wes anderson is a character of his own movies

[The Heart Collector]

i noticed something i thought was funny/weird.

y'know how wes anderson gets bitched at recently because his movies are too elaborate? like, ever since life aquatic (and to a lesser extent, with darjeeling), people complain that it's all too fakey and that the costumes and details are so excessive?

i was watching the dvds for the life aquatic and the royal tenenbaums. they both have documentaries about the creation of the movies. if you see the documentary for the royal tenenbaums, wes looks relatively normal. he has a normal haircut (a shitty one, tbqh), wears regular-ass clothes, sneakers, etc. he wears the odd blazer or what not but he looks like a normal human being.

HOWEVER if you look at the documentary for the life aquatic, he's always wearing suits or jackets/matching pants, with nice scarves, always looks very "dressed" (like he took his sweet ass time to dress himself and match it), has a very nice and distinctive haircut, etc.

then i read on his wikipedia that he regularly gets attention regarding his suits and that all his suits/clothes are made by one tailor.


I PROPOSE that wes anderson thinks he's a character of his own movies. he 'uniforms' himself much like his latter-era movies. life aquatic and the darjeeling limited aren't "wes anderson treading ground", they are the transformation of a human being from 'planet earth guy' to 'guy living in his own fantasy'. (IN TERMS OF AESTHETICS, I MEAN. I'M SURE HE'S STILL INTERNALLY THE SAME DUDE).

[Sigur509]

I always thought he was one suave motherfucker.

Brody probably just raided Andersons closet.

[Scarfather]

I think Wes Anderson will be one of very few filmmakers of this generation who is as remembered as much as a persona as he was as a filmmaker because his films aren't just films, they are extensions of himself: part of a style and world he's created.

People can complain all they want about them being too similar, but that's the point. He isn't pointing a camera at anybody else, he's pointing the camera at himself in a way, there's actors and sets and plots and whatnot, but they're all part of a universe he's created.

It's like a Wes Anderson mythos. Like Hitchcock, or Kubrick, or even Fellini, where you could be presented with a film by any one of them that you have never seen before, have any knowledge of at all, and you would know that they did it immediately just based on style alone. That's unique and nearly unseen nowadays.

[The Postmaster General]

I see where you are coming from, THC. Except, that I think he always looked like an oddball - Bottle Rocket days he looks a bit Tim Burton-in-technicolor-ish.

I think the evolution of his personal style, as with his films, has been contingent on his establishment in Hollywood and his continuously exceeding budgets. The real difference I see between now and then is that e just seems to be spending more money. He has a tailor, appears to be getting fake tans, having his hair styled --- Anjelica Huston actually pointed out during Aquatic that suddenly he went from looking like a dork to a handsome man, using nicer words tho.

I don't understand the "retreading ground" criticism. I've talked, and was disagreed with, that all great auteurs retread themes and moods, not because they are out of ideas, or no longer creative, but because they are doing what they know. It's the directors and writers who try to do something alien to them that fail. I don't like Anderson because of quirky characters or because he picks cool music - I like him because he seems to have a genuine appreciation for the little guy, the poor, and attitude to spare. If he choses to encompass these ideas in a similar environment, I don't really care. It's an Anderson film, and in no means am I attracted to his movies because of superficialities. If that was what made me dug movies, I'd be better off just watching MTV or somethin.

[chasingbanky]

I was talking about Wes the other day with fellow schmoe CosmicPuppet, and I was saying I thought all his movies were just about him.... Therefore his characters are mimicking him, and not the other way around in my eyes.

[The Heart Collector]

I think the main reason why people say he's treading ground is because of Life Aquatic.


It was advertised as an adventure thing, had all these adventure qualities to it, but it was more like a traditional Wes Anderson comedy/drama in a weird setting.

His other movies feel like they're the only thing they could possibly be. While I enjoyed The Life Aquatic immensely, I felt that he could have also done something different, added a little bit more action, made it a little more fantastic. He had the claymation creatures, for example, but they hardly figured in the movie. He had a lot of cool gadgets in the ship, but they hardly figured.

