MUBI

I feared to run into another shallow RomCom when I went to see Up in the Air, but the good reviews and George Clooney convinced me and I did not regret it. A sort of road movie in the air, Up in the Air deals with core human issues of love, being alone and self-discovery. However, the framework is very unique and interesting and the story structure fits into it perfectly. A tighlty knit film which could have gone horribly wrong but didn’t. The humour is subtle and no American scream out loud moments can be found here, but expect quirkiness, awkward moments and the odd confusion flying under the radar. The cast is great, Clooney proves his standing in the world of movies once more, with his suave oozing from the screen. Faminga and Kendrick hold up their ends and especially Faminga is a surprise find for me. Bateman remained colourless but I never really liked him. The movie has a good pace and shifts from the haste of travelling to the sombre moments of life in between. All in all I enjoyed this greatly. The ending was satisfying and without spoiling it, let me say it is not the usual thing you’d expect from American cinema. I also liked the overall artistic style of the movie, which reflects best in the titles and typography used, remined me of the 70ies boom in airplane movies (not that Id been there).

Highly recommended

I really eat up focused character dramas and this is an excellent one that stands strong through multiple viewings. Ryan Bingham is flat out a great character and George Clooney gives a superb, understated performance. He gets a lot of flak for “playing himself”, but I feel like that couldn’t be less true. He takes all of his characters and makes them his own, yes, but I don’t think he’s repeated himself, which shows his power as an actor. Here he takes this guy who, on paper, is a smug prick and makes him someone that you can relate to and genuinely feel for. That in itself is a remarkable achievement. The character himself is a unique one, a guy who has built his entire life around not having any attachments and then has to watch everything he believes in fall apart.

A lot of films find it necessary to have huge moments of evolution for characters, but I admire the ability here to have him gradually change without even realizing it. I love movies that have you look back at the end and realize that the character you started off with has drastically evolved and you don’t even realize it. I always find it hard to believe when someone makes this huge transition, but here there’s this much more natural flow that stays entirely true to the character while still giving him a lot of growth. I feel like so many movies, especially ones that are pretty strict character dramas without a lot of action like this, always end up having to do things with their characters that ring so false just to make things interesting. But this one is so intelligently written and stays so true to it’s characters all the way, it’s really admirable.

Anna Kendrick and Vera Farmiga both more than deserved their Oscar nominations as the women who come along and change Ryan’s perspective on things. Farmiga is fun, interesting and gets you to understand why Ryan wants her to be the one girl he has stick around for a change. It’s a hard role to play; she has to leave an impression without making the story be all about this character’s relationship with Ryan, but she balances out all aspects of her character quite well. Kendrick is the complete opposite, this precocious young girl who dominates the screen whenever she’s on it. She’s strong and independent and almost steals the show. I love her character; this girl who was raised in a world where you’re taught to shut yourself off from everyone else and is then thrust into being an adult and has to come out the other side with herself in tact. The scene with her first solo firing is devastating and she plays it so subtly; it’s very admirable.

The film got a lot of praise for being “of the moment” and while this rings true, I think it’s a lot more than that. It did a tremendous job of putting a human face on the economic crisis our country is facing, without having the film be all about this message. It creates a genuine character drama and then builds this commentary on our current time around it. The film is very of the moment, but it can also stand on it’s own ten or twenty years from now as a strong character drama.

There are definitely some things that I don’t care for in the film, though. I have mixed feelings on everything with the wedding in the final act; it does have some nice emotional moments and it brings necessary development for Ryan, but I feel like it doesn’t really fit with the tone of the rest of the film and it’s a little too conveniently timed. Aside from that, I think the whole thing is a little cookie-cutter and I wish it had gone to darker places. But these are things that have only popped up after a few viewings of the film and ultimately don’t really stick in my mind for long afterwards. I think it’s a great character drama with some tremendous performances and it’s an important one for our time.

