Why "Up" is the New Down

Last updated on: June 1, 2009 at 7:55 am by Richard Clark

Why "Up" is the New Down 2009-06-01T07:55:05-06:00 Richard Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Editor’s Note: You will most likely not want to read this until you’ve seen the film. You have seen the film… right?

The introduction to Pixar’s newest film, “Up,” is utterly shocking. While some of us went in expecting something “cute,” wanting to be distracted from the typical trials of everyday life, and perhaps wanting our sons and daughters to be shielded from them, others of us went in expecting to have to make an extra effort to suspend our disbelief, with the understanding that this was a movie primarily about making a house fly.

What we got instead was an opportunity to approach real life in a way that was utterly realistic and at the same time utterly hopeful. What we found was that this film was not really about a flying house at all.

Entertainment culture is dominated these days by two lenses through which to look at life: Cynicism and Naivete. Offerings such as The Daily Show, Late Night television, Angels and Demons, Green Day’s 21st Century Breakdown all present a highly suspicious look at the world. They submit to the audience the suggestion that those who are supposed to be looking out for us are actually looking out for themselves. Even worse, they tend to suggest that all of life is hopeless and only useful as a means of comedy. We laugh so that we do not cry.

On the other hand, previous Disney films, romantic comedies, and the more current and specific “Night at the Museum 2” all view the world with an absolute certainty that the glass is indeed half full. Often, conflict exists only for a short time, and only to be overcome totally and absolutely by the end of the program. They suggest that while life may not be easy, it is in fact “simple.” Evil is clearly marked as evil and good is either easily identified or simply summed up as “following your heart.”

In fact, adherants to both of these viewpoints, cynicism and naivete, suffer from a lack of complexity in the way they view life. In an effort to make sense of life, they distort it so that it fits into their own warped perspective. Reality isn’t quite ignored, but it is carefully spun.

We are these adherants. We all suffer with a displeasure and discontentment with reality as it is. The cynic in us interprets that which doesn’t go according to plan as a purely negative development. The naive in us refuses to acknowledge that our man-made plans may in fact be flawed. This is a disease none of us is immune from, and it becomes particularly pointed when Christians begin applying it to our belief about God and the way He works in the world and our lives.

This is why “Up” is such a special film. It takes both cynicism and naivete head on, and as a result rings completely and utterly true. Carl Frederickson, the archetypal old cynical man finds a friend in Russell, a classic naive Wilderness Scout. They both find that dreams don’t always come easy and aren’t always achievable, that people aren’t always easily pegged as mean or annoying. Most importantly, they learn not only that hardships, tragedies and struggles are a regular and consistent part of life, but that they are opportunity for growth, surprise, and moments of pure grace.

By the end of the film, you realize, along with the characters, just how much more rich their lives are as a result of their dreams and hopes previously being crushed, not just once, but over and over by divorce, a tree, bad health, death, a disappointing role-model, and geographical distance.

No, the story isn’t really about a flying house at all. That would be too simple, and if that was what it was about, the ending would have been very sad indeed. Of course the cynic would delight in such an ending. After all, that’s what life is really like sometimes, right? The naive would hate such an ending, preferring the old man get to where he always wanted to go.

Neither of those endings would satisfy me, because the story’s about much more than whether or not that house gets where Carl wants it to go. It’s about two characters whose lives were changed for the better… just after they were changed for the worse. That’s grace, and that’s beautiful.

Featured

Film

Headline

Previous Post

May 29, 2009

Podcast #48: Jon and Kate + "Oh, Great it's the Summer TV Season"

Next Post

June 1, 2009 Dissecting an 'Up'-lifting Moment

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Asides Elsewhere Featured Film Games General Culture Headline Literature Music Of the Moment Podcast Politics RetroPost Sports Technology Television Uncategorized Viral

Select a Month February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz