Disney Animated Films
Topic: UP is Disney/ Pixar’s first DUD

#	Author	Message
91	ecdc Thu 6/11/2009 5:09p	I think mawnck is Carl before the journey. Get some balloons and fly to South America instead of yelling at kids to get off your lawn!
92	Jim in Merced CA Thu 6/11/2009 5:50p	Had the UP ended with the whole thing being a dream, and showing Carl getting carried out of the hpuse in a body bag -- it may have made it an even better movie -- almost like a wonderful, fantasy Twilight Zone.. It would have made more logical sense, I suppose. Still -- it's one if my favorite Top 3 Pixar movies -- for me it's 1. The Incredibles 2.Wall-E. 3. UP
93	basil fan Thu 6/11/2009 6:29p	Glad to read mawnck's post. The day we two agree on anything is the day I'll start to worry. Who expects realism in a movie where a house is floated off its foundation by helium balloons? Might as well complain that the dogs in Lady & the Tramp can talk to each other. That dream ending may be OK for late seasons of Dallas when they are desperate to do anything to get back their audience, but it would've made one lousy Pixar movie Just because a movie can shock or surprise an audience doesn't make it good. I guarantee I would've never watched it again. Now I am planning my second trip to the theater and eagerly awaiting the DVD release. Scooby-Doo http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/...tch.html
94	alexbook Thu 6/11/2009 6:40p	Saw it for the second time last night (got a free pass), and enjoyed it again. The point when the house takes off kind of threw me, the second time even more than the first as I noticed more details. You're so clearly in the real world up until then, and yet the house taking off is so clearly impossible. But that's okay, sort of. I mean, starting in the real world and then going off into fantasy is a pretty common convention. In some ways, the return to the "real world" at the end is the really strange part. It's almost as if Mr. Tumnus had come back out of the wardrobe with the Pevensie kids.
95	mawnck Thu 6/11/2009 8:09p	>>Who expects realism in a movie where a house is floated off its foundation by helium balloons? Might as well complain that the dogs in Lady & the Tramp can talk to each other.<< It's not the lack of realism, it's the way they expect you to switch back and forth between realism and Looney Tunes mode whenever they darn well feel like it. Whatever rules are established in whatever fantasy world you create - whether it involves houses picked up by balloons or a little wooden boy with a talking cricket, you have to have a darn good reason to change them midstream or the believability of that world goes down the tubes. Storytelling 102.
96	ecdc Thu 6/11/2009 9:06p	>>Whatever rules are established in whatever fantasy world you create - whether it involves houses picked up by balloons or a little wooden boy with a talking cricket, you have to have a darn good reason to change them midstream or the believability of that world goes down the tubes. Storytelling 102.<< I agree Up had some plot holes and some "Deus ex Machina" going on. I had a hard time initially with the dogs in the planes, too. But what part of Up had us believing that some of this is so implausible? When did they previously establish that dogs wouldn't be able to fly planes? If it's that Up is supposed to take place in the real world, we've got a problem, because early on there's plenty of pretty fantastical things going on. The line between "acceptable unbelievability" and "unacceptable unbelievability" is blurry and varies from person to person. I can buy the dogs flying the planes - but Carl not being hurt like a frail 70-something should? That never crossed my mind because I was too busy...enjoying the movie. I had a friend who objected that in Angels & Demons, two characters are walking from different locales, one is farther away than the other, but they arrive at their destination at the same time. I can't imagine the kind of nitpicking that it takes to notice something like that - and Angels & Demons was no Up. I always enjoy and respect mawnck's perspective, and I think there's some valid points here, but overall, it wasn't my experience and I just can't agree.
97	DyGDisney Thu 6/11/2009 9:20p	Bah, people are thinking too much. It's an animated movie for God's sake. How is it The Incredibles is more believable. I mean, they start out as a typical famiy, but are actually superhero's that save the world. And what about Ratatouille, I mean, do you know any mice that can cook? Or a myriad of Disney movies from Snow White to Beauty and the Beast to Mary Poppins. It's just for fun and entertainment, and the bottom line is......the bottom line!
98	ecdc Thu 6/11/2009 11:38p	>>Bah, people are thinking too much. It's an animated movie for God's sake. How is it The Incredibles is more believable. I mean, they start out as a typical famiy, but are actually superhero's that save the world. And what about Ratatouille, I mean, do you know any mice that can cook? Or a myriad of Disney movies from Snow White to Beauty and the Beast to Mary Poppins.<< No, in fairness to mawnck, he's right about creating a believable world and then staying within the bounds of that world. (Although it's not Storytelling 102, it's actually Storytelling 310.) Ratatouille does a very nice job of staying within those boundaries. Rats can talk to each other, but it sounds like squeaks to humans. Remy can understand English when it's spoken to him. But what if, halfway through the movie, Remy just started talking to Linguini in English, instead of using gestures, without any explanation for the change? It would take you out of the moment. Up pushes those boundaries. But I think the mistake (though I'm sure he'd disagree with that characterization) mawnck is making, is assuming that Up is taking place in the real world. And certainly there's some indication of that - real people are mentioned, like Teddy Roosevelt. There's real contraptions and certainly much of what happens we see happening all the time. But if one is going to complain about breaking the boundaries set, it has to be from the moment the house lifts off into the air. The balloons are held on through the chimney to the fireplace grate. Certainly that couldn't support the house. And that's a pretty narrow chimney, and to support the house, he'd have to have several hundred-thousand balloons - the strings along wouldn't fit. Why accept that premise, but not others? Because the flying house was in the previews, so we're already conditioned for it? At the moment that house takes off, if not sooner, we're expected to suspend some belief in the way the world was previously presented to us as "the real world."
99	Jim in Merced CA Fri 6/12/2009 7:14a	<Bah, people are thinking too much.> This is said so often with regard to entertainment -- and it always chaps my behind. People write that when talking about theme park attractions too. It's dismissive. It suggests that the person noticing the lack of logic, lack of detail, lack of theme-ing, is being 'too picky.' If you want to sit it a movie theater and watch the pretty colors flash by, and just 'be entertained' -- go for it. Just because someone thinks beyond what's presented on the screen, doesn't make them wrong.
100	mawnck Fri 6/12/2009 7:27a	>>Because the flying house was in the previews, so we're already conditioned for it?<< I'd say "yep." It's on all the posters and in all the previews. It also occurs early enough in the movie to be considered an exposition rather than a violation of the movie's reality. I took the psychic dog collar as presented for the same reasons - until the other problems got me thinking about it. The dogs in the airplanes, on the other hand, follow much doggie-like incompetence on the part of Muntz's crew. The dogs we see prior to that are pretty impressive, but they're still essentially doing doggy tricks, not to mention doing other doggie things like getting distracted by thrown tennis balls and imaginary squirrels (which don't appear to exist in the rain forest in the first place) and stealing hot dogs (where'd they get the hot dogs?). Flying a plane - especially with nothing but a squeaky bone for control (where'd they get the squeaky bones?), would be waaay beyond the dogs we see prior to that moment, and from all other indications, way beyond the dogs allegedly doing the actual piloting as well. I'll suspend all the belief you want me to suspend, as long as you let me keep it suspent (?) through the whole movie, and not repeatedly ask me to re-suspend it after you've just gone all realistic on me.