Flying over an economically reeling America, George Clooney lands from here and there to deliver platitudes to the workforce that his company has been commissioned to sack, and finds out that what he likes – the frequent flier miles, the hotel privileges, the anonymity – is just a facade for loneliness, and an easy escape.

Director/co-writer Jason Reitman fashions a sleek, gut-punching entertainment out of this most horrible of professional jobs, adding an examination of modern romance in an age of smart phones and text messaging, as Clooney’s relationship with fellow flier Vera Farmiga, and his teaching of young go-getter Anna Kendrick (all three Oscar nominated) come to form his need to get out of the box.

Clooney is a true leading man, and though this script is so good it’s likely anybody with a reasonable amount of charisma could have knocked it out, he is especially perfect for it, with charm, humor, sex appeal, and contemplation to spare.

Jason Reitman, sutradara asik yang pernah mengarahkan komedi gelap Thank You For Smoking (2006) dan film remaja nominator Oscar, Juno (2007), kembali lagi dengan arahan terbarunya, Up In The Air. Desas-desus menyiratkan bahwa film ini bercerita tentang seorang yang berprofesi sebagai tukang pecat keliling. Well, tidak seremeh kedengarannya, orang ini haruslah berhadapan dengan orang yang akan dipecat, menjelaskan segala sesuatunya, menyediakan berbagai pilihan masa depan, bahkan tak jarang menjadi sasaran cacimaki. Ryan Bingham, nama orang ini, adalah seorang yang mengerti benar seluk-beluk pekerjaannya. Seperti halnya Neil Naylor dalam Thank You For Smoking, dia ahli berbicara. Bingham kerap mengisi seminar mengenai travelling, karena ia juga seorang traveler sejati. Dihampir setiap seminarnya, Bingham senang berujar: In fact, let everything burn and imagine wakin’ up tomorrow, with nothing. Ini adalah slogannya, bukan, ini adalah Ryan Bingham dengan segala sikap keras-kepala nya.

Up in the Air adalah film perjalanan dengan sedikit studi karakter. Bila harus mengisi sebuah blangko mengenai film yang mirip dengan Up in The Air, saya akan menuliskan Away We Go (Sam Mendes, 2009) pada list teratas. Acoustic refraction, sweetness, and simplicity, adalah kunci Away We Go dan hampir semua film Jason Reitman. Hanya saja dalam Away We Go, penonton harus memecah perhatian pada dua karakter utama dengan segala perkembangan emosi-reaksi mereka. Sementara Up in the Air mengerucutkan perhatian kita pada Ryan Bingham, seorang pria tiga puluhan yang menghabiskan 322 hari dari total 365 hari dalam setahun untuk bepergian. Memecati orang diberbagai kota.

Jauh lebih aman membicarakan Ryan Bingham ketimbang membahas Up in the Air. Filmnya sendiri, biasa, dialektika ‘kecil’ dalam masyarakat yang seringkali dijadikan topik oleh Reitman dalam film-filmnya. Thank You For Smoking, tentang Neil Naylor (Aaron Eckhart), seorang juru bicara perusahaan rokok yang senantiasa mengkampanyekan betapa ‘tidak berbahaya’-nya tembakau. Lalu Juno, dimana kehidupan colorful seorang gadis tak sampai tereduksi hanya karena ia hamil, dialektikanya terletak pada eksepsi respon masyarakat dalam menerima kehamilan diluar nikah. Motif ini diangkat lagi dalam Up in the Air, meminjam istilah Teshome Gabriel: “Art as occasion for ‘escape’ from normal routine”. Disini kita bisa memperdebatkan apakah setiap ketidak-biasaan bisa disebut sebagai proses berdialektika?, ataukah dialektika haruslah disangkut-pautkan dengan segmentasi semacam collective engagement?.

