Up In The Air

The whole "10 best picture nominees" shindig that the Academy has going on this year seems like a nice idea the more I think about it. Not just the fact that it's opening up spots for films that aren't usually "Academy friendly", but we're getting a nice slate of diverse movies that we wouldn't see normally from the Academy.

So yeah. Up In The Air? Give it one of those 10 nominations! It's nice, mainstream, palatable, adult, humorous. It hinges its success on the charisma of its lead actors who thankfully step up their games and deliver warm performances (I mean, it's not the most amazing acting in the world... George Clooney plays George Clooney, but his charm takes him far in this role). It takes the standard "business-minded man has a change of heart and embraces family" plot and... while not really putting a new spin on it, it tells that story well at the very least. So go for it, Academy. Give it 7 nominations, including best picture... maybe you don't want to let it win anything, but you know... honor it in some way.

Of course, Up In The Air is hanging in there as one of the "favorites" to win it all (until Avatar picks up a crapload of steam and wins everything), and this is probably due to one thing: "social relevance."

See, George Clooney's character fires people for a living. OH MAN OH MAN OUR COUNTRY IS ECONOMICALLY DEPRESSED AT THE MOMENT SO THIS MOVIE IS GOING TO BE A CAPSULE OF OUR CHALLENGED TIMES AND MEAN SO MUCH TO SO MANY PEOPLE. IT'S GOING TO TELL A STORY OF A SELF-CENTERED MAN WHO SUDDENLY REALIZES THAT *HEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*, THESE PEOPLE ARE HARD WORKING AMERICANS AND THAT HE CANNOT STAND TO SEE SO MANY PEOPLE LOSE THEIR LIVELIHOOD.

That's sort of what a lot of the reviews I've read sound like to me. Of course, the movie is about an insular man who decides mid-flight (pun!) that the path he's taking is ultimately a hollow one. The whole downsizing stuff? More of a way to capture his isolation and detachment than "saying" anything about the current economic climate.

At least that's what it seems like to me. I think I totally read the film differently than everyone else.

Of course, Jason Reitman doesn't want to run the risk of not seeming to comment on the economic situation, cause... you know, that'd mean he's just telling a light Hollywood comedy. So he does stuff like hires recently let go people to act as the "fired" people and let them speak monologues about how losing your job sucks and stuff. It's actually kind of really contrived and annoys me even while thinking about it, but you know... WHATEVER.

The main storyline is that this gal named Natalie, played by Anna Kendrick, introduces "web firing" (or whatever it's called) which would make Clooney's job as a guy who flies around the country to fire people for bosses without the balls to do it themselves pretty much irrelevant. Clooney objects to this, saying that there's an art to consoling the recently let go and that introducing a way to do it via web cam would make the fired even more at loss. Really, he just would rather be flying around everywhere than grounded, but we'll skip that for now.

Essentially, what George Clooney does is BS. He consoles the fired into thinking that the layoff will open up a world of opportunities to them when really they've been fired... and it sucks. Sure, they might land on their feet eventually, but most are going to struggle. That's just the way it is. So Clooney essentially consoles them into thinking that he is going to be there for them when really he'll never see them again.

And so Natalie's new technology is seen as this super bad and soulless concept that'll drive people further into despair. But I can't help but thinking... is it really *that* bad? If I got fired by some outside group because my boss was too weak to do it on their own... would I rather have some guy tell me everything is going to be all right, or some person on the Internet completely failing to make me feel any better because my boss was gutless enough to hire someone to fire me OVER THE INTERNET? I'd honestly take the second option. Sure, it's gross and alienating, but I'd rather have BS plainly labeled "BS", you know? Plus, a gutless boss doesn't deserve a dignified way of getting rid of employees. I'd rather leave work knowing my boss is a chickens*** rather than thinking "oh hey! I can do whatever I want now! Getting fired might be the best thing to happen to me yet!" Perhaps I'd be alone in this, but there you go.

I get that Clooney might be trying to save what little dignity might be left in the situation, but one, I'm not really sure if it's worth saving, and two, Clooney seems so isolated that his desires to "retain this dignity" is just his way of trying to maintain his own lifestyle.

Complicating matters is the fact that Natalie is--to me--the warmest, most relatable character in the movie. She seems like the annoying young corporate do-gooder at first, but then some key facts emerge. Like the fact she took the job because her boyfriend was going to live in the area. And the fact that, once on the road with Clooney, she discovers that she kind of hates her job. Sure, it's probably due to the fact that she hasn't mastered the slick BS that Clooney has refined, but a key scene in which she fires someone with Clooney watching leaves her visibly shaken while Clooney merely shrugs it off.

But that really isn't what the movie is about. It's about Clooney realizing his goal of get 10 million miles in the air is kind of a shallow goal, and then deciding to go after something that makes him happy (i.e. family, a woman). It's nothing new or anything, but it's decently executed. My problem is that the woman Clooney chases after (played by Vera Farmiga) turns out to be SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER an unreasonably cruel person, especially after going to a family get-together with Clooney--at which point I would have brought up the fact that... you know, I'm married. But I guess they couldn't resist having the big reveal. So it comes as little surprise that after he gets burned so bad, he retreats back into his own little lifestyle since it's what he knows best, but he also retreats back into it knowing the hollow feeling it provides SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER.

I do think that Clooney's transformation is indeed aided by Kendrick, though, as he sees this gal who seems to be an even worse type of corporate stooge turn out to be an idealistic young gal who seems to be chasing after love and happiness more than a good job. So really, I don't know. Maybe I just liked her more because she's a young rapscallion like I am. I'm probably wrong and a lot of other people are right. I've spent enough time thinking about this movie. End of post.