Up in the Air

Jason Reitman is now three for three with me when it comes to make films that are both very funny, and touching or moving on at least some level. He's back to directing his own screenplay here, although it's again based on a book, though one that doesn't seem easy to translate to the screen. It's about a man played by George Clooney who travels all over the country all year long firing people for companies who don't want to get their hands dirty doing it themselves. He spends most of his days getting yelled at and pleaded with by all of the people he breaks the bad news to, and has developed a highly optimized system and unusually disconnected philosophy of living, where he feels no real attachment to anything where he lives when not traveling or even his family, and merely goes about his job, sleeping with the occasional fellow traveler and racking up millions of frequent flier miles.

The scenes showing him go about his routine are slickly filmed and edited, and the role fits Clooney like a glove, a little smarmy and arrogant but not unlikable. But of course that's not the whole movie, as things start to change when two women entire his lives. The first is a talented new colleague played by Anna Kendrick who has come up with a way to use the internet instead of flying everywhere to do their jobs, which could eventually phase out the travel aspect of his job completely. The second is an attractive fellow frequent flier played by Vera Farmiga, who's interesting enough that he eventually develops deeper feelings toward than just wanting to get her in bed. The three all got nominated for Oscars, and they're all fairly outstanding in the film. Clooney gets closer to both women over the course of the story, and they both help him grow as a person, and at least attempt to get something more out of his life. Jason Bateman is also good as Clooney's boss, and there's plenty of small appearances by recognizable, solid comic actors like Danny McBride and J.K. Simmons that add flavor to the scenes they're in.

I can see an argument that Up in the Air is style over substance, and that it's capitalizing on the bad economy and job market to appeal to people emotionally. But I thought that stuff made all the scenes of the characters working have more weight and importance, and I can't help but wonder why people wouldn't want to see such a well crafted and produced film. Right from the stylish and classy opening credits, the film is just impeccably put together, and immensely satisfying and enjoyable from start to finish. I guess I can see how one would think Jason Reitman's style is just a touch too polished, too spot on, not experimental enough. But I think people might not give him enough credit for just being good at getting the little things right. The cast and their performances are great, the script is tight as a drum, and the film has a lot of powerful moments without hitting you over the head with them. Little stuff here and there that adds up over time to a film that is at no time annoying or boring or nonsensical. It all fits together into a movie that I have a hard time seeing anybody call their favorite, but that very few should have difficulty liking. And I liked it a lot.

The Big Lebowski

I was watching this again with friends last night, for the first time in too long. While there are films I would name as superior artistic achievements, I really can't think of any that I love more. Few movies hold up to repeated viewings as well as this one, and there are only a small handful of flaws that keep it from being perfect. There's something special about it, like you could try to replicate its success with the same amount of talent both behind and in front of the camera and never find the same magic in a hundred years. Instead of pontificating on why it works, I'll just start listing little details you might not notice the first couple times but help show why it's such a cult favorite. It really is the epitome of that sort of thing, failing when it was in theaters, but it's hard to find someone in my age group who hasn't seen it at this point.

- There's a lot of stuff with shirts that's fun. Most people have noticed that Donnie's bowling shirts never actually have his name on them, but fewer know that between their first and second scenes, Jackie Treehorn's two thugs decided to switch what they were wearing.
- It's fun to think about how people became friends. Walter and the Dude get along but really don't have much in common, leading us to think they were put in a situation where they were forced to find common ground, like they went to college together and were roommates or something. Neither one seems to care much for Donnie, but you can see how they saw his bowling talent and befriended him so they could use him on the team, and him being so weird accepted the only friends he could get.
- A bit more mysterious is how the Jesus and Liam became bowling buddies. The best theory I've heard is that the latter is the former's parole officer.
- Not really a fun fact, but Philip Seymour Hoffman is fantastic in this movie. And it's the only time I've ever seen something make Tara Reid useful.
- When he's discussing the toe with Walter in the diner, the Dude gets angry and dumps some change on the counter to pay for his coffee. It's easy to miss that he picks up a joint he accidentally grabbed with the money before he shuffles out of the place a bit too quickly.
- Walter's inappropriate references to Vietnam are great, but I might like his flashbacks even more. It only happens a couple times, but he'll forget where he is for a minute.
- Have you ever made note of how many times the movie could have ended if the Dude just stayed out of things? Eventually he gets in too deep, but if Walter never told him to go see the other Lebowski, or if he didn't take that specific rug from the place, and so on.
- It's gotta be common knowledge for fans at this point, but it's great how much of the Dude's dialogue is taken from what he's heard other people say and how all the elements of his dreams come from somewhere else in the film. Perhaps the best instance of this is when he tells Larry he's going to castrate him.
- How sad is it that Donnie's bowling buddies are the only ones at his funeral. Does he really have no family at all? I assume they knew him well enough to contact them if he did.
- The entire arc of Jackie's pornographic doodle is great. For one thing, it's a great drawing. For another, why is he drawing that while he's on the phone? What the Dude does is one of his smartest moments, but he gets nothing out of it, and of course it's the only thing in his pockets after he's arrested besides his Ralph's card.

I'm running out of steam here, so I'll wrap it up. Like I said, there are some issues with the movie and I'll touch on those. When the Dude gets thrown out of the cab and Bunny zooms by, the shot lasts too long and the Dude's expression of bewildered dismay ends up looking artificial. It's a very small problem, but again, we're talking about one of my favorite movies ever. Another thing is that I think there's only one scene in the movie that doesn't feature the Dude, the very brief snippet where we see the nihilists ordering breakfast. It's not really necessary because the other scene shows Bunny's toes intact, and it would have been nice if you could say there is no scene in the film without its protagonist. It's a stylistic thing, and when you're that close, you might as well go for it. These are both minor quibbles of course, small bumps in what is still one of cinema's most enjoyable experiences. I don't doubt that I like the movie just a bit too much, but I'm okay with that.

Thank You for Smoking

Thank You for Smoking is a unique, very funny movie with an outstanding cast. Smoking is a very touchy subject, but the film covers a lot of the nonsense that goes on with the anti-smoking movement without being insensitive to its dangers. Little tangent here, but every single campaign I've seen against cigarettes has been annoying and ineffective. If you've ever seen a commercial from New York's fairly recent series of commercials, you'll know what I mean. They try and shock you into quitting with grotesque imagery and fear mongering in a way that I find more offensive than if a smoker came up to me and blew smoke right into my face. Anyway, Eckhart plays a spokesman for a tobacco lobby who goes on TV and pokes holes in the poor arguments against the product he represents and generally wins at life, at least until the plot gets more serious near the middle. There's a bunch of different characters and subplots he jumps between, and the movie is pretty consistently and enjoyably paced.

After watching Juno, it's nice to see Reitman has some flexibility with the kind of comedy he can handle. Smoking is more mature and explicit, but never gets too base in the content and has a similar sense of intelligent humor. It's not quite the heartwarming film that Juno was, but it was put together just as well. I'm not sure how much of the script came from the book it was based on, but it's really just fun to watch how Eckhart faces each obstacle. I'm finding myself with not much to say here, other than almost every single speaking part was played by someone I know the name of or at least recognize, and that seemed almost odd but was also kind of cool. Really good film.