Up in the Air berada di posisi tengah-tengah dalam menganggapi semua hal itu, terbaca dari bagaimana Ryan Bingham menghadapi masalah-masalahnya. Disebuah kesempatan, ketika ditanya tentang keinginan berkeluarga, dia berujar: “Well, it’s simple, you know that moment when you looking to somebody’s eyes and you can feel them staring at your soul and whole world goes quiet? Just for a second? Well, I don’t!!”. latar belakang professionalitas kerja bisa jadi membentuk pribadinya menjadi demikian rupa. Tapi apa yang kemudian dilakukan Bingham, seandainya, ia bertemu dengan sosok wanita yang benar-benar bisa membuat dunianya hening sejenak?. Bisa jadi dialektika personal yang ia peragakan bakal memudar secara tiba-tiba. Ingat, dalam estetika formal sinema Hollywood, semuanya tak akan bisa mengalahkan cinta, bila penulis naskah sudah mentok dalam mencari cara bagaimana memperlakukan karakternya, jawabannya simpel, pakai saja sedikit cinta. Apakah Jason Reitman termasuk dalam sineas tipe ini?. Anda tentu perlu melihat karya-karyanya dulu.

Terlepas dari semua itu, menarik melihat reaksi orang-orang yang dipecat serta-merta oleh orang yang tidak mereka kenal. Ada yang tiba-tiba berdiri menggebrak meja sembari menuding “Who the hell are you?,” Ada yang dengan sedih menunjukkan potret anak-anak mereka sambil menggumam kosong “What do you think I supposed to tell them?”, ada yang menggaruk-garuk kepala lalu bertanya bingung “It’s just like that?”, ada pula yang tersenyum ironis dan menampik nasihat Bingham, lalu berujar optimis “Don’t even sweat it, i’m pretty confident about my plans. Yeah. There is this beautiful bridge by my house, I’m gonna go jump off it”!.

Malgré ses acteurs (Clooney et ses mimiques incessantes toutes faites en fixant la caméra, qui endosse un rôle qui lui va comme un gant tout en en faisant trois tonnes), Reitman signe une comédie assez enlevée et cynique sur notre société. Une critique mordante du monde de l’entreprise et des relations de couple, assez différente dans la forme des films sociaux britanniques auxquels nous sommes habitués. Avec un montage aérien, un talent d’écriture, un cynisme pétillant, Reitman dénonce le rêve américain dans une comédie douce amère, assez simple et classique. Rien d’exceptionnel donc, mais une comédie qui fait mouche.

Sejak merilis debut penyutradaraan film layar lebarnya, Thank You For Smoking, sutradara Jason Reitman sepertinya selalu berhasil untuk memberikan sebuah film drama yang berisi begitu banyak pesan moral namun berhasil disembunyikan dengan sangat rapi melalui kemasan komedi yang ringan. Formula inilah yang juga digunakan Reitman ketika menggarap Juno, film komedi remaja yang dirilis pada tahun 2007, dan sukses baik secara kritikal maupun komersil serta mengantarkan aktris Ellen Page ke tingkat popularitasnya sekarang.

Setelah memproduseri Jennifer’s Body, sebuah film horror yang ditulis oleh Diablo Cody, penulis naskah Juno, yang ternyata tidak memberikan hasil yang cukup memuaskan, Reitman kini kembali duduk di bangku sutradara. Bersama Sheldon Turner (The Longest Yard, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning), Reitman kemudian mengadaptasi novel karya Walter Kirn untuk kemudian menjadi sebuah naskah filmnya, Up in the Air.

Dibintangi oleh trio George Clooney, Vera Farmiga dan Anna Kendrick, Up in the Air menceritakan mengenai Ryan Bingham (Clooney), pria yang bekerja dan berkeliling Amerika Serikat sebagai seorang yang diutus sebuah perusahaan untuk memecat pegawai mereka. Juga seorang pembicara yang acapkali memberikan motivasi dan arahan pada berbagai seminar, Bingham tidak percaya (takut?) akan adanya komitmen dan memiliki sebuah tujuan hidup sendiri: untuk mencapai catatan sebagai seorang frequent flyer dengan raihan terbang sepanjang 10 juta mil. Tentu, Bingham tidak akan menyangka kalau ia akan bertemu dengan Alex (Farmiga), seorang wanita frequent flyer dimana akhirnya Bingham menjalani sebuah hubungan.

