Catching Up With Wes Anderson In His Delightful Moonrise Kingdom!

The Good: Decent performances, Interesting characters, Good direction
The Bad: Simplistic plot, Light on character development
The Basics: I finally take in Moonrise Kingdom, which moved Wes Anderson out of his repetitive slump!


Over the years, I have inadvertently become a fan of the works of a couple of different writer/directors. Unlike the most literal fans ("fanatics"), I have retained the ability to be discriminatory about the works of even my favorite writer/directors. So, I do not universally praise the works of Terry Gilliam, P.T. Anderson or The Wachowski Siblings. Each has had films that are brilliant and some that are downright unwatchable. Because I started my appreciation of the works of Wes Anderson with The Royal Tenenbaums (reviewed here!), I hardly suspected he would become one of my favorite writer/directors. The Royal Tenenbaums is brilliant, but his follow-ups The Life Acquatic With Steve Zissou (reviewed here!) and The Darjeeling Limited (reviewed here!) were essentially rehashings of that film in mood and cast (and, even, direction).

With his latest film reinvigorating my love of his works, I have been eagerly going back to some of the Wes Anderson films I missed after I more or less gave up on him. After watching Moonrise Kingdom, I wish I had gone back sooner! Moonrise Kingdom is almost everything one has come to love and expect from a Wes Anderson film. The movie is packed with awkward moments, somewhat off-putting characters, actors being used in quirky ways and (to a lesser extent) impressive direction with an emphasis on the use of color. Moonrise Kingdom might not have the familiar sense of visual style one expects from a Wes Anderson film - after the opening credits sequence that is - but narratively, it is very much a typical Wes Anderson film . . . without feeling like the writer/director is simply rehashing his prior works.

In the summer of 1965, on the New England island of New Penzance is days away from being hit by a significant storm, the residents are shocked by two young people running away. The New Penzance Khaki Scout camp is put in an uproar when the least-liked camper, orphan Sam, abruptly resigns from the Scouts and runs off. Miles away, Suzy Bishop abandons her lawyer parents and three younger brothers to meet Sam and run away with him.

After an explanation of how Sam and Suzy met the year prior at the Island's church play and they became pen pals, the film follows the story of where the two children run off to and the attempts by both the Khaki Scouts and the island police to recover the children. Sam is pursued by his fellow Khaki Scouts, Scout Master Ward (who is dismayed when Sam's foster family does not want him back) and Captain Sharp, the dim police officer who has a lingering affection for Mrs. Bishop. Mr. and Mrs. Bishop are pretty much estranged and not really in love - their pillow talk is about their respective caseloads - have Sharp hunting their Suzy. Sam and Suzy defend themselves from the Khaki Scout troop and make it to an inlet where they spend a romantic night before they are captured the next morning. But when one of the Khaki Scouts realizes they troop has been cruel to Sam without cause, the kids decide to spring the young lovers and give them a chance at happiness.

Moonrise Kingdom has, from its outset, the potential to be virtually any kind of movie. The title and opening set the film up for a potential cinematic reworking of Bridge To Terabithia. The longer the film went on, the more I had hopes that the movie would be about the two kids and their falling in love and creating their own little paradise at the inlet. That hope, however, got quickly shattered with the capture of Suzy and Sam and the emphasis on keeping Moonrise Kingdom a classic chase story.

Because of its emphasis on plot and the reversals that naturally come from having a chase story, the characters in Moonrise Kingdom hardly grow or develop. Instead, Sam and Suzy grow to accept one another and share an intriguing first love that is based a lot on simply accepting the other for who they are. But most of their time is spent simply running and having four or five scenes where they simply talk. Many of those scenes are not about sharing common interests, they are about fleshing out each character. The chase gives Sam and Suzy shared conflict, but it does little to actually bond them more (they are about as affectionate with one another at the outset as they are at the end).

As always, Wes Anderson does an exceptional job with the film's casting of a decent blend of established actors and some new talents. Sam is played by Jared Gilman and Kara Hayward erupts on screen as Suzy, with a stare that could melt glass. Beyond that, one is almost surprised Wes Anderson films require a casting manager; Anderson tends to use several actors in virtually all of his works and Bill Murray, Tilda Swinton, and Jason Schwartzman all make appearances in Moonrise Kingdom. Bruce Willis is utilized well in Moonrise Kingdom as Captain Sharp. Given how Willis can play calculating and able exceptionally well, watching him as a character who is a virtual moron is a feat!

The film is ruled by Gilman and Hayward and while their characters are hardly connected by deep and binding character traits, the performers have great, if awkward, on-screen chemistry! Gilman and Hayward have great stares and their characters share intensity that they play incredibly well.

But, Moonrise Kingdom sticks with a chase caper more than a heartfelt exploration of young love and that diminishes the magic of the film. While Wes Anderson does an excellent job of making an engaging story, the viewer is left feeling like the movie had so much more potential than was executed.

For other works with Frances McDormand, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Transformers: Dark Of The Moon
Burn After Reading
Friends With Money
Aeon Flux
Something's Gotta Give
City By The Sea
Almost Famous
Wonder Boys
Fargo
Miller’s Crossing

6.5/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2015 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

The Best 10 Movies Of 2014!

| | |
The Basics: 2014 might have been a rough year for quality cinema, but here are the ten films you should see from the year!


Coming into 2015, I was a bit down on movies. 2014 was not an exceptional year for movies and outside one of the nominees, there is no Best Picture Oscar nominee that I would even want to see again. That said, despite a dearth of great films in 2014 (I had to go into the 7.5/10’s to make this list!), there were two films that actually made it into the “perfect” camp this year (out of more 2000 movie reviews, only 35 have gotten perfect 10/10 ratings!). Despite having three movies from 2014 I actually still want to see, I decided to follow-up on my Worst Movies Of 2014 List (that’s here!) with the Best 10 Movies Of 2014.

