Monday, October 12, 2009

Some thoughts on Up...

9:20 PM / Cinema / Comments8 Comments

Cinema
Up

...or "Why I Can't Stand Children"

History repeats itself. A few posts back, I told you about my foolish decision to go and see Pixar's Finding Nemo during the school October week holidays of 2003. Well, today, I went to see the latest Pixar movie, Up, only released in the UK last Friday (yeah, I know). Guess what week this is? That's right: the school October week.

Yeah, I'm guessing you can imagine how that turned out.

Noxious, screaming brats as far as the eye could see, including one infant who started bawling the moment Carl Fredericksen's wife died during the opening five minutes and didn't let up until carried bodily from the auditorium by one of its parents. At least that parent actually did something proactive, though, which is more than can be said for the rest, who seemed content to let their spawn run riot... when they weren't trotting back and forth to the lobby to fetch armloads of feed for their mewling young. The dominating line of thinking seemed to be that, with a so-called "kids' movie", basic rules of etiquette did not apply and it was perfectly reasonable to disrupt the screening for the rest of the audience. That, or the parents in question genuinely can't control their offspring... which, when you consider that they are responsible for actually bringing them into the world in the first place, is a pretty sorry state of affairs.

This image more or less sums up what I had to contend with.

This image more or less sums up what I had to contend with.

That's not to say that all of the children in the audience behaved like this. Indeed, I suspect that a fair number of them were thoroughly innocuous. However, the actions of a minority meant that my strongest memory of the screening is not so much the film itself but rather the extent to which it was disrupted. It's too bad, because it really is a very good film indeed. I went to a traditional 2D screening because I knew it would be my only change to see it on film (the 3D screenings, and the forthcoming DVD and BD releases, are digital), and because I mistakenly believed that parents would shun the 2D version in favour of the spectacle of stereoscopic razzmatazz. More fool me, eh?

Anyway, the basic storyline has already been recounted more than adequately elsewhere, so I won't bother sounding like a broken record. (Yeah, like that would ever happen.) Suffice it to say, Pixar have once again delivered a highly entertaining, visually stunning and genuinely touching film that is up their with the best films I've seen this year, even if it's not in the upper echelons of the studio's dizzyingly impressive output. Last night, ITV broadcast an episode of The South Bank Show focusing on Disney and Pixar, in which the creative chief of both studios, John Lasseter, described Up as Pixar's most cartoony movie to date. Watching it today, it was clear what he meant. The contrast with the studio's previous movie, Wall-E is huge: while that film took on an almost photorealistic appearance at times and was specifically designed to evoke live action cinematography with its lens flares, depth of field and other deliberate imperfections, Up seems far less concerned about appearing "real". On the one hand, it looks a good deal more precise and "perfect" than Wall-E; on the other, it's almost tempting to see it as a step back technologically-speaking. From a conventional (live action) perspective, Wall-E was by far the studio's most technically impressive output to date, with all the supposed flaws very deliberately created. In contrast, Up's visuals have more in common with those of the likes of Cars and Monsters, Inc.

The latter should come as no surprise, as they share a director, Pete Docter, whose sensibility has always leant more towards bright colours, broad physical humour and conventional cartoony cuteness than his more serious-minded, brooding counterpart, Andrew Stanton (Wall-E and Finding Nemo), or indeed Brad Bird, whose The Incredibles remains Pixar's more adult-oriented venture to date. I haven't done any serious research into the differing reactions to their output, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that Bird and Stanton's films do better with the critics while Doctor's are a bigger hit with the audiences. Monsters, Inc. and Up are more conventional crowd-pleasers, and I suspect it's no accident that Pixar followed Wall-E (which is actually a rather depressing film if you take the time to think about it) with something more light-hearted and fanciful.

That's not to say that Up is nothing but a cavalcade of pratfalls and other assorted sight gags. Indeed, the opening scenes, in which we see the film's protagonist, Carl Fredericksen, meet the love of his life, Ellie, and then lose her to a long and debilitating illness, are tragically heartbreaking. This sequence, which recounts everything from their marriage to her death entirely through visuals, is masterfully achieved and the sort of thing that Pixar's more obvious competitors at DreamWorks could do with learning a thing or two from. Despite snuffing it in the opening minutes, Ellie is a constant presence throughout the film, and prevents the curmudgeonly Mr. Fredericksen from coming across as merely a nasty old man.