Wanita lain yang datang di kehidupan Bingham adalah si ambisius Natalie Keener (Kendrick), seorang pegawai di kantornya yang berusaha untuk memotong anggaran biaya dengan berusaha menghilangkan sistem terbang, seperti yang selama ini dilakukan perusahaan tempat Bingham bekerja. Merasa tujuan hidupnya tidak akan tercapai, Bingham memutuskan membawa Keener untuk mengikuti perjalanannya dalam memecat sekelompok orang, agar Keener sadar bahwa berhadapan dengan orang yang akan dipecat adalah sama sekali berbeda dengan menghadapi mereka lewat sebuah webcam, seperti yang selama ini Keener berusaha terapkan.

Di dalam perjalanan, kisah cinta Keener yang kandas, pernikahan adiknya, serta rasa sayangnya yang semakin mendalam terhadap Alex membuat Bingham mempertanyakan tujuan hidupnya selama ini.

Saya sama sekali tidak tahu bagaimana cara Reitman untuk menerjemahkan sebuah novel modern namun puitis dan berisi banyak pesan hidup ini menjadi sebuah tontonan sekelas Up in the Air yang sangat, sangat dapat dinikmati, bahkan bagi seorang penggemar film “normal” sekalipun. Kisah Ryan Bingham dalam film ini mampu tampil begitu nyata dan begitu mengena sehingga mungkin sebagian penontonnya akan merasa bahwa film ini sedang menceritakan mengenai kehidupan mereka sendiri.

Mendengar nama George Clooney yang memerankan seorang tokoh yang memiliki karakteristik seperti Ryan Bingham, sejujurnya, bukanlah sebuah hal yang terlalu menantang bagi saya. Clooney, selama ini, memang dapat digambarkan sebagai Ryan Bingham itu sendiri, baik dilihat dari berbagai karakter yang ia perankan selama ini, maupun dari kehidupan pribadinya. Bingham (baca: Clooney) adalah tipe seorang pria charming yang sangat dikagumi karena etos kerja dan dedikasi yang ia berikan, sehingga sanggup mengenyampingkan kehidupan pribadinya terlebih dahulu.

Walau begitu, saya tetap merasa terpesona atas penjiwaan yang diberikan Clooney atas karakter Bingham. Lewat tatapan matanya, khususnya di bagian akhir, Clooney mampu memberikan tatapan jiwa seorang Bingham yang sensitif, rapuh dan sedang merasa kesepian karena merasa bahwa hidup telah melakukan sebuah kecurangan pada dirinya selama ini.

Vera Farmiga dan Anna Kendrick sendiri mampu memberikan gambaran dua wanita dengan dua kepribadian yang berbeda. Alex yang diperankan Farmiga menjadi sebuah cerminan wanita mapan yang telah “berdamai” dengan kehidupannya, namun masih merasa kehilangan sesuatu, sementara Natalie yang dibawakan Kendrick (ya… Kendrick yang sama yang memerankan tokoh Jessica Stanley dalam Twilight) adalah karakter wanita muda emosional yang masih berapi-api dalam mengejar apa yang telah disediakan masa depan untuk dirinya. Dan Farmiga dan kendrick benar-benar memberikan usaha 110% untuk menggambarkan dua karakter tersebut.

Dengan mengandalkan pada akting para pemeran utamanya, serta naskah cerita yang brilian, Up in the Air berhasil memberikan sebuah kesan tersendiri bagi para penontonnya. Berisi banyak adegan yang mampu menggiring rasa emosional Anda, Up in the Air juga mampu memberikan Anda senyuman mengenai lelucon yang sedang dimainkan oleh hidup pada manusia. Bahkan jika Anda sendirilah yang menjadi korban lelucon tersebut. Jujur, dalam, dan begitu nyata, Up in the Air adalah sebuah film yang tidak akan Anda lupakan dengan begitu mudahnya.

