Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 12:38:45 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Wes Anderson's making his film again

Started by Butchers Blind, February 13, 2020, 12:25:40 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Butchers Blind

Trailer for The French Dispatch.
https://youtu.be/TcPk2p0Zaw4

Another big cast list and I guess if you're familiar with his style you'll know what to expect.

Old Thrashbarg

It looks like the most Wes Anderson-y film of all Wes Anderson's films. Not sure if that'll be a good or bad thing, but I enjoyed the trailer.

amoral

He just gets more and more rigid and lifeless with every movie. Good on him I guess for establishing a signature style, but I feel like ever since Rushmore it's just been a descent into exacting, authoritarian formalism. But like I said, that's how you know it's a Wes Anderson movie so what do I know. I just can't get past the rigidity.

amoral

And again, I know that's the whole point and that's what he's going for. I just don't know how to connect to it emotionally.

famethrowa

I watched a bit of the Grand Budapest and the symmetrical/center line thing just became too distracting after a while. I see he hasn't changed his mind on that here. I don't mind the wry deadpan style though, it's sort of like a Pink Panther movie without Clouseau.

Shit joke at the end of the trailer, how did the lad know the "no crying" sign was there about 10 foot up the wall directly behind him? At least have Bill Murray point at it. Maybe he refused to point.

Sin Agog

Quote from: famethrowa on February 13, 2020, 03:01:53 AM
I watched a bit of the Grand Budapest and the symmetrical/center line thing just became too distracting after a while. I see he hasn't changed his mind on that here. I don't mind the wry deadpan style though, it's sort of like a Pink Panther movie without Clouseau.

Shit joke at the end of the trailer, how did the lad know the "no crying" sign was there about 10 foot up the wall directly behind him? At least have Bill Murray point at it. Maybe he refused to point.

Jaysus, I never quite clocked it before, but almost every one of his shots had one or two people or things in the foreground and everything else stuffed right at the back of a warehouse-sized room.  And just for laughs he'll sometimes throw us for a loop and plop everything next to the camera save for a Bill Murray real doll at the end of a giant hallway.  Even Ozu when he was doing his depth of field thing varied it up every now and then.

phantom_power

I thought Grand Budapest Hotel was his best film in years (haven't seen Isle of Dogs yet) so am looking forward to this. I get what people say about the formalism and how his films are seemingly cold but I believe there is real emotion and heart under the veneer. I find The Royal Tenenbaums and The Life Aquatic very moving, and most of his films get me in the heart as well as the head

SavageHedgehog

Wes Anderson's films seem like something I couldn't imagine not loving were you to describe them to me, yet somehow since Rushmore the end results have never provoked more than very mild engagement.

Jim_MacLaine

If Basquiat hadn't overdosed.



Always looks forward to an Anderson flick although I know he's not to many's taste.

sevendaughters

Aside from the relentless formalism (which I didn't mind in a forerunner like Greenaway) it's more that I thought he was better at using that style to tell essentially domestic dramas in slightly tired American settings. He seemed more of a contemporary of someone like Daniel Clowes and Chris Ware rather than any film director.

His fantastical renderings of Europe and Asia are a bit annoying to be honest. Since the on-the-nose ending of Darjeeling Limited I haven't really warmed to anything he's done since.

Small Man Big Horse

Quote from: phantom_power on February 13, 2020, 08:47:36 AM
I thought Grand Budapest Hotel was his best film in years (haven't seen Isle of Dogs yet) so am looking forward to this. I get what people say about the formalism and how his films are seemingly cold but I believe there is real emotion and heart under the veneer. I find The Royal Tenenbaums and The Life Aquatic very moving, and most of his films get me in the heart as well as the head

I'm with you phantom_power, I absolutely loved Grand Budapest Hotel, and thought Isle Of Dogs (though not quite as good) was enormous fun too so I'm really looking forward to it.

dissolute ocelot

Just about to post what Small Man Big Horse said. Grand Budapest Hotel was vastly entertaining, as well as dealing with big historical themes (in a very oblique way but modelled on the same way Zweig and Joseph Roth also dealt with those themes). Isle of Dogs was also tremendous fun, although you'd have to try a bit harder to argue it was about the rise of Nazism and the decline of Western civilisation.

I'm slightly worried by the suggestion it has an anthology-story format, as that traditionally guarantees at least a third of any film will be sub-par, but he's well able to combine multiple storylines with great economy. There should be a lot for him to work with in the combination of Paris and journalism and the many classic films on both topics, and the mix of the trivial and the serious at which he excels (even if it's scientifically impossible for any film about journalists to be as good as His Girl Friday). I'm sure it'll be entertaining and look fantastic and feature some delightful character actors doing unexpected things.

Inspector Norse

I've found some of his films entertaining and enjoyable, but there is something about his style that turns me off as much as it turns fixie-riding vegan-coffee hipsters on.

Just look at the poster for this new film:



For some, it might be a smart pastiche, or a clever and witty way of using familiar styles and elements while still being very much Wes Anderson. But for me it's just contrived and secondhand.

But then look at that cast! How can a film with that cast not be fun? (even if I do think Murray is going to get a massive metooing one of these days)

Also, no way should they let this guy work with child actors:


Shit Good Nose

I've said before I've not liked an Anderson film since Rushmore.  I grew VERY tired VERY quickly of his whole schtick of making things ever so slightly odd just for the sake of it.  I came out of The Royal Tenenbaums thinking that (seemingly alone in that thinking), and have thought it with every Anderson film since (although I haven't see Isle of Dogs yet).

