Jason Reitman and Diablo Cody to Reteam for Young Adult

Posted by on August 3rd, 2010   Filed under: Comedy, Drama
Source: Deadline New York

Love it or hate it, you have to admit that Juno was a pretty amazing indie success story, and the movie instantly catapulted both director Jason Reitman and screenwriter Diablo Cody to fame. Reitman followed it up with the multiple Oscar-nominated Up in the Air, while Cody’s next script resulted in the somewhat disappointing horror comedy Jennifer’s Body. No doubt she is hoping to get things back on track again by reteaming with Jason Reitman on her next original screenplay, Young Adult. Despite the fact that Reitman has been eyeing a few other projects lately, it looks like this will be his next directorial gig, with Charlize Theron attached to star and a potential November 10th start date in mind.

The story revolves around a ghost writer of young adult novels who wants to reclaim her identity. In order to do this, she attempts to win back her high school boyfriend (who is now married with kids) and revisits old friends and tries to help them achieve their dreams. Is it a coincidence that this script has come about after Cody herself was just hired to write a screenplay for a Sweet Valley High movie?

As for Reitman, it does seem a little surprising that he would be so eager to direct another Diablo Cody script, especially since he has so many other projects in development — not to mention the fact that the Juno backlash is still going strong. I can’t help but think he is running the risk of throwing away all the credibility he built up with Up in the Air, but perhaps the script is just really good. I’ll be curious to see if Cody is still focusing on hipster references and funny slang, or if this will be a more mature effort for her. What do you think, does Young Adult sound like a movie that is worth getting excited about?



  • Henrik

    Jason Reitman is the new no. 1 on my talentless-hacks-that-everybody-loves list. Juno had Ellen Pageas the only non-grating element, and Up in the Air was self-serving shit in my opinion. I think his career is over for me.

  • bard

    So… Reitman makes an extraordinary film, follows that up with a TERRIBLE film, and eeks out a decent/good film, and decides to do another film with a terrible screenwriter?

    Can’t wait…..

  • Kim

    I’m going to throw myself under the bus to say that I loved Juno and Up in the Air. This story makes me happy.

  • really Hendrik? Juno and Up in the Air deserve that much venom – hardly the worst movies to come out in their respective years as you seem to imply. I’m not saying they’re “earth shaking” but a lot better than the regular sh*t. That alone should give him/her a pass. Plus, you of all people, I would think, would appreciate some of the off center elements in Up in the Air?!

  • sorry, HENRIK

  • Henrik

    I appreciate the correction.

    I definitely don’t think Juno and Up in the Air are a lot better than the regular shit. Ellen Page is really good, but Jason Reitman is a hack. I can’t stand his pseudo-playful style, his credits sequences are atrocious, and his movies never explore anything beyond the surface, yet they seem designed to convince the audience that they are.

  • Falsk

    What–I’m siding with Rus and not Henrik? What is the world coming to?!

    But more on topic… I think everyone (but bard) has so far skirted the bigger issue of “Oh-shit-another-Diablo-Cody-film?” Not that I necessarily HATE the lady, but if there’s one thing worth getting up-tight about with “Juno”, it’s that obnoxious dialogue.

  • “his movies never explore anything beyond the surface, yet they seem designed to convince the audience that they are.”

    you have to defend your criticism, Juno presents a young female character very “fleshed out” that deals with some real issues. she is the sexual aggressor and the strong personality in the film, yet everyone doesn’t give the film credit for that, and you basically call it ordinary. It has just as much substance as The Virgin Suicides (which everyone loves) yet because it has one liners it is B.S.!?

    Up in the Air shows, and gives, some commentary on a segment of the modern workforce (high paid, traveling business consultants), the artificial lifestyle this business culture breeds, makes statements on the current business climate thru the characteristics and actions of the lead characters, yet this film is again ordinary?

    I agree they are not pushing the envelope as far as films like “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days” or “The Smartest Guys in the Room” but they aren’t that bad.

  • Henrik

    I liked Ellen Page in Juno, but without her acting grounding the movie and making the emotions feel real, I think it would have been a horrible experience. I agree that she is the sexual aggressor and the strong personality and I will give Ellen Page credit for making it borderline believable that this person would actually say these things and feel these emotions. None of the other actors were able to overcome the script and the direction to tap into anything remotely real in my opinion. I haven’t seen The Virgin Suicides, so I have no idea if that’s better than Juno. It’s been awhile since I saw Juno though, not feeling very compelled to go back.