In a way it felt like Wes Anderson was afraid of doing a straight-up action/adventure film. I mean, it seems silly to spend that insane budget to have all those things as mere backdrop and have relatively weak action (the ship scene, the island scene, the somewhat anticlimactic shark discovery). He even admitted that even though the movie came out to be what he wanted, he regretted spending all that money.

[The Heart Collector]

hi i post twice

[biff_debris]

I agree with Scarfather -- Wes Anderson films are like David Lynch films and Tim Burton films. They're immediately recognizable as to who made them, since they're more than likely part of who made them.

[The Postmaster General]

I think the main reason why people say he's treading ground is because of Life Aquatic.


It was advertised as an adventure thing, had all these adventure qualities to it, but it was more like a traditional Wes Anderson comedy/drama in a weird setting.

His other movies feel like they're the only thing they could possibly be. While I enjoyed The Life Aquatic immensely, I felt that he could have also done something different, added a little bit more action, made it a little more fantastic. He had the claymation creatures, for example, but they hardly figured in the movie. He had a lot of cool gadgets in the ship, but they hardly figured.

In a way it felt like Wes Anderson was afraid of doing a straight-up action/adventure film. I mean, it seems silly to spend that insane budget to have all those things as mere backdrop and have relatively weak action (the ship scene, the island scene, the somewhat anticlimactic shark discovery). He even admitted that even though the movie came out to be what he wanted, he regretted spending all that money.




SPOILERS FOR THE LIFE AQUATIC, JUST IN CASE......



See though, I think the shark discovery was very climatic, not because of the shark, but because of the moment.

Anderson films are about people, more so than I find with other films.

What made the moment of finding the jaguar shark so powerful to me was not because "bam! Zissou found the shark. He rules." but because at that moment, he realizes all of the people that he's ignored through his life, and it is all at once when every life he's encounter touches him - figuratively and literally.

This is what moved me about him asking, "I wonder if he remembers me?" because nearly up to that point, he was self-involved, only trying to gain fame an notoriety. He left all the people who were there for him in the cold, running after these ambitions that were his and only his. Yet, he finally finds this shark, at the sake of losing his son. It fucking hits him, you know. He found this shark, but this shark doesn't know shit about Zissou. It was just a character in his movie, and that was how he treated his own son. To me, it is one of the most poignant moments in modern film, and I know I can get slagged for saying that, but the movie really hit me hard in that regard, and now I'm sounding like a bard.

Now, I know there is question about the actuality of ned really being his son, but I think biologically it didn't matter, because they had bonded as father and son by Steve accepting him as his son, and Ned growing up thinking Steve was his dad. Personally, I like to feel that they were father and son, no matter who got knocked up by who.

I don't feel the action is his films is weak, because they aren't about action. It's like Bottle Rocket, with Dignan shouting how there'll be pole vaulting, laughing gas, hang gliding... This is about the characters, about their dreams and aspirations. I feel Anderson wants to tell stories about his characters, not their environments, and if you want to say it's just a backdrop, that seems fair enough, but I feel like that's not the point.

All of the cool gadgets, the ship, all of it were metaphors pointing at Steve Zissou's life, which is why everything was rundown, broken down and outdated. I don't remember the exact sequence, but it was like when I think Ned points at the submarine and asks what it is, and he refers to it by the name, saying its his ex-wife, but when he's with the reporter and she asks what the name tattooed on his arm is, and he says it's the name of his submarine. Then you have the helicopter, to me representing his inability to maintain relationships, and in the end, this is what kills Ned.

I haven't seen this great movie in almost a year, and could remember a lot more of this stuff if I'd see it again, but I remember that this kind of stuff is everywhere all through this movie.