This looks like more of the same.  EXACTLY.

Old Thrashbarg

Just wanted to add to the love for Grand Budapest Hotel. I think it's probably my favourite Anderson film, certainly in the top two. It feels like there's barely a second of screen time wasted.

Quote from: Inspector Norse on February 13, 2020, 12:26:50 PM
But then look at that cast! How can a film with that cast not be fun? (even if I do think Murray is going to get a massive metooing one of these days)

The supporting cast without their own pictures are as impressive as the main cast. Possibly even more so.

popcorn

ooh I'm Wes Anderson and everything's got to be sideways.

do love him though.

Johnboy

can't hack his style at all, i'm not saying it's all style and nothing else, I just can't get past the arch detail and connect

Lord Mandrake

That's a well cut trailer and a pleasant surprise. He's marmite for sure but never made a film I didn't love. Taika Watiti and Richard Ayoade are doing ok off his back.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

I wonder what the Coen Brothers think of him. He attracts the same sort of criticisms that used to get aimed at their work all the time.

Sebastian Cobb

My main problem with most of his films are the fact they contain Owen Wilson.

He was alright in Bottle Rocket though tbf.

Shit Good Nose

Quote from: Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth on February 13, 2020, 11:18:34 PM
I wonder what the Coen Brothers think of him. He attracts the same sort of criticisms that used to get aimed at their work all the time.

Given that Frances McDormand is in it, they probably say "it's great!" regardless of what they actually think.

kalowski

I'm a huge fan, and this looks great. I can't think of an Anderson film I don't like.

Ferris

Quote from: popcorn on February 13, 2020, 02:55:47 PM
ooh I'm Wes Anderson and everything's got to be sideways.

do love him though.

Laughed.

Jeffrey Wright has a lot of goodwill from me for the HBO version of Angels in America, in which he was excellent. Then again everything about it was excellent.

Off topic within a single sentence, must be a record. Sorry. I'm very tired.

Icehaven

I've enjoyed most of his films but (and this is a spectacularly poorly explained theory, apologies) I always feel as if they're referencing something I don't quite get. The stylisation and idiosyncracies etc. feel as if they're supposed to make you think of something, or some fictional world, which it fits with and makes more sense than it does in this one, but because I/we don't actually know what that thing or world is then half the point is lost on me/us, and I/we'd get a lot more out of them if I/we knew what it was he was trying to invoke. Completely different style but it's the same feeling I get watching Yorgos Lanthimos films (apart from The Favourite, which I haven't seen but understand it isn't in "that" style). Maybe I'm just thick.

Obel

Yeah that might be it.

He just has his own style. It's not trying to evoke anything. People refer to his movies as 'dollhouses', which I guess is appropriate, but he's just landed on a style that is energetic, visually appealing and unique. People saying they can't watch his films because they're hipsterish or pretentious are ironically being pretentious themselves. Fair enough if you don't like the stories or style or whatever, but criticizing a filmmakers style because you think other people you don't like would like it is just cretinous, IMO.

For me Wes Anderson's films are charming, funny, well paced, inventive and lovely to look at. For most part they're an absolute delight. They have playfulness balanced perfectly alongside adult themes. It's just really refreshing to watch a Wes Anderson film I think. Also he writes original screenplays for the most part, which in the age of reboots, sequels and adaptations is something to be cherished.

poodlefaker

Every time I watch one of his films, without fail:

One third of the way through: "Oh, I'm really enjoying this; finally, I get what people see in Wes Anderson now!"
Two thirds of the way through: "Fuck this balls"

phantom_power

Quote from: poodlefaker on February 14, 2020, 11:22:59 AM
Every time I watch one of his films, without fail:

One third of the way through: "Oh, I'm really enjoying this; finally, I get what people see in Wes Anderson now!"
Two thirds of the way through: "Fuck this balls"

I am the opposite. For the first third I am thinking it might all be a bit too arch and distanced for me to like it but from that point on I slowly get drawn into the characters and situations and underlying depth and am absorbed. He is often accused of being all style and no substance but I think that is completely wrong

sevendaughters

his style is to a certain extent the substance. formal distance sets a sense of emotional distance. they're not separate categories, or if they are they're coterminous.

Blumf

Quote from: icehaven on February 14, 2020, 09:53:11 AM
I've enjoyed most of his films but (and this is a spectacularly poorly explained theory, apologies) I always feel as if they're referencing something I don't quite get. The stylisation and idiosyncracies etc. feel as if they're supposed to make you think of something, or some fictional world, which it fits with and makes more sense than it does in this one, but because I/we don't actually know what that thing or world is then half the point is lost on me/us, and I/we'd get a lot more out of them if I/we knew what it was he was trying to invoke.

Could it be very early cinema? That period where they basically bolted the camera down and filmed as a traditional stage layout.

I don't think that's all of it, but there's a definite link there. He plays about with aspect ratios to match too.

Shit Good Nose

I think it's just his personal style as opposed to intentional specific referencing.  He's very big on symmetry and "doll's house" composition (which is where the changing aspect ratios come in) and he's always said that his films all exist within his own "created" world (I'm sure I've heard him say before that they all exist within the same created world).