Rate: 4.5 / 5

Bill Murray made some great roles in the past few years. All of them portraying the same character, in the same situation, with the same end result. His trade mark actually. An actor turned into a symbol.

While customary the protagonist looses his way, has a life-altering experience and then changes his misguided ways (you know the drill), Bill Murray does not. In Broken Flowers he is a lost, bored zombie who embarks on an journey to find his son, only to find that once you need a life-altering experience it is already too late to have one with any effect. In The Life Aquatic he’s a lost has-been, when his son finds him, they both embark on an journey only for one to end up dead and the other where he stopped a few years back. And in Lost in Translation he journeys to the end of the world (well to Japan at least) searching for the holly grail that is full and meaningful life, but ends up with some japanese whiskey and a foot fetish in the making. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Because Bill Murray knows. In life there are periods of time, more interesting than the rest and then its business as usual. You get your 5 minutes, not of fame but of excitement, thrills. He starred in Groundhog Day, so he knows that in order to change your life, a son or a new relationship just does not cut it. You have to meticulously reflect on every aspect of your life, and then train hard and long, replaying the smallest of your decisions until change is possible or granted. Meaning, Bill Murray knows that Groundhog Day is bullshit. Now George Clooney does not know that. He does not even realise that he is starring in a Bill Murray film, not before it is too late, that is. So when a life altering mirage appears in his cold blue life he jumps at it. He is ready to denounce all he has been, just to reinvent himself. He wants his Richard Gere An Officer and a Gentleman moment. Funny. George is old enough to know by know that ones life does not turn for the better because of an airport lounge romance.

More importantly, George should have known that this is a Bill Murray film. And so should Jason Reitman.

Up in the Air is not just a bad movie. It fundamentally misunderstands so many important issues and in doing so, turns something that could have been extremely harmless into something dangerous. It parades around with its claims of populist appeal just as Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) flashes his executive cards. This movie really wants to be our friend. It wants to console us in those areas that are troubling so many of us – unemployment, broken relationships, aging – yet it has nothing of value to say. I don’t fault Jason Reitman for being a bad filmmaker here as much as I fault him for being irresponsible and inexperienced.

Bingham explains to Natalie Keener (Anna Kendrick) that when you fire someone, you never say it is difficult for you. Because this is probably the worst day of many of these people’s lives, they could care less about the asshole firing them. If this is the case, why are we watching this movie about Bingham or Keener? The movie occasionally shows us the reactions of those getting fired. They open the movie, and they help to round out the movie. These are the stories that matter, yet they are treated like mere side notes. I could not tell whether the characters being fired in the movie were actors or people who had actually lost their jobs recently, but the film uses them in such a manipulative fashion, tugging at our emotions without even attempting to offer anything close to a solution. It is as if the film wants us to quietly accept the problems in our country.

The unsettling manner in which Bingham’s story and the tragic setting rub up against each other is mostly the result of Reitman’s apparent uncertainty of what the hell he wanted to do with this movie. In this single movie, he attempts to tackle a variety of issues including the difficulty of long distance relationships, fear of commitment, the war of experience versus youth, the realities of unemployment and so on. By trying to comment on so many different issues at the same time, he prevents himself from being able to say anything substantial about any one topic. The resulting mess does not define our times as much as it hints at our times.

If we really want a movie to define our times, Jason Reitman is not our man. Thank You For Smoking was harmless, but its very lack of ambition was part of its charm. With Juno, he was dealing with the story of a teenager, just about how mature he is at a filmmaker. The movie stands as his strongest because the project did not require quite the level of maturity that a movie like Up in the Air needed from its pilot. This is not to belittle teen pregnancy as a serious issue, but Reitman was able to understand the perspective of a teenager adequately enough. He has neither the wisdom nor the experience to make a movie with material as serious as Up in the Air.