It is imperative to know, at the outset, that I consider movies for my lists based on their wide-release date. As a result, some films, like Predestination (reviewed here!) and Inherent Vice (reviewed here!) would have been on this list, but they only had limited release in 2014, with a wide-release in 2015. I’m not a fan of supporting the “New York City and Los Angeles get to see it, so it should compete against the full field” concept. It’s also worth noting that Still Alice (reviewed here!) should have made the list (by the numbers), but given how I would not recommend it and never want to see it again, despite being able to acknowledge that the acting in it is wonderful and it accomplishes its goals well, I can’t consider it one of the best movies of the year. So, while this list is undoubtedly the only one with these precise ten movies, the Best Ten Movies Of 2014 are:

10. The Best Offer (reviewed here!) – If you had told me on January 1 of last year that the first movie released in the New Year would make the list, I would have said, “no way!” Quiet and contemplative, the film that focuses on a reclusive auctioneer trying to clandestinely rebuild an ancient automaton, before his life takes a right turn, is actually one of the cleverest and most deceptive films in years. Arguably the most underrated performance of Geoffrey Rush’s career, The Best Offer might be the year’s best gem import,

9. Veronica Mars (reviewed here!) – Arguably the most controversial film to be included on this list, Veronica Mars is vastly underrated. Rob Thomas had a herculean task in bringing his popular television show to the big screen, not the least of which was telling a complete story in a shorter amount of time than any of the story arcs on the series! Veronica Mars (reviewed here!) had big, season-long mysteries and the idea that a full story could be told, while introducing the essential characters from the television series to a potentially new audience, in only a couple hours required the right story. Far from being a mess, Veronica Mars is a rousing success of continuing the story of Veronica Mars after a gap of several years. And, to the detractors, at least Thomas didn’t use the “season four” b.s. idea . . .,

8. The Skeleton Twins (reviewed here!) – This might be the only film I was looking forward to seeing all year, missed in theaters, and then lived up when I finally caught it! The Skeleton Twins is heartwrenching and heartwarming and it illustrates just how much two performers can push themselves and each other when they are working with people they like and trust. Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader were robbed this Award’s season! The Skeleton Twins might be dark, but it does not feel oppressive and that is a rare thing these days,

7. This Is Where I Leave You (reviewed here!) – Jason Bateman might be the biggest star to appear in films that made both my Worst and Best Movie lists! Bateman gets top-billing in This Is Where I Leave You, which was the story of a family reuniting to sit Shiva after the death of the family patriarch. The dialogue, casting and performances are excellent,

6. The Double (reviewed here!) – It is rare for me to sing the praises of a creepy movie, but The Double is that good! The strength of Richard Ayoade’s interpretation of the Dostoyevsky original is that: 1. It can be interpreted several different ways and 2. Even when one feels like they aren’t sure exactly what is going on, the film is entirely engaging. The result is a movie that is unsettling, but has some real, enduring value,

5. Comet (reviewed here!) – One of the late releases of 2014, Comet was entirely overlooked during Award’s Season and that is their loss (and ours)! Comet is the smart exploration of a tumultuous relationship that is packed with wonderful dialogue, impressive performances, and memorable characters. This is a love story that feels fresh and real, even when it is difficult and the strength of the movie is that it still manages to entertain while embodying a strong sense of reality,

4. The Grand Budapest Hotel (reviewed here!) – So, here it is! My quest to watch all eight movies that got Best Picture Oscar nods yielded one that I think deserves it! I’m not big on slapstick comedies or classical movies (the novelty win of The Artist (reviewed here!) a few years back still pisses me off!) and I went into seeing The Grand Budapest Hotel biased against it. But, it won me over. The quirky comedy about a lobby boy and a concierge on the run from a family who want their mother’s inheritance is Wes Anderson’s best film in years,

3. Her (reviewed here!) – The Grand Budapest Hotel is lucky that the limited release of Her put it on the ballot last year, instead of this one! Her is original and clever as it tells the story of one man’s burgeoning love with the artificial intelligence on his phone. Spike Jonze has a flair for finding a concept that is smart and foreseeable, while reaching the only possible and logical conclusion to that story . . . with consequences that give us instant empathy for the film’s protagonist. Given how most of Joachim Phoenix’s performance is opposite a screen and he makes the relationship between his character and the voice of Scarlett Johansson seem entirely real, this might be his best performance ever,

2. X-Men: Days Of Future Past (reviewed here!) – While Guardians Of The Galaxy (reviewed here!) was amusing, X-Men: Days Of Future Past had a level of substance that makes it a far superior film. Despite awkwardness in the X-Men timeline and the desire for most fans of the franchise to forget about X-Men III: The Last Stand, X-Men: Days Of Future Past manages to incorporate the disparate elements, characters and timelines and make a story that is the logical conclusion to Magneto’s original threats against humanity back in X-Men. The film, which puts Logan at the center of a time-travel adventure where he must stop the rise of the forces that will lead to a slaughter of mutants is well-executed visually and from a performance and character standpoint. Plus, despite all the Easter Eggs in Marvel movies last year, there was no moment on screen in 2014 that delighted me like the cameos at the climax of this movie! Regardless of what comes next and all the recasting, X-Men: Days Of Future Past is the crown jewel of Marvel movies,


. . . and . . .


. . .the best movie of 2014 is . . .


1. Cheap Thrills (reviewed here!) – Seriously. Cheap Thrills might be one of the least pleasant movies in years, but it was the best, most important film of 2014. If it had reached an audience and people had understood the film’s metaphorical level, the Tea Party would never have managed to get a stranglehold on the U.S. Congress in the 2014 midterm elections. Yes, seriously. That is a lot to credit to one movie, but Cheap Thrills does that. The story of an everyman who is in debt, facing a financial crisis that threatens himself and his family begins innocuously enough. On the day he is fired, he goes to a bar, meets an old chum from school and he and his friend encounter a seemingly benevolent rich guy and his wife. In celebrating the wife’s birthday, the two men are given competitions for increasing amounts of money and the film turns into a powerful metaphor for how business and the media treat everyone but the 1%. The story of how business sets people against one another and how other powerful forces delight in it and reinforce the inhumanity of their actions is gripping, entertaining, difficult-to-watch and entirely brilliant. Cheap Thrills is the must-see movie from 2014.

For other lists, please check out my:
The Top Ten Episodes Of Star Trek: Enterprise
The Top Ten Episodes Of Frasier
The Worst Ten Episodes Of Star Trek

To see how all movies I have reviewed have stacked up against each other check out my Film Review Index Page where the movies are organized from best to worst!

© 2015 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Wes Anderson Creates The Best Slapstick Comedy Of All Time With The Grand Budapest Hotel!

The Good: Very funny, Wonderful acting, Engaging plot and characters, Impressive direction
The Bad: Needlessly complicated narrative technique, A number of the characters do not get developed due to the size of the cast
The Basics: Rightfully being called one of the best films of 2014, The Grand Budapest Hotel restores the reputation of Wes Anderson by creating an entertaining and enduring film!


