Brief: Having not spoken to his younger brothers in the year following their father's death, Francis (Owen Wilson) invites Peter (Adrien Brody) and Jack (Jason Schwartzman) on a "spiritual journey" across India, although Francis conceals from them the real reason for this particular destination.Caution! Impossible to discuss without at least one spoiler!
This is a tricky one. My viewing partner and I fairly obviously thought this movie was a lot funnier than our fellow theatre goers. At the same time, it's not exactly your standard Anderson fare. There are no indicators of the passage of time, no tight shots of of various objects on a shelf or in a drawer to divide the vignettes. This movie, co-scripted by director Wes Anderson with Roman Coppola and Schwartzman, is a lot more openly sexual* and a lot more openly emotional than his previous efforts.
*Special mention goes to the excessive use of the term "hand job" in Rushmore. Also with Schwartzman as the sex symbol, which I understand some people found odd. I don't really get that.
It's still a pretty good movie. I kept my expectations low because I was under the impression when we went into the theatre that there was something wrong with this one. If I had to guess, most critics (or at least David Edelstein and Liz Penn, who always get worked up about this very thing) took umbrage with the fact that the movie kills a nameless Indian boy for the sake of the emotional development of their protagonists, the same overgrown, obsessive man-children that populate Anderson's oeuvre. If the cast hadn't played it so well, if the story hadn't set this particular tragedy in the midst of a year long break down, I'd probably be more pissed than I was.
To be honest, a lot of the misgivings I had evaporated because the principal cast worked so well together. Wilson and Schwartzman are both old hands when it comes to the particularities of Anderson's bubble, and I was surprised at how well Brody fit in. There were a couple of times when his more actorly nature seemed to be struggling against the Anderson patter, but he showed a deft comedic talent that has been overlooked in the past. Besides, he looks great running in slo-mo in a well cut suit.
Speakin of, what was up with the costuming? A fair number of articles before the movie came out made a big deal out of the Marc Jacobs for Louis Vuitton luggage (which was actually pretty cool looking, I won't lie). Recognizing that the voluminous number of pieces they were each carrying was symbolic**, why oh why didn't they have more clothes? These guys each had one impressively cut suit (not that they didn't look great) and one set of pyjamas each, and that was it. Weeks abroad and no changes of clothes? What the hell were they carrying around in those things? (I know what I wrote in the fake footnote but even so).
**Of their emotional baggage. No, no, I know. Listen, just go with it, okay? It can be pretty funny sometimes.
Despite what I read in that Slate article a while back, I am going to have to agree with whoever (possibly the article's author) said that Anderson uses his characters' casual racism to criticize them and the privileged world from which they come. When Peter remarks that he likes India because it smells spicy, he's meant to sound ridiculous. It supposed to be stupid for them to think they could fly off to a foreign country and experience something "spiritual" just by virtue of being there. Of course they do, but it's entirely by accident.
The movie's kind of slow and strange, and it's definitely farther off course that Anderson has ever gone, but it's got a slow charm that will keep you smiling at unexpected moments long after the credits roll. Sometimes, that's enough. B
No comments:
Post a Comment