The movie starts with a cover of Woody Guthrie’s “This Land Is Your Land,” the ultimate populist anthem. This movie tries so hard to appeal to everyone and in doing so ultimately says nothing. Just reflecting on what happens in a single sitting – one minute, a woman threatens suicide after being fired; the next, Bingham and Alex Goran (Vera Farmiga) crash an executive party and dance the night away.

Bingham was right. I really could less about the asshole firing Americans.

A movie for people who are daily forgetting the importance of communicating meaningfully with others – people like me, and probably you. Director Jason Reitman (Juno, Thank You for Smoking) exchanges his smarmy “indie flick” sensibilities for something surprisingly old-fashioned (think Frank Capra without the cheeze) and winds up with a funny, bracing, and thoroughly true film for our time and place. Up in the Air is one for the ages.

I guess I don’t get it. Reitman is so eager to please. So eager to be clever. So eager to think he is making us think. Up in the Air is a predictable exercise in smarmy condesension and self-congratulation with a facade of profundity. This film began to lose me right at the overly stylized and nauseating opening credit sequence and I was long gone by the time we get to the quick airport montages.

Did I mention that there are many many shots of Hilton and American Airline logos, signs, paraphernalia? This movie is a commercial and a masturbatory exercise by an ivory tower film director. It is so detached, so Hollywood, so out of touch.

In a year full of movies that weren’t outstanding in any way, Up In The Air is a standout film. It’s not as great as everyone is proclaiming it to be. In fact, I’d go so far as to call it 2010’s most overrated film. It’s not a bad movie, it’s just certainly not deserving of the amount of press it has gotten. All that aside, I did enjoy the film. It moved at a brisk pace and threw in a very original and satisfying ending that saved it from being monotonous, repetitive and typical of the genre. Reitman has, craft wise, directed his best film with this. The shot composition, coupled with the pacing and stylistic choices really did wonders for a film that could have been bogged down with “Oscar-Bait” cliches. I’d say if you like Clooney (who doesn’t) or Reitman check this out. It’s not the best film of the year, but it’s a solid entry in an overall disappointing movie year.

A film elegantly timely and equally timeless, Up in the Air is an affectionate, pointed account of individual disconnect, economic crisis, and the increasingly interpersonal – yet impersonal – downsizing of our basic human relations. George Clooney is his slickest and most refined here, fitting snuggly into a character that compliments his easygoing charisma while also providing room for surprising emotional nuance. The writing is sharp, clever, and with an acute ear for human drama, rapport giddily bouncing between the characters just as the increasing weight of the pressing social issues sinks in. It’s this beautifully recognized balance between smart comedy and intrapersonal drama that makes the film so resonant; not only does the story speak resolutely about our times, but it breathes it through life fresh and understandable.

Jason Reitman’s newest dramedy is an immaculately assembled movie for the elitist type. While being very slick and handsome looking, its apathetic atmosphere is addictively comfortable, which plays into the forthcoming guilt that accompanies Ryan Bingham’s character arc. As far as performances go, everyone dominates. Through the years, Clooney has mastered the man in mid-life crisis, but never with such stellar creative forces backing him. Anna Kendrick and Vera Farmiga are stupendous while the brief work of Zack Galiafinakis and J.K. Simmons delights. The ending is unexpected, then congested, then very slow to come but it traverses some new ground and is blessed by the otherworldly presense of Sam Elliot. Very smart, touching, a film for these times.

