Up in the Air

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) racks up miles flying around the country firing employees on behalf of companies. But he faces losing the job he savors to recent college grad Natalie Keener (Anna Kendrick) -- and losing the ability to escape emotional ties to anything. A connection he builds with Alex Goran (Vera Farmiga), however, might change his outlook on the future. Golden Globe winner Jason Reitman's smart comedy also stars Jason Bateman.

It should probably more accurately say "the ability to escape emotional ties to everything" because that is what it really seemed like he was trying to do. To be an island. (Also, I frequently mistake Jason Reitman and Jason Bateman, I know who both of them are...but their names are just too, too similar!)

And how much did I pay to watch?
For all those times my mother has treated me to movies, I treated her. So I paid $14. Interestingly enough, if we had gone to Cinema DeLux instead, that is what I probably would have paid for only one of us. Thank heavens for locally owned, independent theatres ;)

And what did I think?
When I see television ads for this movie they use a trite description that declares "Up in the Air is a movie for our time!" Except that is really, really, really is! It is an absolutely correct statement. Whether it is that I have never seen one, or that now I am much more aware of, well, everything, I have never seen a movie that so wholeheartedly encapsulates the zeitgeist of a point in time--specifically "these times".

Everyone in the film is so desperate for a connection. Isn't that sort of what popular culture is consistently selling us? All these dating reality shows--where 500 women fling themselves at one man because all of them so badly want that connection (or maybe they just want to be on tv...who knows?)--and the commercials for match.com and eharmony.com and dating.com, isn't that what they are telling us? That in today's world of go-go-go and digital communication instead of face-to-face communication, that we are really all very desperate to connect with people in a very real and authentic way? It seems like if someone wants to make a connection, they can't. And then those that are alone and like being that way, will realize that they actually don't really want to be alone.

So what does any of that actually mean? Well, as far as movie things go, the acting was excellent. Why? Because you really start out not liking the characters, or not caring about them. But at the end you are so wrapped up in them and their issues. It is funny and poignant and affecting. Everything about it was excellent. I don't know if America wasn't suffering from a recession, and the auto industry wasn't in the toilet, and people are trying to blow up airplanes on Christmas, that the movie would have been as absolutely spot on as it was. If the movie had been made in 2002 when Reitman started writing the screenplay it wouldn't have been nearly as excellent as it was when it came out in 2009.

I guess that can be the theme of today's entries. Right place, right time.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
The movie was absolutely crushing. Just the way I like them. It was exactly, exactly, exactly the sort of sad I like, because sometimes it feels like the sort of sad that my life is when I get to thinking about it. (I am actually a pretty happy person, not really emo at all, but I understand Ryan Bingham's dealy).

This will likely win Oscars--and probably whatever other stupid awards they do before the Oscars--and it will deserve them. But it isn't so stupid and simplistic that it is like the typical Oscar formula (at least, I don't think so). I'd love to read the book, because I love to see the way movies slaughter good books--but I don't think this one was really close to the book, rather more of an adaptation--and then see the movie again.

But for now, I will give it a 10. It is certainly my choice for awards this year. Not that Precious movie... I swear...*shakes head*

Sunshine Cleaning

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us,

Financially on shaky ground yet determined to send her son to a top private school, Rose Lorkowski (Amy Adams) teams up with her unreliable sister, Norah (Emily Blunt), to start a new company that specializes in biohazard removal and crime scene cleanup. Tired of doing all of the work for other people, whether in her job cleaning homes or in her failed relationships, Rose is finally ready to use her entrepreneurial spirit to tidy up her own life.

Doesn't that description just make you smile? It makes me smile.

And how much did I pay to watch?
I got it via netflix. Though, it didn't take me as long to watch it and return it as other movies I've gotten recently. Less than a month, in fact. What an accomplishment!!

And what did I think?
Well, I thought this movie would be sort of quirky and cute, but it was pretty much quirky, dark and depressing.

As the audience you really want things to go well for Amy Adams (as an aside, I've never really liked her very much. She always looks like she is going to cry, but that really worked in this role, because I think she pretty much was always on the verge of tears), she really deserves to have something go well--be it in her personal or professional life--and it just [SPOILER], well, doesn't.

Emily Blunt, as her sister, is the same way. She is very, very "deep down sad. The kind of sad that just takes time" and apparently it will take a lot of time. She was just drifting in this very emo way. As their father, Alan Arkin was also depressing.

I will tell you who I really liked was the armless guy who worked at the cleaning supply store. Though I don't like for their to be romantic undertones in every movie, I really wanted Amy Adams to get with him. Alas.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
This movie was just sort of meandering and depressing with not a whole lot of forward motion or positive character development. There was insight into why the characters were do depressive but that didn't really create a cohesive movie.

It was ok though. 5.

Away We Go

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us

Buoyed by the news that they are expecting their first baby, Burt (John Krasinski) and Verona (Maya Rudolph) embark on a journey to locate the perfect place on the planet to raise their child. But their quest inevitably yields many unexpected surprises. Sam Mendes directs this quirky comedy while Allison Janney, Catherine O'Hara, Josh Hamilton, Jim Gaffigan, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Jeff Daniels co-star.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Honestly, with how few netflix movies I've turned around I wouldn't be surprised if it would have been cheaper to purchase it.

