If Muntz was in his twenties when Carl was a kid, then he’d be around 100 when Carl is in his 80s. A vigorous hundred-year-old and a mostly sedentary eighty-year-old could conceivably look close in age.

The scene could have worked. I would have loved it if Carl’s response had been, “We’ve seen the bird! It’s been following us! The boy has chocolate–the bird LOVES chocolate. Here–take the boy’s chocolate. I’d love to see my hero in action!” If Muntz wigged out THEN, it would justify Carl’s actions thereafter.

But no…we have Carl suddenly and for no reason deciding he had to protect the bird from the man who would capture it ALIVE to take back and show everyone it really existed. There can only be one possible explanation for Carl’s actions:

Zoos are BAD. He sold balloons at a zoo. His wife worked at a zoo. Naturally, he must fight against them. Never mind that he was turning against a man who, just like Carl himself, was devoting everything to and defying the world for his one last great goal in life.

I think Up would have been a perfect short film–if it had ended where the house flew away under a million balloons…

Ha! That’s true, I did find it really silly when the dogs prepared…hot dogs…But I found it interesting how I could let that roll off my shoulder unlike many other films who just didn’t present their ideas as well.

But see, the thing is I feel that something like Remy being able to turn human is beyond the universe that they have created in Ratatouille. Whereas the dog thing is well within the explained universe. Besides, it’s not that dogs can talk, so much as there is technology enabling communication between the species. It’s one step further from still using dirigibles…I guess it’s just kind of Steam Punk for me which is alluded to through out the film.

It’s a long-running JOKE Pablo makes in all of his articles. He tries to plug the Anastasia-is-a-Disney-movie joke into every one of his articles. It’s hilarious. Regular readers of the site and his articles understand that.