History Headscratchers / Up

* Not about the movie itself, but... a Christian movie reviewing site claimed the movie was sexually immoral. Why? Because they read an AccidentalInnuendo line towards the beginning of the movie as implying that Ellie took off her clothes during the part of the movie where Carl and Ellie were both kids. I'm not myself certain whether the line was AccidentalInnuendo or GettingCrapPastTheRadar, but in either case it's very clear that Ellie was actually referring to something else, and I see no reason why I should assume that the writers intended GettingCrapPastTheRadar.
** You're expecting ''Christians'', a religion with a bad reputation for lambasting anything and everything at the drop of a hat, to need a ''reason'' to complain about something?

* The whole point of Muntz's lifelong trip was proving the scientists wrong, right? So why not earn millions or billions from the dog collars(most dog owners would pay through the nose to have a device to actually communicate with their dogs) and presumably, other inventions that he might come up with in his spare time and send a freaking army to find that bird?

*** "...we don't get to see what happens back in the city." Call this DisContuinity, but Pixar did make this: [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hF5KWMX3u4Y]]

** Actually, i find the whole team of writers and animators managed to make an amazing job on this scene. It's left to us to interpret what happened there. If they had mentioned "miscarriage", "sterile", "abortion" or any other big word, children would be upset, and parents would be upset(rightly so) for having to explain such a concept to a young one(Specially if they had mentioned it ''wasn't'' their first try). Now, while we adults can understand the sort of thing that happened and why is such a touching scene, it's not the same for children, whose parent will need to address what happened there.

* I've only seen this movie once and a few days ago, but i don't remember seeing a jungle on the path leading to the waterfall, unless they took some off-screen shortcut. Also, it may just be me but, that path did NOT look like it would take three days to cross. Granted, it's a very old man and a chubby kid carrying a giant house on their back, so what do I know?

** It would've been an option if Muntz didn't derail into a murderous, paranoid psychopath by then.

* Where did Muntz get the voice samples for the dog's collars? Unless he's ''scary'' good, those voices are even better synthed than the best real-world voice synthesizers (Alpha aside)--but even ''those'' need prexisting voice clips from which to work.

**** It's a * very* rare species, killing one would be extremely frowned upon, or even might constitue a crime. On the other hand, he was so obsessed with capturing it, he was willing to murder other people. Even children.

*** FridgeBrilliance : Carl's job isn't exactly high-paying and there's no indication that Ellie had a job other than "occupation : housewife". They were able to buy the house bacause it had been long-abandoned, and keep it up, save money and have a middle-class lifestyle on Carl's income ''because'' there were never any kids.

** Sadly, this scene invokes Occam's Razor. First, the entirety of the scene uses nonverbal cues to clue the viewer in on what is going on. They never show Ellie with a pregnancy bump, and in order to assume she is pregnant, you'd have to also assume that for some reason, they have abandoned the non-verbal cues concept, specifically for that 6 seconds. You would then have to make the logical leap to her being pregnant, in order to think she had lost the baby. Comparitively, if you go with the concept of only taking what the scene actually shows, it makes far more sense that she was informed of being barren. As many who have commented on this already have attested, you don't stop trying to have a baby after one miscarriage.
** Actually, i find the whole team of writers and animators managed to make an amazing job on this scene. It's left to us to interpret what happened there. If they had mentioned "miscarriage", "steryle", "abortion" or any other big word, children would be upset, and parents would be upset(rightly so) for having to explain such a concept to a young one(Specially if they had mentioned it ''wasn't'' their first try). Now, while we adults can understand the sort of thing that happened and why is such a touching scene, it's not the same for children, whose parent will need to address what happened there.

** Pretty much everything said here...also keep in mind, there's some heavy symbolism there. Carl had those balloons, the helium, and the experience necessary from his job at the zoo, a job heavily associated with Ellie and her own zoo job. Balloons are also those magical, colorful things that kids love, because they feel happy. So it's almost as if youth (also VERY strongly associated with Ellie) and memories of Ellie are what're carrying Carl up there.

* Minor, but towards the end when you see Russell graduating with the other scouts, is it me or does Russell look...out of place for lack of a better word? It's hard to explain, but the other kids seem to have more fleshed out faces (re: more noticable noses and chinss) while Russell's is like...not. I know, genes and all, and Russell's design implies he's a bit on the chubby side, but still.

*** While there may be some golden undertones to Asian skin, the lighter shades are very often not noticably different from a cacausian person's. He has Asian features, not just with the eyes but also the shape of his face, straight black hair, and an Asian-American ''voice actor''. Characters aren't always the same race as their voice actors, but Disney ones are more often than not.

** Sounds like [[{{Community}} Not Being Racist Is The New Racism]][[hottip:* : I'm sad that [[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=iphk4daulxtra23i3x9h26jl that]] didn't make it past the YKTTW, we need it... [[YKTTWPlug for examples in fiction]], [[PredefinedMessages mostly]]]]. If you notice that he "looks Asian", you're noticing physiological stereotypes. If you don't, and don't think it matters (I thought the woman at the end looked like [[DarkSkinnedBlonde Mi]][[{{Mukokuseki}} ra]][[AmbiguouslyBrown ge]] from ''TheIncredibles'' with black hair and no tan), you're racially insensitive (wich I find personally insulting, since I didn't notice he was supposed to look even vaguely Asian, or anything more specific than a [[AnimationAnatomyAging probably]]-pudgy kid, until well after everyone else was arguing online about it. For that matter, I didn't even remember that Muntz was a German name until they started playing up the pre-war propaganda style in the documentary, though it probably helps that he has a rather thick North American English accent). If you associate Russell's [[WordOfGod unique]] stylization, naievite, and whatever-shaped eyes with Down's Syndrome, you think all Asians (not even bothering with specific ethnicities) are somehow related to Down's Syndrome sufferers (see also the above comment on people associating other people and things with what they're used to seeing, especially since Pixar went for their stylized look which makes everyone AmbiguouslyHuman). Since WordOfGod says Russell's Asian, I'll go with that, but it would be nice if people would stop picking on everyone with [[{{Mukokuseki}} stateless]]-tinted vision.