First and foremost, though, Up is feel-good escapism - the sort of movie in which dogs are fitted with collars which vocalise their inner thoughts (to hilarious effect) and a house can float thanks to a thousand brightly coloured helium balloons. In every respect - from character design to basic concept - this is not a film that pretends to exist in the real world, and yet the realness of the human emotions are what make it resonate so successfully with the viewer. In terms of Pixar's filmography, I'd put it behind Wall-E, The Incredibles and original Toy Story, but its a marvellous cinematic achievement nonetheless, and as myself and others never tire of repeating, most other studios can't hope to match even Pixar's worst, let alone their best. 9/10

 
8 Comments

1. Marcus said:

...and that's why I'm pro-choice.

Never mind the fact that a parent once had the brilliant idea of taking their 5-year old to my screening of Batman Beginsback in 2005. I had to hear the question: "Where's Batman?" being asked every five minutes for around one hour.

(Posted on Monday, October 12, 2009 at 11:14 PM)

2. Nick Wilson (Bros) said:

Exactly the reason why I hate going to the cinema at any time, as you get this kind of disrespectful conduct even when watching a bloody "18". Somebody had the great idea of bringing their

On one of the few happy notes, the re-release of ET gave me not only the opportunity to see the movie at the cinema (as my local refused to play it at the time because of the amount of pirate copies in the area) but allowed me to enjoy watching a whole new generation of kids emotionally destroyed by it.

Speaking of Pixar, a friend took her 4 year old daughter to see Wall*E at the flicks, and when EVE went into shutdown-mode upon discovering life, she read it as "SHE'S DEAD!!!" and blubbed her eyes out to the point where her embarrassed/annoyed parents had to take her home.

For the above reasons, this is why my missus has a lovely little implant in her arm...

(Posted on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 7:23 AM)

3. Olly said:

This is why I'm just waiting for the US Blu-ray in a couple of weeks. I'd be tempted to do that anyway, having not seen a 'kids' film in the cinema since Shrek for pretty much every reason you listed.

Plus I'm not going to bolster Disney's UK coffers when it does stuff like this. There's no excuse when even the vast majority of Disney movies get pretty much simultaneous releases.

(Posted on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 10:01 AM)

4. DMC said:

Erm, why not just go at a time when kids are not likely to be there? Like evenings.

(Posted on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 10:33 AM)

5. Kram Sacul said:

Because then there would be nothing to grumble about afterwards.

(Posted on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 4:33 PM)

6. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Actually, the reason I didn't go to a later screening is that I really wanted to see it in 2D, and there is only a single 2D screening per day, at midday.

I would wait for the BD, and have done as much for a lot of films I've wanted to see lately, but Pixar is pretty much the only studio that can get me up off my backside and out to the cinema. There's just something about the big screen experience that can't be beaten, even in the company of a crowd of yammering infants.

(Posted on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 5:06 PM)

7. Bleddyn Williams said:

Wow, some mean comments here.

I have a 6 year old and am quite capable of keeping her in line in a movie theatre. But when you go to a family film, you can't exactly complain about it being full of children - most of whom are certainly not "Noxious, screaming brats". I do think that when you become a parent you also develop extra tolerance for certain audiences. When we go to a family film, I expect a certain level of hubbub and am quite tolerant of it, in a way I wouldn't be if I was seeing District 9 on my own for example.

Before I became a dad, I was like people in this thread, and wanted to enjoy a film in peace. If I went to see something family-oriented, I went at a time slot that would minimize children.

Michael, going to a noonday screening on a school vacation week is pretty much ground zero for a kid-filled cinema. You must have had an idea of what you would get, and unfortunately for you, the 2D/3D thing screwed you up. Otherwise it really is that simple - if you don't like kids, pick your time wisely.

(Posted on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 8:45 PM)

8. Marcus said:

There are plenty of kids who behave well in screenings I have o say, only those are not the ones we remember. :)

A father took his 6-year old daughter to my screening of Team America back in 2004.. (I am guessing he was assuming it was a family film due to the puppet animation). He made her sit through the brutal opening sequence in Paris as well as the "everyone has AIDS" musical number. Yet as soon as the oral sex joke kicked in, he finally took her out of the room.

(Posted on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 11:13 PM)

 
To combat spam, commenting is automatically disabled on entries older than 30 days.

Did a comment you tried to post accidentally get eaten by the spam filter? It happens from time to time. I get upwards of 200 spam comments every day and unfortunately don't have the time to weed through all of them in case something genuine ended up there by mistake. If one of your posts gets incorrectly flagged as spam, email me at whiggles[at]ntlworld[dot]com and I'll do my best to retrieve it.