Up in the Air

Okay, first of all, let me warn you: If you haven’t yet seen Jason Reitman’s Up in the Air:

1. Why haven’t you? It’s in theaters everywhere… go now!
2. You might not want to read the following story as it contains some spoilers for the film. (the headline is not a spoiler, trust me)

While George Clooney’s character Ryan Bingham is not dying of terminal cancer in the actual theatrical cut of the film, might one have been written and even filmed? After the jump we get to the bottom of the mystery. Is it true? Was it written? Was it filmed? We talked to Jason Reitman to get the answers.

The mystery first appeared online when a reader emailed Hollywood Elsewhere suspecting that Reitman had originally planned a third act twist reveal in which Ryan Bingham is dying of a terminal cancer. Here is an excerpt from the reader letter:

“Kirn’s 2001 novel is told in the first-person from Bingham’s point-of-view. By the time we reach the third act, after a series of strange and confusing episodes, it becomes clear that Bingham is an unreliable narrator. It is only in the last few pages that we learn he has been suffering from seizures, black-outs for hours on end, and has an upcoming appointment at the Mayo clinic for treatment of this unnamed affliction.In short the book has a twist ending that makes you go back and rethink everything you read. I think director-cowriter Reitman had the same ending in mind when he made the movie only to pull his punches in post. The first clue to Reitman’s intention is the ‘Would you like the cancer?/Would you like the can, sir?’ joke during Bingham’s maiden flight. When I saw this scene, I immediately knew the meaning of the signal since I’d read the book. My presumption was that unlike Kirn in the novel, Reitman was going to be a bit more clever about planting clues about Bingham’s health throughout the story. As it stands in the film now, without the twist, the ‘cancer/can, sir’ joke is an odd bit that doesn’t really make sense. It’s merely a joke that seems to have been written to demonstrate Bingham is preoccupied with thoughts of cancer and death. There are other hints of mortality. If you go back and watch the movie again in your mind, almost everything else Bingham does makes more sense if we suspects he may be dying. As in the novel, Bingham is obsessed with frequent flier miles. (One million in the book, ten million in the film) “I would be number seven,” he explains. “More people have gone to the moon.” If we look at his quest through a mortal lens, we see that instead of just being a guy trying to score points, Bingham is someone racing the clock, trying to achieve something that would give his life a kind of meaning before he meets his early end. Bingham’s rash decision to throw away his whole life/relationship philosophy as he tries to connect with Alex in Chicago is something a sick guy with emotional avoidance issues might just do.”

The gag where the flight attendant asks Bingham if he would like the can, sir has always interested me because it’s the only scene in the film that has no connection to the story. It is for all intents and purposes, a throwaway gag. It’s definitely funny enough to include in the film, and every time I’ve seen the movie it draws bg laughs, but if it were removed from the theatrical cut, it would change nothing. You can watch a clip of the scene embedded below:

I also read an early draft of the screenplay which didn’t contain any sort of cancer subplot. But the evidence above seemed to suggest that it might have been filmed, or at least written… So I decided to contact filmmaker Jason Reitman to try to get an answer to the questions of a cancer subplot. And it appears I wasn’t the only one interested, as Alex from FirstShowing and Kris from InContention were also in on the conference call. You can read the quotes below or listen to the audio for yourself embedded below:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

“You find out at the end of the book that the character is dying of terminal disease and that he is going to the Mayo clinic. But that is something I never wanted to include in the movie, so I never shot a scene where you find out the character is actually dying. For me, the end of the movie is him making a choice of where he wants to go for the rest of his life and certainly he does have the rest of his life. The Do You Want The Can Sir scene, which was my invention, and was not in the book, came out of a real moment when I was on a plane and I overheard a flight attendant actually ask someone, Do you want “the Cancer”, and I actually did a double take. The inclusion in the movie does two things: I thought it would be a cute nod to the people who have read the book, and in the book he is dying of cancer. And 2, more importantly, It kind of speaks to the idea of how we collect things and this certain sense like it is a disease: being addicted to traveling and the obsessiveness over miles or any kind of fruitless collection is like having a disease. Good?”

I decided to follow up by asking Reitman if the “Would You Like the Can Sir” scene was originally longer, and this is how he responded:

“No, that’s it. I’ll tell you this… It was original going to be the opening of the movie. If you read an old draft of Up in the Air, it opens with “Do You Want the Can Sir”. And I always thought that was a clever cold open. And I actually cut it that way and showed it to an audience, but for an audience that knew nothing about the movie, it really freaked them out. Like they really didn’t know what they were watching. I decided it would carry more weight if it happened a little further in. And it’s still a little unusual. It kind of happens out of nowhere, and we never really call back to it. But I felt like it still had a purpose there.