When The Grand Budapest Hotel started to rack up award nominations this award’s season, I had the distinct feeling that the film was being treated as something of a “lifetime achievement award” for writer-director Wes Anderson. After all, Wes Anderson has made some masterful films, but after peaking with The Royal Tenenbaums (reviewed here!), the argument can be pretty easily made that he has simply been rehashing and reworking that movie for at least his two subsequent works - The Life Aquatic Of With Steve Zissou (reviewed here!) and The Darjeeling Limited (reviewed here!). The only Wes Anderson film I have not seen is Moonrise Kingdom and my failure to give it attention was the result of disillusionment following his post-The Royal Tenenbaums films.

So, my expectations were low when I sat down to watch The Grand Budapest Hotel. In fact, my viewing The Grand Budapest Hotel was more an obligatory viewing due to my desire to watch all of the Best Picture Oscar nominees this year. So, when I come out singing the praises of The Grand Budapest Hotel and director Wes Anderson, it is because the film is truly that good. With Anderson’s distinctive sense of style and color and a cast made up mostly of alumni from his prior works, Anderson was given the seemingly daunting task of creating something new and memorable with The Grand Budapest Hotel. He, and his cast and production team, succeeded.

An author sits down and tells the story of his younger self having the story of Zubrowska’s famed Grand Budapest Hotel narrated to him. Moustafa tells the story of how, as a boy, he was a Lobby Boy at the Grand Budapest Hotel during the turbulent time when it was switching owners. The young Lobby Boy Zero befriends the concierge of the Grand Budapest Hotel, M. Gustave. Gustave is a smart, efficient man who has been bedding the exceptionally wealthy Madame D. Madame D. dies abruptly and Gustave goes to her estate where he is surprisingly willed the famous painting Boy With Apple.

The priceless painting is coveted by Madame D.’s sons Dimitri and Jopling, as well as her three daughters. Gustave is framed by one of Madame D.’s servants as the man who killed Madame D. and he begins his run from the law. Unfortunately, he runs pretty much right away into the arms of Inspector Henckels, who has Gustave imprisoned. Gustave must rely upon the efforts of Zero to rescue him so they can sell the painting and live their lives. But Jopling is a homicidal maniac intent upon finding Gustave and his hunt starts to cut a swath of death through Zubrowska toward Gustave, Zero, and Zero’s fiancé, Agatha.

The Grand Budapest Hotel is essentially a screwball comedy and Wes Anderson goes to great lengths to give the film a retro feel and sense of melodrama. What makes The Grand Budapest Hotel work so well is that Anderson mixes things like special effect “skips” and exaggerated movements with more contemporary color palates and incredible performances by some of the best actors working today. With such an extensive cast, Anderson is unable to use them all well; Tom Wilkinson’s part in The Grand Budapest Hotel is essentially a cameo where he is not given the chance to plumb his performing depths. Similarly, Jude Law’s performance as the younger version of Wilkinson’s author character only has him on screen long enough to get the viewer into the narrative of M. Gustave and Zero, as opposed to forcing him to play anything impressive.

The story of The Grand Budapest Hotel is an engaging chase story that feels classic, but has a contemporary level of dialogue. Ralph Fiennes swears his way through The Grand Budapest Hotel and Willem Dafoe’s psychopathic Jopling is chilling in a way that early films would not have dared. In the chase, Gustave becomes a likable protagonist, as does Zero. Zero is given enough backstory to make him compelling – even if the love story of Zero and Agatha is somewhat contrived (it plays into a line about A to Z) and simple.

The performances in The Grand Budapest Hotel are appropriately exceptional. Jeff Goldblum is virtually unrecognizable as the lawyer Kovacs and Adrien Brody is similarly chameleonic as Dmitri. Tilda Swinton’s brief appearance on screen proves that The Grand Budapest Hotel should win a bevy of make-up awards. Even Saoirse Ronan gives a career high performance – her time on screen shows more range and genuine emotion than she did in the entirety of The Host (reviewed here!).

The surprise is how well Tony Revolori plays off Ralph Fiennes. Revolori is given a part that could easily be relegated to hapless sidekick, but in key moments, he steels his eyes and holds his own on screen with Fiennes. Revolori has on-screen panache that makes Zero distinct and the logical antecedent to F. Murray Abraham’s incarnation of the character.

The Grand Budapest Hotel is one of the few films in recent memory that ought to be seen and experienced as opposed to discussed. It is funny, stylish and original enough to decimate any assertion that its nominations are more for Anderson and his body of work than this specific film!

For other films with intriguing narrative techniques, please visit my reviews of:
Stranger Than Fiction
Memento
Adaptation.

9/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2015 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Moby Dick As An Eccentric Comedy: The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou

The Good: Moments of humor, Well-Acted, Quirky parody
The Bad: PACING!, Unoriginal characters, Pacing.
The Basics: A disappointing directoral follow-up to The Royal Tenenbaums finds Wes Anderson putting Bill Murray and a boatload of misfits out to sea to fight a shark, pirates and awkward silences.


Let me open by saying that I loved the movie The Royal Tenenbaums, which was written and directed by Wes Anderson. That movie was clever, well orchestrated, funny and tragic. And at the end of the day, despite a moment of two of slowness, it was entertaining. Thus, I dismissed all of the critical press I had read about Wes Anderson's new film The Life Aquatic. I figured the reviewers were wrong, that someone who made the highly entertaining The Royal Tenenbaums could not fall so far so fast.

I was wrong.

The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou is not a bad movie, not by a long shot. But it is not worthy of your time and attention either. If you have not seen The Royal Tenenbaums, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou is likely to compel you to. If you see this movie and want to see an even better one, The Royal Tenenbaums awaits. If you see this movie and hate it, go watch The Royal Tenenbaums, it is a lot better.

Why? The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou is like The Royal Tenenbaums - LITE. Anderson, writing here with Noah Baumbach, takes the quirky character types he skillfully wove together in The Royal Tenenbaums and creates a similarly zany atmosphere. As well, Anderson directs with an amazing sense of soundtrack and movement (when there is movement). But gone is the interpersonal empathy, the compelling humanization that makes us care about the characters. Instead, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou feels like a shadow of a movie we have seen before and leaves us disappointed.

