Even though I didn’t really like Juno, it was no fault of its director, Jason Reitman. The movie was well-acted, and the directing was pretty good—it was just that hipper-than-thou dialogue that made me cringe. And, I LOVE Thank You For Smoking, which was a particularly well-crafted directorial debut. So, when you consider the amalgamation of George Clooney, Jason Reitman, and a whole slew of funny cameo appearances, it’s no wonder that critics are going gaga for Up in the Air. I’m just not one of them.
Read more after the jump!
Read more after the jump!
Clooney plays Ryan, a “downsizing specialist,” which means he’s on the road over 300 days a year firing people at companies whose bosses are too scared to do it themselves. He loves the road but hates his family, feeling settled, and being stuck. He loves the efficiency of flying and checking into a hotel without even speaking to someone. And, above all else, he loves frequent flyer miles, which he has been collecting to try to reach the lofty goal of 10million. Along the way, he meets a gal who’s like him “with a vagina”—so detached and modern. But, when a plucky newcomer tries to change his company’s ways to video firing, his way of life is threatened.
It’s not that Up in the Air is bad—far from it. It’s actually quite good. Clooney does his Clooney shtick of being so darn likeable even when he hates people. And Vera Farmiga is definitely delightful and charming, even if she’s not your typical Hollywood beauty. Even that chick from Twilight, Anna Kendrick, shows she has real talent outside of the ‘tween scene by playing the slightly uptight up-and-comer trying to change Ryan’s ways.
So, the acting is good; the dialogue is good; the directing is pretty decent, but why didn’t I loooooove it? To be honest, I’m not quite sure. I think it’s because everything feels so smug. Clooney’s character treads the fine line between likeability and assholeness. If it were any other actor, there wouldn’t be that slight spark of likeability. Also, it’s almost as if Reitman is patting himself on the back by crafting a movie about corporate layoffs in a time when it’s a reality for millions of Americans. When Ryan spins a story about how now’s the perfect time for a disgruntled employee to go be a chef like he always wanted to be, it’s so vomit-inducing. There’s no sensitivity in place for those that this is a distinct reality. How realistic is it for a man over the age of 45 to go back to culinary school after being laid off? Again, the whole thing feels so damn smug and almost righteous.
Plus, in the plot department, not much happens. You can see the moral to the story from 10 million frequent flyer miles away. Of course, Ryan will learn that there’s more to life than connecting flights and efficient luggage. But, then again, if you’ve seen enough movies, you can also guess how the modern romance of no-strings attached and appointment sex pans out. It’s ironic that a character that enjoys the least amount of human connection is the one who condones firing people face-to-face--or that he's even in a movie that feels so glib about unemployment.
Up in the Air is much like Clooney’s suits in the film: it is slick and perfectly tailored, but it feels a little too showy to mask the lack of substance underneath.
--Darcie Duttweiler
It’s not that Up in the Air is bad—far from it. It’s actually quite good. Clooney does his Clooney shtick of being so darn likeable even when he hates people. And Vera Farmiga is definitely delightful and charming, even if she’s not your typical Hollywood beauty. Even that chick from Twilight, Anna Kendrick, shows she has real talent outside of the ‘tween scene by playing the slightly uptight up-and-comer trying to change Ryan’s ways.
So, the acting is good; the dialogue is good; the directing is pretty decent, but why didn’t I loooooove it? To be honest, I’m not quite sure. I think it’s because everything feels so smug. Clooney’s character treads the fine line between likeability and assholeness. If it were any other actor, there wouldn’t be that slight spark of likeability. Also, it’s almost as if Reitman is patting himself on the back by crafting a movie about corporate layoffs in a time when it’s a reality for millions of Americans. When Ryan spins a story about how now’s the perfect time for a disgruntled employee to go be a chef like he always wanted to be, it’s so vomit-inducing. There’s no sensitivity in place for those that this is a distinct reality. How realistic is it for a man over the age of 45 to go back to culinary school after being laid off? Again, the whole thing feels so damn smug and almost righteous.
Plus, in the plot department, not much happens. You can see the moral to the story from 10 million frequent flyer miles away. Of course, Ryan will learn that there’s more to life than connecting flights and efficient luggage. But, then again, if you’ve seen enough movies, you can also guess how the modern romance of no-strings attached and appointment sex pans out. It’s ironic that a character that enjoys the least amount of human connection is the one who condones firing people face-to-face--or that he's even in a movie that feels so glib about unemployment.
Up in the Air is much like Clooney’s suits in the film: it is slick and perfectly tailored, but it feels a little too showy to mask the lack of substance underneath.
--Darcie Duttweiler
RSS Feed