Up In the Air

Matt's rating: 3/4 Banana Peels
Ryan's rating: 2/4 Banana Peels
Travis' rating: 3/4 Banana Peels

Review by Matt:

Jason Reitman director of Juno and Thank You For Smoking brings us his most advanced film to date. "Up in the Air" is not a comedy like his preceding films. It is more of a character study if you will. That character is Ryan Bingham played masterfully by George Clooney. There are no bells and whistle's here, no special effects. The film is primarily a vehicle for Clooney's character who is without a place to call "home" and he is content with that. Bingham is practically married to his job with no wife or kids of his own, he has no "luggage". About the closest thing to a connection he has with the "real world" is the flights he takes from one airport to another. The film also stars Verma Fermiga who plays the female lead Alex Goran who like Bingham is married to her job. The two strike up a quick friendship. Their relationship is pruely casual and light-hearted. Soon though Clooney's character realizes he wants to be grounded and would like to start a more serious relationship. For once in his life he puts the cards on the table and lets everything hang in the balance. Suffice it to say, this is where the climax begins and i will leave you with a quote from Clooney's character that i felt was appropriate, especially in these tough economic times.
"Some animals were meant to carry each other to live symbiotically over a lifetime. Star crossed lovers, monogamous swans. We are not swans. We are sharks."

I encourage you to go see this movie, for better or worse it will play with your emotions.



Review by Ryan:

I'm not sure why all the uproar over this movie. I wont tell you it is bad, but it isn't the movie the critics make it out to be. To be honest, I wasn't too enthralled to see the movie based on the previews, which made it seem more like a run of the mill rom-com than a character study. I did give it an honest chance though, given that I enjoyed Reitman's previous two movies.

The movie overall was fairly pedestrian and bland in my opinion. Mostly sexual innuendos mixed in with kitchy catch phrases for living a secluded life. George Clooney added nothing to the movie that any other good actor could have. For a name like Clooney, I would expect the actor to bring that intangible something to the movie, but I must have missed it.

The movie does come together nicely in the end, despite the heart wrenching emptiness conveyed through the story playing out in front of you. There are moral lessons on relationships, relationships with boyfriends, girlfriends, mothers, fathers, and living alone apart from them. In fact, Reitman does a very good job with the end, however, by that time I was so far out of the movie that the significance had been lost.

I urge you not to bases your decision on viewing this movie based off of my review. Go and see this movie, form your own opinions, I am sure you might like the movie as much as my colleagues did.





Review by Travis:

First of all, the fact that "Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel" is higher than "Up In the Air" at the box office (by almost quadruple numbers) right now is a symbol that American cinema is closer than ever to facing it's demise. Maybe a lot of people don't like George Clooney.

This is the third effort by director Jason Reitman (Thank You for Smoking, Juno) and it's easily his best work. Jason Reitman has put off making this film for about 7 years and began writing the screenplay when the economy was in good shape. He decided to make his other two films first and now, as the economy is in the shitter, he has rewrote it and this movie becomes a topical piece that really defines our era of layoffs, misery, and broken dreams. There isn't a single other movie that really relates to this topic that I can think of. Using real people who have been layed off and not actors (some actors were used) in the interview scenes is a "nice touch".

Like the poster says, it's a film about a man ready to make a connection. For his entire life, he has avoided stability and family, and this story is about him coming to understand that life is better with these things. George Clooney plays a man, a professional, named Ryan Bingham who fires employees so that the so-called "pussy" executives don't have to. And he is very, very good at it. He travels SO MUCH for his "face-to-face appointments" with these companies that he seeks after the 10-million mile frequent flyer card, a daunting task but the only lifelong goal that he really has. Once his company tries to ground his efforts at home with him making internet video-chat layoffs instead, he fights to keep his secluded, traveling way-of-life intact. A woman comes into his life, played by Verma Fermiga, who leads a very similar lifestyle (basically living in airports and hotels). Their relationship is defined as "casual" as they only meet up with each other in certain cities that they are both in or nearby to as they travel. It's an exhilarating situation for both characters. Towards the end, Bingham realizes that he doesn't just want a "casual" relationship any more, and therein lies the climax of the film. (The climax of the story was pretty sudden I think, but that's all I'll say because I don't want to ruin it for you.)

Matt and I compared this movie to 'The Wrestler' of last year (Dir. Darren Aronofsky) (note: of course, it's not as good as The Wrestler) in that they're both stories about men coming to terms with who they have become by choosing, sometime ago in the past, the lifestyles they lead now. The characters make choices in their lives to try to reconcile mistakes that they have made in the past. I really like this theme and though I think it may be meant more for middle-aged audiences, I find that any audience over the age of 18 can really relate to the message of this movie. Granted it's not a very original theme, but I think the story of what Ryan Bingham's job and lifestyle entails is absolutely relevant to our modern American situation.

As far as the acting goes, there's nothing worthy of an Oscar here but, for me, most of the actors fit their role very well. George Clooney has got the smooth-talking convincer character down to a T. No eccentric performances really, but then again, like with other Reitman films, that's something that really wasn't needed. The acting was very honest, quietly strong, and understated...a perfect tone to the movie. Zach Galifianakis makes a tiny appearance in the beginning of the film, which was great. Danny McBride plays Binghams soon to be brother-in-law and I found him to be oddly placed and awkward in the role. Maybe it's because I know him best from Tropic Thunder and so it's confusing to see him in what was meant to be a serious role. I think Reitman just put him in there for some sort of "comic relief" which, if that's the case, is just poor judgment. I found myself laughing AT him when I don't think I was supposed to be laughing at all. (Don't get me wrong though, this film is very funny at the same time.)

