"Up In the Air" is dry, dull, lacking emotion and tries to be intelligent about existentialism

Rating: 1/10 (20 December 2009)

Heard wonderful things about this film (mostly through the critics) and was looking forward to it but after seeing it at the Arc Light Theater last night I am wondering what all the critical praise is about? Is it coming from the influence of the heavy hitters on the cast like George Clooney, the Reitman father-son combo, or the studio? Not sure, but I am sure that the film is dry, dull, boring and did not move me in any way (and the audience in the theater).
Some summary: Ryan Bingham (played by Clooney)is at home in his infinite aerial travel. He flies to offices where his job is to fire other people out of their jobs in a calm, cool and hazard free manner. He has a great travel routine, preferred rental car and hotel stay and seems to enjoy his away from home traveling lifestyle. He enjoys short flings with women as long as they stay in a controlled routine and do not affect his routine. In his life appear two significant women -- a young upstart (Kendrick) who threatens to reduce his travel with a Computer Chat methodology to fire people and a sexy traveling professional woman (Farmiga) who reminds him of the lack of substance in his life in spite of his concealed need for it.
Well, that summary sounds like the makings of a good film and it could have been but the actuality of the filmic execution was poor. The acting performances of all the characters seemed so held back and unmoving and they are good actors so it must have been the screenplay or the direction. The comedy was dull -- primarily because of the pretentious dialog (look for the Cancer/Can Sir joke in the plane) -- and most jokes fail except for a sympathy laugh that you must give because they are so obviously in need of a reaction.
The camera work as well is boring and when it does pick up it is inappropriate. We see rapid pans and the Steadicams pushes in quick when Clooney is explaining his travel routine expertise and I felt that these camera moves would be better for a "Bourne Ultimatum" film or a "James Bond" film. The rest of the film has slow dolly moves and traditional framing -- nothing good or bad to say here, just a display of uninspired camera moves.
The screenplay is at best relevant because of the current job cuts and economic climate. The majority of it is an attempt to appear clever and substantial but it pales in comparison to films who really execute this like "Annie Hall", "Sideways" and "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button".
I usually like Clooney but in this film his performance is too cool, too reserved and unmoving. I suppose the real flaw is in the writing and directing of Jason Reitman -- he, thus far, appears to be a mediocre talent who seems to be getting his way with the Awards and Critics not on merit but on the influence of his father Ivan Reitman and other influential forces.
Some positive notes: I have to say that the Opening Credit sequence was well done and so was the use of purposeful hollow or full fonts in the films inter titles. Also the color correction was strong -- they use mostly cool and clean colors to punctuate Clooney's isolation and only use warmer, richer colors when he is at his sister's wedding falling in love with the character played by Vera Farmiga.
This year 2009, so far, unlike last year, looks fairly weak for the Oscar season -- "Invictus" and "Basterds" seem to be the only strong films; and if "Up In The Air" gets a Best Picture nomination or win we will look back only critically at the nomination and forget the film. Maybe I do not "get" Reitman's style because I found "Juno" boring, over-hyped and definitely not deserving of an Original Screenplay Oscar Win as well; "Thank you for Smoking" was passable to me.