This movie is fairly weak, but okay

Rating: 4/10 (30 May 2009)

I'm a big fan of pixar movies, I think finding nemo, ratatouille and Wall-E (though to be fair I didn't like Wall-e either the first time I saw it) are some of the best examples of narrative storytelling in the last 20 years. Simply put, the Pixar clan know how to tell stories.
That's why I was so surprised when I saw up. Now, maybe my expectations are too high, but I found it to be one of the weaker Pixar efforts. And here's a few reasons why.
1. It draws on associated emotion, not real emotion. Much of the sadness in the film (and this is a sad - not happy movie) isn't earned. It comes from referencing other films and our own associations - specifically at the beginning. The opening montage goes by so quickly, as a scrap book, that it falls upon cliché to create the emotion. Granted, for many people this will work, because to be honest, there's something affecting about seeing cartoons go through "serious" emotions. Yet, these scenes lack the depth of having our characters go through real actions and real feelings. Things happen, the characters don't do anything - they let things happen to them. (and example is that Russel's (spoiler) parents are divorced. This scene is handled in a clichéd and associated way. So and so's not my mom! Heard that one before...) If you enjoyed the opening montage, watch Mr. Holland's opus - that movie does this same thing better.
2. This movie isn't funny. All of the best jokes are used in the trailers/commercials. Much of the comedy is played too subtly (not subtle, but too subtle) and passed over too quickly. There's never a clear moment of what the movie is trying to make us feel at any given time - which brings me to
3. Tone. Is this a comedy, is it a melodrama? The movie doesn't really know what it is or is trying to say. It's inconsistencies constantly set up a new series of expectations which are never followed through on. It's serious...I'm thinking it's going to ... oh wait, a joke...wait...
4. The narrative. The movie takes about 2 acts to find itself as a movie. Carl meanders though the film trying to take his South America. He wants to put his house down, and every 2 minutes a new complication arrives. Then, in the third act, he battles the old and now evil (how old is this guy supposed to be if Carl is 78?) Charles Muntz. He comes to defend russel and dug, and the bird. He finds a purpose - the movie finds itself as a movie! Finally...but by then we've spent 2 acts trying to get into another story completely.
4A. there are a lot of clever storytelling devices, there is a good story here. It's a matter of the storytelling and dramatic devices the filmmakers use to elucidate that the story that are weak.
5. The characters. Between Carl and Russel (shout out to the Asian community) we have a weak set of characters. The most interesting character, Ellie, dies. Her passive husband is left - the into to him shows how awesome she is. What did she see in him anyway? what did he do? Russel is kind of an idiot spaz. why should I root for someone who's so incompetent?
If Pixar can animate characters with big heads and big eyes, everyone will think it's cute. Great date movies, great for kids, and hipsters. The overall storytelling I felt was pretty weak in UP. It felt like it was rushed off without knowing precisely where it was going - which is a joy to watch in the other pixar movies. Brad Bird and Andrew Stanton make you feel like you're in the hands of a master who is taking good care you - who is guiding you and surprising you, but never doing something you're not enjoying. Up is very muddled film-making. It's not horrible, but it's much weaker than the other films.
cheers.