Alex from FirstShowing then mentioned that in the trailers he noticed some cuts where he is talking to a guy in a plane, and later walking with him in an airport (the guy disappears behind a wall as Clooney walks). Jason responded explaining that it was part of an extended sequence we will see on the DVD/Blu-ray:

“That’s a whole sequence in the book called “To Know Me Is To Fly With Me”, and it’s sad because that was a sequence I really loved. Out of everything I cut out of the movie, that is probably the sequence I’m most proud of because I thought the sequence was directorialy pretty cool, and it really got at who the character really was. But you just didn’t need it at the end of the day. We needed to get to the meat of the story. It will be on the DVD. It’s actually a great sequence and I had a lot of fun shooting it. And for a plane shoot, I thought it was pretty fucking cool. And it had that great shot — that shot I had the idea of from the moment of writing which is this great visual: You’ve got two guys walking next to each other and boom, one is suddenly gone. And right as he is looking up to say goodbye, he disappears. Something I’m going to have on the DVD which is really cool is that I do a lot of video storyboards, and I cut together this piece to music which goes between the video storyboard and the real shot — and that’s one of those where it’s the video storyboard of the shot and it transitions into the real shot.”

So there you have it. Even though it isn’t true, it was an interesting theory.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

  • katieb3
    SPOILER ALERT:

    Interesting about the can/sir origin but that's not the major problem with Reitman's rendition of "Up in the Air".

    I didn't buy the scene where Alex calls George Clooney (Ryan Bingham, whatever) and chews him out for showing up on her doorstep.

    a) No one turns down George Clooney, especially not her.
    b) Calling their affair a "parenthesis" (technically a parenthetical) would only make sense if they had had a one-night stand rather than an on-going Meet-you-in-St. Louis sort of fling.

    Also, not sure how you collect 10 million frequent flier miles traveling mostly to cities in the Midwest you could drive to.

    And no one who looks and dresses like George Clooney does in the movie would have that job, or work for shlumpy Jason Bateman. If GC had a paunch for the role, as he did in Syriana, maybe. But here he's like a walking Armani ad.
  • robertnlee
    Yeah, I don't buy it. The movie's sloppy as hell, anyway, not an adaptation of the book, really, and the simplest explanation is they dropped that part of the novel at some point and just thought that line was cute or something. As it is, it's such obvious foreshadowing, coming as it does on the heels of Clooney's opening narration, that my GF, who never read the novel, leaned over and went "Oh, so I guess he's got cancer?"

    It's a leftover in a pretty lame movie.
  • Catherine
    I was going to read the book and am disappointed to learn about the cancer here. No, it's not a spoiler for the movie, unless someone expected the plot twist and didn't get it. This is, however, a major spoiler for the book. I'm sure the author will be pleased.
  • quintushalls
    I would have liked another nod in the film to it. Like, if you saw him comb his hair in one scene and a little more than usual comes off and he just looks at it for a second and then moves on like it was nothing, a 5 second scene that could give more to the film.
  • I interpreted the 'cancer/can sir' scene as another sign that Bingham's pre-occupation (aware or otherwise) with death and what it means to accomplish something in life. I actually prefer this same reading without him having cancer. How we all experience life in relation to death is meaningful, regardless if we are dying or not. A modern aging man re-examining life in relationship to society's attitudes toward death is just as fascinating and resonant with me as the story of a man on the verge of dying.
  • GabeJa
    Cooky, just rewatched the film last night, and did notice the abruptness of the cancer scene. I must say, I was a little perplexed, and was wondering about it literally earlier today. Thanks /film!
  • Cancerboy
    frankly.. now knowing this. I kinda hate Reitman for not including this. What a douche bag. typical " Cancer aint funny" approach.

    Hey Jason.. If youre reading this. FUCK YOU. Cancer IS funny. Try having it. You'd be surprised at your sense of humor of it all. We need films that do. I wish I didnt pay money to see your film. I knew I shoulda just downloaded it. next time I will.
  • walterkirn
    walter kirn here, the the author of the book, writing to clear up the notion that bingham has cancer in the novel. that's left open. he's got something, certainly, and the suggestion is that it's physical and grave, but because of his utter unreliability -- and that of medicine itself -- we can't be sure what is, specifically, and it may even be something he's exaggerating or is more afraid of than needs to be. as for the notion that jason left this in and later cut it out, it's nonsense. he knew right away he wasn't going to go there. but i agree with him that the "can, sir" bit is not as irrelevant as some assert -- that, as he so aptly explains, it's an allusion to a wider, social, metaphysical ailment that he and all of us, maybe, are in the grips of and which epidemic is raging in the background of our current way of life. his ability to elucidate this touch speaks to his mastery of his craft, i think, and the subtlety of his artistic consciousness. speaking for myself, though, as a viewer, i think the scene when sam elliott appears to award ryan his ultra-loyalty card has a slightly surreal otherworldly heightened quality that suggests ryan is meeting god in elliot and accounting for his time on earth, the way the myths say we'll have to in the afterlife. the lighting in the scene is one clue, as is the allegorical subtext to the conversation they have. from this scene on, it seems to me, ryan is in another realm somehow, and the little redemptive gestures he makes there are those of a soul in some sort of cosmic between-state trying to clear his karma some before going on to another incarnation. whether jason intended this or not, who knows, but for me the last few minutes may well take place in a zone where spiritual reality is more important than physical reality. one that may well be heaven, though not announced as such.
  • robertnlee
    "as for the notion that jason left this in and later cut it out, it's nonsense. he knew right away he wasn't going to go there."