Steve Zissou, a noted documentary maker, presents his latest magnum opus, a diving expedition that does horribly wrong when his partner is killed by a shark off camera. Depressed at the loss and the direction his life is heading, Zissou gets his film crew together to go in search of the shark that killed his partner.

Zissou is accompanied by a protective assistant named Klaus Daimler, financed by his somewhat estranged wife Eleanor and interviewed by a young, pregnant reporter named Jane. Also on his expedition is Ned Plimpton, a young man who Steve believes may be his son by a relationship he had many many years ago. Also along is a bond stooge, a Portugese-singing David Bowie cover artist, and a rival oceanographer.

The characters are certainly interesting, but they feel familiar, like Wes Anderson has put together another eclectic ensemble that speaks and acts in a way very similar to an eclectic group he put together before. Zissou is interesting, as are most of the people around him, but not interesting enough in a different way to carry the attention of the viewer.

My last heads up is to the costume designer. The costume designer put a hat on Seu Jorge in a scene where Zissou's crew is fighting pirates that makes the scene. In fact, the movie has moments that are wonderfully funny, but those parts are not sustained.

In fact, they are broken up by long stretches of people talking. Slowly. The real reason The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou fails is that it fails to capture the audience with a belief that it is going anywhere. It does not feel like it is going anywhere and when it starts to move, it is going slowly and then it keeps going slowly and when it looks like it might pick up, there is a long scene where people speak filled with a lot of meaningful pauses, then a lot of waiting and then we just stop caring. Then the movie picks up, and is fast for an incident, then there's some talking, a significant scene that moves along nicely, then the movie is over. Except that it keeps going on.

The speed at which events happen is agonizingly slow. It is difficult to watch and the singlemost reason I will not subject myself to this movie again. Who will like The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou? People who have not seen The Royal Tenenbaums. Is Bill Murray good in the movie? Yes. Can you live without seeing his performance here? Absolutely. Because at the end of the day, the writing to sustain this movie as something new and different and vital is just not there and 118 minutes of The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou feels at least twice that long.

In a bad way.

For other works by Wes Anderson, be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Darjeeling Limited
The Squid And The Whale
The Royal Tenenbaums
Rushmore
Bottle Rocket

4/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of all the films I have reviewed!

© 2012, 2005 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Rushmore: Wes Anderson's Early Work Proves He Is Not A One-Trick Pony!

The Good: Funny, Quirky, Intense characters, Decent acting
The Bad: Some pacing issues, Light on DVD bonus features
The Basics: An ambitious movie by Wes Anderson, Rushmore explores a few months in the life of an overachiever and his adult friends.


Sometimes, one of the nice things about encountering the works of an artist in any medium later than their initial offerings is that it gives one perspective when going back to look at their earlier works. As someone who found an appreciation for the works of writer-director Wes Anderson with his film The Royal Tenenbaums (reviewed here!) I have had mixed feelings about some of his subsequent works. I was both eager and afraid to take in his works prior to The Royal Tenenbaums because I while I loved that movie, I was beginning to fear that he truly was a one-trick pony. If that movie was derivative of one of his earlier movies, I feared it would be less brilliant in retrospect. So, when a coworker at my previous Job From Hell highly recommended Rushmore, I finally decided to pick it up.

Rushmore is one of two movies Wes Anderson wrote and directed before The Royal Tenenbaums and I am quite pleased to say that it is quite a different film in form and story, if not in cast. Actually, the most intense difference between Rushmore and every other Wes Anderson film I have seen is in mood. Rushmore is a much more active movie and while Anderson holds on significant moments of awkwardness, the movie does not belabor those emotions. Instead, there is the feeling that the director is kept on a shorter leash (or is keeping himself on that leash) and it works to keep the movie generally moving at a pretty decent pace. And while the characters are consumed with the somewhat typical Wes Anderson sense of melancholy and misery, the movie does not seem overcome by the mood, instead it clips along feeling funny and fresh instead of oppressive.

Max Fischer is a fifteen year-old student at the prestigious Rushmore Academy, a private school that sets rich students up for success in the future. Having written a play at a young age and won a scholarship there, Max has spent years devoting himself to the institution by creating various clubs and causes to keep himself occupied, even at the expense of his academic achievement. Accompanied by the student he mentors, Dirk Calloway, Max follows a note written in a library book back to a young new first grade teacher.

Obviously smitten, Max befriends Miss Cross, a widow at the same time he befriends the eccentric and disenchanted businessman Herman Blume. Max and Blume begin ambitious plans to build an aquarium at Rushmore, but soon their plans go awry when Max is expelled for his failing grades and Herman falls in love with Rosemary. Max, furious about losing both Cross and his place at Rushmore initiates a war with Herman that pits them against one another for the heart of the (mostly) indifferent Rosemary Cross.

Rushmore is remarkably intelligent and remarkably silly at the same time. Indeed, it is the combination of these two things that makes the movie something truly special to watch. Blume gets Max's attention when he advocates violent overthrow of the rich at a speech at Rushmore and Max's attention to detail in regard to that earns him Blume's respect. As Max struggles to find his path, Herman takes Max under his wing and offers him a position at his company. In this way, we see a somewhat absurd mix of the practical (man recognizing a brilliant youth) and the absurd (that said businessman would put so much faith in a fifteen year-old). But more than that, the depressed and disappointed Blume soon latches on to Rosemary in a way that does not so much reinvigorate him as give him a purpose. Maligned by his annoying children, Herman is sympathetic and when he falls for Rosemary, the viewer desperately hopes he might actually develop a spine and some happiness.

The resulting war between Max and Herman is ridiculous and high comedy. Both the boy and the man engage in tactics that are brutal to try to crush the other and there are moments, when Herman is safe, where it is clear he envies the imagination of the boy. Max and Herman make as good of adversaries in the middle of Rushmore as they make friends in the film's beginning and it is a pleasure to see something so funny, clever and well-conceived.

In other words, the characters work and the object of the affection of the two men, Rosemary Cross is deeply sympathetic as well. Cross is a smart person and it is refreshing to see a young woman who is portrayed as intelligent enough to recognize the obvious crush Max has on her from the beginning. Moreover, that she addresses it so forthrightly in the beginning gives her a spunk and intrigue that make her worth watching.

