Why "Up" Makes Me Cry

---

This week: Up

Most men might be ashamed to admit that a movie has caused them to shed some tears -- I am not most men. Come on guys, man up and admit it - you've seen a movie or two that's caused the eyes to get leaky. You can wipe your eye and try to play the itchy eye game and hide it or just embellish the fact that you do in fact have some emotions. No worries - chicks dig men in touch with their own emotions (so long as you're not a total pansy). Up is one of those movies that make me cry.

Following in the footsteps of movies like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Closer, and Toy Story 3 (the end scene) - Up is a move that tugs at my emotional chords. The storyline of the old man who loses his wife, that he loved so much for all of his life, and then goes on an adventure to bring the house they live in to the place they always dreamed of going (but never got the chance) is a heart warmer.

---

The evolution of Carl & Ellie

---

Up is a starless movie - meaning there are no big names attached to the movie. With animation - it is very possible and should be repeated more then it is. The movie involves the director behind Monsters, Inc. and the writer of Finding Nemo (as a co-director). As far as the voice actors - I've never heard of them before.

The plot is simple - old man (Carl) goes on adventure with young scout kid (Russell) to bring their flying house to Paradise Falls (where Carl and his wife Ellie always wanted to visit but never could). Once arrived in Paradise Falls, they encounter a series of misadventures with an old angry man (adventurer Charles Muntz), an Ostrich-like colorful bird (Kevin), and talking dogs including the main ally of Carl & Russell - Dug.
Dug the talking Dog - who doesn't want a talking Dog?!

The goal for Carl is to get his floating house to the edge of the waterfall in Paradise Falls. He faces many obstacles along the way with Charles Muntz (and the angry dogs) and his quest for Kevin the ostrich-like bird who hangs with Russell and Dug. Once he finally gets the house to the cliff (after Russell takes off to rescue Kevin) - Carl realizes that his new adventure has only started and goes off to rescue Russell and Kevin.


Kevin the Ostrich-like bird. Apparently she's a rainbow bird...yes she

A story mainly about adventure, Up demonstrates a tale that can appeal to all ages. Not too childish and silly - the movie encounters grown up themes such as loss of a loved one and the father not around much for his kid. The film did extremely well in theatres and was a critical success.

Up continues to prove the dominance of Pixar films - and even though it's owned by Disney - it's interesting to note that Pixar animated movies have really dominated Disney animated movies as of late. Perhaps if Disney used more grown up and appealing themes instead of thinking we all still lived in the 1950's they'd do as good as Pixar. (Maybe that's why they bought them...)

Up also leaves an interesting plot hole that occurs to me - Where is the kid's mom?! I mean come on - these days if an old man flew off with a young kid - we'd all think the worst. The dad's MIA'ness is sorta explained in the movie - but the mom? No explanation. Pretty sure the cops would be involved in this whole story and the old man would never ever get to hang out with the kid again when the house landed.

Hey, where's my mommy!?

Despite the plot hole - Up is a great tale that everyone can watch and enjoy. Is it Badass material? Absolutely not - but every once in a while it's good to get in touch with the emotional chords. In the Eric ratings chart (follows much like the Michael Scott ratings system from the "Beach Games" episode of The Office) - I'd give it 7 points, 4 gold stars, and 2 thumps up.

And now for the tearjerker moments in Up:




Suggestions for the next movie review?  Let me know in comments!

The Mission is a Man: Saving Private Ryan

Classic film. Classic (how old does a film have to be to be a classic? SPR came out in 1998. I'm sure there is some kind of rule written into the stars or something for how old a film has to be).

I've been waiting for the semester to end to watch this flick. After all, it clocks in at 2hrs and 49mins, which is quite a commitment. What is rare about this movie is that it has very few parts that lag. Usually when you get long movies like this, they have that problem. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly drags in a few spots, but the epic-ness of that film saves it, and makes it a true western standard, against which other westerns are forever compared.

Tom Hanks plays Captain Miller, the main character.

My favorite part about Saving Private Ryan isn't all of the guts and gore -- of which there is plenty -- but it's the singular question that the film attempts to answer. The question is singular but not simple. In war, how can you rationalize death? The film creates the most difficult situation possible, which is sacrificing the lives of multiple men, for the life of one particular person, Private James Francis Ryan (from Iowa).

The movie spells it out for you, with some very memorable dialogue (to me).

Captain Miller: You see, when... when you end up killing one of your men, you see, you tell yourself it happened so you could save the lives of two or three or ten others. Maybe a hundred others... Do you know how many men I've lost under my command? 

Sergeant Horvath: How many? 

Captain Miller: Ninety-four... But that means I've saved the lives of ten times that many... doesn't it? Maybe even 20, right? . . . Twenty times as many? And that's how simple it is. That's how you... that's how you rationalize making the choice between the mission and the man.  

Sergeant Horvath: ...Yeah, but this time the mission is the man. 

Captain Miller: Yeah... well... He better be worth it. He better go home and cure a disease, or invent a longer-lasting light bulb or something. 

So this sets the scene for the entire movie, which is a trek across the fields and towns of the Normandy region of France. Their mission is to find Private Ryan, who parachuted with the airborne behind enemy lines prior to the D-Day invasion. He is a special person, because he is a sole surviving son -- his three brothers having been killed in action across the globe. Along the way, the squad encounters enemy patrols, snipers, machine gun nests, tanks, and their final epic battle. The squad of eight loses several man during their journey, and nearly breaks apart. At one point they almost kill each other as the tension grows.

These characters are struggling with the ultimate question of the film. In this case, the question, more narrowed, is how can you rationalize the death of many to save one? The mission is not like other military ones, whereby killing the enemy saves other good guys down the line (temporally). The mission is the man. You are saving one man, at the cost of many. This is a hard question to answer. One possible answer is that the film serves as a microcosm of a larger metaphor. That is, sacrifice in [just] war paves the way for future liberty. In this sense, the film is rational. That is, you are giving Private Ryan a future (and his family). As a metaphor, this works. As a pure analog, the story falters, because you are denying the liberty of the men killed to save Ryan. Socially, though, the sacrifice of the other men to save Ryan is acceptable given the weight we accord to family. Regardless of your personal answer, the story tackles an epic question, and is why it is so memorable and endeared.

Captain Miller with Private Ryan (Matt Damon)

on the bridge Ryan is under orders to protect. Before

the final battle, Private Ryan learns of his

brothers' deaths, but decides to stay and defend

the bridge until the infantry arrive.

A few words sum up this rambling of a post. Lying injured on a bridge in France, a dying Captain Miller leans into Private Ryan's ear and whispers: "James, earn this... earn it."

"...earn this..."