    Well, I stand corrected by the author, then. I still didn't much like the movie version and like the novel very much. I've read and loved your work since She Needed Me and early shorts, though, and consider you one of my favorite recent authors and have pushed you on some other readers and writers pretty hard over the years... and now I feel like a big old fanboy and will shut up.
  • shane
    wow, very cool to hear your thoughts on the movie, walter. I definitely got a sort of surreal vibe from that Sam Elliott scene. It's definitely one of the most uncomfortable / heartbreaking / simultaneously hilarious scenes in the flim and certainly carries significant weight for the main character...it's pretty much the realization of his only goal in life and it defines how hollow his existence may actually be.
  • shane
    Yeah, that "can, sir" gag was one of the few things in Up In The Air that reminded me of the humor in Thank You For Smoking.

    "When do you sleep?"
    "Sunday."
  • Having never read the book, and having really enjoyed Jason's "Thank You For Smoking". Knew right away that the "Do you want the cancer?" remark was a very funny satirical euphemism. Was the person in the marquee laughing the loudest on that one, the timing of his reaction was pretty sharp. Probably going to have to read the book now that I have read this, and it is interesting to note how much the interpretation of the movie differs if you have read the book. Also great to hear that their will be extended montages in the DVD/Bluray release.
    By the way, could you guys find out when the Bluray/DVD is being released? These are really interesting discussions! Cool stuff, keep up the great editorial work gentlemen!
  • wittyphrase
    I was also just thinking after reading this, "Well NOW I want to read the book." Some things in the first half of the movie hit close to home as someone that travels a lot for work but that "...can, sir?" bit threw me off and made me wonder if that was going to come back later on in some way. It would have made sense given how much discussion there is about planning your life and using a termination as an opportunity to do what you really love.

    Also, the image and voice over that the movie closes with? The cancer subplot from the book might have made sense in the film.
  • John
    Yes, but why did he cut out the cancer subplot? That isn't addressed in Reitman's responses.
  • robear
    I saw it today and, wow, that film was phenomenal, I can't wait to see it again
  • Just that clip alone makes me really want the DVD/BD of UITA. Much better quality than the theater I saw it in, which had all sorts of marks on the print (on day ONE) and a slightly blown out speaker or two behind the screen. Not a terrible experience by any means, but not up to par with many home setups.
  • jgro44
    I hope they include the scene where he interacts with the guy on the plane somewhere in the DVD.
  • ScanCase
    I'm so tired of the spoiler debate.
  • the title of this article is a spoiler because it tells us that jason actually responded to the rumors.
  • Stunsail
    PETER is sort of is a spoiler for even us who haven't seen the film and have been avoiding spoilers will avoid reading this article - and so probably miss your comment (i only scrolled down to voice a complaint) - but they will still see the headline and so will be thinking of that all throughout the film, is there one, isn't there, etc It's a bad bad move on /Film's behalf. Surely there was a better way to write the title - this looks like an unashamed hit grabber at best...
  • I am clear to say, before the jump that "the headline is not a spoiler, trust me" and that "George Clooney’s character Ryan Bingham is not dying of terminal cancer in the actual theatrical cut of the film" I dont know how much clearer you can be? We try to keep all spoilers after the jump, so you should always feel free to read the "tease" and headline without fear of being spoiled.
  • Meagan Flynn
    Peter,
    This is the "cancer" flight attendant. Just wanted to say I liked the article. :) M. Flynn
  • ^
    why make that title, then warn for spoilers. too late.
  • There is no cancer subplot in the film, thus the headline is not a spoiler.
  • dagreenman18
    He might mean spoilers for the Book.


    As for the "can, sir", looks like Jason has confirmed it was nothing but a big lipped alligator" moment
  • damnitall
    Well no one would know it's referring to the book since it says nothing about the book in the title.
blog comments powered by Disqus