Also, I think this movie should be seen by any college student who is stricken with the question of whether or not it's better to immediately get a job in an office building after graduation so you can start making payments OR to just follow your dreams and hope that stability, happiness, and prosperity follow with you. To me, I can't think of many other movies that really drove this point home better than 'Up In the Air' has.

Inglorious Basterds

Rated by: Travis
4/4 Banana Peels

"We're in the Nazi killin' business and, cousin, business is a-boomin"

2 hours and 33 minutes of badassedness. Hitler's death was immaculate and the performances by Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt are superb.



^^^Nation's Pride is a fictional Nazi propaganda film that appeared in Inglorious Basterds. The six-minute clip above was released as a promotion for IB and was directed by Eli Roth (dir. Hostel), who played the baseball bat-wielding Bear Jew.

Mystic River

Rated by: Ryan

3/4 banana peels

If your looking for a happy film, this isn't it. If your looking for a film that explores the modern psyche of shoot first and ask questions later, then this is your film. Clint Eastwood interweaves the lives of three boys from Boston, and does so without worrying about leaving the audience with a happy feeling. The feel of every shot matches the grittiness of the neighborhood the characters inhabit. The color is muted and cold to carry out this feeling.

Not only does Eastwood pull amazing performances from his Oscar winners Sean Penn and Tim Robbins, he manages to pull out career performances from almost every actor in the movie. The story is very well written with most loose ends tied together, although it does get a little reckless towards the end. This forces the viewer to question whether the characters would truly act this way rather than continuing to believe the heart felt story in the previous hour and a half. It also tends to lag at parts but the pace keeps up pretty good for the crime drama.

Go, rent this movie, but understand you might not see this movie as a happy ending.

Sherlock Holmes

Reviewed by: Ryan

Ryan
3/4 Banana Peels

Matthew
2 and a half/4 Banana Peels

I have now seen this film twice and enjoyed it just as much the second time as the first. Guy Ritchie tells the story of Holmes in a gritty way, akin to Snatch. His style is superb, but questionable at moments. The pictures he puts on the screen are beautifully bleak and dirty yet colorful, right down to the extras chosen. Robert Downey Jr. shines as a more eccentric and physically brute Sherlock than the original, this works to his advantage and mesh's with Ritchie's style better. Jude Law too does a wonderful job as Dr. Watson, and coupled with Downey Jr., make the movie as good as it is.

In the second viewing, however, a few flaws that had previously been glanced over stuck out like sore thumbs. Most dealt with continuity problems in a script that wove many early events with later events. Other issues had to do with the assumptions made and the logic used by Holmes to solve the mystery. Both of these issues are minor in comparison to the total film, and the logical assumptions and leaps are needed to keep the story interesting and fresh and is possibly a non issue. Another issue is the villain, at best he was mildly intimidating but mostly bordered on corny. He often disrupted the otherwise masterful work that has been laid down by his counterparts.

I highly encourage the viewing of this movie.

Antichrist

Reviewed by: Matthew
4/4 banana peels




Just when I thought I had already seen the most grotesque yet beautiful film ever (Gasper Noe's Irreversible), this movie comes along. Antichrist is intended to be a fable about the fall of man, set in a mirror-world where chaos and Satan reigns, not God. In reality, it is the uncanny story of Adam and Eve told very much in reverse chronological order to the actual biblical story. The characters have no names; they are simply referred to as He and She played respectively by Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg. They are the center pieces of the movie, without their humble performances this movie wouldn't have gotten two inches off the ground. They embrace their roles and take the movie to the next level without looking back. The movie opens with a brief prologue which is shot strictly in black and white. You see Dafoe and Gainsbourgs' characters making passionate love in the night while their infant son "Nick" (reference to the devil) crawls around exploring and ultimately falls to his death. This sets up chapter one titled "Grief" You see the couple grieving the seemingly accidental death of their son, so they set out for their country home, in a place called Eden (the place “She” fears the most) in order to get away from it all and save their marriage. Next is the chapter titled "Pain". He is a therapist and feels that only He can get through to his wife, who has now become physically ill after their child's death. He is a man of reason. She is very much driven by emotion. Without spoiling the movie, what follows is a series of bizarre interactions with nature, failed attempts at therapy (of the verbal, sexual, and physical varieties) and then a very disturbing climax hence the third chapters title "Despair". Man is capable of limitless harm and that leads to human destruction. Finally, the movie is topped off by the hauntingly arresting epilogue that had me speechless.

The film shines for me personally during the stunning musical black & white prologue and epilogue. Von Trier has always pushed the envelope to that next degree; he has always been the king provocateur. He is determined to confront and shake his audience more than any other filmmaker (IE: Lynch, Noe). I applaud Von Trier for not holding back and letting the cannon's loose just as he always does. This movie will stay with me and the majority of the viewers who go watch this. Be prepared, you will be forever changed by Lars Von Trier's Antichrist for a long time to come.