** There's a much simpler reason. He doesn't realize immediatly the connection between Kevin and the skeleton, since it's hard to remember ALL the details of a story you knew from years and years ago. And by the time that he has noticed, just about the same time that Russell recognized the shape of the skeleton, it's more than obvious that Muntz might not be the friendly person he seemed like when dinner began. Really, Carl didn't want to mention the bird because he realized that Muntz's paranoia was too dangerous to risk making him suspicious.

** Muntz was considered lost. Admittedly South America is a long way away, but * someone* would have told the story of the crazy gringo flying his zepplin into Caracas.

** Given how absolutely beserk Carl went when his letterbox got damaged, it's fair to assume he didn't want to 'soil' the Adventure book by thumbing through it after Ellie's death. He didn't strike me as being a nosy chap, at any rate.

* It bugs me how there are several ''really obvious'' references to studio Ghibli films in this movie, yet nobody notices. If it were from any other animation studio, I would have passed it iff as coincidental, but knowing Pixars relationship with Studio Ghibli, it is very logical to assume that:

** Someone's definately mentioned at least once outright that Ghibli was an inspiration. This troper felt the end, between the music and the shot of the sky, with the mundane shot of two people just being normal, was ''very'' Ghibli.

* I get that Carl is supposed to be presented as an older protagonist than normal, but it still seems kind of awkward that the montage of his life with Ellie completely skips over everything between their first meeting and their marriage. As a pair of lovestruck adventure seekers I'd have thought the early years of their friendship and growing romance could have provided some touching images that would make their lifestory feel more complete, even if it only took up a few seconds of the montage.

** This Troper thinks they exageratted what Carl had done in order to get him out of the house

** Maybe he had another one elswhere in the house.

** "It's just a house". The turning point in Carl's characterisation is when he sees all the photographs of his marriage and the message from his late wife that she enjoyed their adventure and that he should now find a new one. So despite all the attachment he shows towards it prior to that point, there is no remorse when the house eventually flies away. Now considering that the credits involve many, many photographs with Russell, it seems pretty clear that Carl's new adventure is being a father figure for him.

*** Why does he give a rats ass who finds it? whoever finds it, it will prove him right. as stated before, he doesnt need the money (if there is any to be had from finding the bird), he can sell his inventions, or just keep living like hes been doing, which apparently doesnt take much if any money, since hes been doing it for ~60 years with no income.

**** The real problem is where he got all the balloons, and why they didn't lift the house until he "released" them (If the whole house doesn't weigh them down, a tarp or something definitely wouldn't either). As far as lifting the house using a large (but still terribly undersized) amount of balloons, it works for me, at least. Not like anyone would actually be able to accurately count the balloons. I don't have a lot of physics knowledge, but just the fact that the cluster of balloons is so much bigger than the house does it for me. And even if I did notice the blatant impossibility, I am a fan of animation and it's quite obvious that 90% of every animated work ever created has some degree of "cartooniness" to it. I see it as "large amounts of balloons could eventually lift up anything," not "There's about 11,980,000 too few balloons." If that doesn't do it, then MST3KMantra.

**** It works for me, at least. Not like anyone would actually be able to accurately count the balloons. I don't have a lot of physics knowledge, but just the fact that the cluster of balloons is so much bigger than the house does it for me. And even if I did notice the blatant impossibility, I am a fan of animation and it's quite obvious that 90% of every animated work ever created has some degree of "cartooniness" to it. I see it as "large amounts of balloons could eventually lift up anything," not "There's about 11,980,000 too few balloons." If that doesn't do it, then MST3KMantra.

****One of the DVD extras directly addresses this. They ''did the math'' and found out that it would take more than 12 ''million'' balloons and be totally unrenderable. Director Peter Doctor said, "Ok, then just make it look like ''a whole lot'' of balloons." (There were just over 20,000 in the final renders.)

**** Searching for "[[http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=site%3Atvtropes.org+Up&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=site%3Atvtropes.org+Up&gs_rfai=&fp=bcdf8cbbf06dc4f site:tvtropes.org Up]]" gives you the right page as the very first link. Of course, you have to know about [[http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/answer.py?answer=136861 Google's advanced search options]] to figure this out, [[SoYeah so yeah]].

*Why didn't Carl get in trouble with the FAA or the police throughout the film? I mean, he launched a house attached with balloons unregulated into the sky and landed a ''blimp'' on top of an ice cream parlor. SoYeah.

* Why did Russell need so many more badges than all the other kids to graduate to Senior Wilderness Explorer? At the beginning he shows Carl all his badges and tells him he needs one more in order to graduate, and he has a ridiculously large amount of badges. At the end of the movie, all the other kids graduating have, like, five or ten badges. Why show favoritism to everybody but Russell, Scout Master? Oh, let's pick on the fat kid. To hell with you! Russell's awesome. All those other kids can bite me! ... SoYeah. ItJustBugsMe.