Hi, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab...
I was sorry to hear that Wes Anderson didn’t make it to the Egyptian screening of THE LIFE AQUATIC WITH STEVE ZISSOU the other night because he got stuck in New York. For those who saw it on the East Coast, like our first reviewer, sounds like you lucked out:
Here’s another Life Aquatic review for you. I recently had the chance to see this screened followed by a discussion with Wes Anderson moderated by Elvis Mitchell. There are some very minor spoilers.
First of all, let me say that I am a BIG Wes Anderson fan, I think all of his films are fantastic, and Rushmore is as close to genius as you can get. When I first heard about the Life Aquatic, I nearly shat my pants. Wes directing Jeff Goldblum, Willem Defoe, and animation by Henry Selick! Holy Shit! But then I saw the movie and...and...I was a little dissapointed. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie, and it's probably better than most of the stuff I've seen recently. But Wes Anderson has run into a problem I predicted back when I first saw The Royal Tenenbaums.
Rushmore may be my favorite, but it's hard to deny that Royal Tenenbaums was Anderson's PERFECT movie. But even watching Tenenbaums, something bothered me about it, but not in a bad way. It just felt like the characters and scenes in Tenenbaums could have easily been switched with those of Rushmore. I don't have anything against a director sticking to his style, or placing his characters in their own connected universe, but essentially, what Wes has done with The Life Aquatic is reimagine his past two movies. While not a remake, you can easily picture his new characters in any of his previous films. Even some of his dialogue and scenes are rehashed, but I don't want to spoil too much for you by giving examples.
Now for the acting. Bill Murray, is obviously, amazing in the film. He never dissapoints. I believe Owen Wilson if the best character in the movie, he's got the greatest lines ("I'm going to fight you, Steve.") and his accent is terribly great. Willem Defoe's character was originally going to be played by a German or Swedish actor according to Wes. I wish they had chosen to do so, because I'm not sure how much I like Willem in this movie. He's funny...but...he could have been a lot better. Maybe it's just a problem with the script, but he didn't have much to do. Goldblum is SEVERELY underused, and anyone in their right mind knows that he can be very, very funny. I really wish he played a bigger part. I didn't care at all for any of the women in this movie. Angelica Huston practically reprises her role from Tenenbaums and only serves as a plot device, while Cate Blanchett just kind of slows the story down and is just put in there to stir up conflict between Owen and Bill.
Finally, I just want to add perhaps the biggest dissapointment. Henry Selick's animation was almost non-existent in this movie. I was looking forward to a lot of really cool animation, but it only shows up very few times in the film, and it doesn't really move the story along. Anderson only used it because it was easier than using real fish. It only works well once, towards the end, and its actually a very beautiful scene. I believe they could have used the animation a lot more extensively without overshadowing the movie. Hopefully Selick will have a chance to shine with Anderson on The Fantastic Mr. Fox.
Wow, I've really complained a lot. But, remember, I enjoyed this film. There are many good parts, including Pele, which spends the movie singing David Bowie songs translated into Portoguese, and the pirate scenes, which are marvellous. (I'd like to see Anderson try an Action film). I only complain so much about these little things because I expect SO MUCH for Wes. He's proven himself to be an astounding filmmakers in so few films, but I believe that if he makes one more film sooo similar to his last three, that perhaps he will start receiving bad reviews, and I'd really not like to see that happen. Maybe its a good idea that he's taking a break with an animated film.
Anyways, Harry, sorry to be so lengthy. If you use this, call me Jovani.
I’m starting to see some of Anderson’s fans turn on him, like Jeffrey Wells over at Hollywood Elsewhere. He basically used a blind item to kick Anderson in the nuts on Friday, never naming the director, but making it quite clear who he was talking about. You could argue that he’s become trapped by his style, but you could also say that he’s simply figured out what it is he wants to do, and how he likes to tell stories. Here’s a review from the Egyptian screening in LA:
Hola Moriarty,
I was lucky enough to see the Life Aquatic at the Egyptian theatre here in LA last night. Wes Anderson was supposed to show up, but that fell through. Thankfully, the film came through and delivered the goods. I’ll try and keep the spoilers to a minimum.
THE GOOD:
Bill Murray has proven again that not only is he one of the finest comedic actors today, he’s one of the best period. He’s understated again, similar to Tenenbaums or Lost in Translation, but with his usual charm. The fact that he can go crazy with “mad eye” and chase pirates off his ship and then make you actual empathize with his emotional state later on in the movie is a tribute to his skills and those of Anderson.
