My friend Eric tweeted late last night,” ‘Up in the Air’: politely misguided liberal fantasy, or egregiously clueless and downright offensive in parts Piece Of Shit?”
It made me think of the clip above. I watched Up in the Air earlier this week and wondered what the fuss was about. It tries to do a lot, but I’m not sure it accomplishes very much. It’s boilerplate romance-gone-wrong fare, freighted with a message about how our priorities are wrong and somehow the horrible economy will help us figure out what’s important. Sorry, Mr. Reitman, but the notion of making lemonade doesn’t work when you can’t afford the lemons in the first place.
For people who’ve never been laid off, it seems like the stuff dreams are made of. You’re freed from a job you probably hated anyway; you get some severance, or at least unemployment; and you can reevaluate things and move on. Which is the logic that informs this amazingly hilarious Onion article I read way back in October 2003, when I was about six months into what would be a 2+ year underemployment bid.
I felt that the testimonials that came at the end of the movie from folks who’d lost their jobs in the recent downturn echoed the hope the Obama campaign gave them. Their optimism and their reliance on family to support them in their time of need were both very poignant, but Reitman conveniently leaves out all the stories from the past few years about folks who’ve lost their jobs and have then gone on to violent attacks on their workplaces and communities.
Is Reitman the new W.D. Howells, that is, someone who puts a smiley face on realism? There’s but one “dead end” in the movie, the woman who follows through on her threat to commit suicide. Everyone else just goes on their merry way, for better or worse. Whether it’s finding a new job, or having an affair, or just running away from it all thanks to a nearly infinite supply of frequent flier miles, everyone can find an escape from the humdrum, if not outright happiness.
I think it’s that that people dislike about Reitman’s movies. The simple-mindedness. The breezy dialogue. The beautiful people. The whole ‘resiliency of the human spirit’ trope, which sometimes just seems a little more realistic than the way it’s presented here. Reitman’s youthful, privileged worldview makes it difficult to see things differently than he does, that is, through a lens of infinite possibility. The problem is that Reitman’s skies, like those in Up in the Air, are sunny and cloudless.
What makes me both laugh and cry is that the Tea Party nutters think Clooney is on some
extreme liberal attack on capitalism. Just like with Obama they could not be more wrong.
UP IN THE AIR is pure Clintonite pro-capitalist propaganda with a very thin liberal paintjob. I did not know until after seeing it on DVD but the director used to make Wal Mart TV ads for a living…and who was it Mr Walton said was the best advocate and corporate board member and corporate lawyer on behalf of Wal Mart interests ever ?
One Mrs H.R.Clinton. I could easily imagine her saying she never remembered the woman who said she was going to jump off a bridge.
Here is a remark I left on IMDB in a message board discussion about UP IN THE AIR…
That’s wishy washy Hollywood Clintonites for ya. They have no radical edge.
No real challenge to capitalism just like Obama. The illusions of the perfect
American existence still retained intact. Such as Clooney’s lightweight travel
and the notion that he can travel in his suit and still look perfect at the other end
of the flight. Anyone who has travelled knows what air travel does to a suit.
It is better to travel in comfort clothes and have a suit in a suit bag. Does
the Clooney character NEVER sweat or have to suffer the humiliation of having to
take a crap in the confinement of an airplane toilet (notice how no matter how big the planes get the toilets are still awful even if you are slim ?) Plus even posh hotels are still hotels that bed has been slept in by about 5000 people. Imagine if your bed at home had been used by 5000 people how would you feel about that ? He makes remarks about the Spirit of Louis but I can think of a disturbing airport linkage in the revelation of the Western’s world disregard for its victims in the global South. Paris- De Gaulle, NYC- JFK, Washington — Dulles and Toronto — Pearson all Western world airports named after political figures who instigated or backed 30 years of war imposed upon the Vietnamese people by Franco-American imperialism. Want an airport named after you ? Kill a few million people in the name of anti-communism/terrorism/whatever demon dejour.
Proudly the exception is Liverpool’s Airport named after John Lennon…how refreshing !!
The marketing slogan for The Liverpool John Lennon International Airport is
“Above Us Only Sky” from Imagine.
Here’s a great piece from the Awl I just read yesterday about Vera Farmiga’s character. I think what’s most fascinating is how Reitman really tries to humanize people who are essentially sociopathic by nature. Even if we set aside the political implications of their work, they’re still at root completely disconnected from what it means to be human. When the best way to preserve dignity is the option of firing people face to face, you know there’s something wrong with Reitman’s moral compass.
Here’s a great piece from the Awl I just read yesterday about Vera Farmiga’s character. I think what’s most fascinating is how Reitman really tries to humanize people who are essentially sociopathic by nature. Even if we set aside the political implications of their work, they’re still at root completely disconnected from what it means to be human. When the best way to preserve dignity is the option of firing people face to face, you know there’s something wrong with Reitman’s moral compass.
What makes me both laugh and cry is that the Tea Party nutters think Clooney is on some
extreme liberal attack on capitalism. Just like with Obama they could not be more wrong.
UP IN THE AIR is pure Clintonite pro-capitalist propaganda with a very thin liberal paintjob. I did not know until after seeing it on DVD but the director used to make Wal Mart TV ads for a living…and who was it Mr Walton said was the best advocate and corporate board member and corporate lawyer on behalf of Wal Mart interests ever ?
One Mrs H.R.Clinton. I could easily imagine her saying she never remembered the woman who said she was going to jump off a bridge.
Here is a remark I left on IMDB in a message board discussion about UP IN THE AIR…
That’s wishy washy Hollywood Clintonites for ya. They have no radical edge.
No real challenge to capitalism just like Obama. The illusions of the perfect
American existence still retained intact. Such as Clooney’s lightweight travel
and the notion that he can travel in his suit and still look perfect at the other end
of the flight. Anyone who has travelled knows what air travel does to a suit.
It is better to travel in comfort clothes and have a suit in a suit bag. Does
the Clooney character NEVER sweat or have to suffer the humiliation of having to
take a crap in the confinement of an airplane toilet (notice how no matter how big the planes get the toilets are still awful even if you are slim ?) Plus even posh hotels are still hotels that bed has been slept in by about 5000 people. Imagine if your bed at home had been used by 5000 people how would you feel about that ? He makes remarks about the Spirit of Louis but I can think of a disturbing airport linkage in the revelation of the Western’s world disregard for its victims in the global South. Paris- De Gaulle, NYC- JFK, Washington — Dulles and Toronto — Pearson all Western world airports named after political figures who instigated or backed 30 years of war imposed upon the Vietnamese people by Franco-American imperialism. Want an airport named after you ? Kill a few million people in the name of anti-communism/terrorism/whatever demon dejour.
Proudly the exception is Liverpool’s Airport named after John Lennon…how refreshing !!
The marketing slogan for The Liverpool John Lennon International Airport is
“Above Us Only Sky” from Imagine.
Here’s a great piece from the Awl I just read yesterday about Vera Farmiga’s character. I think what’s most fascinating is how Reitman really tries to humanize people who are essentially sociopathic by nature. Even if we set aside the political implications of their work, they’re still at root completely disconnected from what it means to be human. When the best way to preserve dignity is the option of firing people face to face, you know there’s something wrong with Reitman’s moral compass.