Russell's innocence and devotion shows his purity, and the example he sets through that purity helps Carl see the error in his ways of thinking. The house "represents Carl's attachment to the physical world," while Paradise Falls is heaven, or at least how Carl imagines heaven, based on a particularly utopian locale he saw on TV as a youth. They theory says: "The raising of the house represents Carl's initial transition from the physical world to the spiritual world.
He 'rises up' in the same way as people who have near-death experiences relate the feeling of floating above their body and watching as the doctors resuscitate it. And when he finally lands at Paradise Falls after having a transformative journey and without his home, which he finally let go of , Carl has finished his transition, presumably reuniting with Ellie in heaven.
Now go have a new one! Why would Carl return to earth and Russell's ceremony after finding Heaven? What is the montage of Carl and Russell's adventures during the credits? It was his lifelong dream to go with his wife and be with her there. What was he going to do there? Hunt his food and clean his own water, in his age?
Carl was planning to die at Paradise Falls. That way he'd be with his wife again. Until that point, all of those dogs were still dogs doing dog things, simply with the added comedy of the translation collars allowing us to hear what they were saying. Once they got in the airplanes, though, they broke the rules of the world that had already been established. I had the same complaints about the pilot dogs and the lack of concern over Russel being missing, but then it was pointed out to me that I was bothered by those but OK with he house being flown around the world by a bunch of balloons tied to the fireplace grating.
I was a bit bothered by the flippant death of the bad guy, actually. Falling from great height has got t be a horrible way to go. I almost wonder how much of that was tacked in after all the test audiences committed suicide from severe depression. I feel like any critique of their filmmaking is washed away in the constant accolades. Aside from Invincibles — where Helen is inarguably the most capable character and, jealous with fairly good merit — their films are altogether lacking in dynamic women.
I actually turned off Ratatouille after the great female character was downgraded into a wussy sidekick mid-film. Who gives a fuck what you think? This film is for kids, not for adults to over analyze and complain about, you sound like a butt hurt feminist. Phyllis was the woman sitting in the audience at the end of the movie. I really wish more of his family was explained. She is not in movie. A reasonable conclusion might be that this film is told primarily from the perspective of an old man, and the second main character is a boy.
And the film is narrowly focused on these two characters, and there is nothing wrong with that. As a mom with three boys and a husband who is at work and misses a lot, I have something to say about your view on females roles, especially in UP.
Charles looks so good, in fact, that you almost expect him to reveal he's somehow halted the aging process. Unfortunately, beauty is only skin deep, and Charles turns out to be a psychopathic killer.
Charles is just made up of good genes and a bad, bad personality, proving once again that you can't judge a book by its cover. Charles has clearly been warped by his desire to prove that he's not a fraud and that giant birds do, in fact, exist. He's so desperate to capture a living specimen that he has literally killed people to keep them from getting to one first. This would, at least, prove that there is, in fact, a monstrously large species of bird living in the wild.
A video might also be enough to gain the interest of the scientific community, prove that he didn't fake finding the bird, and prompt an actual expedition with a research team to hunt down one of these birds.
There's absolutely no reason that, in an age when smartphones exist, Charles couldn't have just taken a video of one of these massive winged creatures instead of attempting to continue his murder spree. It almost seems like Charles is looking for a reason to kill people. Unless Charles' airship, the Spirit of Adventure, has the same mysterious anti-aging properties as its owner, we've got to wonder how it is still air-worthy.
This airship has been flying since the s! Sure, Charles is an inventor who has no doubt been able to make repairs to the ship over the decades, but it still seems incredible that it's flying after almost a century. It's reasonable to question just how safe it is to fly such an old aircraft.
There's also the fact that Charles isn't just flying the Spirit of Adventure on special occasions — he's actually living on the ship full time. According to Flexport , an aircraft is air-worthy for around 30 years. Even if the Spirit of Adventure is a top-of-the-line airship that has been well-maintained, we can't imagine that it can remain safe for decades longer than modern airplanes.
Just when we thought we had wrapped our heads around Carl's flying house in Disney's Up , we are introduced to a team of talking dogs. Okay, they don't exactly talk they're wearing special collars that translate their thoughts into English , but they do know how to perform some pretty unnatural not to mention impossible tricks like cook and fly planes.
Wait, what? Even in a world where technology that lets you have conversations with dogs exists, we have to wonder exactly how Charles trained these dogs so well.
Are they some sort of ultra-smart breed designed by the military? And just why were these dogs trained to fly planes? Is Charles trying to build up some sort of dog army? And if so, for what? Is Charles' quest for a giant bird just a cover for his ultimate dream of world domination? Russell is pretty proud of the fact that he's able to "train" Kevin the bird by giving her chocolate.
It turns out, though, that this isn't actually a good thing. Birds aren't supposed to eat chocolate , and giving it to them can have some pretty nasty side effects. Birds are susceptible to chocolate poisoning, which affects the digestive system.
Of course, Up 's Kevin is a particularly large bird, so it would take quite a bit of chocolate to kill her. Had she been smaller, though, that chocolate Russell feeds her could lead to vomiting, diarrhea, seizures, and eventually death.
Russell is just a kid and clearly doesn't know better so we can't blame him, although you'd think that Carl, an adult, would question whether or not giving a wild animal chocolate is the best idea. Thankfully, nothing bad happened to Kevin in the movie or else Russell would have ended up pretty traumatized. On the surface, Disney's Up is a whimsical fantasy adventure.
It's bright and colorful and has a fabulous score. But there are so many sinister themes that, as an adult, it's kind of hard not to get a little depressed watching it. The first few minutes are already loaded with tragedy. Ellie and Carl lose their baby and, it seems, can't have any more kids. From there, Ellie dies, we find out that a businessman is trying to buy Carl's house so he can build on the property, and Carl is ordered to leave his beloved home and enter a nursing home.
Things seem like they'll get better from there as Carl takes to the sky and heads to Paradise Falls. The house magically floats across the world and, by a stroke of seemingly good fortune, Carl runs into his childhood hero Disney has long been in the practice of selling dreams, but Up seems more concerned with destroying them. We get that the Wilderness Explorers in Disney's Up are modeled after the Boy Scouts, but they still seem pretty patriarchal.
First of all, while there's no assumption of gender in the organization's name, all the members appear to be male. They are accompanied by men presumably family members on stage as they receive their badges.
0コメント