The rest of the cast pulls off their roles as you’d suspect, well. Special nods to Blanchett and Wilson who become the emotional heart of the film and pull Bill along on his emotional journey. I couldn’t find a single off-note to complain of. Except perhaps the Disney people taking everybody’s camera phones. I mean, really, is a still of your movie going to ruin the marketing push.
The production design of the film is spectacular with much of the credit going to Anderson, his designer Mark Friedberg, and DP Robert Yeoman. The film looks tremendous with all the visual quirks you’d expect. The ship is built, theatre-style, with the viewer being able to see the characters go from the bottom of the boat to the deck in one continuous shot. The stop-motion animation was great. And the underwater stuff all looked vibrant, with an interesting blend of the real with purposefully artificial sea life, sort of hyper-real if that makes any sense.
The script is as clever and effective as you’d expect from Anderson’s first three films. It see-saws from pure ludicrous (funnily so) and back to real feeling with as deft a touch as I’ve seen recently. Both Anderson and Noah Baumbach deserve a lot of credit for injecting their own quirks and themes into a movie while keeping it emotionally satisfying.
THE NOT QUITE AS GOOD
My only real problem with the film was the pacing. The film is about 2 hours and 15 minutes long. And sometimes seems to drag just a little. A friend I was with might have lost consciousness for a few minutes. I’m pretty sure this was the final cut and it seems to me that they could have cut 5 to 10 minutes without losing much. But in the end, I’m sure Anderson decided that the world was rich enough that the viewer wouldn’t mind staying a little longer.
I could go on, but I’m sure most people have already made up their minds about it. I’ll just say that there is some wonderful stuff and if you go in with an open mind, you should leave happy. In fact, not one person in the theatre got up before the credits finished. First screening I'd ever been to in LA that happened. Now, I’m going to get into SPOILER TERRITORY in reply to that review you ran this morning that had a problem with the ending. DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN’T SEEN THE FILM…..
Victorypalace and Brattilina seemed to have a problem with the ending and the fact that Owen Wilson dies. I’d argue that the movie is about Bill Murray’s journey from being a me-first A-hole to a more caring human being. The fact that Wilson dies is what makes the conclusion of seeing the Jag shark so satisfying. Wilson brought Murray back from being a waste. Instead of thinking about his desires first (revenge for Esteban’s eating) Murray watches the shark go by and lets himself show and receive emotion (for the first time) from the rest of the crew in the sub. That’s the moment where we as an audience realize that Murray realize he’s gained an appreciation of others around him (through his relationship with Wilson) in the voyage and sadly, what he lost (Wilson). I thought it was a terrifically poignant moment that really brought the film together.
That’s it from me, if you use this I’m WolffmanJack. And remember, “the interns only get one glock to share.”
A lovely review, and I agree with much of what you said, WolffmanJack. Here’s another:
Sorry, don't know who to send this to, so here you both go:
Saw a preview screening of THE LIFE AQUATIC WITH STEVE ZISSOU last night at the Egyptian in Hollywood. I don't want to spoil anything in this movie, but its definitely Wes Anderson's love letter to filmmaking. Oh sure, on its surface its about an aging oceanographer in the midst of a mid-life crisis, trying to connect with the son he may/may not have had while trying to hunt down the mythical sea monster he may/may not have seen chaw down on his best friend. But anyone who's worked an independent production company will be laughing their ass off.
I remember how after ADAPTATION was released, everyone I know in LA was talking about how they were working on a script JUST LIKE "ADAPTATION." Well, God bless Mr. Anderson for realizing no one but people who work in "the industry" give a shit about movies ACTUALLY set in the Hollywood/independent film system. Instead he treats it all as fantasy, but the dynamics and relationships are there, and we have a wonderful satire of what its like to be on the sinking ship of a production.
This is probably the most interesting film about filmmaking since 8 1/2, and its nice and subtle, never overwhelming the kitschy world of Rushmore and Royal Tenenbaums. This is Bill Murrary's most realized character in a W. A. film, and he's no longer the man-child of Rushmore into a fully grown man whose every living day seems to bear the burden of all those which precede it. Every character feels complete, and is given a moment to simply exist on screen, even the interns (God bless 'em). This leads to a slow pace and major dragging in some spots, but everything pays off in unexpected ways.
Acting, great across the board, but three stars steal the screen when Murrary's not around, and SHARE it when he is: Owen Wilson finally gives a performance full of his charm, but lacking the surfer dude persona leading to criticisms that he plays himself all the time-or he's a more interesting person than people assume (duh). Cate Blanchett is... radiant... that's the only world that comes to mind. Their relationship is new to Anderson, its a genuine romance capturing the desire of youthful lust with the reality of their situation. Willem Dafoe needs to keep doing comedy, simple as that.
