium balloons to his house and you have to accept it. Much like the rest of the film – stuff happens in no particular order or for no particular reason and you just have to accept it. And, I think this is what made me dislike the film. When watching Finding Nemo, you are aware from the start that the father is off to find his fishy son; cue the adventure. In Ratatouille, the boy needs to learn how to cook to keep his job; cue the mousey help and the kitchen adventure. In Monster’s Inc., they have to get the little girl back through her door; cue the monster fun.
I could go on, but I’m sure you understand what I’m getting at. There is no ultimate driving factor for this film to be taking place. There’s no story arc, no real character development and the annoying little eight-year-old fat kid has found a friend in a 78-year-old man. So, basically, if he wasn’t going to get the living b’Jesus kicked out of him for being a complete and utter pain in the a***, he sure as hell will now, Pixar, given that his only friend is a mere sneeze away from having drinks with the Grim Reaper.
I’m not convinced this is supposed to be a children’s film either. Not only does the film deal quite starkly with death being the overall theme in the first twenty minutes, but there are a number of issues that children just don’t need to see in an animated film. Carl (sorry, this is the old man’s name and I probably should have used it earlier) is facing his house about to be repossessed. His lifelong house with all his memories of his dead wife Ellie is about to be destroyed. If that isn’t enough, he gets so depressed with it all that he tries to set fire to it later! His beloved house! Oh, and by the way, during the course of their marriage they weren’t able to have children – despite trying – and, later, he loses his teeth. This film is centred around death and is actually quite sad. Now, if you didn’t click away when I asked you to a few paragraphs ago and still think I’m talking nonsense, then fair play to you.
But, I just couldn’t get my head around this film and I was excited about it for so long. There are talking dogs that are just a little ill-thought out and are supposed to be the antagonists to whatever story has developed. Let’s not forget the nonsensical (female) bird called Kevin. And you know what? I laughed out very loudly when Russell named this bird Kevin. And do you know why? Because that is exactly the sort of humour I expect (and love) from Pixar. It’s simple and it makes sense because kids get away with anything. Up is a little too complex and is just badly organised to be of the usual Pixar standard. Sorry guys and gals. I thought this was going to be a lot better.
I await Toy Story 3 with much anticipation.
Up gets an appalling 2 out of 5 from me.
Comments - share your opinion or ask a question...
Sorry. I have to say I completely disagree with your review. You’ve also failed to mention the 3D element of the film or did you see it in 2D?
This is, in my opinion, was quite a daring move for Pixar. Why? Because it dealt with death and how things don’t always work out like you thought. Russell was just what Carl needed in his life. Since losing his wife and best friend Ellie, Carl became sour against the world, but Russell gave him new life and meaning to his life and gave him back some youth. The house represented what was left of his wife as he’d never fully excepted losing her. Russell’s brilliant line of “It’s the boring things I seem to remember”. You feel for him also as you find out that his Dad is in the army and he’s a very lonely kid.
The 3D element to this film was outstanding! It gave the scenery more life and left you slack jawed many a time. It was a colourful film, but this added to the vibrancy 3D and it looked stunning.
The opening sequence was brilliant as I’ve never felt for a character so quickly in an animated movie. You understand how much Carl and Ellie loved each other, and made you understand his loneliness and pain. Now, this is only a small thing, but the fact that Pixar showed blood on another human shows you just how more adult these films are becoming. But I did laugh my arse off quite a few times, but not as much as I have in the past, but it was still the funniest Pixar film since cars. (That’s not to say Ratatouille and Wall-E weren’t funny. Wall-E is THE best Pixar film to date).
A ‘fat annoying kid’? Aren’t most kids that age that hyperactive and curious? I agree this wasn’t Pixar’s best, but you seem to have a problem with a house tied to balloons, yet were impressed with talking fish, talking cars and a rat that can cook. This is a world of make believe where anything is possible.
I’m a massive Pixar fan also and have never seen a bad film they’ve done yet and I still stand by that.
Although this wasn’t their best, I was still mesmerized by this story.
I think you’ve built this up to much and expected it to be the Holy Grail of animated films and you’ve failed to see the true storyline throughout this film.
A morale I picked out from the film? Life’s always an adventure. Live it. Tell me what the other morales are? Aren’t most Pixar films about friendship and realising what you’ve got right in front of you?
This review is a poor reflection of the film.
Oh and one more thing, you said “…………….he gets so depressed with it all that he tries to set fire to it later! His beloved house! ”
It wasn’t Carl who set fire to it! It was the villian of the film who sets fire to it so Carl has to make a choice!! Save Kevin, or save his house!!
It’s Carl who puts the fire out!!
Again, I’m afraid I have to disagree! I thought it was absolutly brilliant, including the “pre film” (the little cartoon before the real film, which was both cute and funny!). I do totally agree with the first comment and I think this is a great example of both disney and pixar going back to the ‘good ‘ol days’ with films like toy story which were funny, lighthearted and heartwarming!