Wes Anderson is given a difficult task with Herman Blume, though, and it establishes both his obsession with melancholy characters and his utilizing actor Bill Murray in each of his films. Anderson saw the dramatic potential within Murray quite early on and while others would use it and use it well, it is hard to believe they would have gotten all they could out of Murray were it not for Anderson preparing both the actor and the audience. Herman Blume has to be a man who could believably put his faith and his money in Max and the mix of the character's boredom with corporate America, his desire for Miss Cross and his appreciation of the way Max's mind works all come together to make for a surprisingly believable character.

As it stands, the characters are interesting and Anderson's ability to keep things moving prevents the viewer from ever being mired in Blume's melancholy too long and that works quite well for the film. Rushmore does not lag, though there are moments where the viewer wonders where it is going. Because it is a Wes Anderson movie, the viewer is asked to have a little faith and - despite the two failures I've endured of his - Anderson makes good on that faith. I am left wondering how those who did not have confidence in the writer-director would have made it through the movie initially, but truth be told, the movie works and while it does not so much have a resolution that is satisfying, it remains true to itself and remains largely original. In fact, in the last few years of watching everything I could get my hands on that was different, the only movie even remotely similar to Rushmore that I've encountered is Ghost World.

Part of what makes Rushmore work so well is that Wes Anderson keeps the story focused on the three primary characters. Indeed, I do not believe that there is a single scene that does not have some combination of Max, Herman and/or Rosemary. The characters are well represented and the story is rounded out well with a supplemental cast of actors like Brian Cox, Seymour Cassel, and Luke Wilson. But the three principles rock the film and keep it fresh.

Olivia Williams plays Rosemary Cross and I will admit that when I first saw her, my impression was that she was just going to be another Hollywood-beautiful face on screen. Rushmore is the only thing - to date - that I have seen Williams in and I am quite pleased to say I was wrong about my first impression. She plays Cross as serious, practical and surprisingly substantial given how little air time she has on screen.

Bill Murray makes a dramatic performance that rivals his surprise greatness in Cradle Will Rock (reviewed here!). He is subtle and quiet, never begging for the laugh. Instead, Murray presents a fearless melancholy in Blume that could be stifling were it not for the moments the actor explodes open his eyes and makes a bold proclamation. Murray's challenge - which he easily meets - is to make those moments seem like they are within characters and he does that quite effectively.

But it is actor Jason Schwartzman who is called upon to carry Rushmore. I liked Schwartzman for his supporting performance in the underrated Jersey Girl where he at least made an impression. Here, he makes one rethink the notion that directors should avoid young actors. He comes to the role with a serious intensity that makes the viewer unquestioningly believe in the reality of Max Fisher. His performance is subtle enough that he clearly establishes his damage well before Fisher speaks the lines of his pain to Blume. Schwartzman is almost the straightman of this weird comedy and he does that well.

On DVD, Rushmore is a little light on DVD extras for my tastes. There is a trailer for the movie and that is about it. Given how this movie appears to have launched Wes Anderson's popularity, it would have been nice to get a commentary track and/or deleted scenes. No such luck, though.

As it stands, Rushmore is a surprisingly good dramedy that creates a quirky character, develops a strange love triangle and makes a war between two people on the fringe of society that is engaging for all audiences.

For other works with Brian Cox, be sure to check out my review of:
Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes
The Fantastic Mr. Fox
X-2: X-Men United
The 25th Hour
Adaptation.
The Ring
The Bourne Identity
Braveheart

7/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of all the films I have reviewed!

© 2012, 2008 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Wes Anderson Starts Pretty Big With Bottle Rocket, A Little Film That Could...

The Good: Decent acting, Interesting characters
The Bad: A little slow, Not much happens
The Basics: Wes Anderson spends two-thirds of a film trying to avoid telling a crime caper and manages a decent love story instead.


Watching some of his newer works, it might be fairly easy for one to fear that writer and director Wes Anderson is a one-trick pony. After revealing the full extent of his genius with The Royal Tenenbaums, he essentially remade the same movie twice with his subsequent films. So, I was pleasantly surprised when I went back and watched Rushmore, which he did prior to The Royal Tenenbaums. Because I enjoyed that, I decided to go back to his beginning and watch Bottle Rocket. It's fun sometimes to see how writer/directors get their start and Bottle Rocket is no exception.

Bottle Rocket establishes Anderson's known conceits: in each of his movies (it seems) there is a running scene with the camera tracking the runner, a strong use of soundtrack and a number of moments that are quiet and somewhat awkward. I like those latter moments in Anderson's films; they often happen to me so I see their inclusion in his movies as added realism. His movies tend to need to breathe some and that works well. It works well in Bottle Rocket especially, because not so much happens in this movie.

Anthony Adams is rescued from a mental health institution where he has voluntarily checked himself in by Dignan, an idiot who has a plan for the rest of their lives that involves a crime spree. Dignan, Anthony and Bob rob Anthony's house in order to have enough money to stay on the run until they are able to hook up with Mr. Henry, a supposedly notorious crime boss that Dignan used to work for. After robbing a book store, the trio descends upon a motel to lay low for a while.

While Bob is called back home to help get his brother out of a legal jam involving pot being grown in the backyard, Anthony falls in love with the beautiful housekeeper Inez. Determined to stay with her, but bothered by Dignan, they eventually set out to find Mr. Henry and begin their planned life of crime . . . with unexpected results.

Bottle Rocket is a very slow movie and it is inappropriately billed as a crime caper. Instead of being a crime caper, it is pretty much a group of people waiting to become criminals and the one whom the audience empathizes with most (Anthony) falls in love instead. Far more time is spent in Bottle Rocket with getting Anthony to Inez and then him trying to communicate with her and fall in love with her than with any of the Dignan plots. Instead, the film is something of a farce on the expectations of what a crime movie will be.

This puts director Wes Anderson in something of a bind because the script he and co-writer Owen Wilson wrote ends up being a movie that is not much of anything. It is a period of transition for Anthony and Dignan and it is entertaining for those patient enough to go along with it, but not so much for those who might be looking for something meaningful. It is a pretty standard Wes Anderson dramedy, though, effectively mixing quirky characters with a dramatic situation that results in a film that is both funny and dramatic.

The aspect of Bottle Rocket that is a tough sell is certainly in the plot. This is not a movie where much happens, but as a debut film goes, it quickly becomes a decent exercise in style to illustrate just what Wes Anderson is capable of. In fact, the only usual conceit included in a Wes Anderson film that is not in Bottle Rocket is an appearance by Bill Murray. James Caan more than makes up for that as Mr. Henry.