DEFINITELY IN THE AIR

From the director of glorified indie films, “Thank You For Smoking,” and “Juno,” Hollywood can pat itself on the back for supporting a film to the tune of 24 million, about the current unemployment crisis, through one mans somewhat inner journey traveling the country as a corporate downsizing, aka firing expert. Last night at the DGA in Los Angeles, I previewed the film which was followed by a Q&A with creator, Jason Reitman. George Clooney plays Ryan Bingham, a sharp, proud, smooth talking bachelor, gliding through airports, living out of a glossy, well-oiled black suitcase. His life is presented as a series of transactions with premiere plastic, coming and going from sterilized hotel rooms, “on the road” minus some forty days out of the year, practically invisible to his family. Office after office, he is the man that fires unsuspecting employees for companies too cowardly to do the job themselves— and make no mistake, Ryan Bingham is very good at it. Ending each termination session with saying that who ever built an empire had to first reach rock bottom, Bingham is also a motivational speaker with a motto inspiring people to let go of their baggage, through the contrived metaphor of a backpack. I have to confess, Clooney is equally as convincing as the character he plays—his sparkling eyes and cool, collected demeanor bringing a sense of empathy to the otherwise apathetic Bingham.

As the narrative progresses, a few things happen—Bingham meets Alex, played by Vera Farmiga, a successful, frequently flying woman he likes, crudely described in her own words as like him, but with a vagina. He also faces losing his precious solitary lifestyle because his company is going digital, investing in web-based video technology to cut costs and fire people electronically through a monitor—and the woman responsible for this is Natalie, depicted by Anna Kendrick, an ambitious, Cornell graduate with her pick of places to work, overly-confident, but naive and inexperienced in what is required in the fragile art of firing. Bingham’s boss assigns him the task of taking Alex on the road to show her the ropes, which he begrudgingly does. A series of events veer the film from initially being a dark comedy to a more serious drama—where Bingham’s life begins to unravel and make less sense as he discovers his own desire to love and be loved.

While it’s intentions are good, my qualms with this film are many. Yes, it’s conventionally well-shot and has a certain “fresh” quality by Hollywood standards, but the writing feels self-conscious and apart from Bingham, surrounding characters are reduced to movie clichés. After the screening, Jason Reitman commented that in addition to Bingham’s character, he was interested in exploring the contemporary phenomenon of single women mid-life, who were promised that success would bring them happiness. Had he genuinely followed through with this, “Up in the Air,” would have been a more interesting film on many levels, but Reitman’s treatment of Alex falls very short of any kind of resonant execution. She struts around in heels with an overt masculinity, rarely revealing any semblance of a soul and proving in the end that she hardly has one. And while the younger Natalie may be ambitious, the director is relentless in undermining her as the comic relief, bumbling around like a fool, marriage-obsessed, crying like a baby on Bingham’s shoulder, apologizing for one thing or another. Had Reitman given them more dimension, their parallel lives could have been effective and meaningful.

Choosing to use 22 non-actors recently let go of their jobs for the segments where Bingham and Natalie execute their terminations, Reitman infuses the film with a vérité quality, utilizing candid, impromptu, oftentimes, deeply sad segments to communicate the realities of what has affected national record-breaking populations. It is infuriating to witness Reitman cutting many of these people as they are mid-sentence, without grace, using their words only when they serve the pacing of his film. Had Reitman afforded these anonymous souls the time to speak, to look us in the face, the film could have actually been profound. Reitman essentially packages their sorrows in an unsettling way, making their suffering and desperation digestible for audiences.

This is a film driven by the powerhouse that is George Clooney. Asserting that the film would not have been funded had it not been for Clooney’s involvement, Reitman has created a movie in his service—actually about a man very similar to the actor, a bachelor who travels a lot, used to play basketball, and is perhaps experiencing a mid-life crisis. Beyond this, the film lacks the depth and sincerity it should have for a subject matter so relevant to today’s climate. When the film is over and the credits roll, Reitman includes a song composed by an unemployed, 50 year old, who handed him a tape about the condition and depression of living without work. After being asked about this, Reitman cracked a condescending joke to the audience about how when this man found out his music would be included in the film, he thought he could start a music career.

And why not? Reitman’s arrogance is as transparent as his film.