Am afriad as far as I’m concerned you’re definitaly in a minority in not liking this, and although I don’t have the time to go through all the reasons which I have a differing opinion to you (although nicely outlined by Arthur above) I belive you’ve been a little to skeptical of this, and missed the whole point of the film :)
A bit of both from me…
I did think UP would be one that would defiantly split the fans but one thing I did not expect was that what you thought were its worst points, I thought were its strongest. I love the little fat kid! Not at first though. At first I wanted him to die (and not in a good way). But I grew to like him and, it pains me to say this, even feel sorry for him. This could be due to the fact I have children and that I may be able to sympathise with them a little more (I have taken a wiled guess that you have no children Serena, and If I am wrong I am sorry). I also loved the randomness of the story line. It took me back to days of old watching films like “The Never Ending Story” and “Labyrinth”. Totally random flights of fancy with quirky characters and unthinkable scenarios. If you like your story lines more structured, more robust and well laid out, maybe (just a suggestion) you should not be watching “children’s films”.
Anyway, I don’t want to seam all negative on the review. I thought UP was a good pixar production, however, I have realised that not all pixar productions appeal to all people. E.g, I love finding Nemo but loath Monsters inc. I don’t know why I hate it as the animation is good, the story line complete and it is funny in some places, but ultimately, it just boars me?
Overall I thought the review was well written and I can see where Serena is coming from. Looking forward to reading more.
@ Arthur: Yeah, it’s weird. I knew I wanted to like this film and yet couldn’t bring myself to. I just couldn’t hold onto it like I have been able to do with the others. I adore Pixar and their oddness, like you say, but for some reason this premise just seemed a little shaky.
I’m still also not convinced that kids should be having to deal with this stuff so early on. I mean, it’s obvious Pixar aren’t just for children, but even Finding Nemo and The Incredibles dealt with mature themes on a child-friendly level. Isn’t that the point of cartoons; that they appeal to children?
And yes you’re right, I didn’t see it in 3D. Maybe the interaction would have changed my view a little more, who knows?
I do appreciate your rebuttal, though, thank you :)
@Mike: With regards to children, I love them, ask anyone that knows me, haha. I want a million of them! But, I don’t like that the kid had to be this stereotypical annoying kid for us to like him. He could have just been a standard-looking kid. I think you’ve missed the point of my rant with the kid.
Thank you for your kind words about the review, there’ll be more soon.
Overall: I knew I was in the minority. There was just something about it that didn’t quite sit at home with me on it. I guess it really is true that one (wo)man’s trash is another man’s treasure!
Let’s roll on the next one :)
I think you are wrong when you say all the characters in the film are not Dynamic. Whist the villain and the kid comrade isn’t; the main character is. He goes from a grump old man who hates kids to, can only think about his dead wife and childhood dream (spoiler) to a grandfather figure to the fat kid who has fulfilled his dream. Instead of valuing adventure in the unknown ‘wilderness’ (as an fan who glorifies the ordeal as the meaning of life) he finds that the most important things are the moments you have with the people you care about (as quoted from the fat little kid, “I’m sorry I sound boring but it’s the boring stuff I remember the most.’ Also the fact that his idol turn out to be a jerk suggest idolizing ain’t the way to go.). I wouldn’t say at any point that the relationship between the kid and the old man is that of a friend/buddy.
I wouldn’t say random things happen for no reason, maybe the comedy is like that but you clearly know the motivations for each character.
You can look at Pixar films in two general ways that a very different. You can say that the Incredible is a movie about a super hero family who do cool things or a film about a man/family trying to find themselves and their place with each other in a environment where they have to keep their lives secret. You can say the Monsters, Inc is a world where a company of Monsters that scare things, or that two monsters find out that the thing they ‘fear’/don’t understand is really just a precious delight so much they do anything they can to protect her.
Usually Pixar films have a general equilibrium between the two. This does not (while there are certain creative characters there for humor reasons). This is more relationships, people and finding a new perspective kind of film. Up is about an old man dealing with losing the most important thing to him since he was a kid and moving on in life. He does a big sacrifice at the end. A story about a boy finding a father/grand father figure in a grump old man. That is the point and driving force of the film.
I think the montage was important because the House=Ellie and Ellie=most important thing in his 70 years of life. Him letting go of the house at the end wouldn’t be as effective without the back story. Also explains why he wants to go to South America and somewhat justifies the lengths he goes to fulfill this dream.
When I think of Pixar film, I think their focus is relationships but if you are more about “another worldly” kind of film and want to be bombarded with a ton of visuals, then this is not the film for you. :O
Though I do admit that the film isn’t straight forward with you in the beginning. There are hints but not until he release his balloons 20 minutes into the movie that you are like, oh it’s a ‘going on an adventure/do your dream” film.
P.S. Moral of the story is to not live in the past and look to the future. At least that’s why I got out of it.
This review has to be one of the most cold hearted i have ever read. The author should clearly stick to antique Disney (Beauty and the Beast, Cinderella, etc). Times are changing buddy…kids have access to infinite amounts of communication and are bombarded on a daily basis with all kinds of information. They are fully aware of household problems and all that’s going on around them, at least to some extent. This movie, besides the amazing visuals, teaches children a valuable lesson…hold on to love, to a dream and STICK TO IT. Troubles arise, but nothing is to much for love. And THAT is surely what i want my kids to learn. Pixar is worthy of my time and money in so many levels, and each movie created is an amazing rollercoaster of emotions (WALL-E).