Because so little happens in Bottle Rocket, the film largely rests on the backs of the actors and the characters they portray to sell the story. Owen Wilson plays Dignan and Bottle Rocket is not a bad outing for him. Owen is able to deadpan remarkably well and he has some of the most memorable one-liners in the film. Running around with a buzz cut, he smoothly delivers a line about simply liking short hair to someone who assumes Dignan is in the military. Owen gets an easy laugh with the simple line in that case and it works beautifully to establish the character.

Outside the performance by Owen Wilson, though, Dignan is a largely unlikable character and one who seems to waste much of the viewer's time and attention on screen. Instead, the storyline between Anthony and Inez is far more compelling. Theirs is a simple love story but it works because both characters seem to want many of the same things. So, despite the fact that Inez does not speak much English, when Anthony makes it clear how he feels about her, the film is a pleasant and quiet little love story more than anything else. It's almost too bad that Dignan comes back to upset that story with his witless crime schemes and the pursuit of Mr. Henry.

Lumi Cavazos plays Inez and she has a very simple and powerful screen presence that makes her a good rival for screentime with Owen Wilson. Where Owen is frenetic and moves so much and says so much, Cavazos establishes her character with a minimal amount of movement and dialogue. She is stunning to view and quietly brilliant in the simplicity of her performance.

Cavazos plays well off Luke Wilson, who plays Anthony. Luke Wilson gives a subtle performance of his own, much different from, for example, his role in My Super Ex-Girlfrend. In Bottle Rocket, he is quiet, thoughtful and plays a character who has tangible sense of insecurity to him. Luke portrays this with a very introverted sense of body language, holding himself with a slight slouch and delivering his lines in a quiet timbre that is realistic for one who might have recently had a nervous breakdown.

Bottle Rocket is a tough sell and I think I enjoyed it more because it showed a solid start for director Wes Anderson. On DVD, there is a commentary track and trailers, but not much more (I did not have access to the Criterion Collection DVD). The film looks and sounds good, though. This movie has an art house movie feel to it and those who go into it with that as the expectation are much more likely to enjoy it than those who go in figuring it will be some great crime caper.

For other works by Wes Anderson, be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Darjeeling Limited
The Squid And The Whale
The Royal Tenenbaums

5.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing of all my movie reviews!

© 2012, 2008 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Wes Anderson Recreates The Mood, But Not The Greatness Of The Royal Tenenbaums With The Darjeeling Limited.

The Good: Decent enough acting, Good DVD extras
The Bad: Oppressive mood, Boring, Low on character development, Dismal plot
The Basics: Filled with his regular performers, a depressing tone and character who trudge through their existence miserable, Wes Anderson tries to resell his one good idea yet again.


In the DVD bonus features for one of his films, writer-director Kevin Smith talks about his early films and describes them as essentially rewriting the same film different ways. He has a pretty unified theme over the first few films and hid that fact by creating different enough circumstances to place the similar characters in. Writer and director Wes Anderson, whose prior films include The Royal Tenenbaums (reviewed here!) and The Life Aquatic With Steve Zizou seems to have the same obsession with mood, pacing and the way his characters interact, if not speak and what they experience. With his film The Darjeeling Limited, he manages to once more create a dismal and depressing experience that feels and sounds like his prior films, yet lacks the style and panache of either of them. Instead of being clever or original, by a quarter of the way through The Darjeeling Limited, anyone who has seen the prior two films is likely to believe that they have seen this one.

The Darjeeling Limited is presented on DVD with a short film Hotel Chavier that precedes the events in the movie and adds nothing of real substance to the primary movie. What it does manage to do is quickly establish the stifling mood and slow pace of the movie that follows. It is a charmless short that is marginally connected to The Darjeeling Limited in that it features one of the main characters and establishes where he is before the movie begins. It also explains why Natalie Portman appears in a very fast series of cuts near the end of the film. Well, sort of.

Set in India on the train - the Darjeeling Limited - the men of the Whitman family, Francis, Peter and Jack. Brought together by Francis for a spiritual journey across India, the trio tiptoes around their complex dynamic of who is being honest with one another in the family and what the trip means to each sibling. Wounded prior to the journey, Francis becomes a pain in the butt to his brothers, who scheme with one another and betray the other to Francis whenever caught. One carries on with the wife of the train's conductor or usher and the other purchases a dangerous snake when the train stops.

While they avoid one another or interact, they make mention of their mother who has run off to become a nun. Soon, though, they find themselves separated from the train when the snake gets loose and India cough syrup does its thing . . .

I wish I could write "finding themselves stranded away from the train leads the Whitman brothers to a deeper sense of understanding," but the truth is by the time we get to this point in the movie, it's already so dull as to be virtually narcoleptic. I suffered through the end of the film, despising it almost all the way and how the brothers interact with one another becomes no more interesting as the movie goes on.

On the plot front, this is a ridiculously simple movie: three men share a room on a train. They talk, they get off the train, they get back on, they talk some more, they get kicked off, they wander in the Indian deserts, the audience doesn't care. In other words, this is not so much a movie about things that happen. This is not an action movie, it is not so much a growth movie, it is a mood movie and as such, the plot is almost nonexistent.

The fundamental problem with The Darjeeling Limited is that it's not much of a character study either. Writer and director Wes Anderson has the ability to make characters who are unlikable likable and perfectly viewable; he proved that with The Royal Tenenbaums. He fails to recapture such a sense of magic and class that he infused Royal Tenenbaum with to make Gene Hackman's protagonist in that movie one who was enjoyable to watch. Instead, in The Darjeeling Limited, the viewer is subjected to hour upon hour (to be fair, it's barely over the minimum ninety minutes, so one does wonder why the writer and director bothered with the short film attached to the beginning instead of adding it to the actual film) of nothing happening and watching the young men of the Whitman clan sitting and talking.

Worse yet is that much of the time the film runs has the Whitman men not talking. They lay on their bunks on the train or they trudge witlessly through the Indian wilderness or they . . . okay, they talk. But Francis keeps repeating the same stupid catch phrase "Can we all agree to . . ." and it becomes pretty clear that Peter has stolen everything he possibly could from the dead father's estate and this movie is tragically boring. Yes, there is such a thing as a movie with sex and beautiful looking people and the occasional displaced line that is genius that is more boring than virtually any other movie one has ever seen. The Darjeeling Limited is that movie.

