The Subplot From “UP” That Pixar Removed
Posted by John Campeaon 12. 06. 2009in News Chat
I’ve already raved on and on about how good… no good isn’t the right word… PERFECT the new Pixar movie “UP” is, but I’m going to gush just a little bit more since I saw it the other night for the second time and it just got better. It is… a perfect movie. No weaknesses, no flaws. It’s touching, beautiful, exciting, charming, endearing and outright HILARIOUS all at the same time. It is the best picture of the year, and if another one comes out in the next few months that’s BETTER than “UP”, then this will be one hell of a movie year.
At any rate… the good folks over at MTV came across this little bit of interesting information. Apparently there was another subplot in UP that was supposed to be a part of the film that they decided to cut out:
When MTV News visited the Pixar headquarters in Emeryville, CA recently we couldn’t help but notice that there were early sketches on the walls of Carl (Ed Asner) — the 78 year old man who flies his house to South America in “Up.” In these pictures we saw, he was constantly holding a giant egg. It wasn’t his breakfast either, but instead the spawn of his rare, hunted bird friend Kevin.
“That was early on,” director Pete Docter explained of a subplot that focused on a fountain of youth. “We had the bird give birth to this egg, and Carl then felt like he needed to take this baby — it needed tending to, and needed to get home.” “[Carl needed to] get away from these awful dogs and things,” he said of the character’s unseen adventures protecting the egg.
Sounds interesting… but ultimately I’m glad they took it out of the film. It’s already full and adding another “symbolic” subplot would have been unnecessary in my opinion.
Damn… now I want to go watch it again.
This post was written by :
John Campea who has written 6783 posts on The Movie Blog
visit author's website | Contact the Author
Me too!
John,
Interesting observation or maybe not from me. My friends kids(both under 5) hated UP and WallE. I haven’t seen Up but loved WallE.
They loved Cars and Toy Story and he other Pixar films but these 2 are just not hitting for them at all. Is that common? If so are these 2 films more like kids movie made for adults?
I can see how a 4 year old boy wouldn’t be into WallE, little dialog and slow paced with just a couple of exceptions.
Am I on to something or are these 2 kids rare exceptions?
Hey Russell,
I’ve said for a long time now that Pixar does NOT make kids movies. They make movies that are kid friendly.
Looks at the themes of their flicks. Marriage issues, aging issues, dealing with having kids and being a parent… all these are concept beyond children basically… but Pixar makes their films in such a way that kids are generally entertained by them too… but they are not the target.
Cheers!
Finally saw Up on this past Wednesday, and the hype is spot on – UP is perfect. I laughed, I wept, and did it all with my wife and two kids in tow.
The great thing about Pixar films is the levels of enjoyment that they offer. My oldest son (7 years) enjoyed the goofy stuff – the dogs, Russell, etc. My youngest son (15 mos) was enamored with the richness of the scenery. And my wife and I were both moved by the underlying love story.
I hate to see anything animated instantly labeled a “kids” movie. What Pixar does is create family films – and they do it better than anyone else.
Gotta agree with John, Up is the movie of the year so far, I found no flaws whatsoever in the film, and I cannot wait to see it again. I took my 2 9year olds and my 7year old and they all loved it (and they all loved Wall-E as well and they were a bit younger last year). Gotta agree with you John, another subplot would have been too much there was enough going on in the movie already.
I thought that the movie might go in the “fountain of youth” direction. It just seemed odd to me that Muntz was still alive when Carl was an old man. When I saw that he was alive the first thing that popped into my mind was that the falls were some kind of fountain of youth.
The movie did NOT need that subplot.
If the bird was in South America, why would Carl have the egg? “We had the bird give birth to this egg”? At Carl’s home in North America? Would the bird say “Hey CArl, I’m going to South America now, have an egg.” This blog is not making any sense…
I think Pixar is becoming more like Studio Ghibli which each movie. They are not made specifically for kids but if kids enjoy them too all the better.
John-
Saw ‘UP’ for the first time two nights ago. Like you I am a HUGE Pixar fan. I agree with your assessment that they are the best studio around right now.
However, I was shocked to see the film that-while brilliant at times-if full of moments that make it flawed. The talking dogs for one were a universal killjoy in the theater. Everyone looked at each other after the 10th failed talking dog joke with a “WTF” expression on their faces. This seems like a bad Disney decision from 5 years ago. Lets add cute dogs that talk like the fighter pilots from ‘Star Wars’. Kids will find that cool…right?
The film opens with one of the sweetest and most beautiful sequences in years. After that in slowly goes down hill. The fountain of youth story line would have been a wonderful add, considering the theme of the flick.
I cannot believe for a second that you think this film is better than ‘WALL*E’ or ‘Ratatouille’. Better than ‘Toy Story’ 1 or 2? No way!
I remember having a good friend of mine tell me she thought this film was a 7 after seeing it with her 8 year old son. I thought she must have been nuts after reading your review last week. After seeing it, I wholeheartedly agree. It is in the middle of the pack of Pixar films.
You are a fantastic critic most of the time, but you really find NO flaws in this flick?
A very good film? Yes. Perfect? Hardly.
Up was a great film, but I have to say Wall-E was a much better film, to me, that deserved more respect than it ever received. Up is good but not the perfect film that Wall-E is. Something rubbed me wrong when all of the sudden dogs were flying mini-airplanes. Yet, what really ruined the film for me was how the whole runaway from the old evil explorer subplot ,materialized. Why did Carl not tell him they had the bird, just because the kid loved kevin? That doesn’t seem plausible to me since Carl was not terribly attached to the little chunk at the beginning. I just felt like the more natural series of events would have had Carl telling his boyhood friend that he had the bird the man was looking for to clear his name. This progression just seemed forced to me and was a major linchpin for the progression of the film.
oh and that ladder on the dirigible was quite convenient, but hey it is a movie and a pseudoid’s film at that.
i only have one word to say.
SQUIRREL!
I really enjoyed this movie, but I think that “outright HILARIOUS” might be a bit of a stretch. Humorous, sure. But I definitely didn’t think this movie was as funny as The Incredibles or Toy Story 2. Sweet, yes. Funny, yes. But let’s not overdo it with the hyperbole on the humor front.