Sure, I'm sure Anderson does wish he didn't spend so much money on Aquatic. This is nothing really notable about any artist. Like Kirk Cobain saying he regrets not just getting some film school student to make the "Teen Spirit" video, yet he loves it. I don't know Wes' exact feelings about this movie, but to me it's totally amazing, a real piece of work, and probably the most beautiful out of all his films - barring further viewings of Darjeeling, which I feel went more in this direction.

One thing I was thinking recently, with the placement of Owen Wilson in his films, and in the theme of Anderson being a character of his own movies --- When Ned accuses Steve of making him nothing more than a character in his movies, with all that's happened with the two, and the recent coincidences with Darjeeling and Wilson's personal life --- "I'm nothing but a character in your movie!" -- Does anyone find it interesting as this is what Wilson is saying to Anderson, given their somewhat growing apart through the blooming of their careers? It's somewhat eerie if you ask me. They were tight circa-Bottle Rocket.

[Rawlin67]

andersons one of those guys that has a certain, distinct style that you could never accidentally call someone elses. some directors do that, others just splurge around with a whole bunch of styles and such. wes is a master at what he does though, there are few that can match that kind of humor with such a dark undertone. and somehow, still make it all seem really beautiful.

[MansooLee]

My take on the Life Aquatic is that it is all fake, the movie we see is the documentary he shows off. Everything is set up just to get the recognition back. There was no shark, there was no death, just a big ploy by Murray and Huston.

[Raoul Duke]

I think the main reason why people say he's treading ground is because of Life Aquatic.


It was advertised as an adventure thing, had all these adventure qualities to it, but it was more like a traditional Wes Anderson comedy/drama in a weird setting.

His other movies feel like they're the only thing they could possibly be. While I enjoyed The Life Aquatic immensely, I felt that he could have also done something different, added a little bit more action, made it a little more fantastic. He had the claymation creatures, for example, but they hardly figured in the movie. He had a lot of cool gadgets in the ship, but they hardly figured.

In a way it felt like Wes Anderson was afraid of doing a straight-up action/adventure film. I mean, it seems silly to spend that insane budget to have all those things as mere backdrop and have relatively weak action (the ship scene, the island scene, the somewhat anticlimactic shark discovery). He even admitted that even though the movie came out to be what he wanted, he regretted spending all that money.

Did you see Darjeeling Limited? It of course had the usual Anderson quirks/whatever. But it felt quite a bit different. There were moments in it that surprised me..out of character for his usual movies.

[The Postmaster General]

My take on the Life Aquatic is that it is all fake, the movie we see is the documentary he shows off. Everything is set up just to get the recognition back. There was no shark, there was no death, just a big ploy by Murray and Huston.


I think that certain elements seemed kind of fake. ;)

Ultimately, I don't think there was no character development in Zissou, and the film was about him pulling a scam. If the movie we see is all a documentary, how exactly did they get that hidden camera to track through the boat like that with no one noticing?

There are points in the movie, though, when what we see is as it is presented through Zissou's mind, indicated by overall change in color tone, namely when everything takes on a blue hint at the point when Zissou overtakes the pirates and then switching back.... I believe when Ned is wounded, but I haven't seen it in about a year.

The only reason I remark on you theory, is because I think you are right that there is a movie within a movie, but as for Zissou's character you just drew a very different resolve than I did. An interesting factor that does back up your claim --- the appearance of Ned standing at the boat at the end of the movie. I took this as Ned being represented in the flag that he made -- one of the first times Zissou allowed someone else to put themself in his world, thus what we see isn't Ned, but his spirit.

I took the movie within a movie as just showing the unrealism of Steve's world. Like Ned told him, he's just a character in his movie -- I think everything up until Ned dies is about Zissou, but at that point, he starts to make it about everyone else.

It's cool to hear other people thinking a lot into this movie, because I really found it to be like that, and haven't found others who are tearing it apart, and not taking everything at the surface. To me, this movie is in the same class as Barton Fink, and even The Holy Mountain --- This movie is about a lot more going on than what we are told.