And what did I think?
I guess the thing I cannot comprehend at this point in my life is the idea that being married, or even being with another person, will become your life. Like, waking up with the person, doing whatever during the day, and coming back to that person becomes your life. That having a kid and spending all your time with the other person is your life. That whole two of us against the world thing. I just am not at a point in my life where I comprehend that.

I think about other people I know who have lives with a very significant other and I truly have a hard time understanding it. And I don't know if that says I am destined for a life of loneliness or what, but it is sort of depressing.

BUT, this movie was amazing! God, Jim Krazinski is just so flipping cute. And sweet. And adorable!

What was so amazing about it? Well, for one thing, it was hilarious. Allison Janey was out of control. When they go to Arizona we--I mean Mel and I--almost lost our shit. She is hilarious. Jim Gaffigan was funny too. But not nearly as funny as Allison Janey. Then Maggie Gyllenhall was hilarious too, again, not nearly as funny as Allison Janey, in the really uncomfortable Ricky Gervais way.

It was also poignant and heartfelt. The story in Montreal was so excellent and real and sad. And so necessary in the plot. I think this is probably the doing of Dave Eggers--you know, Mr. Depressing real life author of A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius. He wrote this movie with his wife, apparently.

The only thing I didn't especially care for was the ending. And maybe it was because I didn't really want the movie to end or maybe it was because the final seemed sort of obvious. But, either way as a whole it was very enjoyable.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
This is definitely one that I will purchase. Keep your eye out at Target... my birthday is in March.

I give it a high 9. Like I said, I didn't care for the ending too much but it was otherwise entirely enjoyable!

The Last Days of Disco

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us

Writer-director Whit Stillman captures the end of an era, chronicling love and heartbreak in a mirror-balled world of exclusive nightclubs packed with young singles who dispense wit drier than their martinis. A smart script and spot-on performances from an ensemble cast (including Robert Sean Leonard, Chloë Sevigny and Kate Beckinsale) distinguish Stillman's satire, the final installment in his so-called "yuppie trilogy."

Ok.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, I got it on netflix, about a bazillion years ago (actually less than a month ago), and I haven't been watching many movies, so I probably paid 1) more than I should have 2) more than I would have at blockbuster 3) more than it was worth.

And what did I think?
Well, reading this Slate article made me want to watch this movie. I mean, I'm a pretty smart gal. I enjoy quality, dense, smart films. The types of films that are Criterion Collection. But, jesus up in heaven, I did not get The Last Days of Disco at all! Maybe if I watched these other films in the "yuppie trilogy"--Metropolitan and Barcelona--I would have gotten what the heck was going on in this movie. Maybe if I had lived during the time that this movie took place in I would have understood it. But I seriously had absolutely no idea what was going on!

Was I somehow supposed to be moved by the crash in the 1980s? By these ladies trying to destroy each other and becoming "independent"? I seriously did not get it. Wikipedia talks about "themes" in the movie, and how for Chloe Sevigny this is her most asked about movie, but I really didn't see them or get that. Boys Don't Cry is so much better. (Don't bother watching Kids. That was likely my biggest movie watching mistake ever. Talk about effing depressing!)

Maybe I just like my "coming of age" 1990s movies more like Before Sunrise and Reality Bites and Clueless (ok, that one is a stretch).

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I give it a 3. Maybe watch the other ones and then watch this one. Or maybe not.

Two Lovers

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

"After his engagement falls through, Leonard Kraditor (Joaquin Phoenix) juggles the affections of Michelle (Gwyneth Paltrow), his beautiful, self-destructive neighbor, and Sandra (Vinessa Shaw), the attractive, sensible daughter of his father's business associate. Writer-director James Gray's beautifully nuanced romantic drama is set in Brooklyn and also stars Elias Koteas. The film was nominated for the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival."

tah freaking dah!

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nerfffffffin. I watched this bad boy on netflix's view it now option. Well, I guess I did pay something, because if I didn't have my flix subscription then I wouldn't be eligible to watch this, but lets just ignore that for this moment.

And what did I think?
What I thought was that I loved that there were no value judgements from the director. In a story that is sort of complex like this one, with complex and damaged characters, it was SO entirely refreshing that the director or writer didn't write any of the characters as "the bad guy". There were really repugnant things about all the characters, really sad things about all the characters, and endearing things about all the characters. It left the action of judging who was good and who was bad and who deserved what to the audience. And it was likewise refreshing that the filmmakers thought the audience would be smart enough to decide who they liked and who they didn't. Filmmakers don't seem to give audiences enough credit these days.

In the same vein of this being complex, as a viewer it was hard for me to pick who I liked and who I didn't. I think that is quite an accomplishment. Usually I pick someone in a film I like--usually someone I can relate to for some reason--but I couldn't pick anyone. I just felt sorry for everyone. Sorrier for some, but I felt sorry for all of them. They were just so damaged.

The film also took place in Brighton Beach, so there were tons of Russians and other Eastern Europeans, and the weather was so overcast and depressing--the settings really seemed to match the story. I assume that was done deliberately. I give the production team a lot of credit on this one.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I think you should watch this. Sometimes I think that my opinions on film are sort of bizarrely skewed--I don't know why. But I thought this one was really good. It isn't the type of film I would buy and watch over and over, but I thought it was really good. Nuanced. (I love that word).

I gave it a 4 on Netflix, so I will give it an 8 here.