Enough's been said about the magical puppet animation and the Bowie soundtrack in Portuguese already, in the end, I keep comparing LIFE AQUATIC to Porco Rosso and Buckaroo Banzai. They all share events that would be played for high melodrama in another film which just occur, leaving the characters to simply deal with it. These films also succeed at throwing a stylized world at the viewer, and have oddball inhabitants whose quirks add to the texture of the story rather than require exposition. If its not his best film, its definitely Anderson's most mature, and the most genuinely funny tragedy to hit the screen in years. When death happens, it happens, and in the end Steve's journey is cathartic baby. I hope multiple viewings benefit THE LIFE AQUATIC as much as Rosso and Banzai.
It doesn't target youth in the same way RUSHMORE, BOTTLE ROCKET and TENENBAUMS do, so I don't know how many people (lots of film students it looked like) at the screening really loved it - at times I was busting a gut alone in the balcony. Maybe Anderson's films bring out a "hip" crowd that only embraces the superficial aspects, maybe it was just too funny to laugh at. There was a lot of clapping during the "Buckaroo Banzai" credit sequence and nobody left their seats until the ENTIRE credits finished rolling. Reminds me of the Japanese comment that the greatest compliment an audience can give a film is silence.
Right on.
The hell with it, call me New Jersey.
Interesting take on it. I didn’t think about the film as a take on filmmaking overall, but it works really well if you read it that way. Let’s see another:
Hey guys,
Hope this qualifies as a scoop. Spoiler free (I hope)...
I just got back from the Egyptian Theater where the American Cinematheque (every film geek in L.A. should seriously become a member) just showed "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou". Real quick: It's directed by Wes Anderson and stars Bill Murray along with a rather long list of superbly talented actors. Regarding Anderson; I saw Rushmore and passed on Royal Tenenbaums. There is a definite stylistic semblance to Rushmore with regards to characters, cinematography, and pacing. The humor and drama are completely different however.
This is a very silly (in a good way) yet very confusing movie. I laughed a lot. A LOT. I had a great time. But in the end I wasn't sure what it was the movie was trying to accomplish. Was it a drama? Was it a comedy? Is it a parody? Is there a message? Is any of this really the point? I sure don't have a clue. It's obvious that this movie exists in an imaginary movie world where these goofy characters are free to behave like lunatics. But there are intermittent moments of profound drama that sometimes seem to spring from nowhere. Some plot threads are built-up and deserted. There were a several moments of delayed laughter where the audience had to take a few seconds to decide whether the events on-screen were horrific of hilarious. Those moments inevitably resulted in a chuckle but exemplifies one of the major reasons this movie is so difficult to decipher.
But what about Bill? Well, Bill Murray dominates this movie. The long list of supporting characters are awesome. Very funny, and very intriguing. Dafoe is a ton of fun to watch, Goldblum is ridiculous, and the post-LoTR Blanchett is the most attractive pregnant lady since Zeta Jones in Traffic. But it's Murray who controls this movie from start to finish. It reminded me a lot of his role in Kingpin but with the benefit of a spotlight. Great great great! Even though Murray and his supporters can be cartoonish at times and too realistic at others I ended up getting attached to them and rooting for them.
To me this movie is a lot like The Simpsons. The characters are extreme, the jokes aren't always rooted in reality, and there is the occasional dramatic moment to keep you connected with the characters. For whatever reason though it's natural and funny to see Homer strangle Bart for no reason. This is much different than when you see someone get shot and maimed for no reason in Life Aquatic. And even though it felt a little long towards the end this movie never failed to keep me entertained. More like it reached a plateau at the halfway point and stayed there through the end. But it's a high quality plateau so while I may have yearned for more there wasn't anything wrong with what I was getting.
My guess is that this movie will get a very broad reaction from viewers. I have quite a bit of criticisms but my appreciation for this film boils down to the simple fact that this movie made me laugh really hard many times.
Thanks guys. Love the site!
-Killer Pineapple
A nice batch of reviews overall. Let’s wrap today up with a couple of clips from the film, both focusing on Steve Zissou’s relationship with Ned, his maybe-son.
LIFE AQUATIC -- Chapter: NED PART 1
LIFE AQUATIC -- Chapter: NED PART 2
BILL MURRAY SIZED
Thanks, everyone.
"Moriarty" out.