    Up in the Air was the opposite, George Clooney in the lead role was a horrible choice in my opinion. He just glances off everything, being the definition of a pretty face. Not once did I ever feel anything from the character, nor did I find his experiences very believable. His lifestyle was artificial? The film commented on that? Any attempt at actually making some sort of point about people being laid off was ruined by having JK Simmons playing himself in one scene, hamming it up like he has been doing ever since Spider-Man. I remember Up in the Air as superboring, and constantly was thinking if they had cast a real actor instead of George Clooney (say, Paul Giamatti or Phillip Seymour Hoffman) there might actually be some sort of experience to be had, but Reitman is to blame moreso than Clooney. Look at that opening titles sequence, it’s like a fucking Pixar movie, in no way did I ever feel connected to the movie, it’s all about doing something that is provably important and undeniably wellmade. But it doesn’t have anything underneath the surface, in no way does it feel like Jason Reitman actually cares about his movie, there’s just this weird detached “story” being laid out and it’s up to the actors to overcome the “playful” (I’m not using that complimentary) direction and storytelling to try and make the experience worthwhile.

  • Henrik

    When I write comments in english, I use so many ,’s it makes my sentences impossible to comprehend.

  • bard

    I can’t believe people are arguing for Juno. That’s one of the worst movies I’ve watched from the 2000’s.

    Granted, I don’t see all the movies that come out every week, so I avoid ones that look particulary bad.

    Nobody has really commented on “Thank You For Smoking” and I think that that is just sad. That film is incredible. Everything about it is great. I can’t believe that Juno and Up in the Air came from the same director.

  • if you have a problem with JK Simmons then I can see that the “different than the normal movie” father / daughter relationship doesn’t work for you, and part of the reason you didn’t like the other characters in Juno. Allison Janney is also good as a different take on the typical step-mom role / relationship.

    I don’t think you really want Giamatti or Hoffman in the suave lead for Up in the Air – that’s like casting a black spiderman…sorry couldn’t help myself. I think Clooney was fine, but I’ve been on his side since Micheal Clayton…(really since Oh Brother)

    I find it interesting that you’re so hard on these films yet they are primarily comedies. I almost feel you want them to be strictly dramas?! Is that what is making you feel they are not “deep” enough? Do you have an example of a comedy that does go deep enough…maybe “Being There” or dare I say it, “Forest Gump”.

    I think in a way “Up in the Air” is detached by design. Its making a lot of comments on society, more so than the characters…even thought its making comments on society thru the characters. (Like Thank You For Smoking, excellent)

    I do agree with you that not using real people (or unknown actors) for all of the firing scenes was a mistake.

    you really get hung up on title cards, I happen to think the opening of Juno was awesome…I don’t remember the opening to Up in the Air which means it was probably weak.

  • Henrik

    The opening credits of Juno made me think I was about to watch “Independent Movie” as in from the directors of “Epic Movie”.

    I think Forrest Gump is great. It’s funny, has great acting and an interesting story. If Tom Hanks had played the lead in Up in the Air, it could have been a much, much better movie. I’m a pretty huge Tom Hanks fan.

    I think the lead in Up in the Air is only suave because it’s George Clooney. All he does is get involved with a woman in the exact same situation as him. Through hollywood politics, it’s dictated that both have to be super attractive, but in no way does it add anything to the story. They could just as well have been realistic people, although you’d have to change much of the movie in order to have it contain realism. Is Up in the Air really meant as a comedy though? I don’t think I laughed once. Even though it had Danny McBride, an awesome actor horribly miscast.

  • Henrik

    “if you have a problem with JK Simmons then I can see that the “different than the normal movie” father / daughter relationship doesn’t work for you, and part of the reason you didn’t like the other characters in Juno. Allison Janney is also good as a different take on the typical step-mom role / relationship. ”

    I don’t have a problem with JK Simmons I think, I’m just sick of seing him doing Jameson in all these movies now. I hardly understand the rest of what you’re saying here, but I don’t remember the relationships as being particularly surprising or original.

  • “through hollywood politics, it’s dictated that both have to be super attractive, but in no way does it add anything to the story.”

    that is were we differ, for a period of time, I had friends that were exactly like Clooney in “Up in the Air”, all good looking males that were shallow tech. or pharmaceutical consultants flying in and out of Chicago every week. The film speaks to a type and style of business person that is not divorced from the physical appearance. maybe you don’t have this business climate in Europe …no you do, I know people that do the international business consulting thing too AND THEY ARE GORGEOUS ALSO, WTF!

  • Henrik

    Alright, maybe it makes sense that a person employed in a job like in the movie would have to have a certain charisma. I’d much rather be fired by Tom Hanks than George Clooney though, at least Hanks seems like he has humanity. I don’t see anything beneath Clooney’s oh-so-smooth flesh, and I remember also trying to figure out what exactly distinguished his performance and character in Up in the Air from his Bruce Wayne performance, and not being able to. Just having these thoughts during the movie should tell you how bored I was.