All times are Pacific Time (US)

Note: Information on the discussion boards is sometimes based on rumors or incorrect information and should not be assumed true. Messages do not necessarily reflect the opinion of LaughingPlace.com or its editors.

More messages:	1-10	11-20	21-30	31-40	41-50
	51-60	61-70	71-80	81-90	91-100
	101-110	111-120	121-130	131-140	141-149

< Previous Topic

Next Topic >

You must be a registered user to post messages.
Click here to register.
After registration you will automatically be brought back to this topic

Antenna Toppers and Accessories
Antenna Toppers of all styles including sports, holiday, animals, occupations and more. Hundreds to choose f rom.

What's on
The Latest
Miley Cyrus tour bus in fatal crash, Miley not aboard
Captain EO on the way back?
Mobile Magic Application Transforms Verizon Wireless Phones Into Electronic Tour Guides to Navigate Disney Parks
Disney Executives Swap Jobs
2009 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade Sailor Mickey Mouse Plush Available Online
Disney Digital Books Expands Its Vast Library with Princess and the Frog Books
Disney Interactive Studios Starts a New Holiday Tradition with Disney's A Chrsitmas Carol Video Game
Jonas and Sonny With a Chance Video Games Invite Fans Onstage, Backstage and Beyond
Disney Cruise Line in Macy's Parade for the first time
Space Mountain preview

Click here for The Latest