This film is the cinematic equivalent of watching paint dry.

Actually, that metaphor is not a bad one. Francis insists that the point of the journey is to build some character and to try to figure out the relationship the three brothers actually have and what it means. This is an honorable goal, but Anderson's nihilistic tendencies rob the audience of any sort of meaningful catharsis or even any genuine character development between the brothers Whitman. That might be intriguing or compelling or even inspiring for its vision, save that the viewer has seen that before . . . from Wes Anderson. We get it, play us a new song, maestro!

The acting falls flat as well, which is a bit of a surprise considering how much I usually like Owen Wilson in Wes Anderson movies. Yes, usually he is interesting at least, though I often tout Luke Wilson's acting, Owen tends to hold his own in Anderson's movies. Here, he feels like he is reading off a script and he is never fully convincing as Francis. Instead, the viewer waits for him to get around to telling the story of the bandages on his head and then we feel like it is Wilson who has told us the story.

This is not a unique problem to Owen Wilson, though, either. In one of the final scenes of the movie (don't worry, this doesn't give anything away), there is dancing. The Whitman men dance. In that scene, Adrien Brody especially is utterly unconvincing as sticking within the character of Peter. Instead, watching him dance sure seems like watching Adrien Brody dance and that's poor acting.

Considering how much I was looking forward to The Darjeeling Limited" it ought to be noted that while I did watch the "prequel" Hotel Chavier, I could not stomach watching the movie a second time with the commentary track on. Similarly, I found I had no interest in the behind-the-scenes featurettes and truth be told, after watching such a long-feeling movie, it is hard to believe that those bonus features would make the work any better.

For other films featuring Adrien Brody, please check out my reviews of:
Predators
The Fantastic Mr. Fox

3/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2008 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

A Perfect Family Saga Of Weird Timelessness: The Royal Tenenbaums Stands Up!

The Good: GREAT characters, Acting, Mood, Plot, Production design, Soundtrack
The Bad: Nothing comes to mind . . .
The Basics: An amazing piece of drama, the Tenenbaum family stands on the brink of destruction until Royal returns to try to gain redemption in The Royal Tenenbaums.


I've had a thing about Ben Stiller for a while; I watch every movie with him I can and I end up disappointed. Mystery Men, Zoolander (reviewed here!), and whatever else I've seen him in. I repress the memories. I write reviews, then repress it. The Royal Tenenbaums changes all of that. It figures: all he had to do was take a dramatic role and he works perfectly!

The Royal Tenenbaums is a character study of a strange upper class American family. The film revolves around Royal Tenenbaum, a disbarred lawyer who abandoned his children twenty-two years ago. His children were all geniuses: Chas who is an international finance master, Margot who is a brilliant playwright who has stopped producing, and Richie who was an amazing and famous tennis player. Richie's friend, Eli, is a novelist who is also a drug addict. Royal's wife, from whom he has been separated is Ethel, is a psychologist who is being courted by her accountant, Henry Sherman. When Chas, widowered for a year, has a nervous breakdown, the Tenenbaums come back together in Ethel's house. It is at this time that Royal claims he is dying and moves in as well hoping to reconcile with his family. In the course of the film, it quickly becomes clear that Royal is a liar, Eli is horribly drugged, Chas needs help and Richie is in love with Margot. And Margot's husband, Raleigh has no chance with her.

The Royal Tenenbaums is a family saga about one of the oddest upper class families ever conceived. Written by director Wes Anderson and actor Owen Wilson, this film is like a "Magnolia" Light, with less torment or less obvious torment. Presented as if it were a novel, The Royal Tenenbaums periodically presents chapter openings and then continues with the characters actually progressing from the way the scene is set up on the page.

The magic of this film is that it has the feel of a novel. It has the complexities, the lines that we want to come back to again and again. Moreover, the sets are so richly colored and decorated it's visually impressive: beautiful to the eye. The incredible thing about the writing is that it has all of the pauses of paragraph breaks throughout the film. So, there are moments when the viewer comes in on the reaction to startling information being revealed and it works perfectly to have these shots that establish the scenes, then move. Perfect.

Add to that, the musical direction is amazing. The themes seem almost constant and when "Ruby Tuesday" belts out after a moment of profound revelation, the emotions in the viewer just burst over with Richie. All of the music is great and perfectly timed.

The characters are all intriguing. Chas is amazing in his wounded sensibilities, hurt and protective. He makes so much sense in lieu of his wife's death. But all of the other characters are equally intriguing. Margot's strange backstory is hilarious and Richie's life is just plain understandably tormented. So sad, but so wonderful to watch. Eli . . . Eli is just the strangest freak to grace the screen since Edward Scissorhands (though not in the same way).

What the viewer gets is a complex drama about how people interact and what binds individuals - especially in a family - again. Royal's quest for redemption from his family is complicated several times, yet still her perseveres.

What makes the film rewatchable often is the acting. The acting here is wonderful. Gene Hackman is great as Royal. He makes Royal horrible in his simplistic selfishness. He plays Royal different from every other villain he has ever created. He embodies the worst in fatherly neglect and he does it with a sense of humor.

Gwyneth Paltrow, Anjelica Huston and Owen Wilson are each great as Margot, Ethel, and Eli. But Luke Wilson plays a mature and complex role in Richie. He is a sensible character and Wilson plays the part with serious determination that illustrate his potential as a great drama actor.

But Ben Stiller does it here. He acts as Chas. He ACTS! Here he's not Ben Stiller playing Ben Stiller as Zoolander, here he's Ben Stiller playing Chas Tenenbaum. There's no hint of Stiller's ego and repetitive humor scheme here. He gets into the part of a paranoid businessman in a red workout suit. This is the role he deserves an award for.

That's not to say the film doesn't have humor. It's funny in a lot of places, but it's also horribly sad and wrenching. It may take a few viewings to understand all of the different elements - just as a great book may require more readings - but heck, who wouldn't want to see a well stylized film about a brother with an Oedipal Complex, a father in search of redemption and a paranoid man in a workout suit with children in identical outfits rushing around trying to save themselves. It's a lot of fun, but it requires initial patience. It's worth it, though.

A great cast, intriguing characters and amazing direction make this film a must see.

