It seems as though Wes Anderson has started making pastiches of his own films. I wish he'd turn down the idiosyncrasies and stylistic flourishes just a little bit.
I'll still be going to see this, natch.
Normally can't stand Anderson, but this looks like fun.
Is that an ensemble cast, or is that just everyone?
the damn symmetry in every other shot is getting annoying.
Looks fun though.
I wasn't sure about this movie when I saw the poster. I thought the Darjeeling Limited (just caught up with this from Netflix) was much too leaden and tedious. The trailer has changed my mind, it looks a lot more like the energetic and fun Anderson from Moonrise Kingdom. Yes he like quirky cinematography, but that's just who he is. Complaining about it is like going to a Michael Bay film and complaining about all of the explosions and incomprehensible action scenes, or going to a Woody Allen movie and complaining about the Jew jokes.
What is going on with all those format changes?
Apparently, the aspect ratios help to identify which of three timeframes the scene is set it, so I guess it will be bouncing around backwards and forwards.
Looks likely to be the best comedy released in recent years, at least to my somewhat absurdist tasted. The trailer has a definite feel of Monty Python meets It's A Mad, Mad... World.
Looks fun in a Wes Anderson way, but the lack of affect he insists on from just about every actor is getting kind of tiresome.
One of the reasons I like watching Wes Anderson movies is because of the great cast he always has. Yeah he's got a unique style too, and some movies have great stories, but what I enjoy most are the characters and the cast playing them.
Nice use of Russian folk song "Katyusha"-- that was my favorite song when I was about 8 years old.
I adore Rushmore to this day, but I find everything Anderson did after that almost unwatchable -- cloying, incessantly repeated variations on the same themes.
Bah! Bottle Rocket, Royal Tenenbaums and The Life Aquatic were all masterpieces. Not so much the Darjeeling Unlimited.
I'm with you on this one. Possibly even prepared to forgive the fruit on your pizza.
Also, Anderson's visual tics drive me nuts. Even those of his movies that I'm able to enjoy (mostly Moonrise Kingdom and Rushmore) make me feel like I'm obliged to peer through a window at a series of dollhouse dioramas to see a story unfold. His movies invariably give me a crick in the neck, a dash of claustrophobia, and a saccharine aftertaste.
One of the things that's great about Wes Anderson is that despite the fact that his films are superficially similar (and, well, not just superficially in many ways), you have to judge each one on its own - and everyone will have a different opinion.
I thought Bottle Rocket was nigh-unwatchable. Royal Tenenbaums is wonderful art - a masterwork, truly - but not really a favorite of mine, and more than a bit cloying at times.
The Life Aquatic is a wonderful absurdist comedy, but the family theme is really not well explored there (as it is so well in Royal Tenenbaums) and it ends up ringing hollow to me. Lots to like about it, but not a masterpiece.
Same with Darjeeling Limited, which has a rather inane plot (they literally lose their emotional baggage at the end), but I absolutely love that film for its atmosphere (lifted with great reverence from 50's and 60's era Bollywood, but with a distinctive Anderson touch) and the characters and the acting - it's my favorite from him.
Rushmore is fantastic... nothing bad to say about that one Perhaps not surprisingly, other than Bottle Rocket it's the least distinctively visually Anderson-like, which seems to allow more people to like it who don't like the distinctive look and feel of the later films.
Moonrise Kingdom is wonderful too, and turning his usual themes of family, outsiderness, etc. on to kids was a great move. The atmosphere again takes a starring role, along with absurdist comedy and special effects that sometimes go a little over the top - like Anderson was parodying himself, I thought. I'm not sure it's going to hold up as well as his other films over time (it feels kind of trendy, even though Anderson's earlier films are part of what sparked the trends).
I am excited for this new one because it again looks like he is parodying himself a bit, but he's also combining the endearingness of Moonrise Kingdom with the relative realism and constraint of Darjeeling Limited, with the quality of character development from Rushmore and Royal Tenenbaums. And despite what some think because of the obvious similarities, he does make major strides in his style and approach with each new film, and it's very clear from the trailer that this one is no different.
@Donald_Petersen I think most fans find the dollhouse diorama aspect to be part of what's so endearing. The stories are compartmentalized not just internally, but in relation to the rest of the world - he's created his own world and instead of it feeling like a fake fantasy world as in most movies, it feels real (for at least as long as the film is playing). I get a saccharine aftertaste from his films too, but usually I'm OK with it, or can at least laugh at how dumb the endings are sometimes. I don't want these movies to end, so the often-bad endings don't matter
Yeah, you're right about that first part especially. I think my distaste for most of his oeuvre is for two reasons. Number one, his movies always strike me as, well, trying to be endearing. I never see Anderson's movies as trying to be particularly dramatic, or tragic, or exciting, or contemplative, or satiric, or biting, or naturalistic. It seems to me that the word "twee" was invented to describe his work.
And number two, I can never really relate to the characters and situations. Though Anderson's from Texas, his work seems to come from a blue-blooded East Coast sensibility that resonates not at all with my blue-collar West Coast background. Watching an Anderson movie always feels like being invited over to play in the bedroom of the New Kid in school, who is really bright and imaginative, but insists on us playing only with his dollhouse and making up stories about all the friends he left behind in Massapequa. The guy is far from untalented, but his scope is so rigidly narrow that I find it really hard to suspend my disbelief and get into the movie. All I see are imaginary protractors and laser-levels stashed just out of frame.
At least this new movie appears to have the energy of a madcap screwball comedy. Maybe it'll provide some yuks.
I saw "Bottle Rocket" for the first time, very recently. I'm tempted to regard it as a proto-Anderson film-- some of the elements are there, some are not fully formed, and some are just absent.
Ha, I do agree. He definitely does go over the top trying to be endearing on occasion, instead of letting it happen naturally.
I do tend to like movies that don't try to be anything from your list (Yasujiro Ozu films are the ultimate example, but that also applies to Gravity), but it does not always work for Anderson (especially with Bottle Rocket, and to a lesser extent Life Aquatic). It's the best thing about Darjeeling Limited, though.
And, yes, I do actually quite relate to the characters. I'm not the idle rich but I do come from a "blue-blooded East Coast" background and a lot of things resonate with my experience the past few years, in ivory tower environments (including a top-ranking private east coast university) and then being unemployed. I'm also a huge classic movie geek, a photography enthusiast, into vintage clothing, etc. etc. - I'm pretty much squarely the target audience
next page →