UP

I watched UP http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1049413/ the other day.
It was enjoyable, but I'm disinclined to go along with the majority who claim that it is PIXAR's best work thus far.
Sure, this film is good and I enjoyed myself; it's just that it gets blown away by the likes of WALL-E, Ratatouille and the greatly underrated The Incredibles.
At least UP kicks the crap out of Cars. Ugh, that movie annoys me. It was just like a big-budget adaptation of those irritating BBC kids shows involving sentient vehicles that caper about the village and mockingly cavort in front of humans; their rightful masters.
Burn them all and crush them into a cube, I say.
I wish I could say that'll occur in the sequel, but I know it won't. Shame.

Let's take a look at the highs and the lows of this particular adventure...

HIGHS:
- The early montage involving Carl and Ellie's relationship. This was just beautifully done. The film had basically just begun and I found myself already crying. Their early courtship followed by the rise and inevitable falls of life are displayed with such care and emotion that I was hooked instantly.
PIXAR have always stuck to their motto that “story is king” and that belief is backed up by their diligent attention to the little details regarding character interaction. Simple little moments like Ellie gently placing her hand upon Carl's as children, coupled with the painted hand prints during the mailbox scene just provide depths to the story that sucks you in until you finally realise that you're staring at the screen through moist eyes.
PIXAR made me cry with a speechless little robot and they did it again with this wonderful sequence. Well done.
In fact, such an emotional high point so early in the narrative actually left me kind of detached from the later stages of the film, but perhaps that's just me.

- Kevin the bird is great. I'm not able to type volumes of text concerning this character, because, frankly, she doesn't do very much. What she does do though, and well, is stare about blankly in that awesome 'vacant sidekick' kind of way and squawk in a manner that is funnier than any line of dialogue could be.
She must have been fun to write. Just change the surrounding context and the audience can provide their own meaning for the squawk. Worked for me; I was laughing, and while I was underwhelmed by Kevin at first, by the end of the film, I found myself wishing that she had more screen time.

- Dug is the second character who I wished was given the chance to show off more. He's a big, squishy Golden Retriever...with a collar that allows him to talk. That's just awesome, right there. He's eager to please his master (whoever that may be) and he has that that delicately balanced canine personality that teeters between focused attention and squirrel-based distraction. He gets his share of laughs and he's generally always present on screen...but I couldn't help feeling that the multi-lingual collar plus his personality hinted at some wasted potential, script-wise.
Still, his solid visual design makes him a nice addition to the PIXAR roster and it'd be nice to see him used in some shorts or something similar down the line.

(Clearly reading his lines.)

- PIXAR never really fail to impress with their opening shorts, and 'Partly Cloudy' continues this tradition. I'm even inclined to say that I laughed more during this short than during UP. The concept alone is impressive enough to warrant extended praise and without trying to spoil anything, I'll simply say that the storks that deliver babies have a sort of work-like relationship with clouds. It's a brilliantly simple premise that works wonderfully.
...Oh, and there are few things funnier than watching a stork get winded after a baby ram smashes into its chest. Hilarious.

(Poor, poor stork...)

LOWS:
- Russell is a strange character. He's got a great design and there's loads of potential under the surface, but he never gets any really good lines and I just generally found myself wondering when he was going to click into place, y'know? Yes, I laughed when he got whipped across the face by a tent support strut but that wasn't enough.
Usually the sight of a fat kid getting injured is a comedy high-point and enough to make me enthusiastically recommend it to any film fans who'd enjoy the humorous sight of a plump child being accidentally whacked in the face by a plastic rod.
Alas, this time I felt like something was missing.

- The script could've used some more punch. The dialogue and narrative did the job and everything zigged and zagged where appropriate, but I expected some more spice. If someone cooks you a steak and just hands it to you on a plate, you'd be like, “Sure, this is a well-cooked steak, but I'd like a side of fries, some sauce and a frosty beverage to go with it.” THEN, sir, you'd have a meal.
With UP, I still felt hungry afterwards.
I saw this with my brother-in law and young niece and I think it left her unsatisfied as well. During the car ride home, she spoke more about how much she loved Monsters vs Aliens, instead of how funny Dug was.
Hmmm. Not the words of a customer who's just enjoyed a full meal, says I.

(Potentially hungry UP viewer)

- The talking dogs were wasted. I've already mentioned Dug, but all of the other dogs are basically just loud obstacles. Snore.
Speaking of which; the whole opposing force is nothing to rave about. Okay, the whole 'hero becomes villain' angle is not bad, but Charles Muntz just felt like a hollow place-holder. I got the same vibe from Clayton in Tarzan back in the day, who looked like Captain Hook's brother and seemed like he was merely the villain-shaped peg necessary to fill the villain-hole.
Lazy, folks.

I mentioned The Incredibles earlier, and I'll mention it again now for 2 reasons:
1. It's awesome and it warrants repeated viewing.
2. UP has a few things in common with it in the ways that it has been painted with some darker narrative tones in comparison to most of PIXAR's lighter fare.
I should make it VERY clear now that I personally do not consider this to be a textbook negative; au contraire. I yearn for the day when there are countless animated films aimed at more mature audiences. (Hurry up and get released, 9 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472033/ )
I mention this purely because I was feeling more down than up during this film, and that was not what I had expected. Especially not when 2 key characters had the potential for far more comedy than what was served to us.

As I write this, I'm detecting a scent of negativity that was not my intention.
This IS a good film and the adventure was worth every step. I guess I'm just not as passionate about this film as I thought I'd be. And, as I've learnt like any artist who explores their craft; my work suffers a little when the passion is not there.
Oh well, no drama.

My advice is to suffer through a painful viewing of Cars again before watching UP; then after being in the company of Larry The Cable Guy and the rest of the lame components that make up that bland, damaged wreck, you'll find your journey far more uplifting.

Seriously; Cars is crap, folks.