For other works with Bill Murray, please be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Fantastic Mr. Fox
Zombieland
Get Smart
Charlie's Angels
Cradle Will Rock

10/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2002 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

More Mediocre Than Actually Bad, The Fantastic Mr. Fox By Wes Anderson Simply Isn't Fantastic.

The Good: Moments of humor, Fun animation, Decent plot progression, Interesting characters.
The Bad: Predictable arcs, Pacing is a little slow
The Basics: A fun, but somewhat slow, film, The Fantastic Mr. Fox works as a decent fable that most adults are likely to appreciate.


It always amuses me when my wife picks out our film for the night and then we discover I enjoy it a lot more than she does. Last year, we got too busy with other things to go see The Fantastic Mr. Fox while it was in theaters, so when our local library got the film in on DVD, we made sure to pick it up. She seemed disappointed by it, whereas I liked what I saw, mostly because it made good use out of talented voice actors while having an engaging style.

In almost every way, The Fantastic Mr. Fox is a typical Wes Anderson film. Anderson adapted the book by Roald Dahl and like most of his other works, he says more with soundtrack and silence than most directors say with a verbose script. The Fantastic Mr. Fox is no different in that regard. Mr. Fox, Mrs. Fox, Ash and Kristofferson make profound statements followed by silence and stares in reaction. This is very much the canvass Wes Anderson paints upon and it is packed with his brushstrokes.

Of course, in The Fantastic Mr. Fox, Anderson hides his human statements in the guise of animal characters and it did not take long while watching the movie that the full extent of the necessary suspension of disbelief kicked in for my partner and I. She commented on how foxes do not climb trees before acknowledging that they do not stand on their hind legs and wear clothes either. Despite their outward appearances, the characters in The Fantastic Mr. Fox are very much human. The underlying theme of the movie, which is packed with characters undergoing various forms of angst and discontent, is about the acceptance of the primal Self. Dahl and Anderson think it is time to accept that part of ourselves which we - as part of organized societies - repress. And the argument is well-made in The Fantastic Mr. Fox.

Mr. Fox is out with Mrs. Fox stealing chickens when they are trapped and Mrs. Fox informs her companion that she is pregnant. Getting out of the cage they are in, Mr. Fox vows to quit his stealing ways and become a responsible member of society. Two (human) years later, Mr. Fox writes a newspaper column, is generally respected and is eager to buy the treehouse of his dreams. Moving Mrs. Fox, their son Ash and his nephew Kristofferson into the house, Mr. Fox begins to feel restless. As Ash and Kristofferson compete for the attentions of a classmate, Mr. Fox enlists his Weasel friend to accompany him on a heist of the nearby farms of Boggins, Bunce and Bean.

But the ruthless quality of Boggins, Bunce and Bean is more than just the stuff of local legends and children's songs. When Mr. Fox fills his family's pantry with cider and chickens from the farms, Franklin Bean organizes his fellow farmers and becomes obsessed with capturing and killing Mr. Fox. When their first encounter leaves Mr. Fox without his tail, Mrs. Fox becomes upset over her husband's violation of trust and when Kristofferson is captured, Mr. Fox must put the welfare of all of the animals in the field above his own life.

Mr. Fox is an intriguing character and in pure Wes Anderson form, he has his character flaws. He is constantly conniving and he never truly listens to Mrs. Fox or what her wants and needs are. Mrs. Fox is meek and kind, but she does try to voice her opinions, most of which Mr. Fox does the exact opposite of. Still, it is clear Mr. Fox loves Mrs. Fox and his son, even when he is impressed by Kristofferson's athletic abilities. That level of awe leaves Ash feeling left out and the parallel story with the young foxes competing may seem unnecessary, but it lends a timeless feel to the conflicts that Mr. and Mrs. Fox are going through.

The Fantastic Mr. Fox has a claymation style of animation to it and visually the film is fun, if a little choppy. For close-up shots, Anderson captures genuine emotions, like tears welling up and spilling forth from Mrs. Fox's eyes or a look of intelligence and cunning from Mr. Fox as he hatches his latest plan. Indeed, The Fantastic Mr. Fox might have worked just as well as a movie without dialogue. As a silent movie with the soundtrack intact, the animation is so expressive one suspects very little would be lost.

That said, the pacing for the movie is off. The Fantastic Mr. Fox tries to tell a fairly epic story and it succeeds, but it hardly captivates the viewer for the entire running time. Instead, the movie starts out good, gets bogged down with the subplot involving Kristofferson and Ash before returning to the title character and his issues and flaws. As the siege begins and goes from bad to worse, the viewer sits with a "get on with it" attitude because the movie simply is not getting there terribly quickly.

The characters in The Fantastic Mr. Fox are largely archetypes, but because the message is actually one big allegory - or, actually, a true fable - it works for that. They do not need to have real deep personalities which set them apart from every other character in film and literature to work and so the movie works as a story that is belaboring a simple message. Arguably the most important messages of The Fantastic Mr. Fox are: play to your strengths and no one benefits when we suppress our true natures for society.

Like most Wes Anderson movies, The Fantastic Mr. Fox is packed with great actors, several of whom have appeared in Anderson's other works. As one might expect, Bill Murray, Owen Wilson and Jason Schwartzman all have roles in The Fantastic Mr. Fox and they all do well, especially Schwartzman with Anderson's traditional dialogue stops. But this film is headlined by George Clooney (Mr. Fox) and Meryl Streep (Mrs. Fox). Streep brings a more energetic vocal performance than I've ever heard from her in her live-action films, but Clooney is instantly familiar in the role of Mr. Fox. Indeed, one suspects he was channeling his part from O Brother, Where Art Thou? to deliver most of his lines. The voice acting is competent, but unsurprising given the stacked deck of this particular cast.

On DVD, The Fantastic Mr. Fox comes with a handful of deleted scenes and a commentary track. There are also featurettes on adapting the novel and the special effects (how the animation was done). These are all informative and the commentary track is entertaining as well.

Ultimately, The Fantastic Mr. Fox is entertaining and it illustrates that Wes Anderson has not lost all of his talents or abilities, which ought to give us all hope. But it is not a flawless work and fans of Anderson are likely to enjoy it more than those who are not into slow movies with righteous soundtracks and awkward dialogue patterns.

For other animated movies, please check out my reviews of:
Toy Story 3
Wizards
Despicable Me

4.5/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here for an organized list!

© 2010 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |